Podcasts about sls

The Space Show Presents Dr. Ajay Kothari, Sunday, 1-25-26.Quick summaryThe meeting focused on Dr. Kothari's presentation of a cargo delivery concept to the moon using multiple Falcon Heavy upper stages docked together, which he proposed as an alternative to NASA's current Artemis program. Ajay argued this method could be implemented more quickly and cheaply than the Starship program, with the potential to establish a permanent lunar presence before China's planned International Lunar Research Station. While the Trump administration aims to land humans on the moon by 2028, several participants expressed skepticism about meeting this timeline, with Bill suggesting this concept could be better aligned with later Artemis missions. The discussion included technical details about fuel requirements, landing capabilities, and cost comparisons, with Marshall proposing a stacked configuration as an alternative design approach.Detailed SummaryDr. Ajay Kothari started his discussion by sharing his recent experience presenting at an international conference on sustainable energy propulsion in India, where he was the only speaker focused on space. He emphasized the importance of not underestimating the technical capabilities of other countries, particularly India and China, and highlighted the impressive work being done at Indian Institutes of Technology. Ajay presented the paradigm for space exploration and discussed the potential of thorium nuclear energy for various applications, including data centers and small modular reactors. The presentation was well-received, and he plans to share some slides during the meeting.After sharing his experience at a conference in India, where he was impressed by the hospitality and technology, and received an award for his presentation, Ajay then discussed the importance of establishing a sustainable and cost-effective lunar settlement, criticizing the current plans for Artemis missions as they do not address the need for permanent infrastructure. Ajay emphasized that the real competition is not about the first human landing, but about creating a permanent presence on the Moon with habitats and outposts, which was not adequately addressed in recent congressional actions.Our guest presented a proposal for a lunar cargo mission using Falcon Heavy, emphasizing its cost-effectiveness and potential to beat China to a permanent lunar presence. He highlighted the need for reusable booster stages and low-drag upper stages to reduce mission costs and mass requirements. David questioned the funding and necessity of the cargo mission, to which Ajay explained the urgency due to China's plans for an International Lunar Research Station and the importance of establishing a presence on the moon. Bill inquired about Artemis baseline architecture, and Dr. Kothari acknowledged familiarity with Artemis 4 and 5 but noted uncertainty about later missions.Ajay and Bill discussed the timeline for the Artemis 8 mission, which is currently scheduled for 2033 but is likely to be delayed to the mid-2030s. Ajay emphasized the need for an earlier presence on the moon to compete with China's space station plans by 2030. Bill presented details on the Artemis 8 module, which can house up to four astronauts for short stays. Ajay calculated the delta V required for lunar missions and discussed propellant fractions and payload capacities for different launch vehicles, including the Falcon Heavy and New Glenn.Ajay presented a comparison of different rocket systems for cargo transport, focusing on the cost-effectiveness of Falcon Heavy and New Glenn compared to the SLS. He demonstrated that using Falcon Heavy for four flights could save up to 80% compared to the SLS, while New Glenn was also competitive with similar cost savings. He emphasized that these proven systems should be preferred over the unproven SLS for cargo missions, and suggested that TSS should push for this approach, particularly for missions up to Artemis V.Ajay and Bill discussed the implications of using cargo components in a human mission to the moon, with Bill raising concerns about potential risks to human safety if cargo missions fail. Ajay clarified that cargo missions would occur before human missions, minimizing risk. Bill also inquired about propellant loss in upper stages for the Falcon Heavy, to which Dr. Ajay explained that redesigns would be necessary to accommodate additional fuel and cargo, including potentially larger tanks and increased dry weight. Ajay emphasized the importance of repurposing upper stages for missions beyond Earth, contrasting this with Elon Musk's focus on reusability.The group discussed NASA's Artemis mission plans, with David explaining that the current administration's goal is limited to landing humans on the moon by 2028 before China does, rather than establishing a permanent presence. Ajay emphasized the importance of building a permanent lunar base, suggesting it could be achieved within two years with additional funding from Congress, though he acknowledged this might not be realized until after 2028. The discussion highlighted a disconnect between long-term planning needs and current budget constraints, with David noting that future mission planning would likely depend on the next administration's priorities.Ajay proposed a plan to establish a permanent lunar presence before Artemis 3, suggesting the construction of structures on the moon with a budget of $500-600 million and the capability to transport 15 tons of cargo. He emphasized the importance of this initiative for the country and suggested that it could be implemented alongside SpaceX's Starship program. The group discussed the challenges of convincing Elon Musk to shift from the Starship plan, with Phil highlighting the political and logistical obstacles. Marshall suggested setting a baseline design for a lunar station and challenging SpaceX to improve upon it, while John proposed this plan as a potential alternative if Starship encounters technical difficulties.The group discussed a proposal for a moon landing mission using multiple Falcon Heavy upper stages. Ajay presented his concept of using four stages, with one in the center and three at 120-degree intervals, connected and fired together for translunar injection. Bill suggested creating drawings to better illustrate the concept, while Philip proposed an alternative architecture involving fuel transfer between stages before landing. The discussion highlighted concerns about the feasibility of completing the mission within the proposed timeline of 2028, with David expressing skepticism about the three-year timeline given the complexity of testing and approvals.Our guest discussed his ongoing efforts to publish a detailed mission architecture proposal, including a recent contact with the White House and an upcoming meeting with Trump's political advisors. He is awaiting publication confirmation from Jeff Faust, who has previously published several of Ajay's articles. The group discussed the likelihood of reaching the moon in 2028, with Dr. Sherry Bell and others expressing doubt about government timelines, while noting that China has its own lunar ambitions. The conversation ended with updates on upcoming Space Show guests and a call for ISDC presenter submissions, with Dr. Bell offering priority to meeting participants.