BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810

33 rockets?
33 is Freemason number!
But 6 was not working!

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <csoka01@gmail.com>
wrote:

>BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
>
>33 rockets?
>33 is Freemason number!
>But 6 was not working!

A largely successful first launch by all accounts.

On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 6:39:25 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:

> Tesla stock fell 8% today.

Which is a great buying opportunity!

On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 6:57:53 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust
> wrote:
> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >
> >33 rockets?
> >33 is Freemason number!
> >But 6 was not working!
> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.

Rocket went haywire after 4 min in flight and control room blew it up.
Launch successful, flight is not!
😰

On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >
> >33 rockets?
> >33 is Freemason number!
> >But 6 was not working!
> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.

On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsnell01@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
>> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
>> >
>> >33 rockets?
>> >33 is Freemason number!
>> >But 6 was not working!
>> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
>
>Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.

No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
any case.

On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >> >
> >> >33 rockets?
> >> >33 is Freemason number!
> >> >But 6 was not working!
> >> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
> >
> >Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
> any case.

The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.

On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT), W <wsnell01@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
>> >> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
>> >> >
>> >> >33 rockets?
>> >> >33 is Freemason number!
>> >> >But 6 was not working!
>> >> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
>> >
>> >Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
>> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
>> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
>> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
>> any case.
>
>The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
>They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.

The Titanic was not an experiment. Engineering failures are not
automatically "experiments" even if they lead to new knowledge.

This launch was designed from the beginning as an experiment. Its only
purpose was to test parts of the design and collect performance data.
However crazy Musk is, his companies have a great many extremely
smart, competent engineers, and I have little doubt this large rocket
will be successful. Their Falcon 9 rockets are the most reliable and
inexpensive rockets ever created. They know what they are doing.

On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:11:42 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >> >> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >> >> >
> >> >> >33 rockets?
> >> >> >33 is Freemason number!
> >> >> >But 6 was not working!
> >> >> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
> >> >
> >> >Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
> >> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
> >> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
> >> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
> >> any case.
> >
> >The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
> >They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.
> The Titanic was not an experiment. Engineering failures are not
> automatically "experiments" even if they lead to new knowledge.
>
> This launch was designed from the beginning as an experiment. Its only
> purpose was to test parts of the design and collect performance data.
> However crazy Musk is, his companies have a great many extremely
> smart, competent engineers, and I have little doubt this large rocket
> will be successful. Their Falcon 9 rockets are the most reliable and
> inexpensive rockets ever created. They know what they are doing.

You are going to have to admit that you are wrong (as you usually are.)

The intention of the launch was to reach an altitude; it did not. If this was an "experiment" then so was something such as the Titanic's voyage.

On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 11:44:46 -0700 (PDT), W <wsnell01@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:11:42?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
>> >> >> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >33 rockets?
>> >> >> >33 is Freemason number!
>> >> >> >But 6 was not working!
>> >> >> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
>> >> >
>> >> >Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
>> >> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
>> >> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
>> >> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
>> >> any case.
>> >
>> >The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
>> >They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.
>> The Titanic was not an experiment. Engineering failures are not
>> automatically "experiments" even if they lead to new knowledge.
>>
>> This launch was designed from the beginning as an experiment. Its only
>> purpose was to test parts of the design and collect performance data.
>> However crazy Musk is, his companies have a great many extremely
>> smart, competent engineers, and I have little doubt this large rocket
>> will be successful. Their Falcon 9 rockets are the most reliable and
>> inexpensive rockets ever created. They know what they are doing.
>
>You are going to have to admit that you are wrong (as you usually are.)
>
>The intention of the launch was to reach an altitude; it did not. If this was an "experiment" then so was something such as the Titanic's voyage.

You are one of the most profoundly ignorant people I know. And you say
the stupidest things.

On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 3:00:23 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 11:44:46 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 11:11:42?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:07:16 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52?AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> >> >> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail..com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >> >> >> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >33 rockets?
> >> >> >> >33 is Freemason number!
> >> >> >> >But 6 was not working!
> >> >> >> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
> >> >> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
> >> >> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
> >> >> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
> >> >> any case.
> >> >
> >> >The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
> >> >They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.
> >> The Titanic was not an experiment. Engineering failures are not
> >> automatically "experiments" even if they lead to new knowledge.
> >>
> >> This launch was designed from the beginning as an experiment. Its only
> >> purpose was to test parts of the design and collect performance data.
> >> However crazy Musk is, his companies have a great many extremely
> >> smart, competent engineers, and I have little doubt this large rocket
> >> will be successful. Their Falcon 9 rockets are the most reliable and
> >> inexpensive rockets ever created. They know what they are doing.
> >
> >You are going to have to admit that you are wrong (as you usually are.)
> >
> >The intention of the launch was to reach an altitude; it did not. If this was an "experiment" then so was something such as the Titanic's voyage.
> You are one of the most profoundly ignorant people I know. And you say
> the stupidest things.

peterson, you can't even recognize an "experiment" when you see one.

