One of man\'s greatest achievements...

[server]

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

<https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html>

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.



--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[John Walliker]

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 18:25:48 UTC, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html
10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Ground-based telescopes would not be able to see the things that Webb
is looking for, so the answer is none.
If not on Webb, do you really think that the money would have been spent
on things that save lives?

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:55:31 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
<jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 18:25:48 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html
10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Ground-based telescopes would not be able to see the things that Webb
is looking for, so the answer is none.

Illogical. The answer is \"many.\"

If not on Webb, do you really think that the money would have been spent
on things that save lives?

Could, not would.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[Dimiter_Popoff]

On 1/7/2022 20:25, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

None of which could see what Webb is supposed to see if things get
right (still not there yet, some thumb pressing won\'t hurt).
The Earth has an atmosphere, you know .

As for time and budget - well, if this were the only sci project
soaking a lot more than what it should/could have...

 

[ke...@kjwdesigns.com]

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 10:25:48 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
....

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html
10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

....
The US spent 70 times the total cost of the telescope on the military in a single year.

$753.5 billion vs $10 billion. It seems we would rather kill people than save them anyway.

kw

 

[whit3rd]

On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 11:41:17 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:55:31 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
jrwal...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 18:25:48 UTC, John Larkin wrote:

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Ground-based telescopes would not be able to see the things that Webb
is looking for, so the answer is none.

Illogical. The answer is \"many.\"

Huh? The goal is to collect more information, and redundant telescopes are just
repeating the same info over and over. New bits of spectrum, and novel
capabilities, don\'t result from \'many ground-based telescopes\'.

Multiplicity of hardware bits isn\'t productive in reaching the goal; it\'s
a bad economic decision.

So, what does \'10x over budget\' mean? There wasn\'t a budget in
the original plan for the Webb. What does \'20 years late\' mean?
Launch delay was a few months, the project only got a NAME 20 years ago.
Did the universe do something vitally interesting that\'s over now?

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:34:17 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 11:41:17 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:55:31 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
jrwal...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 18:25:48 UTC, John Larkin wrote:

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Ground-based telescopes would not be able to see the things that Webb
is looking for, so the answer is none.

Illogical. The answer is \"many.\"

Huh? The goal is to collect more information, and redundant telescopes are just
repeating the same info over and over. New bits of spectrum, and novel
capabilities, don\'t result from \'many ground-based telescopes\'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Magellan_Telescope


Estimated to cost $1 billion.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank)]

John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Include how much is spent on the ISS, and what it has produced. Very poor
ROI.

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 21:09:03 -0000 (UTC), \"Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank)\"
<spamme@not.com> wrote:

John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Include how much is spent on the ISS, and what it has produced. Very poor
ROI.

Right. Growing beans in microgravity.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[whit3rd]

On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 12:46:19 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 12:34:17 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:

...The goal is to collect more information, and redundant telescopes are just
repeating the same info over and over. New bits of spectrum, and novel
capabilities, don\'t result from \'many ground-based telescopes\'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_Magellan_Telescope

Estimated to cost $1 billion.

Not a budget exactly comparable to the Webb, of course; it will also be
over a couple of decades of work, but that\'s the CONSTRUCTION cost,
doesn\'t include staffing and ongoing work after first light, nor does
it include the ongoing support work internal to the dozen or so partners
in the project planning. It won\'t do much for 10-28.5 um infrared,
unlike the Webb.

Visible light spans only 0.4 to 0.7 um, quite a small range by comparison.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 8, 2022 at 5:25:48 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html
10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

John Larkin doesn\'t know much about science. or he wouldn\'t think that ground-based telescopes could have done the job that the James Webb telescope is uniquely placed to carry out.

Wittering on about how many lives the US could have saved by spending the money elsewhere rather ignores the fact that the US doesn\'t seem to spend enough on keeping it own citizens alive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

puts the US at fortieth in the league table with an average live expectancy of 78.4 years. Australia is at 7th, with 83.0 years. Germany is 29th with 81.7 years.