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4494 ZOOM Dr. Ethan Siegel | Tuesday 27 Jan 2026 700PM PTGuests: Dr. Ethan SiegelZoom: Dr. Siegel talks with us on the latest factual science, science plus, terrific cosmic story telling, astrophysics and moreBroadcast 4495: Zoom: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 28 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4496 Zoom Sarah Scoles | Friday 30 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Sarah ScolesZoom Sarah Scoles, top space journalist returns with lots of space new stories to discussBroadcast 4497 Zoom Mark Whittington | Sunday 01 Feb 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Mark WhittingtonZoom: Author, Journalist, Writer Mark Whittington returns a discussion about his latest O-Eds and space opinions. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Humans are preparing to return to the Moon. On this episode of Planetary Radio, host Sarah Al-Ahmed is joined by Kelsey Young and Noah Petro, two of the scientists helping turn humanity’s return to the Moon into reality. Kelsey Young is a research space scientist at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and serves as the Artemis Science Flight Operations Lead. She also leads the Lunar Observations and Imaging Campaign for Artemis II, defining what astronauts will observe, document, and study as they fly around the Moon for the first time in more than 50 years. Noah Petro is the lab chief of the Planetary Geology, Geophysics, and Geochemistry Laboratory at NASA Goddard and the Project Scientist for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. He also serves as the Project Scientist for Artemis III, helping shape the science behind humanity’s first lunar footsteps of the 21st century. Together, they discuss how Artemis II and Artemis III build on decades of lunar science, how astronauts are being trained to observe the Moon like geologists, and why the Moon’s south pole is such a compelling destination for future exploration. Then, we wrap up with What’s Up, where Bruce Betts, chief scientist of The Planetary Society, shares the story of the first and so far only professional geologist to walk on the Moon. Discover more at: https://www.planetary.org/planetary-radio/2026-artemis-ii-and-iiiSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The European Union has officially and metaphorically switched on the IRIS2 secure satellite communications network, the homegrown 10.6 billion Euro European alternative to Starlink. ESA and EUMETSAT have finalized their agreement on the EPS-Sterna constellation. Planet Labs has signed a new agreement with the Surveying and Mapping Authority of Slovenia, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Our guest today is  Les Lake,  Vice President of Business Development at All Points Logistics.  You can connect with Les on LinkedIn, and learn more about All Points Logistics on their website. Selected Reading EU Deploys First Satellite Service in Bid to Limit US Dependence (Bloomberg) EU space agency signs contract to launch Galileo satellites with Ariane 6  (Reuters) EUMETSAT and ESA set to start the implementation of EPS-Sterna (EUMETSAT) Planet Signs Enterprise Agreement with Slovenian Government to Support Agriculture, Urban Planning and Disaster Management (Business Wire) NASA lines up WDR for SLS ahead of Artemis II (NSF)  NASA Launches Its Most Powerful, Efficient Supercomputer (NASA) ESA's Biomass goes live with data now open to all (ESA)  Share your feedback. What do you think about T-Minus Space Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show.  Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Space Show presents Bob Zimmerman, Tuesday, 1-20-26Quick SummaryWe started this Space Show program with Bob Zimmerman with discussions about space exploration policies, private industry involvement, and the current state of various space companies, including ULA and Blue Origin, along with a brief mention of Robert's book “Conscious Choice.”Detailed SummaryBob and David discussed the potential impact of a space program incident with Artemis, comparing it to past accidents and suggesting it could lead to a significant overhaul of NASA's programs. The conversation touched on the Artemis flight and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Bob opened up referring to his Op-Ed in which he criticized the press coverage of NASA's Artemis II mission, accusing journalists of being overly positive without addressing engineering concerns. He expressed concerns about the mission's safety, particularly regarding the untested life support system and the damaged heat shield, which NASA has only partially addressed by adjusting the flight path. Zimmerman compared the situation to SpaceX's more rigorous testing requirements for its Crew Dragon capsule, highlighting NASA's double standard in demanding multiple uncrewed test flights from commercial partners but not from its own SLS rocket.Bob also expressed concerns about NASA's decision to proceed with the Artemis II mission, citing inadequate testing and a culture that prioritizes schedule over engineering safety. He highlighted that the mission lacks critical testing, such as a heat shield test using Falcon Heavy, and criticized NASA's management for not standing up to political pressure to achieve a lunar landing before the current administration's term ends. Marshall suggested using an alternative method to test the heat shield, but Bob explained that NASA had already lost valuable time and was planning to use a different design for the next mission. Several in the group agreed that the Artemis II mission, while potentially successful, could be counterproductive by allowing NASA to continue misleading the public about the program's readiness.Next, Bob went after the Senate launch system as poorly managed and equipment-poor, noting that Congress created the rocket without a clear mission, which NASA is now struggling to define. He expressed more concerns about the Orion heat shield's untested design and emphasized the importance of fixing problems rather than working around them, especially when human lives are at stake. Phil suggested that sophisticated simulations could reduce the number of flights needed, but Robert argued that ultimately, hardware must be tested in real-world conditions. David pointed out that NASA's statements indicate they plan to use a new heat shield design in a future mission, which Phil initially criticized but Bob defended as a necessary step, albeit one that should have been tested beforehand.The Wisdom Team discussed concerns about NASA's approach to the Orion and SLS mission, with Bob being critical of NASA's management and politicians for prioritizing cost savings over safety by reusing shuttle parts. Dallas and Joe expressed skepticism about the mission's cost-effectiveness and engineering decisions, while David emphasized the need for Congress to question NASA's choices. The discussion highlighted the tension between political pressures and engineering realities in space exploration, with no clear solutions proposed by the end of the meeting.Bob went on expressing skepticism about NASA's Artemis program and the Space Launch System (SLS), arguing that the real space program in the United