(Part 2) Top products from r/space

STEM generates wealth. Good message.

But apace advocates have been saying this since the 1960's. Neil's not bringing anything new to the table. This 2012 testimony didn't generate much support from policy makers. Neither did the book he published in 2012.

Space advocates can point to huge benefits generated by research from the 1950's and 60's. Not all of it was NASA R&D. Some of it was military and commercial. A few of the more prominent:

Miniaturization of electronics -- Rockets and missiles needed compact, low mass electronics. U.S. funded R&D helped put American companies at the forefront of an electronics revolution. There were already transistor radios around when NASA formed but the R&D helped accelerate trends like Moore's Law.

Communication sats. Generally not NASA's but it's hard to imagine commerical entities launching satellites if NASA and the U.S. military hadn't blazed a trail. These are huge beneficial spin off from the space program.

Weather sats. Again, not NASA but enabled by development of launch technology More accurate weather prediction has saved lives, prevented property damage and enabled farmers to produce more food.

Will future NASA endeavors generate such dramatic spin offs? If that could be solidly demonstrated, it'd be easier to persuade policy makers. I certainly don't regard it as a given.

One of the rallying cries has been Colonize Mars! With huge, disposable rockets like the SLS. Basically Apollo rockets redux. The Apollo trips to the moon were about 10 billion a pop. It is likely SLS trips to Mars every two years would be even more expensive. Settling Mars would take a long sustained effort taking decades or maybe even centuries. Would policy makers support that sustained effort? An expensive, high profile program would be a lightning rod for policy makers that want to appear fiscally responsible. I'd give the program two presidential cycles. Agaiin, Apollo redux.

Some critics maintain the chief benefit of SLS and Orion is providing employment in certain congressional districts. Pork, in other words. I tend to agree. I don't think NASA is blazing new trails with SLS and Orion.

Many serious proponents of exploiting and settling space call for improved robotics and In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). Already British Petroleum is using remotely operated vehicles to build sophisticated infrastructure on the sea floor where humans can't reach. Should NASA invest heavily in improved tele-robots, this could potentially generate enormous spin offs. I can see tele-robot operaters donning their motion capture suits in their living rooms. No need to commute to work. Besides working on the lunar surface or on asteroids, tele-robot operatros could do work in the deeper mines, high mountain tops, the sea floor. As well as hazardous disaster areas like Fukashima after a tsunami.

Summary: "A penny for NASA" is too simplistic. Some NASA projects might have big pay offs. Others are likely dead ends. If we want to persuade policy makers and fire up the public, we need to place our bets on good horses.

Rule of thumb is avoid cheap refractors. With refractors you need top notch optics to get good results, and you will never find them on cheaper ones. Don't be fooled by the magnification number, 300x magnification is useless when your optics cannot produce good results to begin with. It's just a cheap trick they use to impress beginners


Your best bet, with a 200€ budget is to get a good pair of binoculars, something around 15x70 and a tripod. If you still want a telescope, what you need is a reflector. Check out the dobsonians in Amazon, they're great and pack a lot of power for what you pay for, best bang for your buck as a beginner. Example: Orion 8944 SkyQuest XT6 Classic Dobsonian Telescope https://www.amazon.com/dp/B001DDW9UW/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_DsWCCb75RADY1

Telescopes are one thing where price does really matter though, it is advised to spend as much as you can on one, because quality and results obtained exponentially go up the pricier they are.

My suggestion would be to get a pair of nice binoculars, and if you like what you see thru them in the night sky (completely dark, away from City lights preferably) save up for a nice telescope. I've seen quite a few deep sky objects with just these cheap Olympus 10x50 ones, in completely dark skies. Olympus Trooper 10x50 DPS I Binocular (Black) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000AKGX3/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_HIWCCb36S5DK2

Good luck!

I know I’m showing up a bit late, but I absolutely have to recommend The Black Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics by Leonard Susskind:

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Hole-War-Stephen-Mechanics/dp/0316016411

I know it might sound like an overly-specific or technical book, and the title gives the impression that the author has a chip on his shoulder about Stephen Hawking, but I can assure you that neither of those things are the case!