On 21/04/2023 15:07, W wrote:
> On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
>>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
>>>>>
>>>>> 33 rockets?
>>>>> 33 is Freemason number!
>>>>> But 6 was not working!
>>>> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
>>>
>>> Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.

Apart from sinking with disastrous loss of life it did. As the guy who
jumped off the Empire State Tower was heard to say on the way down "so
far so good". Unfortunately the laws of physics take no prisoners.

Starship was unmanned so although an expensive firework no lives were
lost and a lot of telemetry data gained. That is a very big difference.

>> No, because the Titanic was not an experiment. This was, and the
>> primary goal was the launch, not the flight. Most of the information
>> they were seeking they got. It was going to crash into the ocean in
>> any case.
>
> The Titanic was an "experiment," even if the builders, owners and governments did not intend it to be.
> They learned to add more lifeboats, install radio, and keep track of iceberg activity.

It was more of an experiment because the designers erroneously believed
that it was unsinkable because of the watertight bulkhead design. They
had not anticipated that a large iceberg glancing collision would
compromise structural integrity by taking out several sections one the
same side and all at once.

They had radio but the Titanic was more concerned about sending its rich
list passenger traffic to shore than listening to iceberg warnings.

--
Martin Brown

On Saturday, April 22, 2023 at 4:41:28 PM UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 21/04/2023 15:07, W wrote:
> > On Friday, April 21, 2023 at 9:40:52 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT), W <wsne...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 9:57:53?PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:53:31 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <cso...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> BBC News - SpaceX Starship: Elon Musk's big rocket explodes on test flight
> >>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65334810
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 33 rockets?
> >>>>> 33 is Freemason number!
> >>>>> But 6 was not working!
> >>>> A largely successful first launch by all accounts.
> >>>
> >>> Using the same reasoning, the Titanic had a largely successful first voyage, by all accounts.
> Apart from sinking with disastrous loss of life it did. As the guy who
> jumped off the Empire State Tower was heard to say on the way down "so
> far so good". Unfortunately the laws of physics take no prisoners.
>

There are no laws of physics, there are the stultifying 'Rules of Reasoning' designed for those who are not interested in solar system and Earth science research and particularly the RuleIII joke-

RULE III
" The qualities of bodies, which admit neither intension nor remission of degrees, and which
are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the
universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

That heap of bollox, as you would call it, was grafted into genuine observations and insights to make it appear that mathematicians knew what they were talking about.

Common sense tells you that a holed ship will sink and that an apple falls to the ground, the crap that the Earth falls around the Sun or angular momentum are from people still stuck in the late 17th century. You can bring all the mathematicians here that you want but the poor buggers haven't a clue that their Rule III is based on an RA/Dec conclusion-

" It is a fact not generally known that, owing to the difference between solar and sidereal time, the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often than there are days in the year" NASA /Harvard

The laws of physics is based on the RA/Dec framework and expressed as a stupid mouthful that bears no relationship to what Kepler nor any of the other solar system researchers did-

" That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun." Newton

Laws of physics indeed, more like the laws of know-nothings.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone wish to know what Kepler actually said and did-

"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler

"But it is absolutely certain and exact that the ratio which exists
between the periodic times of any two planets is precisely the ratio
of the 3/2th power of the mean distances, i.e., of the spheres
themselves; provided, however, that the arithmetic mean between both
diameters of the elliptic orbit be slightly less than the longer
diameter. And so if any one take the period, say, of the Earth, which
is one year, and the period of Saturn, which is thirty years, and
extract the cube roots of this ratio and then square the ensuing ratio
by squaring the cube roots, he will have as his numerical products the
most just ratio of the distances of the Earth and Saturn from the sun.
1 For the cube root of 1 is 1, and the square of it is 1; and the cube
root of 30 is greater than 3, and therefore the square of it is
greater than 9. And Saturn, at its mean distance from the sun, is
slightly higher than nine times the mean distance of the Earth from
the sun." Kepler