States is currently led by SpaceX. He criticized the Artemis mission as trivial and not historically significant, advocating instead for fostering a robust American private industry in low Earth orbit and beyond. Dr. Kothari questioned Bob's views, particularly regarding his recent op-ed, and discussed the potential dangers of the Artemis II mission. They also touched on alternative testing methods for the Orion spacecraft and the need for infrastructure development on the Moon.The Wisdom Team discussed the role of government and private enterprise in space exploration, with Bob emphasizing the importance of competition and innovation among various American space companies. Phil argued that NASA's leadership is crucial for guiding private industry and managing risks, while Bob suggested that NASA should set goals and provide a framework for private companies to achieve them without micromanaging the process. Joe noted that the Artemis Accords might be the most enduring legacy of the Artemis program.The tem discussed the Artemis Accords, which Bob explained were initially introduced by the Trump administration as a way to encourage private enterprise in space and potentially lead to changes in the Outer Space Treaty that prohibits property rights. Joe noted that Portugal had recently joined the Accords, bringing the total to 60 nations, with many post-Soviet countries participating. Phil suggested that allowing property rights in space could help redirect expansionist leaders' attention from Earth to space exploration, while Bob agreed with this approach and proposed establishing international rules similar to the Homestead Act to allow nations to claim territory under specific conditions.Bob discussed the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter's aging issues, noting an increase in anomalies and color dropouts due to the camera's degradation. Alfred McEwen explained that the problem is being managed by adjusting the camera's temperature, but more funding is needed for calibration. Robert highlighted the orbiter's importance in revealing Mars' icy nature and its potential for future human settlement. The group also discussed private and government missions to Venus, including Rocket Lab's delayed mission, NASA's canceled missions, and India's planned Venus orbiter. Phil mentioned China's proposed Venus Volcano Imaging and Climate Explorer mission, though its launch details remain unclear.The group discussed current and future planetary missions, with Bob noting that NASA's Venus missions are on hold and the U.S. has limited active planetary exploration compared to other countries. They explored Blue Origin's potential to increase competition in space travel, with Bob expressing hope that under new CEO David Limp's leadership, the company could become more competitive with SpaceX. The discussion also covered Blue Origin's orbital reef project, which our guest described as currently inactive, and Marshall inquired about cost reduction goals in space travel, to which Bob and Phil noted that while Blue Origin's David Limp has mentioned reducing costs by two orders of magnitude, no company has yet achieved even a one-order reduction.The group discussed the potential for terrestrial nuclear power plants, noting that while there is growing demand due to AI data centers, there remains significant public resistance. Bob expressed concerns about the “delusional” enthusiasm for AI, particularly in journalism where AI-generated articles are often inaccurate and inappropriate. The conversation shifted to space industry developments, with Ajay discussing small modular reactors (SMRs) and Generation 4 reactors that could serve both propulsion and energy needs. The discussion concluded with Bob emphasizing the need for multiple space companies beyond SpaceX, highlighting the importance of competition and redundancy in the industry.As we were nearing the end of the discussion, we focused on the current state and future of ULA, with Bob noting that while ULA has significant contracts with Amazon and Boeing, its Vulcan rocket lacks reusability and may struggle to compete with emerging reusable rockets like Starship and Neutron. The team discussed the leadership changes at ULA, with an interim leader appointed but no permanent replacement named yet. The conversation concluded with a plug for Bob's book “Conscious Choice” which explores the origins of slavery in Virginia and its relevance to space exploration, with David and Phil confirming they had read the book and found it informative.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4491 Zoom Dr. Antonio Del Popolo | Friday 23 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr/. Antonio Del PopoloZoom: Dr. Popolo talks about hs new booik, “Extraterrestrial Life: We are not alone.”Broadcast 4492 Zoom Dr. Ajay Kothari | Sunday 25 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Ajay KothariZoom Dr. Kothari on “MUCH NEEDED CARGO TO MOON” Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Listen to 148 Future Now Show - X-Class Pandora A lively show today, we take a look at what’s going on in our corner of the universe.  Looks like we just weathered what is  known as an X-Class solar flare, lighting up the Northern skies with the aurora borealis, and and giving global communications a bit of a glitchy headache. Thanks to the Golden Dome initiative Rocket Lab is hitting it big time on Wall Street, and the new space telescope, Pandora, looks at the solar flares of other star systems in the search of E.T. life. And the ultimate rocket showdown: Who’s packing the bigger boom? Elon’s SpaceX Starship or NASA’s mighty SLS? We’re diving into the specs, the swagger, and who might actually win the space race crown. Popcorn ready?  Over in Metaverse land, Meta just showed the door to about 1,500 folks tied to their VR dreams as they’re desperately trying to plug the multi-billion-dollar money bleed. And Siri? Oh boy—Apple’s ditching the OpenAI hookup and switching allegiances to Google’s Gemini for that next-level upgrade. Why the swap? We break it down, including Bobby’s hot take: local AI running right on your device is about to take over the world. That’s why Apple’s reportedly renting Google’s monster server farms instead of building their own—smart move or sneaky strategy? In the programming world, Claude.ai is killing it, allowing complex programming to be done in English!No more staring at cryptic errors for hours; just talk to it like a super-genius buddy.Health corner: We’re spilling the tea on sugar substitutes that won’t wreck your vibe. Check out cool options like Tagatose (tastes almost like the real deal but with way fewer calories and barely any blood sugar spike), plus GlyNAC and glycine for those extra wellness perks. Sweet without the guilt?And get this—in Japan, researchers discovered that simple blue lights on subway platforms slash suicide rates by a mind-blowing 84%. Calming vibes from LED magic turning a tragic problem into a low-cost win. Humanity-level glow-up! Meanwhile, look up, its…Devos time! Enjoy..

NASA rolled out its Orion spacecraft and SLS rocket, preparing to launch the second Artemis mission. Plus, scientists are studying microscopic organisms called Tardigrades to see how resilient they are when it comes to extreme environments, like space.