The story of the “war” itself is really just about how Susskind and Hawking had a friendly scientific disagreement over whether it’s theoretically possible to retrieve something after it enters a black hole. They discussed it for years, and eventually it was Stephen Hawking who admitted he was wrong.

But the reason I’m mentioning the book is that it does an amazing job of explaining everything. Susskind knows that in order to write a story about the black hole war that people will actually find interesting, he has to explain black holes, gravity, light, and quantum physics in ways that normal people can understand. And he does!

The book isn’t amazing because it’s a story about someone who proved to Stephen Hawking that he was wrong. It’s amazing because when you’re finished with it, you’ll actually understand why he was wrong, and why it’s so important.

Other people have suggested some great books, and it’s never too late to go back to school, but if you want a book that will really spark your passion and motivation, I can’t recommend this book enough.

Now I’m all hyped and feel like I should read it again...

Try to catch a webcast of a rocket launch live, and watch it together. SpaceX's webcasts are usually informative with good camera feeds, etc. There are phone apps that keep track of launch dates. Try to find one that fits your schedule, but be aware that they are subject to weather.

I recommend this HBO series, From Earth to the Moon (Amazon Link). There's also the new movie Hidden Figures that came out. I haven't seen it, but reviews are good so far. It has female role models for your daughter to look up to.

When you do get the funds to travel to the US, you can book a tour with JPL in California or visit NASA's Kennedy Center in Florida. I highly recommend the Kennedy Visitor Center as it probably has too much for one day much like Disneyland.

Buy her space related things when it comes to Halloween costumes, LEGOs, Christmas ornaments, or whatever. LEGOs are inspirational and can help foster a creative mind.

I wouldn’t say microscopic, but significantly smaller than a small black hole. Surprisingly, and please Reddit, don’t hang me for citing a Hollywood movie in a discussion about astrophysics, the movie Interstellar is a fantastic example of what happens when you’re close to a SMBH. Kip Thorne was the science/physics advisor for the film and does a great job keeping the physics true to science. If you’re able, read The Science of Interstellar. It’s amazingly written and Thorne is so so so good at explaining complex ideas in simple language. Also pictures.

Jupiter will be visible after sunset throughout the summer and well into the fall. There are lots of free nigh sky apps which can help you identify what you're seeing.

Telescopes are probably more affordable than you might think. Check out /r/telescopes for info and advice.

Also consider getting some binoculars. Even a very cheap set (like these) will allow you to see Jupiter's four brightest moons, craters on our Moon, star clusters, galaxies (look like fuzzy clouds), comets (when applicable), thousands of stars invisible to the naked eye, hundreds of satellites, etc. Plus they're great for daytime views.

You're welcome.

If you would like to learn a bit more about this kinda thing and the engineering behind spacecraft I can recommend a couple of good books:

How Spacecraft Fly: Spaceflight Without Formulae is a good intro.
If you are looking for a bit more Spacecraft Systems Engineering goes into more detail but requires some understanding of calculus. For both Google can be your friend for finding sources.

Flick through even just the first one and you'll gain a new perspective when playing KSP on what everything does and why it is needed!

That's a great scope you got yourself there, it'll treat you well. Check out the books NightWatch and Turn Left at Orion for great information on how to get started in Astronomy. "NightWatch" answers a lot of questions you might have where "Turn Left.." serves more as a guide and map to the night sky, and both serve as excellent resources.

I knew I didn't pay that much for it, so I looked it up. It's funny, because when I Google it, I get this link for the four-disc "collector's edition" for almost $90. So I went back into my purchase history and found the version I bought for only $16.47 - I had actually gotten it for $12-and-change. The five-disc one is cropped to 16:9, the four-disc is the original 4:3 aspect ratio. Not having seen the original, I would never have known it was cropped.

I'm honestly surprised that HBO hasn't remastered this for HD. I'd be really surprised if they didn't produce it on film, given the production values HBO is known for. Visual effects can be touched up, and it is a very high-quality series that would do at least well enough on Blu-Ray to justify the expense of remastering.

A Man on the Moon by Andy Chaiken is considered THE text on the Apollo program. If formed the basis of the mini series From the Earth to the Moon

Failure is not an Option by Gene Kranz is a wonderful first hand account of life in the trenches from Mercury thru Apollo.

