7 ms·
When the model doesn't fit, add an extra free parameter! Seriously though, I wonder what the ramifications to other parts of astrophysics would be if this is t
by smaddox 3y ago
When the model doesn't fit, add an extra free parameter!
Seriously though, I wonder what the ramifications to other parts of astrophysics would be if this is true.
- redroyal 3y ago[flagged]
- Euphorbium 3y ago[flagged]
- psychphysic 3y agoCan't tell if you're being tongue in cheek here.
- kgwxd 3y agoHistory would imply not.
- 7373737373 3y agoTell that to the dinosaurs
- dandanua 3y agoAnd what is a productive utility for you, exactly?
- notaustinpowers 3y agoIt's okay to admit you don't understand what astrophysicists do.
- photonerd 3y agoPlease tell me this is sarcasm
- areoform 3y ago> no productive utility to us tiny human beings whatsoever. It’s a racket Do you use GPS? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5253894/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5253894/ Have you ever used a MRI or undergone a CAT scan? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDL_(programming_language)#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDL_(programming_language)#His... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRAF Used anything that involves interferometry - contact lenses, anything with a lens or a laser, optical coherence tomography (OCT) etc? https://nexsci.caltech.edu/workshop/2003/2003_MSS/07_Monday/history_030706a.pdf https://nexsci.caltech.edu/workshop/2003/2003_MSS/07_Monday/... I can go on, but I think I've made my point. But even if these fruits didn't come of it, something doesn't have to be "productive" or useful according to your definition to justify its existence. Just like art or music doesn't have to be "productive," useful or even beautiful by your definitions to exist. There is more to human existence than breathing, eating and leaving bad comments on websites.
- redroyal 3y agoI think you made my point actually
- jamilton 3y agoI'd rather have a billion dollars of art installments than another giant telescope. Or a billion dollars of art installments and a billion dollars of welfare, that'd still be much cheaper than the JWST alone. Are there any relatively recent societal benefits? These all seem 20+ years old. At first I was thinking it might be because NASA's budget got smaller since the 70s, but it's actually increased slightly. I think it's completely fair to see astrophysics as somewhat vain. The comparison to art is apt - it's essentially a luxury. And the fruits are somewhat of a bad defense, IMO. Besides satellite technology, they're basically side benefits, not something the money was actually spent for. Presumably if the same amount of money was spent on "make something useful to society" there would be higher yield to society than what we got from "get a rocket to the moon" and "make a better telescope". That being said, satellite technology is incredible and I'm glad we have it.
- helsontaveras18 3y agoLove the idea that it's a racket, that astrophysicists are making millions of dollars watching stars, and we're paying for the fancy cars they drive.
- FredPret 3y agoYeah, down with Big Telescope. This thing goes all the way to the top. In all seriousness, no portion of my tax payer dollars make me happier than the money that goes to the ISS and JWT and other expensive sciency things in space
- redroyal 3y agoWhat about your fellow citizens who can’t afford to eat?
- dev_slash_null 3y agoHow much of that food was grown with help from weather satellites, and GPS satellites, among other things?
- redroyal 3y agoAstrophysics can’t take credit for satellites and GPS those were built with the primary incentive of guided munitions and have little to do w outer space. The field has become something like a crossover between a religion and a cheap tabloid