Artemis 2 förbereder bemannade färder längre ut i rymden än tidigare. Detta och fler genombrott väntas under forskningsåret 2026. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. Artemis 2 markerar nästa stora steg i rymdfarten när en bemannad testfärd tar människan längre bort från jorden än någon tidigare expedition. Den kraftfulla SLS‑raketen och Orion‑kapseln ska föra fyra astronauter runt och förbi månen, i ett läge där internationell konkurrens om framtidens rymdresor skärps. Samtidigt växer intresset för månens sydpol, där fruset vatten kan bli nyckeln till framtida baser och vidare färder mot Mars.Året rymmer också stora förväntningar inom flera forskningsområden. Inom genteknik väntas EU öppna för enklare regler kring genetiskt förändrade grödor, vilket kan bana väg för mer klimattåliga växter och djur. I naturvårdens värld intensifieras jakten på bättre koll över den biologiska mångfalden genom drönare, ljudanalys och DNA‑insamling.Tekniska språng präglar dessutom utvecklingen av artificiell intelligens, där nollklicksinternet och automatiserade svar förändrar förutsättningarna för källkritik och informationsflöden. Parallellt diskuteras riskerna med djuphavsgruvbrytning, där ännu okända organismer hotas innan forskare ens hunnit kartlägga dem.Programledare: Björn Gunérbjorn.guner@sr.seReportrar: Camilla Widebeck, camilla.widebeck@sr.seGustaf Klarin, gustaf.klarin@sr.seSara Sällström, sara.sallstrom@sr.seProducent: Lars Broströmlars.brostrom@sr.se

Save 10% on a Las Vegas Advisor 2026 membership and book with code MTM.  https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/shop/products/lva-membership-platinum/ Episode Description On this episode of MTM Vegas we take you to one of the most iconic names in Vegas. Sahara Las Vegas is 70 years old, but the property has had a wild ride the past 20 years. We recently took a tour with the property's GM to see how the transition back to Sahara has gone, what is new at the property, how they are going for something different and why it is probably way underrated. We also have exclusive news about a new hotel within a hotel concept, a new speakeasy & the Bazaar Meat replacement. Plus we discuss our biggest highlights, surprising takeaways and why Sahara may still be struggling. Episode Guide 0:00 Welcome to MTM Travel 0:31 Info about our Sahara property tour 1:33 The history of Sahara's transition back from SLS 3:27 Sahara's standard rooms are very good 5:15 Alexandria Tower rebrand - New name + concept  7:07 Sahara's pool - Big improvement? 9:27 Sahara's restaurant row 11:20 Bazaar Meat replacement info - Maroon is coming 13:18 How Sahara is catering to locals + garage issues 14:45 Our biggest surprise - Magic Mike Theater 17:19 Sahara's biggest drawback & our final takeaways 20:00 Sahara framed carpet Each week tens of thousands of people tune into our MtM Vegas news shows at http://www.YouTube.com/milestomemories. We do two news shows weekly on YouTube with this being the audio version. Never miss out on the latest happenings in and around Las Vegas! Enjoying the podcast? Please consider leaving us a positive review on your favorite podcast platform! You can also connect with us anytime at podcast@milestomemories.com.  You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify or by searching "MtM Vegas" or "Miles to Memories" in your favorite podcast app. Don't forget to check out our travel/miles/points podcast as well!

In this bonus episode of Gangland Wire, retired Kansas City Intelligence Detective Gary Jenkins takes listeners back to 1970s Chicago for a series of lesser-known yet revealing stories about the Chicago Outfit, centered on violent enforcer Frank Schweihs, also known as “Frank the German.”   The episode begins with a personal side quest—tracking down the mystery of Tony Accardo and his rare red 1950s Mercedes sports car, possibly a 300 SL. These exotic cars were produced in limited numbers, and with Accardo's history attached, the vehicle could be worth a fortune today. The question is: where did it go?   From there, the story moves deep into Outfit territory. Schweihs was a feared figure who worked under Joseph Lombardo and alongside other notorious mobsters. I recount an undercover operation involving a wired Old Town business owner who helped federal agents capture Schweihs, extorting money, one of the cases that eventually put him behind bars. The episode also explores a remarkable undercover IRS investigation in which an agent posing as a criminal associate gained Schweihs' trust. Listeners hear about crooked real estate deals, political corruption, bribe demands, and just how casually violence was discussed inside the Outfit's inner circle—including talk of bombing a politician's car when business deals stalled.   These stories offer a raw, street-level look at how the Chicago Outfit operated during its peak years—how intimidation, corruption, and violence were everyday tools of business—and why figures like Frank Schweihs remain symbols of the Outfit's brutality. Hit me up on Venmo for a cup of coffee or a shot and a beer @ganglandwire Click here to “buy me a cup of coffee” Subscribe to the website for weekly notifications about updates and other Mob information. To go to the store or make a donation or rent Ballot Theft: Burglary, Murder, Coverup, click here To rent ‘Brothers against Brothers’ or ‘Gangland Wire,’ the documentaries click here.  To purchase one of my books, click here. 00:00 – Introduction and Chicago Bonus Episode 00:24 – Tony Accardo's Red Mercedes Mystery 02:55 – The Chicago Outfit in the 1970s 03:31 – Frank Schweihs and the Extortion Case 04:42 – Undercover IRS Agent Inside the Outfit 06:33 – Corruption, Real Estate, and Political Payoffs 08:37 – Violence Threats and Taking the Case Down 09:35 – Windy City Mafia and Final Thoughts Transcript [0:00] Well, hey, all you wiretappers out there, Gary Jenkins, retired Kansas City Police Intelligence Unit detective here back in the studio with a little bonus episode, Gangland Wire. And I’ve been doing a bunch of Chicago stuff, as you know. Well, here’s one more before I stray away from Chicago. I had been away from Chicago for a long time and I missed it. I missed you guys up there. And, you know, here’s another thing before I really get started in this story. Okay. [0:24] I’m on a mission right now. I remembered an old story about Tony Accardo had a 1950s Mercedes SL, and I think it was a Gull Wing, but I’m not sure. It was a 300 SL. [0:40] He for sure had a 1950s Mercedes red sports car. And I always wondered, you know, I wonder what happened to that car. You know, I ought to be able to run that down. I interviewed a guy recently about an investigation into finding an extremely rare exotic car that was worth like $25 million or something. It was a teardrop, German-made, something about a Talbert Lago or some game like that. Anyhow, so it got me thinking. And they were talking about running down the cars and the history on cars, the Provence on cars. And they said, when you have a really good story attached to a car, it makes it worth a whole lot more money than normal. And I called up a friend of mine that wheels and deals in classic cars through Mecham’s. And I think there’s another auto auction. He said, oh, yeah. He said, man, you can find that car. If it hadn’t already had that priced into it, the fact that Tony Accardo sold it or owned it, then it would be worth a whole lot more money. So I thought, well, let’s just see if we can’t find that car. I started looking into it. These 1950s Mercedes 300 SLs, there wasn’t very many I’ve made. There was only a couple thousand I’ve made in over several years’ time. And the best I could tell, they’re all accounted for in some manner. I don’t know. I haven’t figured that out yet. I started asking around and trying to find people that could help me with sources on that. So if you know anybody that’s a real expert on these old Mercedes sports cars. [2:10] Send them to me. Have them email me at ganglandwire at gmail.com or something