And my personal favorite space book - Roving Mars which was turned into a great IMAX movie as well.

Leonard Susskind, as is mentioned, wrote a book that I strongly recommend The Black Hole Warin which he goes on to talk about A.) Hawking Radiation B.) Whether "Information" that goes into a black hole is permanently destroyed and for me, at lest, C.) he brought up the notion of the universe being a holographic image.

He sets out to write the book for the populous at large, and I feel he succeed in that. The Book was a VERY excellent read for the subject at hand. I would strongly recommend it to anyone who frequents this sub reddit.

Could you give a few examples of "higher end astronomy binoculars"?

I got a set of Celestron Upclose G2's from a friend and I'm pretty happy with them, but I'd like to know where I might go next. Should I get an even better set of binoculars, or should I just go straight for the telescope?

OK, you should head over to /r/astronomy, but in the meantime, here's my generic advice for everyone who is interested in looking up.

• Get some decent binoculars (10x50 are great all-rounders)
  
• Get a planisphere for your latitude
  
• Get a copy of Terry Dickenson's Nightwatch
  
  Learn this one thing: Magnification makes it harder to see stuff. Low magnification is where it's AT for the most part.
  

This question gets asked all the time on this sub. I did a search for the term books and compiled this list from the dozens of previous answers:

How to Read the Solar System: A Guide to the Stars and Planets by Christ North and Paul Abel.


A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson.


A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather than Nothing by Lawrence Krauss.


Cosmos by Carl Sagan.

Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space by Carl Sagan.


Foundations of Astrophysics by Barbara Ryden and Bradley Peterson.


Final Countdown: NASA and the End of the Space Shuttle Program by Pat Duggins.


An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth: What Going to Space Taught Me About Ingenuity, Determination, and Being Prepared for Anything by Chris Hadfield.


You Are Here: Around the World in 92 Minutes: Photographs from the International Space Station by Chris Hadfield.


Space Shuttle: The History of Developing the Space Transportation System by Dennis Jenkins.


Wings in Orbit: Scientific and Engineering Legacies of the Space Shuttle, 1971-2010 by Chapline, Hale, Lane, and Lula.


No Downlink: A Dramatic Narrative About the Challenger Accident and Our Time by Claus Jensen.


Voices from the Moon: Apollo Astronauts Describe Their Lunar Experiences by Andrew Chaikin.


A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts by Andrew Chaikin.


Breaking the Chains of Gravity: The Story of Spaceflight before NASA by Amy Teitel.


Moon Lander: How We Developed the Apollo Lunar Module by Thomas Kelly.


The Scientific Exploration of Venus by Fredric Taylor.


The Right Stuff by Tom Wolfe.


Into the Black: The Extraordinary Untold Story of the First Flight of the Space Shuttle Columbia and the Astronauts Who Flew Her by Rowland White and Richard Truly.


An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics by Bradley Carroll and Dale Ostlie.


Rockets, Missiles, and Men in Space by Willy Ley.


Ignition!: An Informal History of Liquid Rocket Propellants by John Clark.


A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking.


Russia in Space by Anatoly Zak.


Rain Of Iron And Ice: The Very Real Threat Of Comet And Asteroid Bombardment by John Lewis.


Mining the Sky: Untold Riches From The Asteroids, Comets, And Planets by John Lewis.


Asteroid Mining: Wealth for the New Space Economy by John Lewis.


Coming of Age in the Milky Way by Timothy Ferris.


The Whole Shebang: A State of the Universe Report by Timothy Ferris.


Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandries by Neil deGrasse Tyson.


Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution by Neil deGrasse Tyson.


Rocket Men: The Epic Story of the First Men on the Moon by Craig Nelson.


The Martian by Andy Weir.


Packing for Mars:The Curious Science of Life in the Void by Mary Roach.


The Overview Effect: Space Exploration and Human Evolution by Frank White.


Gravitation by Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler.


The Science of Interstellar by Kip Thorne.


Entering Space: An Astronaut’s Oddyssey by Joseph Allen.


International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems by Hopkins, Hopkins, and Isakowitz.


The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality by Brian Greene.


