John_Hasler

Let's not set the precedent of having the UN make decisions about space.

A missile would not change the re-entry time or location: just break the target into many pieces. In the one case where the US used a missile the target broke into many small pieces which mostly burned up on re-entry but I don't think that would happen with the ISS. Uncontrolled re-entry of a single large object would, I think, be preferable to re-entry of dozens of them.

No agreement would have any effect on the headlines saying "US allows its spacestation to crash on city, killing 800 people".

The viscosity of hot water is much lower.

https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/how-the-higgs-field-works-with-math/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curvature#Space

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifold

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curvature#Flat_space

Curvature is well defined for manifolds with any number of dimensions. "Flat" in this context means "zero curvature", not "two dimensional".

But there's a guy up on one of the veritcal tanks working on the lifting rings so perhaps Zack is right.

That looks like a long reach from where it's parked.

The LR11000 has moved into the space near gate D2 where they recently demolished the storage sheds. I think it's there to handle the last three horizontal tanks (unless it's just there to compact the new asphalt...)

Yes. It isn't hard to generate random numbers in hardware. It is hard to generate them very fast. This device would not help solve that problem.

They are not emitted simultaneously. The collision is messy. The GRB comes from leftover bits of neutron star.

Musk has said that he expected approval of a new FTS to be the long pole.