like that. And if you are, you know, give me a call, 816-931-3535. I just think it would be fun to find it. I’d do a little show on it if I found it. And find out what happened to it. Now, it might make somebody really happy. We can find it, and he didn’t know that it was Tony Accardo’s old car. Now, these old VINs, you know, now they’re 17 digits. Well, back then, they were like six or seven digits, and to trace it through the VIN, that old a car, with no more than I have to go on right now, it’s just almost impossible. I need to find, narrow down that maybe somebody has a story about who had it and try to find that person and then work down from there if maybe that person still has it. I don’t know. But it would be a fun little, it’s going to be a fun little project. But anyhow, let’s go up to Chicago in the 1970s. You know, you were rocking and rolling up there in Chicago. The outfit ruled. We just had all that information from Bob Cooley and all the things that he did and he was involved in up there. And they owned the city. You know, they damn near owned the whole city. So there’s one guy named Frank Schweihs. Now you may have heard of Frank Schweihs. He was called the German, Frank, the German Schweihs. He was a guy that Red Wemette met who has his show. [3:31] Can’t even think of the name of it anymore. He had a show with Adam out in Las Vegas. Red Wemette. He kind of went into the employ of the FBI. Nobody really had a case on him. He was just tired of him shaking him down. So he volunteered, and Frank Schweihs was coming around extorting money from him. He had a dirty bookstore or something like that in Old Town. Frank Schweihs had a restaurant in Old Town. Frank Schweihs started coming around, and Red Wilmette let the bureau wire up his TV. So it had a camera and a microphone in it, and it recorded all kinds of information about Frank Schweihs. And they ended up convicting him of extorting money from Red Wilmette. He was also a defendant in the Family Seekers trial, and I think Red testified in that. Frank Schweihs, he had gotten introduced to an IRS agent named Johnson, but he was going under the name Virgil Williams. Now, Virgil Williams, we’re just going to call him Virgil Williams. He was a black dude. He was a big black dude, looked like a former, you know, defensive tackle for the Chicago Bears or something. [4:42] And he had started out, the IRS had put him undercover, working the South Side and working policy back in the earlier 60s. And somehow he got introduced to Frank Schweihs as this guy who was, you know, involved in gambling and involved in the rackets in some manner on the south side and the black rackets. Frank was trying to sell him his restaurant in Old Town. Of course, he was trying to rip him off is what he was trying to do. You don’t just do business with a guy like Frank Schweihs. Absolutely, you do not do business with him. If you start going down that path, what he’s going to do, he’s going to rip you off in some manner. Guys start telling stories about later on, he’s at the trial and around that time he’s interviewed and he start telling stories about working with Frank, he said, Frank, and he would sit around the restaurant and talk and drink and, and Frank would say, we’re in about undercover agents. And he said, yeah, he said, I can spot him a mile off. He said, no undercover is ever going to get close to me. He said, uh, you know, I can just hear, I can pick out who’s going up and down the street out there and who’s an undercover agent. And he’d point out people. Of course, this guy knew that they really weren’t undercover agents, but you know, he, you know, would act like, oh yeah, you’re really cool, Frank, you’re a guy I need to do business with. You know what time it is. He said the one time, Frank told him, he said, I wish that us whites were as aggressive and binding as you blacks are. He said, the guy said, I said, I almost choked on that. [6:11] He said, who’s more violent than Frank Schweihs? And he worked for Joy the Clown Lombardo. And, you know, Harry Aleman was in that mix and the Wild Bunch. And, I mean, who’s more violent and vicious than those guys? I don’t think anybody. But he thought that blacks really had it going on when it came to the violence thing. [6:33] It was a hell of a story. He also, after he got done, he didn’t have much more on Frank, but talked about he was trying to, he got in. Frank probably hooked him up with this guy, a guy named Herman Kaye. And he told him that he would buy a building from him. And actually, the building was owned by Goodwill Industries. And this Herman Kay was kind of a high-ranking person in Goodwill Industries. And, and he was going to sell it for $325,000 in cash. He said, uh, uh, Johnson walked in. He said, I just dumped $325,000 in cash right on his, uh, desk. And so this guy said, oh no, no, no, we can’t do that. Cause he was, he was, you know, front of himself off was like a black dope dealer. It had just tons of cash. [7:18] He said, you know, we can’t do it like that. You know, we got to figure out how to get that in the check. And then you got to pay me and pay me so much under the table. And so they ended up making a case on this guy for ripping over $400,000 off in a series of real estate deals in which the Goodwill industries are the victim. Now, who would rip off Goodwill? I mean, who would you go in and shoplift from Goodwill? I think this guy probably would. He was an employee. It’s just, it’s crazy. I mean, these are just a few little stories of the outfit in 1970s Chicago. Johnson said he recalled one day he went into the office of a North suburban mayor, started talking to him about getting something done, said he was a businessman from Chicago, and he wanted to start a bar, and he wanted to have gambling and prostitution in it, and he needed some protection. [8:09] And the guy said the guy asked him for $2,000, and he said, okay, you know, I can handle that. And he said, the guy also warned him. He said, you know, he said, if you aren’t who you say you are, you know, uh, I won’t send my police down there to take care of you. I’ll take care of you myself. The guy, the mayor never really figured out after they ended up doing him. Now during this time, also the IRS agent kept telling the German that he couldn’t really. [8:37] Close a deal on the restaurant that Frank was going to sell him. He said, because there’s a politician that was holding up the licensing process on it. And, and Frank Swiss, he didn’t say who it was, but Frank Swiss decided it must be a guy named George Dunn, who was a Cook County commissioner and really was probably, it could have been a successor to Richard Daly. And he was, uh, uh, he was really heavy into Cook County politics. And I believe he was the one who was holding up the transaction and Frank wanted to bomb his car. You know, the guy said, no, no, no, no, we’ll get this worked out. And then they ended up taking the whole thing down before anything happened. [9:15] But it was a hell of an undercover investigation this guy had. So thanks a lot, guys. Just another little story about the Chicago outfit. Don’t forget, I’ve got my book, Windy City Mafia, the Chicago outfit. It is on Amazon and just go to run Gary Jenkins Mafia on Amazon, Mafia Books on Amazon. You’ll find all my books. And I’ve got a bunch of interesting little stories I’ve done on the podcast that are in this book. It especially makes a nice gift for somebody that is interested in Chicago outfit. It’s not very much. And I just wanted to let you know about that. I don’t usually try to sell. Sometimes I try to sell a lot. Sometimes I don’t try to sell at all. It’s kind of a hit or miss with me. If I did this to earn money with, I’d be screwed anyhow. I just do it for the love of doing it. So thanks a lot, guys. And don’t forget about that red Mercedes, little red Mercedes car. We got to find that red Mercedes of Tony Accardo’s. It’s got to be out there somewhere. You just don’t junk out a car like that. So thanks, guys.