How the Universe Got Its Spots: Diary of a Finite Time in a Finite Space by Janna Levin.


This New Ocean: The Story of the First Space Age by William Burrows.


The Last Man on the Moon by Eugene Cernan.


Failure is Not an Option: Mission Control from Mercury to Apollo 13 and Beyond by Eugene Cernan.


Apollo 13 by Jim Lovell and Jeffrey Kluger.


The end

Ok the best place to start is always the bible of rocket science
https://www.amazon.com/Rocket-Propulsion-Elements-George-Sutton/dp/0470080248


also this is a great book about overall design

https://www.amazon.com/Spacecraft-Systems-Engineering-Peter-Fortescue/dp/047075012X/ref=pd_sim_14_19?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=047075012X&pd_rd_r=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR&pd_rd_w=m3KtM&pd_rd_wg=XqmQL&psc=1&refRID=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR

Other than rocket engines and structures it would be
https://www.amazon.com/Orbital-Mechanics-Engineering-Students-Aerospace/dp/0080977472/ref=pd_sim_14_5?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0080977472&pd_rd_r=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR&pd_rd_w=m3KtM&pd_rd_wg=XqmQL&psc=1&refRID=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR

https://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Astrodynamics-Dover-Aeronautical-Engineering/dp/0486600610/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0486600610&pd_rd_r=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR&pd_rd_w=m3KtM&pd_rd_wg=XqmQL&psc=1&refRID=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR

After reading that book cover to cover you can branch into multiple aspects of aerospace engineering.

There are also less formal and fun books like https://www.amazon.de/Ignition-informal-history-liquid-propellants/dp/0813507251
or
https://www.amazon.com/History-Liquid-Propellant-Engines-Library/dp/1563476495/ref=pd_sim_14_63?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1563476495&pd_rd_r=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR&pd_rd_w=m3KtM&pd_rd_wg=XqmQL&psc=1&refRID=NV7BKDVSN225K69DY2JR

http://www.amazon.com/Orion-10014-SkyQuest-Dobsonian-Telescope/dp/B0000XMSNO

I got this one for my kids this Christmas, Pretty reasonable price and I can clearly make out the Cloud bands on Jupiter and the 4 Galilean moons. I guess I will find out about being able to see the spot and the shadows later this month. If I knew then what I know now I would have kicked in the extra $$ for the XT6... http://www.amazon.com/Orion-8944-SkyQuest-Dobsonian-Telescope/dp/B001DDW9UW/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1420267036&sr=1-1&keywords=XT6

This was a great resource for me in trying to sort out how to best spend my money.

http://www.rocketroberts.com/astro/firstscopes.htm

yes.

It was shortly after he left Paypal if I remember right. He went overseas there with some people, met with them to try to buy rockets, they said he was crazy. The thing to keep in mind is, for that moment it was crazy. Spaceflights like this were always pioneered by governments because of cost, not companies, let alone individuals looking to make a company.

He pulled something off that is absolutely tremendous. He has his flaws... But I think we needed Musk; I bet he has inspired a whole new generation of scientists and engineers.

If you want to read more about this, check out the biography written on him, Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future. It was very good, and it puts into perspective some of his bigger goals.

From Packing for Mars, by Mary Roach (chapter 11)


> The zero-gravity fart has been a popular orbital pursuit, particularly on all-male flights. One hears tell of astronauts using intestinal gas like rocket propellant to "launch themselves across the middeck," as astronaut Roger Crouch put it. He had heard the claims and was dubious. "The mass and velocity of the expelled gas," he told me in an email that has forevermore endeared him to me, "is very small compared to the mass of the human body." Thus it was unlikely that it could accelerate a 180-pound astronaut. Crouch pointed out that an exhaled breath doesn’t propel an astronaut in any direction, and the lungs hold about six liters of air—versus the fart, which, as we learned from Dr. Murphy, holds at most three soda cans’ worth.

