r/SpaceXBets • • 8h ago

Image Can you believe it?

Post image
25 Upvotes

76 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/OwlsHootTwice 6h ago

Falcon Heavy has had 13 launches since the roadster went up, including three this year, and all have successfully delivered payloads to space.

The Nancy Grace Roman space telescope, launched last month, is on route to the Sun/Earth L2 point about a million miles from earth where it will do deep sky observations looking for exoplanets.

2

u/Admirable_Ground_163 6h ago

It's not Heavy, but it is a con.  They are really good at faking it, they have it down to a science. 

1

u/OwlsHootTwice 6h ago

You yourself could track them with an easy to obtain telescope and do the measurements yourself as to how far away they are. But then that would require critical thinking

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 6h ago

It is very easy to observe these objects in the sky, no doubt.  The doubt arises when it is assumed that they are satellites.  Objects in orbit are supposedly about 200 miles up. 

Do you really think that you can see an object the size of a school bus from 200 miles away in the blackness of night?  Could it be that the objects are much lower and are something else that they are not telling us?  

Since the Earth is Flat and motionless, they can't be in orbit, so what could it be? 

2

u/Next_Instruction_528 5h ago

"Since the Earth is Flat and motionless, they can't be in orbit, so what could it be? "

Oh so you're actually insane. You should lead with that next time

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 6h ago

Maybe the objects that you can track were already moving up there for a long time and they just assigned them a name. 

2

u/OwlsHootTwice 6h ago

That’s easy enough to verify too. The sky has been photographed for 150 years now. Compare two photos and see that there’s new objects now. Objects that correspond to satellites placed in specific orbits and launched on well known dates. The math isn’t that hard.

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 6h ago edited 6h ago

Yeah, that is how you could verify it.  Still wouldn't prove that what you are seeing is a satellite though, it just proves that the object that you are seeing is what they want you to think it is, not what it actually is, which are highly likely two different things.  Have you seen the Neutral Buoyancy Lab?  They film the "space walks" in a swimming pool. 

1

u/OwlsHootTwice 2h ago

Doesn’t matter what it is or what you want to name them. The point is that astronomers photographed the entirety of the sky starting in the 19th century, frequently using the large telescopes that were built, and then analyzed those photos and catalogued the heavens. Then in 1957 additional objects began appearing, objects that were launched from the ground and placed in various orbits. The only new things being added to the heavens were added by humans

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 6h ago

The sky has been photographed for 150 years yet somehow they can't film 24 hour 4k Livestream from the space station or a continuous no-cut shot from the ground, to space and back down to the ground. 

1

u/LegendTheo 5h ago

You should ask musk to publish the full uncut footage from one or two of the cameras on ship from its last flight. That would be an uncut shot from earth to orbit and back.

I bet SpaceX would do it. They only cut those shots to show other things after all.

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 5h ago

We have been asking for 12 years.  Nasa and SpaceX both.  Are ye' new to the flat and motionless plane? 

1

u/LegendTheo 5h ago

The only vehicle capable of an uncut video is Starship as everything else we've put into orbit loses connection during re-entry.

Starship finally was put into a stable orbit a few weeks ago. That's the one to ask about, since they streamed uncut video from the whole flight.

Although, to be honest, I'm not sure what you think "cutting" is doing to any of the starship launches. If the views they're showing were being faked, they'd have to be CGI. No amount of cutting is going to allow you to do a physical effect for re-entry visuals.

1

u/Admirable_Ground_163 5h ago

So there is an uncut 4k video from the ground to re-entry?  They could shoot a continuous shot from the capsule and upload it after as well to get the whole shot. 

1

u/LegendTheo 3h ago

Yes there is an uncut shot. It's just not been released uncut. If you watch any of the recent (particularly the last) starship flights, they all have continuous video from launch to splashdown. They do have cuts, as they switch cameras.

Previously what you're asking for was basically impossible. Almost all orbital missions prior to Starship were measured in at minimum days to usually months or years. An uncut video would require either continuous transmission, which prior to starship breaks on reentry, or large enough storage to stream and record the whole file. Which you're not going to get at 4k for days or months.

Also, why does it have to be 4K? I'm guessing you picked that as most space cameras are not 4k, so it reduces the surface area of people being able to provide one. What does 4k get you? You can easily cgi 4k, especially with everything at extreme distance light an orbital flight.

→ More replies (0)