Open Lines Discussion, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2026Quick SummaryOur program focused on space industry developments and future missions, including discussions about Artemis III, SpaceX's priorities, and various private sector lunar missions planned for 2026. The group explored space technology advancements, investment trends, and launch cost reduction possibilities, while also addressing challenges in pharmaceutical pricing and international space cooperation. The conversation concluded with updates on space missions and budget concerns for 2026, as well as discussions about UAP evidence and plans to expand the show's reach through streaming and social media promotion.Early on we discussed space solar power and its potential applications, including AI data centers in space. Bill mentioned his connection to Virtus Solus, a space-based solar power company, and shared their recent announcement of a 97% efficiency rate for their rectenna. The conversation then shifted to Artemis III, with David expressing concern about delays hindering progress towards 2028 goals. Joseph provided an update on Artemis III hardware development, noting that while the SLS is far along in integration, both the Blue lander and Starship are still in early stages. The group also discussed the challenges and requirements for Starship refueling tests, with Joe expressing doubt about meeting timelines due to multiple technical hurdles.Our Wisdom Team discussed the Artemis program's goal of returning Americans to the moon by 2028, as outlined in a recent executive order. They debated the feasibility of meeting this timeline, considering the technical limitations of SpaceX's launch frequency and the need for reliability improvements. The conversation touched on the potential for multiple launch platforms and the possibility of using Starship for refueling missions. David raised concerns about the need for a decision on whether to stick with the current program or make changes, while Bill and others expressed worries about the timeline and the pressure on NASA management to meet it. We also discussed the executive order's mention of establishing initial elements of a permanent lunar outpost by 2030 and the potential for using nuclear reactors on the moon.SpaceX's priorities were discussed by Doug noting that while Mars is SpaceX's top priority, lunar development is a secondary focus. Joseph highlighted that once Starship achieves reusability, it could significantly increase launch capacity to 20,000 tons annually, with a target launch for in-orbit refueling and docking by Q3 or Q4 2023. The discussion also covered multiple private sector lunar missions planned for 2026, including Blue Origin's Mark 1 lander carrying the Viper rover, and the potential for commercial satellite communications to provide cellular service in underserved regions.The Wisdom Team talked about satellite positioning systems, particularly in Japan, where 4 out of 7 satellites must be visible over Japan at any given moment for non-GPS positioning. They explored potential business opportunities in space, including semiconductor manufacturing, medical products, and solar panels, though Joe noted that space manufacturing capabilities are not yet advanced enough to support these ideas. John Jossy shared that venture capital is primarily flowing to low Earth orbit companies, with recent large rases by companies like Stoke Space ($510 million) and Impulse Space ($300 million), while lunar ventures receive less attention.Later we discussed the state of space technology and investment, with Joe noting that venture capital investment in space has increased significantly, leading to companies raising hundreds of millions of dollars. They debated the potential for launch cost reductions, with Joseph suggesting that a factor of three reduction could be possible, though not necessarily reaching the extremely low costs Elon Musk has proposed for Starship. The conversation touched on the separate tracks of government programs like Artemis and commercial space development, with Bill and Joseph agreeing that these developments are largely independent. David raised questions about the incentives for launch companies to significantly reduce costs, given the current profitability of launches, and the group discussed the potential for new low-cost launchers, including a Chinese Starship-like vehicle, though its market impact in the West remained uncertain.The team talked about the challenges faced by pharmaceutical companies due to pressure to lower drug prices, contrasting this with the lack of similar pressure on commercial launch services. They also talked about recent repairs to the ISS, where Russian cosmonauts successfully sealed leaks using a patented sealing agent. The conversation concluded with a discussion about international space cooperation, particularly highlighting India's growing space program and its potential for future partnerships with Western countries.In addition, we discussed several space industry developments, including SpaceX's potential Mars mission and the status of various space vehicles. John Jossy shared information about SpaceX's planned Mars mission, while the group expressed uncertainty about the future of Boeing's capsule and Dream Chaser. They also discussed the transition of Tory Bruno from ULA to Blue Origin, and the potential implications for ULA's future. Bill provided an update on the Starliner program, noting that the next flight would be cargo-only in April, with crewed missions not expected until late 2026 or early 2027.As we were nearing the end of the program, various space missions and budget concerns for 2026 were mentioned. They talked about a private Rocket Lab mission to Venus in collaboration with MIT, scheduled for summer 2026. Bill provided updates on U.S. Venus missions, noting that the Senate version of the budget would preserve both Venus missions, while the House version funds the Mars sample return. The group also discussed the status of the NASA SBIR program, which has not been reauthorized for 2026, though ongoing projects from prior awards can continue. David expressed frustration about the lack of credible evidence regarding UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) claims, questioning why the topic remains so mysterious and unsubstantiated.The group discussed the challenges and secrecy surrounding UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) evidence and the potential for public disclosure, with John Hunt suggesting that classified information might be harder to prove than assumed. David expressed skepticism about the truthfulness of statements and emphasized the need for tangible evidence to gain public trust. The conversation also touched on the popularity of UFO topics in media, with Joseph suggesting that increased discussion of UAPs could boost listener numbers. The conversation ended with plans to explore options for streaming Zoom programs on YouTube and promoting the show on social media to reach a broader audience.Special thanks to our sponsors:American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 448t ZOOM Guy Schumann | Tuesday 13 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Guy SchumannOur guest is the CEO of RSS-Hydro in Luxembourg. The company helps assess and mitigate the risks of natural extremes, safeguarding both your communities and assets with resilience and security from space assets.Broadcast 4487: Hotel Mars TBD | Wednesday 14 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonHotel Mars TBDBroadcast 4488 Zoom, DR. ARMEN PAPAZIAN | Friday 16 Jan 2026 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Armen PapazianArmen presents