> Or the average person’s, anyway. "My genes have blessed me with an extraordinary ability to expel some of the byproducts of digestion," wrote Crouch. "So given that, I thought that it should be tested. In what I thought was a real voluminous and rapidly expelled purge, I failed to move noticeably." Crouch surmised that his experiment may have been compromised by the "action/reaction of the gas passing through "through the pants." Disappointingly, both his flights were mixed-gender, so Crouch was disinclined to "strip down naked" and try it again. He was heading to Cape Canaveral and promised to ask around for some other astronauts’ input, but so far no one is, as they say, spilling the beans.

Great book. If you get a chance to read it, it's chocked full of hilarious/disgusting/interesting stuff like this.

most of the costs come from developing the spacecraft and its life support systems, and then qualifying it to a level the operator feels safe with. 20 billion seems like a good number to wildy guess at.

if you want equations, they are in here https://www.amazon.com/Space-Mission-Engineering-Technology-Library/dp/1881883159

There are several courses that ARO (usually) has, but ME exclusive program doesn't, such as Gas Dynamics, Low/High Speed Aerodynamics, Orbital Mechanics, Aircraft Stability, and Jet Propulsion. I based this statement from the school (CalPoly Pomona) that I went to. YMMV.

Book recommendations:

• Orbital Mechanics
  
• Gas Dynamics & High Speed Aerodynamics
  
• Flight Mechanics
  
• Jet Propulsion
  
• Spacecraft Design
  
• Rocket Propulsion
  
  Aerospace is broad subject, you haven't specified whether you're interested in structures, aerodynamics, flight mechanics, or propulsion. I gave you a broad list of selection to reflect that, although I assume you are more inclined toward Astronautics (Space) part of Aerospace instead of Aeronautics (Air); hence you posted your question in /r/space.

This Orion has great reviews. I have a Skywatcher myself, which is slightly more expensive. Of course you can also go the second hand route, just have to take a good look at the state of the primary and secondary mirrors.

This is one of my all time favorite topics of conjecture. My favorite book on this topic was one called Where Is Everybody by Stephen Webb. If you enjoyed this article I guarantee you'll want to buy this book.

Dragonfly - I highly recommend it as well. Excellent, comprehensive book about Mir.

Get a nice set of binoculars, these are good and inexpensive:
https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B006ZN4TZS/ref=acr_search_see_all?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Trust me on this. Many want to start with a telescope, and I did myself, but the scope I got I outgrew quickly and now these are my go to. Get to some dark lands and whip these bad boys out and you will be astonished all you can see with them. It's like having a telescope in your hands that you can hang around your neck.

Once you get the hang of space and what's out there to view, then get a telescope. But start with some good nocs. You wont be sorry.

Clear skies!

>What kind of telescope is a "good" beginner's telescope?

Here are some guides.

>How do you know where to aim your scope?

http://www.stellarium.org/

>How can I learn more about identifying stars and star formations?

http://www.amazon.com/NightWatch-Practical-Guide-Viewing-Universe/dp/155407147X

>Also, any information that you think would be helpful

Don't over search the web for good telescopes, as a beginner you should get a normal telescope and see how much you ACTUALLY like the night sky, starting with binoculars is advised since they cost way less and you can still see a lot of stuff. If you want more you move on to a telescope.

also: /r/Astronomy

I think that was Apollo 12, had a good episode in 'From The Earth To The Moon' mini-series all about that. Pretty funny!

http://www.amazon.com/From-Earth-Moon-Collectors-Edition/dp/0783114222

http://www.earthtothemoon.com/apollo_12.html

I haven't read too many that would fit the bill, but the first ones that come to mind are:

• Packing for Mars: The Curious Science of Life in the Void
  
• The 4 Percent Universe: Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and the Race to Discover the Rest of Reality (I haven't managed to read through the entire thing, but so far it is pretty good)
  
• Dragonfly: NASA And The Crisis Aboard Mir
  
• Failure Is Not an Option: Mission Control From Mercury to Apollo 13 and Beyond
  
  If anything else comes to mind, I'll make sure to post it.

@HardHarry

How much do you think the US government spends on NASA per year?

Go read Neil De Grasse Tyson's latest book

http://www.amazon.com/Space-Chronicles-Facing-Ultimate-Frontier/dp/0393082105/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1332717037&sr=8-1


@yogthos

Tyson also mentions that those social programs have largely been addressed -- with typical government efficiency -- already. Alternate energy research is also in progress.

