2013: A Space Odyssey - a cosmological review of the year

Great review of the year. Thanks Reg! See you all next year.

Science...

...is awesome! Hoping for some exciting discoveries in 2014. My son and I will be on the back deck with his new telescope trying to make a few of our own (they're all exciting when you're 6).

add three per cent extra risk to the existing 20 to 25 per cent risk of fatal cancer

Is that really unacceptable? How about selecting from those with a lower than usual family history of cancer?

Asian Space Agencies...

Since the Russians, Indians, Chinese and even the Iranians launch from Asia, they all qualify.

Their results were broadly positive. It is clear that any Moon-landing methodology is more popular in Asia than the USA, Things can always change, though.

I don't know how this wide-ranging topic goes without mentioning Mars-one. Although great enthusiasm has been shown, it may not be as intense or broad-based as originally hoped.

Finally, the India Mars-probe had a key failing that involved a full-power orbit adjustment. Did they ever get a fix or have they relegated their mission to the half-power orbit adjustments that worked when they left Earth Orbit.

From a USA perspective, the increasing use of the Commercial service providers has been VERY interesting. They have learning curves, just like anyone else. I don't know if the international community see this as revolutionary a change as USA people do. For too long, people have treated Basic-Research agencies (NASA, for one) like they were commercial service providers. NASA has been a whipping boy of the USA+international press because it DOES NOT perform like a commercial company.

Just before the Gong

Jews in Space (but without Mel Brooks)

Nobody has to get cancer, nor is anyone likely to die of depressurization from

small meteors piercing a space capsule on long journeys, nor does anyone

have to be depressed by the thought of being encased in shit.

George Bull, the Canadian-American Werner von Braun, was building powder-

loaded "Superguns" to put sturdy payloads into orbit at a small fraction of the

cost of rocket launches.

One SDI project that was axed to save others was the "gas gun", using rubber

bladders of flammable gas instead of gunpowder, but even as a US govern-

ment project it probably would have substantially lowered the cost of putting

sturdy payloads in orbit.

Since George Bull and the US government did the first part of R&D, private

ventures could eliminate most of the cost of putting sturdy payloads in orbit

by finishing their work on one or both types; "supergun" or "space cannon".

'Sturdy payloads' would include dovetailed sections of heavy radiation and

meteor shielding, to be assembled in orbit, around a rocket-launched crew-

capsule. The shielding sections could be bundled and fired into orbit many

times at very low cost, until all the sections were gathered and fastened

around the crew capsule. Much more rocket fuel could be fired into orbit in

this way than would be cost-feasible if rocket-launched, so the journey would

be shortened by having more rocket fuel to accelerate and decelerate the

capsule between Earth orbit and Mars.

Other sturdy payloads can include electronics with no moving parts, some

electromechanical devices and structural members and shielding to build

a space station that would be far safer and lasting than the precarious

structures it is feasible to launch and build in orbit now. Because everything

boosted into space with rockets has to be super light, effective shielding

and structural strength to withstand collisions with meteors and space

junk is cost prohibitive as effective radiation shielding is.

So the private company that builds a supergun or space cannon in the

desert will make long space journeys and orbital space stations safe.