his latest space economics paper which is posted on The Space Show blog for this program.Broadcast 4489 Zoom Dan Adamo | Sunday 18 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dan AdamoZoom: Dan discusses the special lunar orbit being used for the Artemis program Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Special Open Lines as the last Space Show for 2025, 12-30-25Quick SummaryWe explored various rocket systems' capabilities and development status, including SpaceX's Starship, Blue Origin's New Glenn, and NASA's SLS, while discussing the Artemis missions and Gateway project funding. The program ended with discussions about space infrastructure development, sustainable technology implementation, and the future of space exploration, including private sector initiatives and the potential for dual-use technologies.Detailed SummaryI discussed my appearance on Tom Olson's radio show. We then discussed the phenomenon of SpaceX employees potentially leaving to start their own space businesses after the company's IPO, which John Jossy clarified as similar to the “PayPal mafia” concept. Doug expressed skepticism about Mike Griffin's plan to meet the 2028 moon timeline using existing architecture, noting that Starship's development is crucial for Artemis III's success. The conversation also touched on the U.S.'s withdrawal from the Gateway project as depicted by Tom, with ESA now taking full responsibility for its development. This was later challenged and clarified.We talked about the status of the Gateway project for the Artemis missions, clarifying that Congress has provided full funding for Gateway despite the President's budget proposal to end it. They debated the necessity of Gateway and the NRHO orbit, with concerns raised about astronaut safety and the potential to strand individuals on the moon. David shared insights from a recent show featuring Mike Griffin, noting lower-than-expected viewership despite high expectations, perhaps due to the holidays. Later we discussed the success of Blue Origin's New Glenn launch.Also discussed were the capabilities and development status of various rocket systems, including SpaceX's Starship, Blue Origin's New Glenn, and NASA's SLS. Doug explained that SpaceX's Starship version 2 is still in development and its payload capabilities are not yet proven, while Blue Origin recently announced plans to stretch their New Glenn rocket to increase its payload capacity. We touched on SpaceX's Mars cargo landing plans, with Doug noting that Elon Musk's target of 10-30 tons for initial cargo landings seems low to reduce the number of refills needed, potentially eliminating the need for propellant depots or tanker flights. Marshall raised questions about the orbital reentry and heat shield capabilities of the Starship, suggesting that SpaceX may not fully understand how to handle the heat shield requirements for both lunar and Martian landings until they attempt a test flight.Our Wisdom Team discussed SpaceX's progress with their Starship program, noting that while they have had successful ocean landings, a double catch test is an important benchmark for evaluating shield performance. John Jossy mentioned that Relativity Space, led by Eric Schmidt, plans to launch their Taren R rocket late next year with the goal of building data centers in space. The conversation ended with welcoming two new participants, Benjamin Ayala and Twain Knight, who expressed interest in learning about space and discussed their academic backgrounds in physics and aerospace engineering both were students but as you will hear, fizzled out as being guests on the program.The group discussed the need for NASA to develop a sustainable infrastructure plan for a permanent presence in space, with Gary Barnhard (he joined us via Zoom) emphasizing the importance of establishing clear driving requirements from a science, systems engineering, and architectural design standpoint. Gary shared an example from the International Space Station's development to illustrate the impact of controversial requirements, highlighting the need for careful consideration of system capabilities. The discussion concluded with Gary outlining plans for a collaborative design charrette leading up to IAC 2026, which aims to gather insights and explore potential synergies for improving space infrastructure, with a focus on leveraging international partnerships and developing interoperability specifications for power beaming and communication networks.Gary discussed a novel approach to micro and partial gravity adaptation, emphasizing the importance of implementing technology with real-world applications and tangible data. Doug inquired about the goal of a design charrette, which Gary explained is to articulate driving requirements rather than provide prescriptive architectural recommendations. They discussed the development of SpaceX's Starship and the potential for propellant depots, with Gary highlighting the need for sustainable infrastructure and the importance of understanding various propulsion solutions. The conversation touched on life support systems for space missions, with Gary emphasizing the need for systems with multiple degrees of failure tolerance and a buffer for self-stabilization.The discussion continued to focus on the future of space exploration and commercial space activities. Gary emphasized the importance of private sector initiatives and the need for companies to take responsibility and authority in driving progress. He noted that the cost of launching payloads to the moon has decreased significantly, with potential for further reductions. Marshall highlighted SpaceX's achievements in 2025, including the success of Falcon 9 and Starlink satellites, and predicted that SpaceX could become the leading force in space exploration by 2027. The group discussed the economic implications of these developments and the potential for dual-use technologies that benefit both space and terrestrial applications.We discussed challenges and progress in space exploration, with Marshall highlighting SpaceX's successful recovery of its first stage and Blue Origin's advancements with hydrogen-oxygen upper stages. David expressed concerns about the lack of substantial progress in human spaceflight and space settlement, comparing it to the slow development of nuclear power. John Hunt suggested that developing a continuously inhabited moon base could provide more experience for long-term space living before considering permanent settlement. We emphasized the potential for private enterprise to drive future space missions, citing its willingness to take risks and its ability to operate without government scrutiny. The conversation also touched on the psychological impacts of sending couples and families into space and comparing it to the spirit of early American settlers.Gary presented an overview of XISP Inc.'s mission development efforts, highlighting their work on space wear technology that combines electro muscular stimulation with kinetic fabrics for exercise in variable gravity environments. He explained that the technology, which can provide equivalent of a 4-hour workout in 20 minutes, is already available commercially and is being tested with a broad demographic group. David expressed interest in featuring Gary in a dedicated Space Show segment and discussed the potential for using similar technology with animals, particularly dogs, for space missions. The group agreed to schedule Gary's next appearance on the Space Show for February. or later, then program concluded its broadcast.