Other forms of science.... well, in these anti-science times that we live in, if it isn't bogus global warming science, it doesn't matter.

For other perspectives, try reading some different blogs:

http://blogs.airspacemag.com/moon/

http://launiusr.wordpress.com/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/beyondapollo/

Yes, that is a good point. That was also detailed in the book I read.

If anyone cares, I think it's this book (I read at least two so I'm not 100% sure): https://www.amazon.com/Elon-Musk-SpaceX-Fantastic-Future/dp/006230125X/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1475082388&sr=8-5

Space Mission Engineering/SMAD is a pretty good general overview of space mission engineering and spacecraft design, if that's what you're looking for. That's the senior design textbook for my program, but it's written by a number of engineers at NASA and in the industry. Braeunig also has some good information on some basics of the science (and it's free), but it's mostly undergrad-level orbital mechanics and rocket propulsion.

Is there anything more specific (other than heat transfer) that you're looking for?

Could I get your opinion on these? My area is as bad as it gets for light pollution so didn't want to blow too much on binoculars but these seem to have good specs at a good price.

It's intended to be a textbook for the next generation of space systems engineers. The old books like Sutton mostly cover how to design conventional rockets. I felt like a more comprehensive book was needed.

Watched this when it came out. Fantastic show. You may also like From the earth to the moon. Its basically tom hanks doing for the moon what band of brothers did with private ryan.
https://www.amazon.com/Earth-Moon-Four-Disc-Collectors/dp/0783114222

I think you'll have better luck with books than film. This book provides a very thorough account of the early days of Soviet/Russian space stations. This one is written (in part) by Alexi Leonov, the Soviet's star cosmonaut, and he talks about training with Gagarin and the other early cosmonauts in the Vostok days, and about his Voskhod spacewalk.

Mary Roach touched on it in her book packing for mars. If you haven't read it I'd recommend it. Very entertaining and well researched.

In short, the answer is no. It came close to happening though.

http://www.amazon.com/Packing-Mars-Curious-Science-Life/dp/1469235919

Yep, kids on the way; had to sell his home and move in on the couch of another silicone valley investor to finish the first rocket launch that landed his first contracts. Said he was days away from being negative. This is an amazing read <EDIT harmless joke out> https://www.amazon.com/Elon-Musk-SpaceX-Fantastic-Future/dp/006230125X

If the Universe Is Teeming with Aliens ... WHERE IS EVERYBODY? is a nice book on the subject that I bought on another redditors recommendation, and it was really worth it!

Impressive work. I've liked books such as Spacecraft Systems Engineering(Fortescue etc.) for example but they are not exactly easily accessible or cheap and can be of a limited scope. There's certainly a need for a broader online source!

I know, I know, I'm a grumpy old man but in my defense I was always grumpy.

Great book on the Shuttle and how it came to be:

"Into the Black" by Rowland White.

https://www.amazon.com/Into-Black-Extraordinary-Columbia-Astronauts/dp/1501123629

The New S.M.A.D

Google it, its the shit

Source : recently graduated aero/astro engineer

Edit: https://www.amazon.com/Space-Mission-Engineering-Technology-Library/dp/1881883159

You heard wrong. Kip Thorne, one of today's leading theoretical physicists, was intimately involved to ensure the science wasn't inaccurate. Here are some great interviews that discuss this:

• Science Friday
  
• Wired
  
• Scientific American
  
  Kip even wrote a book called The Science of Interstellar that goes into a lot more detail.

Doing a quick search, the shipping weight of a gorilla suit on Amazon.com is 4.3 pounds, but for the ease of calculations, let's round up to 4.4 pounds (2 kilograms). The next US based rocket to go to the ISS is the Orbital ATK's Cygnus cargo delivery on October 9th, 2016, which uses the Antares rocket to delivery cargo. The cost per kilogram for the Antares rocket is $95,000 USD.

The bottom line is that it cost $190k USD to get that gorilla suit into space.

How long before we can get a space elevator?