The US could clearly do a lot better, but it would need socialised medicine - universal health care - to get there and it is clearly unwilling to spend that kind of money on keeping it\'s own citizens alive, let alone anybody else.

It\'s a bogus claim.

--
Bill Sloman. Sydney

 

[Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank)]

Beeper <beeper@acme.com> wrote:

On 1/7/22 10:25 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late.

How so? Please provide citation to a credible source supporting your
claims that documents the original projected budget and expected
delivery/launch date.

Don\'t be a jerk. You can find out yourself. Google \"jwst over budget and
late\"

There\'s about 654,000 results. Pick any of the recent (2021-2022) articles.

You will find John was accurate and being conservative.

It really strips my gears when a childish arrogant idiot cannot search for
answers himself.

PLONK

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 8, 2022 at 6:12:12 PM UTC+11, Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank) wrote:

Beeper <bee...@acme.com> wrote:

On 1/7/22 10:25 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late.

How so? Please provide citation to a credible source supporting your
claims that documents the original projected budget and expected
delivery/launch date.

Don\'t be a jerk. You can find out yourself. Google \"over budget and
late\".

That doesn\'t limit the search to the James Webb telescope. The media just love that particular phrase.

There\'s about 654,000 results. Pick any of the recent (2021-2022) articles.

But you haven\'t posted a link to even one of them, probably because none of them refer to the James Webb telescope. If the telescope really was twenty years late, the interesting estimates would have been made back around 2001. The development of complicated projects takes time, because you spend that time looking in progressively finer detail into all the stuff you have to build, and it does tend to look more expensive as you find the problems that weren\'t initially obvious.

> You will find John was accurate and being conservative.

That would be a first.

> It really strips my gears when a childish arrogant idiot cannot search for answers himself.

The kind of childish arrogant idiot who claims to have found 654.000 results and hasn\'t post a link to one of them will throw all kinds of tantrums but isn\'t going to get taken seriously.

> PLONK

Childish tantrum ...

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, January 8, 2022 at 2:12:12 AM UTC-5, Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank) wrote:

Beeper <bee...@acme.com> wrote:

On 1/7/22 10:25 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late.

How so? Please provide citation to a credible source supporting your
claims that documents the original projected budget and expected
delivery/launch date.
Don\'t be a jerk. You can find out yourself. Google \"jwst over budget and
late\"

There\'s about 654,000 results. Pick any of the recent (2021-2022) articles.

You will find John was accurate and being conservative.

It really strips my gears when a childish arrogant idiot cannot search for
answers himself.

PLONK

It is so ironic when someone complains about someone else being childish and then responds by plonking them. lol

\"I\'m taking my toys and going home.\"

Whatever. SED drama.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Beeper]

On 1/7/22 11:12 PM, Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank) wrote:

Beeper <beeper@acme.com> wrote:

On 1/7/22 10:25 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late.

How so? Please provide citation to a credible source supporting your
claims that documents the original projected budget and expected
delivery/launch date.

Don\'t be a jerk. You can find out yourself. Google \"jwst over budget and
late\"

There\'s about 654,000 results. Pick any of the recent (2021-2022) articles.

You will find John was accurate and being conservative.

It really strips my gears when a childish arrogant idiot cannot search for
answers himself.

PLONK

Wow. I know that it is over budget and launched later than anticipated,
but I don\'t find support for \"10x over budget and 20 years late.\"

Don\'t be a jerk.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 07/01/2022 18:25, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Not dissimilar to any large scale cutting edge science project then.

Ground based telescopes can only do so much - the atmosphere really gets
in the way and removing entirely it would kill a lot of people. Problem
is that the Earth\'s atmosphere is opaque to the radiation that the Webb
telescope detects.

Chances are that as with every new high resolution imaging system that
comes online at a new wavelength it will find various interesting new
phenomena that were completely unexpected in addition to looking for the
oldest most distant luminous galaxies and quasars.

Serendipity has a habit of finding new things when a new waveband is
opened up to scrutiny. 8 acre radio array got pulsars, HST did visual,
Chandra did X-rays. Thermal band IR was always going to be next.

