Hubble - Worth the money?

[Ags]

I haven't seen any such studies, and i somewhat doubt if they're true or more than just consequential.

OK, I have to respond. The studies I refer to are large-scale clinical trials. A quick google brings up results like:

Well - Vitamin Pills - A False Hope? - NYTimes.com

The most famous one was a huge study in Scandinavia that was to investigate the benefits of various vitamin supplements, but the study was closed several years early on ethical grounds - the damage done to the vitamin recipients' health was considered to outweigh the benefits of continuing the study. Later (and smaller) studies have shown less extreme results, admittedly.

Wikipedia has some more info on studies showing zero-benefit of multivitamns:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivitamin

I'm not anti vitamins - my doctor has told me to take vitamin D supplements, for example. But you are not doing yourself any favors by popping some pretty powerful chemicals like smarties without good reason to do so.

Anyway, just eat your 5 a day and give the vitamin money to NASA!

[Superewza]

Well that study seems to say that they do nothing to protect against cancer or heart disease, which is to be expected really since those aren't really illnesses that your immune system can conquer. It says nothing about bacterial or viral infections such as the common cold, and the body's efficiency in dealing with it.

Plus anybody who engages in regular exercise, such as running, (which you really should if you care about your health, before even thinking about pills) require a lot of Vitamin C, E and B6 - more than your average diet can provide. So the question would be between supplements of vegetables and fruits or supplements of pills, and i doubt if, purely on the Vitamin side of things, there's much difference between them.

[lw24]

Could we bring this back on track please guys. Discuss vitamins in 'The Lounge' if you really want

[Superewza]

Yeah... i don't really know how that came up anyway

Still, you're asking on an astronomy forum if we think Hubble is worth it, what do you expect to get as an answer? I mean, yes - it's worth pretty much any expense in my eyes, but i once read that for the cost of the Hubble repair missions we could have built a whole new scope. I don't know how much validity that has, but still, if only we'd got it right the first time.

[Ags]

Sorry! I didn't mean to be controversial.

[Sam]

In my view the money spent on Hubble is worth it, aside from the huge amount of jobs it created or advancements in research and education in the US that have been sparked by hubble it has also inspired people the world over to marvel at the universe and I bet it has got a lot of kids interested in science.

[blackparticle]

I watched a few Hubble documentaries over the past few cloudy nights. The IMAX one narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio and the ESA offering.

Of course it was worth it.

One thing I did wonder about.. When Hubble gets to the end of its lifespan they plan on attaching a rocket pod and dropping it out of its orbit and burning it up in the Pacific somewhere.

Why?

Ok, I understand that at some point it goes from space telescope to space junk but surely they don't need to write it off completely. Just because the shuttle has been retired doesn't mean that it won't be salvageable in the future.

Why not just put it into cold storage?

If the worry is a declining orbit then wouldn't it be just as easy to send it off in the other direction and put it into a lunar orbit for example? I'm sure there is somewhere in space that it can sit and wait for an interested party to fix it up. After all, as telescopes go, it's a damn good one.

I can easily see a scenario, say around 2050 - 2100, when we might have a couple of interplanetary cargo vessels that do automated supply hops between the Earth, Mars and the moon. If one of these could pick it up, retrofit it out with what would be modern technology, fit an Ion drive to the back and send it out towards Jupiter and Saturn, I'm sure it would take on a new lease of life doing detailed surveys of their moons.

It just seems such a waste to toast it for no good reason.

[ScubaMike]

10 Billion - spread over 21 years (and still counting).

Absolute bargain.

The 10 Billion cost doesn't take into account the increase in manufacturing, trade etc etc that the build/launch/support has resulted in.

Stop the bankers bonuses for a year and it would probably pay for it a few times over.

[welshdai]

i have found that the images from hubble are one of the most inspirational tools to use as a science teacher. totally mind boggling

where did all of the money come from for hubble? was it all from tax etc?

[Macavity]

Still, you're asking on an astronomy forum if we think Hubble is worth it, what do you expect to get as an answer?

True enough. I wince at the way science often leaves itself (naively!) exposed to the criticism of politicians, "hard working" Joe Bloggs etc. My heart <breaks> (sic) over the potential loss of the James Webb telescope. But I get angry over (justified?) accusations of inefficiencies, "management" incompetence etc. And it does little good to compare this with the *wastrels* of politics and the financial sector. They always seem to bounce back. Science rarely recovers from "cuts".

I's great that Brian Cox "seduces the youth" into science, with an (implicit) promise of vague celebrity, of "CERN nights" (LOL), nerd-chic etc. To the upcoming generation of scientists, may I still commend involvement with the HARDWARE - "Get your hands dirty", lads (and lasses)! There's more to science than ambition, "names on papers" and "foreign conferences"...

Not bitter HERE, But I DO feel that science (some erstwhile

fellow scientists!) need a "kick up the backside" occasionally.

[FraserClarke]

where did all of the money come from for hubble? was it all from tax etc?

Yes, government funded (i.e. tax). Roughly 85% US and 15% Europe. I think Canada might have a share in there, but not sure.

HST, as a project, has been around since at least the mid-seventies, and you can trace it back conceptually to the forties!

[ollypenrice]

Zakalwe's spending figures throw the whole thing into relief, even comic relief, were it not for the fact that our military lunacy is such a menace.

The thing that distinguishes us from stones is our curiosity. Long may we feed it by furthering our enquiries. What is more beautiful than a telescope quietly collecting light from faraway places which are every bit as real (and much more interesting) than the local supermarket.

Olly

[jonathan]

10 Billion is such small fry compared to the figures I regularly hear on the news. How many billions have been lost from imaginary stocks and shares in a matter of days? That money never really existed apart from inside some computer system, Hubble does exist and we get results from it.

[Superewza]

One thing I did wonder about.. When Hubble gets to the end of its lifespan they plan on attaching a rocket pod and dropping it out of its orbit and burning it up in the Pacific somewhere.

Why?

Ok, I understand that at some point it goes from space telescope to space junk but surely they don't need to write it off completely. Just because the shuttle has been retired doesn't mean that it won't be salvageable in the future.

Why not just put it into cold storage?

If the worry is a declining orbit then wouldn't it be just as easy to send it off in the other direction and put it into a lunar orbit for example? I'm sure there is somewhere in space that it can sit and wait for an interested party to fix it up. After all, as telescopes go, it's a damn good one.

I can easily see a scenario, say around 2050 - 2100, when we might have a couple of interplanetary cargo vessels that do automated supply hops between the Earth, Mars and the moon. If one of these could pick it up, retrofit it out with what would be modern technology, fit an Ion drive to the back and send it out towards Jupiter and Saturn, I'm sure it would take on a new lease of life doing detailed surveys of their moons.

It just seems such a waste to toast it for no good reason.

If only they would attach a retro rocket to it so it could burn up in the atmosphere - more than likely they'll leave it and it will become another piece of space debris. Of which there is far too much for comfort already. That said Hubble is in a relatively high altitude orbit so probably won't pose a problem, but still - if we don't do something to tackle the problem now then it will come back to bite us a thousand times over when we really start getting into space.

As for retrofitting it, it has a usable lifespan for a reason. The instruments get destroyed by the constant radiation, gyros run out of fuel and the optics get bombarded by micrometeorites. That far in the future we'd more than likely have the capability to build something far better suited to such a mission for half the cost of a repair and refurbish. Maybe for sentimental value we could bring it back down and put it in a museum, but without the Shuttle that's not really a possibility.

That said, i could NEVER justify allowing the ISS to just burn up in the atmosphere, not after everything we've put into it.