Space Mission Analysis and Design. :)

https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Analysis-Design-Technology-Library/dp/1881883108/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1480574050&sr=8-2&keywords=smad

Into The Black was a good read

Yes the book Dragonfly

According to Steve Squyres, the lead scientist of the mission and author of this book, 90 days was what they expected. They hoped for more.

i think thats actually not possible. I believe thats because you need to expand the flow to derive thrust and making the "bell" long enough to align the (now atmospheric pressure) flow exactly with the slipstream is impractical (it weighs too much). It might be possible if you were building a test article (ie. a rocket that didnt actually go anywhere, so it had no thrust/weight requirement). In any other configuration, whatever bell size you choose will be suboptimal in some regime. (ie. underexpanded at sea level, or overexpanded at altitude, etc.)
(there are variable geometry nozzles, and in fact thats what the aerospike is supposedly "better" at), but doing that in metal is quite expensive in weight.

I remember working this out for myself while reading Sutton about 10 years ago, but i cant remember why now.

Another fun little thought exercise is the "ice rocket" (the one that actually produces ice in the exhaust becuase of the expansion). This apparently can actually occur.

You can get a 6" Dobsonian for about $300. This only comes with a single eyepiece, so to get higher magnification views of the Moon and planets you may also want a second eyepiece and a Barlow lens. For $400 you can get the telescope with both, or for $430, an 8" Dobsonian with both. You'll be able to see more with the 8" telescope, but it's also a little heavier and less portable.

Also look at the sidebar of /r/astronomy. There are some guides for buying your first telescope there.

Roving Mars for the story of the MER rovers. The Smithsonian Book of Mars is a little outdated but it is cheap.

You might want to just check out the highly rated books at Amazon.

If you want some deeper knowledge about this topic I recommend this book:


https://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Teeming-Aliens-Everybody-Extraterrestrial/dp/0387955011

The first scope does not have computer control, you will have to manually adjust the scope. Don't forget to budget in some eyepieces. I would reccomend a book called NightWatch by Terence Dickinson before you buy anything.

http://www.amazon.com/NightWatch-Practical-Guide-Viewing-Universe/dp/155407147X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1313168978&sr=8-2

Most gorilla costumes I could find mass about two kilograms.

If it had been lifted as part of two astronauts' combined personal weight allowance, It would have cost $646,000.

Assuming the contract rate of $210 million for a full crew (Which is several times as much as it costs Roscosmos) and launch mass capacity of 650 kg (7800 kg Soyuz FG/Fregat max launch mass - 7150 kg Soyuz TMA-M capsule mass)

2.1x10^8 / 6.5x10^2 = 3.23x10^5
323000 x 2 = $646,000

It's much more likely it was delivered as part of a crew care package in a cargo mission, in which case it could have been as cheap as $34,000.

SpaceX lists a per-launch cost of $57 million to put a net 3310kg of cargo to the ISS.

5.7x10^7 / 3.31x10^3 = 1.7x10^4
17000 x 2 = $34,000

TL;DR: Nice try Elon, but you're no FedEx.

Link for LAZY

Quite literally because the whole process the International Astronomical Union goes through to decide these things is political. The choice of words was a compromise. Technically, dwarf planets are not planets or a subset of planets, even though this might defy the common way we use words.

For further reading:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Killed-Pluto-Why-Coming/dp/0385531109

so according to http://www.techinsider.io/spacex-rocket-cargo-price-by-weight-2016-6, it cost about $10,000 to send up 1 pound of stuff to space.

https://www.amazon.com/California-Costumes-Adult-Gorilla-Costume/dp/B00272LJHC has a gorilla outfit. The shipping weight is 4.3 pounds. Let's just assume more than half of that is the box and other shipping stuff.

Leaving 2 pounds left, to make this one video and to send up a gorilla outfit cost about $20,000

I suggest reading this for some answers. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0393082105

How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had it Coming is a great read for anyone to fully understand why classifying Pluto as a planet just doesn't work.

That's one expensive gorilla suit. Using some estimations on costs to lift mass to low earth orbit:

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/1989/what-is-the-current-cost-per-pound-to-send-something-into-leo

($2.2k - $13.2k), and using the shipping weight of a sample gorilla suit on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/California-Costumes-Adult-Gorilla-Costume/dp/B00272LJHC

(4.3 lbs) it cost somewhere around $9.5k-$56.8k to put that suit on the space station.

