But in Reg standard units
96 miles in diameter is 896.4971 milliWales. Other conversions left as an exercise for the reader.
NASA has announced that its Mars Science Laboratory, aka Curiosity, will touch down in Mars' Gale crater, described as boffins' "top choice to pursue the ambitious goals of this new rover mission". Gale crater is a depression 96 miles (154km) in diameter – covering "about the combined area of Connecticut and Rhode Island" – …
... about as much as a Jubble Telescope ?
Which may or may not be roughly equivalent to 1 x Mega Jub.
(Curiosity - maybe that will be the name future Mars inhabitants will give to it's decayed remains when they are unearthed in years hence - just a thought)
Right, I'm off - jub done :-)
"Curiosity is tasked with sniffing water, but also organic compounds - although Michael Meyer, lead scientist for the Mars Exploration Program at NASA HQ, described the chance of finding the latter as "a long shot"."
Methinks all here on Earth recognise that there is every chance of lead scientists for the Mars Exploration Program at NASA HQ sniffing organic compounds, as a former for their long shots.
The crying shame though is that they could surely do so much more, better, at home, rather than pratting about in an alien field they know absolutely nothing about.
I was surprised to find that post was completely comprehensible to me.
Then I spotted the 1 at the end of your name.
The cash value of NASA's budget is huge.
But it's size as a *percentage* of the US federal budget is *tiny*. At the peak of Apollo this reference
shows the peak year was 1966 at a whopping 4.41% of the *whole* US federal budget.
The last *listed* year it (2008) it was 0.6%.. That's 6/10's of *one* percent.
So dumping NASA would release a whole 0.6% of the US federal budget (don't think it'll go back to voters. Governments can always find a use for "savings")
I've no idea what that's the equivalent of. Possibly enough to give every US solider in the field another meal a day (as if US soldiers were starved already)?
There *are* reasons for shutting down (or radically re-structuring) NASA
Funding a *massive* increase in health, social or defense spending (depending on your personal outlook) is *not* one of them.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021