Minecraft: Asteroid edition

Dear readers 

If you think this to be a misleading ploy, utilizing a famous franchise/brand; to attract views then you would be nothing short of utterly correct. It was cleverly devised by a devious friend of mine.
Ok, ok you caught me; I have no friends hahaha. This is the kind of self effacing humor which can be expected from this blog.

What you can also expect is Controversy.

To find it we once again look to the celestial heavens, more specifically to the rocky masses rolling through space AKA Asteroids.  In case the title didn’t already give it away (In which case you probably won’t be interested in the article anyway and I suggest you move it along); the controversy of the day and the coming decades will be Asteroid Mining.
 

Before we start it is of crucial significance to acknowledge the organizations currently researching the field of asteroid mining:
-NASA
-Deep Space industries
-Planetary Resources Inc
-Kepler Energy and Space Engineering LLC

Now several questions strike the mind when talking about the “prospect” of asteroid mining (a dash of mining humor, you younglings probably won’t get it)

1) Why in the seven hells are we even talking of mining asteroids?

To answer, I direct you to an economic phrase; “Limited resources and unlimited wants”. The earth’s resources, specifically mined elements that are necessary for modern industry to function (e.g.:-zinc, tin, lead, copper, etc.) are estimated to expire in 50 to 60 years time.

What on earth are we to do? Nothing would provide a solution, well nothing on earth that is.
Scientists really thought outside the box and the atmosphere and found an answer, Asteroids.

Asteroids are like meteoroids but instead of containing space rubble and garbage, they are rich with wicked valuable metals and elements.  

About time we did talk about asteroid mining don’t you think? 

2) How do we know for certain if there’s even anything worth mining on those godforsaken space boulders?

Ah well, Specialized satellites are to be devised to acquire details about composition, proximity acceleration required to get to and from the intended target and other key factors in order to determine if a particular asteroid is indeed a valid and valuable prospect for mining.

Planetary resources inc. has planned the development of the following equipment to carry out the prospecting of asteroids:

-Arkyd series 100(the LEO space telescope) a telescope to analyze asteroids (currently being worked on, there’s a kick starter and everything)
-Arkyd series 200(the Interceptor) a  probe of sorts that would further analyze the asteroid on site
-Arkyd series 300 (the Rendezvous Prospector) satellite that will  research and find resources “deeper in space”

To elaborate further on the selection process, first and foremost the asteroid has to be a ‘Near earth asteroid’ so that the acceleration needed to transport the resources to and from is less, thus getting a higher return on the prospect.

The composition itself varies from asteroid to asteroid however they can be classified into 3 main common types, but there are many other subclasses you can Google if you are interested.

3) Fine but how are we going to mine a bloody Asteroid if it is blasting through space?

The organizations mentioned afore have concocted several methods on how to approach the mining aspect as illustrated in the pictures below.

A) Shoot to Drill - a robotic prospector is to remain on site to drill for precious materials that will be shipped to earth via capsules.

What it would actually look like

What I wish it would be like.

B) Bag ‘em and drag ‘em- a mission to retrieve an asteroid by enveloping it and transporting it to the moon’s orbit for it to be mined.

What it could actually look like

What a caricature of the proposed mission would be like.

C) Haul Ass-teroid –Towing an asteroid using rocket power into earth’s orbit for mining.

What it could be like

What it's actually going to be like

 

4) Is Asteroid Mining really worth it? Yes or No?                    

                                   

Yes. That’s all folks, have a pleasant day.                      

5) Seriously? GOD you piss me off! Elaborate please. 

Well “Yes” in the long run would be a better answer.  This is because with the current technology we possess feasibility is in a horrid state.

To put this in context NASA’s upcoming mission (OSIRIS-Rex) which costs around $1 billion estimated to bring back 2 ounces of gold or platinum, $1800 per ounce.
So technically ROI would be $3600-$1billion/$1billion X 100 which amounts to extremely BAD.
Granted the project is indeed just an asteroid study and sample retrieval but can they not bring a bigger sample?

But it is the prospect of Asteroid Mining in the long run will that make it a worthwhile investment as it will push humanity to discover efficient and cost effective space travel (the development of a Space fuel depot is already in the talks due to this).

It could be the first step that would lead us to colonize planets.

It could be the first step that would lead us to make our first contact with extraterrestrials.

It could be the first step that would lead us to BE extraterrestrials.

And, in my mind, thus solves the controversy.

Progress demands our attention and our support.

Our resources are depleting whether we like it or not. I say high time we started thinking about it and thinking off world.

SO in conclusion Asteroid Mining FTW

Comment below if you agree and want to add anything or if your opinion differs. I would appreciate it either way.
You know, whatevs.

Haters gonna hate, Lovers gonna love, and honey badgers don’t give a Sh*t.

Peace out. Cheers

Just Dusting The Big Bang Theory

Dear Readers

I apologize for being off the interweb for some time. Contrary to popular belief I do have a life, but that is a controversy for another time.

On this auspicious day I have decided to tackle the fascinating, the intriguing and extremely controversial topic regarding the recent detection of gravitational waves, and as I do so I am completely aware that I am miles behind the whole band wagon.
FYI, I was waiting for some time to ensure its validity.

But first, lemme t.......ell you that I do not under any circumstance employ or even think to paraphrase cheesy "trending" catchphrases; that would be beneath me. Apologies my ADHD is acting up again. Back to the matter at hand...........

What in the seven hells are these gravitational waves?

To get a brief gist of what these physicists are on about, go to the link below.
http://www.space.com/25090-big-bang-gravity-waves-discovered-video.html

Basically put these are the residual gravitational waves theorized by physicists to be proof of the inflation of the universe just moments after the big bang.
The hypothesis suggests that due to the expansion of the universe in such a short amount of time, that these waves also expanded, ergo we should be able to observe them.

