Skip to main content

The Candidates on Space: Election '08


Popular Mechanics ran an interesting feature. They presented each of the candidates views on a number of issues that are of interest to their readers.

Among the issues was space exploration. According to Popular Mechanics only two of the candidates have any view at all. Both of those are Democrats, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. According to PM, none of the Republican candidates weighed in on this issue!

I did a little hunting around and found that most of the candidates have reported views on space exploration. Links to the views of the rest of the candidates follow.

Ron Paul: This is a link to Ron Paul's stance on privatizing space from 1988. There doesn't seem to be anything available after that.

John Edwards: The following link describes what Kerry and Edwards thought about space in the 2004 election. They didn't come out with their views until days before the election last time, maybe Edwards is waiting again this time.

Rudy Giuliani: Giuliani spoke on the future of the space administration on January 18th.

Mike Huckabee: CNN had a few words on Huckabee's response to a debate question regarding the space program.

John McCain: McCain's views are summarized here with an attribution to his campaign site.

Mitt Romney: A few notes from a Fox News blogger on Romney's NASA views.

If I've left out your favorite candidate, please let me know in the comments below, and I'll fire off an update!

Comments

Jim Bowery said…
Ron Paul's 1988 policy is the only sane policy. His vitriolic comments have been proven tragically prescient over the intervening 2 decades.

Popular posts from this blog

Cool Math Tricks: Deriving the Divergence, (Del or Nabla) into New (Cylindrical) Coordinate Systems

Now available as a Kindle ebook for 99 cents! Get a spiffy ebook, and fund more physics
The following is a pretty lengthy procedure, but converting the divergence, (nabla, del) operator between coordinate systems comes up pretty often. While there are tables for converting between common coordinate systems, there seem to be fewer explanations of the procedure for deriving the conversion, so here goes!

What do we actually want?

To convert the Cartesian nabla



to the nabla for another coordinate system, say… cylindrical coordinates.



What we’ll need:

1. The Cartesian Nabla:



2. A set of equations relating the Cartesian coordinates to cylindrical coordinates:



3. A set of equations relating the Cartesian basis vectors to the basis vectors of the new coordinate system:



How to do it:

Use the chain rule for differentiation to convert the derivatives with respect to the Cartesian variables to derivatives with respect to the cylindrical variables.

The chain rule can be used to convert a differe…

Division: Distributing the Work

Our unschooling math comes in bits and pieces.  The oldest kid here, seven year-old No. 1 loves math problems, so math moves along pretty fast for her.  Here’s how she arrived at the distributive property recently.  Tldr; it came about only because she needed it.
“Give me a math problem!” No. 1 asked Mom-person.

“OK, what’s 18 divided by 2?  But, you’re going to have to do it as you walk.  You and Dad need to head out.”

And so, No. 1 and I found ourselves headed out on our mini-adventure with a new math problem to discuss.

One looked at the ceiling of the library lost in thought as we walked.  She glanced down at her fingers for a moment.  “Is it six?”

“I don’t know, let’s see,” I hedged.  “What’s two times six?  Is it eighteen?”

One looked at me hopefully heading back into her mental math.

I needed to visit the restroom before we left, so I hurried her calculation along.  “What’s two times five?”

I got a grin, and another look indicating she was thinking about that one.

I flashed eac…

The Valentine's Day Magnetic Monopole

There's an assymetry to the form of the two Maxwell's equations shown in picture 1.  While the divergence of the electric field is proportional to the electric charge density at a given point, the divergence of the magnetic field is equal to zero.  This is typically explained in the following way.  While we know that electrons, the fundamental electric charge carriers exist, evidence seems to indicate that magnetic monopoles, the particles that would carry magnetic 'charge', either don't exist, or, the energies required to create them are so high that they are exceedingly rare.  That doesn't stop us from looking for them though!

Keeping with the theme of Fairbank[1] and his academic progeny over the semester break, today's post is about the discovery of a magnetic monopole candidate event by one of the Fairbank's graduate students, Blas Cabrera[2].  Cabrera was utilizing a loop type of magnetic monopole detector.  Its operation is in concept very simpl…