Space Technology

Science & Reason on Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/ScienceReason

Science@ESA: Episode 1: The Full Spectrum - Telescopes: Space-based Astronomy

---
Please subscribe to Science & Reason:
• http://www.youtube.com/Best0fScience
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceMagazine
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceTV
• http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker
---

In this first episode of Science@ESA Rebecca Barnes sets the scene for this vodcast series by looking at why we need to send telescopes into space and considers what these 'eyes in the skies' can tell us about the extraordinary Universe in which we live.

The Science@ESA vodcasts explore the extraordinary Universe in which we live as it is seen through the "eyes" of ESA's fleet of science spacecraft.

• http://astronomy2009.esa.int
• http://www.youtube.com/esa
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_technology
.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Space
• Technology
• Satellites
• Science
• Electromagnetic
• Radiation
• Spectrum
• Universe
• Astronomy
• Telescopes
• ESA
• NASA
• Hubble
• Big
• Bang
• Galaxies
• Solar
• System
• Planets
• Black
• Holes
• Dark
• Matter
• Energy
• Milky
• Way
• Speed
• Light
• Gravity

[puncheex]

The point in cold temperatures is to reduce to a minimum the random noise cased by heat. The colder the sensors and optics are, the less they jiggle and vibrate mechanically and electrically, and the cleaner the signal is (lower SNR, Signal to Noise Ratio), and the better they can see faint photons that have been travelling to us since day 1.

[GoblinXXX]

I've got nothing against her right leg...

Unfortunately, neither has she.

[JonThm]

The univers had no start! We see further into space every year - which pushes the big bang back by 2 billion years - a year!

[RYOGERG]

Quite informing.... :)

[Maxdwolf]

No data? There's the basic theory which fits with the composition of the sun and pressure of the sun's core that we know to be the case. There's the spectrometric observations and the neutrino observations. The creation of plasma balls in the lab has no bearing on the stars as the model would require an electron flux that's not there.

It is the archive link that provided the error message. Given that even Thornton's site has none of the overwhelming data you allude to I remain sceptical.

[Maxdwolf]

What have you given me to argue against but to throw out the names of a few people who have no standing in the scientific establishment and the video of Soupdragon, which is rife w. factual errors. Example: the twin "paradox" (verified by experiment and the claim that the Michelson-Morley experiment did not give a null result.

[SuperFinGuy]

There is no data that the sun is fueled by fusion. I beg you to give me a piece of scientific data to prove it. On the contrary there is overwhelming data that there is no fusion and stars are actually plasma balls and can actually be replicated in the lab.

If the link is not working go to archive*org and look for cosmologystatement*org and open the latest archive they have of the site.

[SuperFinGuy]

"Ridiculousness"

Thanks for making my point that now you have no argument and you're just resorting to name calling.

What is ridiculous is that even though the gravity centered cosmology doesn't work and it is patched up with non-existent hypotheticals, you still have the nerve to call it science.

[Maxdwolf]

Haven't started with it, you just came in late. I've had to waste hours of my time reading up on these people. Thornhill just builds off the ridiculousness of Velikovsky. These people don't just believe that electromagnetism overrides gravity on large scales, but that the sun is fueled by the flow of electrons rather than fusion.

As for the web archive:

"We're sorry, but the URL or date specified were invalid. Please try another request"

[SuperFinGuy]

The big bang has little to do with relativity. It fundamentally violates it actually. Not to mention that the plasma cosmology also uses relativity.

Are you serious? Birkeland currents are observed in space and were named after Birkeland for explaining and reproducing them in the lab. So they are not 'trying', it is fact. Look it up!

[SuperFinGuy]

Actually it is the big bang bang that is based on creationist ideas and was proposed by a priest called Georges Lemaitre.

Why is Soupdragon not credible? Is he telling any lies? Or is it because he is not well known? Why don't you check his references? lol Science is not a popularity contest, no wonder like so many others you just assume instead of applying the scientific method.

[SuperFinGuy]

You know it is a sign of lack of objectivity and honesty when one starts with name calling.

I am talking about scientists like Eric J. Lerner, Halton C. Arp, Wal Thornhill, Immanuel Velikovsky and many others. Look here for a list of scientists that support the plasma cosmology:

cosmologystatement*org or if it's still offline here:

h**p://web.archive*org/web/200­80804202204/h**p://3W's*cosmol­ogystatement*org/