Is this the best way to be spending our tax dollars?

No. That was Susskind et al.

Today, many physicists believe that the holographic principle (specifically the AdS/CFT duality) demonstrates that Hawking's conclusion was incorrect, and that information is in fact preserved.[5] In 2004 Hawking himself conceded a bet he had made, agreeing that black hole evaporation does in fact preserve information.

The Black Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics by Susskind is one of my favorite books.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0887307833

Bryan Burrough.

A lot of the book covers the politics of the joint Russian/American missions to the ageing MIR, but I read it for the firsthand accounts of the MIR fire and Progress collision and wasn't disappointed.

For more details on the firewall paradox, I like Leonard Susskind's lectures, and especially his book, The Black Hole War, which is very accessible. He focuses on the holographic principle as the solution (falling observer sees no big change, outside observer sees them destroyed by firewall), but as far as I know this hasn't been fully resolved yet.

Relevant book: If the Universe Is Teeming with Aliens... Where Is Everybody? Fifty Solutions to Fermi's Paradox and the Problem of Extraterrestrial Life

If you can find a copy (and she doesn't have one), she might like Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of the Cold War Space Race, written by Alexei Leonov (cosmonaut, first human to walk in space) and David Scott (Apollo 15 commander). They talk about their experiences in the astronaut/cosmonaut training, some about their earlier life, and, of course, their missions. Leonov also talks about working on some relatively lesser-know parts of the Soviet program, such as their moon landing effort (he was slated to be the first Soviet on the moon), and meeting with Sergei Korolyov.

Amazon link

How I Killed Pluto and Why it had it Coming.

First, let's rephrase your statement 'SpaceX showed significant cost savings during Falcon 9 development, compared to traditionally procured launchers' The distinction is important, especially since you don't have insight into SpaceX's accounts to back up that claim, but rather tertiary sources through the GAO.

Secondly, developing launchers and developing spacecraft art nothing alike. I'm almost a full stack launch vehicle engineer. I'd be so far out of my depth on a spacecraft development campaign, it'd be funny. SpaceX was able to develop Falcon 9 for so cheap because:

1. Using available technology (Fasttrac, PICA)
   
2. Leveraging 21st century information technology
   
3. Iterative development cycles using operational flights for technology development.
   
4. Economies of scale
   
5. Significantly different risk stance.
   
   Planetary science missions (especially to Europa):
   
   
6. Have no COTS or prior art solutions
   
7. Don't benefit as significantly from enterprise information systems due to being one-offs
   
8. Have cycle times of decades, due to interplanetary flight times at minimum, limiting the Silicon Valley 'fail fast' mentality
   
9. Are one-offs
   
10. Can't accept significant risk, due to cost, and probably due to nuclear materials onboard.
    
    ​
    
    You ignored the precedent of ISI's Beresheet lander, and my indictment of your ad revenue model. Please read SMAD before commenting again.

The majority of the myth comes from misinformation and Soviet-era paranoia. The facts:

1. The Soviet space program conducted two test flights with dogs and a realistic crash test dummy leading up to the launch of Vostok 1. This dummy, nicknamed "Ivan Ivanovich," was equipped with a radio that broadcasted recordings of a choir and a recipe for cabbage soup. He was retrieved from the capsule in the same way that Gagarin would later exit Vostok 1 - IE, ejection seat. It is possible that someone witnessed the landing and thought that the dummy (never alive) was in fact a dead cosmonaut. (Said dummy is presently on display at the Smithsonian.)
   
   
2. Around the same time, a cosmonaut trainee Valentin Bondarenko was killed in a ground-based training accident. News of the accident was kept from official outlets and evidence of Bondarenko ever being enrolled in the program was airbrushed out of official photographs. Between the test launches with the dummy and the vanished cadet, it's easy to understand how someone could have thought the Soviets managed to kill someone in flight. (Alexei Leonov discusses the incident in detail in his autobiography.)
   
   This only disproves one theory, but the others are pretty sketchy and I wouldn't bother giving them too much credence. At the very least, it's pretty conclusive that Gagarin was the first human being in space and the Soviets did not kill someone prior with a launch, although there was an unrelated training fatality.