If we are really lucky it will be able to see deep enough to go beyond
the edge of galaxy formation. IOW longer exposures don\'t find any more
fainter galaxies just makes the ones you see there already brighter.

It was the huge number of active radio galaxies at high redshift that
put the final nail in the Steady State universe theory of Fred Hoyle.
(a man who should still have had a Nobel prize but never got one)

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[server]

On Sat, 8 Jan 2022 17:06:36 +0000, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

On 07/01/2022 18:25, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives we
could have saved.

Not dissimilar to any large scale cutting edge science project then.

It\'s hard to separate big science from big money.



--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, January 8, 2022 at 9:47:39 AM UTC-5, Beeper wrote:

On 1/7/22 11:12 PM, Arnie Dwyer (ex Jan Frank) wrote:
Beeper <bee...@acme.com> wrote:

On 1/7/22 10:25 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

10x over budget and 20 years late.

How so? Please provide citation to a credible source supporting your
claims that documents the original projected budget and expected
delivery/launch date.

Don\'t be a jerk. You can find out yourself. Google \"jwst over budget and
late\"

There\'s about 654,000 results. Pick any of the recent (2021-2022) articles.

You will find John was accurate and being conservative.

It really strips my gears when a childish arrogant idiot cannot search for
answers himself.

PLONK
Wow. I know that it is over budget and launched later than anticipated,
but I don\'t find support for \"10x over budget and 20 years late.\"
Don\'t be a jerk.

There are lies, damn lies and budget quotes!

From NPR web page, \"Originally, the cost of the telescope was estimated to be only around $1 billion to $3.5 billion, and expected launch dates ranged from 2007 to 2011.\" So if the end cost is $10 billion, I suppose you could say it was 10x over budget if you use the minimum starting number.

The difference between government overruns and commercial overruns is that commercial overruns have the option of shutting down or continuing. Oh, wait, the government does that as well.

\"I\'ve got one word for you Benjamin. Nuclear!\" Well, that wasn\'t the word, but in this case nuclear plants are exactly the commercial parallel to large military and space projects. The US had two nuclear plant underway on the eastern seaboard until the cost overruns on them caused one to be scrapped, the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Power Station and the other continues construction, the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant. The Vogtle plant is years behind and many billions of dollars over budget. The problems with nuclear power plant construction makes a space telescope look like a cake walk.

Both the government and industry will cancel projects when they are hopelessly out of control. Both the government and industry will continue on projects they should have canceled in the early stages in spite of the clear indications the projects are flawed.

The James Webb space telescope is not fundamentally flawed. It was a research project as much as development. This device was not possible to build at the time they started planning it. They planned for technological advancement in the design and construction and so had to be more fluid in the process. Yeah, it was over budget and schedule, but in the end we got an amazing piece of equipment. The only question is, is it what we need? That is open to debate, but there was no other way to build it other than to start working and only stopping when it was done, much as they did with the SR-71 blackbird. No one complained about the schedule delays and cost overruns on that because they didn\'t tell anyone publicly they were building it.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[server]

John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:1h4htg1718nr1jr2kcdkha2etjv8jgbl5k@4ax.com:

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 10:55:31 -0800 (PST), John Walliker
jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, 7 January 2022 at 18:25:48 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 06:32:40 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

This is commendable work...

Many nations involved.

Many many tons of gear down here and techs and engineers to
make use
of it...

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html
10x over budget and 20 years late. Imagine how many ground-based
telescopes we could have built for that cost, or how many lives
we could have saved.

Ground-based telescopes would not be able to see the things that
Webb is looking for, so the answer is none.

Illogical. The answer is \"many.\"

Absolutely retarded. His answer was spot on, you stupid twerp.
So, read it again, zero knowledge putz boy.

If not on Webb, do you really think that the money would have been
spent on things that save lives?

Could, not would.

You are an abject idiot, John Larkin. You prove it fairly often in
your decades long invasion of this group.