Easier said than done. The theory dated back to 1965;Experimentation only began in 2006 and after a grueling nine year search finally.

 On  March 17th 2014 it was announced that the astrophysicists working with BICEP2 telescope found what looked like solid proof of these gravitational waves in the cosmic microwave background.

However things which are too good to be true, often are. Several claims have been made stirring a whirlwind of doubts as to the validity of the results gathered by the BICEP2 project, mainly revolving around space dust. Dust of all things!

How does dust affect these results you say? In the very basic sense like all things we see, space dust absorbs light and re-emits them as infrared radiation. Critics claim that the analysis published by the BICEP2 project fails to account for these emitions.This is where the true controversy begins.

In response the BICEP2 team revised their paper. In it John Kovac, key member of the BICEP 2 project, states that they did in fact take this into account. However this was yet again refuted by new information obtained by the Planck space telescope which says that ,although factored ,the Space dust was not properly accounted for in their revised paper and that the lack of proper information about this technically renders the evidence null.

However despite all opposition The BICEP 2 team stand firm and confident that their evidence is true and solid and hoping that this "space dust storm" will blow over. 

Alas this controversy shall remain unsolved at least till the end of the year. I shall meet you then or perhaps a few months after.

It truly is a matter of faith.

Do you BELIEVE in the BICEP 2 team and the gravitas of their literally astronomical find?
Or
Do you TRUST in the DUST that proves that this was just a premature blunder.

Whatever your answer is one thing is for certain.

This would be great material for an Epic Rap Battle of History.





Carpe Diem. Peace out!

Valentines Day. If I Do Quote So Myself.

Dear Astute Readers

This is just a quote I came up with ,albeit late,for Valentines.

Be it single or plural I hope you had a brilliant day.

Photo credit: http://stazzix.deviantart.com/

Science Guy vs God. Let the Battle Begin.

Dear Astute readers.Firstly I address that although the title of this post conveys a hostile atmosphere it is further from the truth. In all honesty it is a marketing ploy which most bloggers use to get that much needed ego-boosting traffic.

Before starting to write I contemplated whether relating my opinion in a vastly religious world would be the best thing to do. But then I thought more on the subject and realised only God can judge me so I went ahead. This article could be considered ideologically sensitive I suppose, so be warned. I’m also bad with disclaimers.

In case you didn't know the debate was between Bill Nye (Educator, Engineer, Scientist and TV icon) and Ken Ham (Young Earth creationist and Evangelist).

Science Guy Bill Nye (Left) and Creation Bloke Ken Ham (Right)
Expressions Say It All.

The subject matter discussed revolved around the main topics of the creationist tree of evolution as opposed to everything originating from a single organism ,the validity of the events stated in the bible, the age of the earth and methods of proving this among many other things, but most importantly what affect this should have on the education system.
I will attempt to briefly summarise how I feel the debate proceeded.

The Main focus of Young earth creationists is the age of our world. They believe the earth to be 6000 years old based on a book written, rewritten, passed down and translated through the ages. Whereas in mainstream science, experiments have been done to determine the age of the earth to be approximately 4.5 billion years old.

Let us look at fact and logic. Although I would love to travel back in time unfortunately I cannot so the only proof I have that the earth is 6000 years old is a single book written by a man. But what I can do is travel to Australia (incidentally and ironically where Mr. Ken Ham is from). I will journey to Western Australia, specifically Jack Hills where I can find zircon crystals and perform a radiometric age dating experiments to find that they are at least 4.404 billion years old.

Ken Ham states that radiometric dating is fallible but I would assume that scientists would have moved on to better age dating methods or use none at all if they were faulted instead of continuing to use them in self delusion.

He uses an example for which he did not present actual proof that a thousand year wood fragment was found encased in million year rock. His argument is: How can the ages differ? The answer might be tectonic plate movements, where rock layers could have slid over and under the wood fragments and over time encapsulating it between them.

Fundamentally the age of the planet being so young begs the question of how rates of nature were so incredibly rapid in the past and why they have slowed down in the present day and age. For example the tectonic plate movements. As such I believe this to be a flawed hypothesis.

Moving on to the creationist tree of evolution. Ken Ham eloquently puts that instead of a single organism from which all animals originate, that all animals stem from different "kinds" of animals. The term "kind" he says refers to, I believe, sub classes or families. Therefore meaning that according to creationism the classification of order, class, phylum and even kingdom are perhaps moot. Now I don't know much about taxonomy but I believe that they have determined the classifications of order, class, phylum and kingdom through molecular genetic research and experimentation.

For example humans are in the primate order meaning we share incredibly similar genetic compositions with other primates so it is likely that at some point we all descended from a single organism. Going even further into the class of mammalia new relationships have been found linking the different families of mammals. This contradicts the creationist tree of evolution.

Furthermore as Bill Nye says if indeed we were to imagine a young world, given the number of species that exist today:
A) The evolution process would have to be remarkably fast.
B) Dozens of Species would have to be found everyday
 

Sadly neither is the case in the present day. However what is fascinating is that this theory closely resembles a much loved kids cartoon.

In conclusion I fear that Science has triumphed purely due to the lack of evidence and flawed theories presented by the Creationist party and therefore conventional science MUST remain to be in use public schools. 

   All in all the debate is incredibly entertaining and educative and I advise you to watch it.

 

Finally I remind you that religion, although having faults, is and has played a key role in giving hope, a sense of community and inspiring people. It is through patience respect and restraint that we will attain peace and enlightenment.

On the other hand bombard me with your comments, questions and corrections.Rebuttle I shall.

Cheers