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4482: Zoom: Open Lines to kick of 2026 | Sunday 04 Jan 2026 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines to start the New Year Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Marcia Smith, the founder and editor of Space Policy Online, joins the show and revisits a conversation we had one year ago, recorded just weeks before the second Trump administration took office. That episode, “The Challenges of Change at NASA,” explored the institutional and political roadblocks to radical change at the U.S. space agency. A lot has happened since that show, including DOGE, mass staff departures, a draconian budget cut proposal, a dramatic shift toward sending humans to Mars, and the rapid departure of 20% of NASA's workforce. But at the end of the year, much remains the same. The SLS and Orion programs continue unchanged, with funding locked in through 2032. The humans-to-Mars policy has effectively vanished; returning U.S. astronauts to the Moon, to stay, is again centered within civil space policy. NASA's science missions, though still facing a serious budgetary threat, have not gone away. So, did we see real change at NASA? And to what end? Or was it merely disruption masquerading as change? Marcia Smith and host Casey Dreier revisit their original analysis and discuss what they got wrong, what they got right, and what surprised them about 2025 in civil space policy. Discover more at: https://www.planetary.org/planetary-radio/spe-2025-a-year-of-disruption-and-change-at-nasaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

SpaceTime with Stuart Gary - Series 28 Episode 154In this episode of SpaceTime, we explore significant milestones in lunar exploration and the latest challenges in space technology.Accelerated Launch for Artemis 2NASA has moved up the launch date for the historic Artemis 2 manned moon mission to early February, marking the first human journey to the moon in over 50 years since Apollo 17. The Orion spacecraft, named Integrity, will embark on a 10-day mission, completing a free return trajectory around the moon. This episode discusses the mission's objectives, including in-space demonstrations and the deployment of five cubesats, as well as the importance of this mission for future lunar exploration and potential Mars missions.New Insights from Lunar Rock SamplesRecent studies of lunar rock samples have revealed a new timeline for lunar impacts, pushing back the history of Earth's nearest celestial neighbour by 300 million years. The Apollo 17 rock sample, known as 76535, has provided crucial insights into the moon's formation and its geological history. Advanced computer simulations suggest that the impact that formed the Serenitatis Basin may have brought this rock to the surface, reshaping our understanding of the moon's bombardment history and its implications for Earth.Japan's H3 Rocket FailureThe Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has faced a setback with the failure of its new H3 rocket during a satellite launch. This follows a previous failure during its maiden flight. The H3 rocket, designed to replace the H2, aims to enhance Japan's capabilities in the global space market but has encountered significant technical challenges.www.spacetimewithstuartgary.com✍️ Episode ReferencesGeophysical Research LettersNASA ReportsJAXA UpdatesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/spacetime-your-guide-to-space-astronomy--2458531/support.(00:00:00) This is Space Time Series 28, Episode 154 for broadcast on 31 December 2025(00:00:47) NASA accelerates Artemis 2 moon mission launch(00:12:30) New lunar rock samples shift timeline of impacts(00:20:10) Japan's H3 rocket fails to deploy satellite(00:25:00) Study reveals links between social media use and cognitive performance in children(00:27:30) Coffee and tea's effects on bone health in older women

The Space Show Presents Special End of Year Messaging From Space Show Supporters To All, Friday, 12-16-25Quick Summary:Our program began with discussions exploring technical and political challenges related to NASA's Artemis program and the 2028 moon landing timeline, including concerns about safety, funding, and competing lunar missions. The conversation ended with discussions about autonomous systems in space, regulatory requirements for pilots, and the current state of the Space Show's funding and operations. Space Show participants included myself, Marshall Martin, John Jossy, John Hunt and later we were joined by Phil Swan.David began by promoting a recent segment highlighting past programs and encouraging donations to support the show during the final days of our 2025 campaign. Marshall shared his long-standing interest in space and support for the Space Show, recalling a childhood fascination with space and his daughter's involvement in a Loral tour. He talked about his compelling need to continue financially donating to The Space Show and urged other listeners to do the same given the importance of the program and its unique format. Marshall and David then discussed the political aspects of space exploration and the importance of understanding political issues to predict future developments. They talked about Jared Isaacman's presence at NASA headquarters and the need for quick decisions regarding the 2028 moon landing timeline. John Hunt expressed concerns about the readiness of the Starship lander for the 2028 mission and suggested that an alternative, human-rated lander would be needed. The Wisdom Team also discussed the potential impact of China's space program on U.S. efforts and the historical context of space race reactions.Team members discussed concerns about the Artemis program's timeline and safety, particularly focusing on Mike Griffin's warning about a 6.5-day wait period before a crew could return from the moon and the potential for crew strandings in crisis situations. They noted that while the 2028 deadline might be unrealistic, Elon Musk's company could potentially develop a competing lunar mission, though Marshall acknowledged this was currently only a 10% possibility. The discussion concluded with John Jossy suggesting that Artemis III might be delayed until a reliable and safe human landing system is developed, while Marshall emphasized that the lunar mission race includes both Artemis and China's space program, with funding and technical challenges remaining significant obstacles for both.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of a 2028 moon mission without the Gateway, with David highlighting that Starship would need orbital refueling, a lunar landing system, spacesuits, and an elevator like lander to reach the surface, none of which are currently ready. John Jossy added that Artemis 3 does not plan for a landing pad, and John Hunt suggested that Jared might need to inform the Chief of Staff about the timeline concerns, as President Trump probably wants the mission to happen during his presidency. The discussion concluded with Hunt noting that careerists might be hesitant to speak up due to job security concerns, while Trump might be more willing to take risks.Together we talked about the challenges and potential timelines for returning to the moon, considering both technical and policy aspects. Marshall suggested that Congress might continue to fund a lunar program even if it faces delays, while David proposed a hypothetical 2029 deadline to potentially allow more time for engineering and safety improvements. The discussion highlighted concerns about technological breakthroughs, funding, and the availability of top talent, with John Hunt emphasizing the need for better program management and funding levels to meet goals.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges and timelines for NASA's Artemis program, particularly focusing on the 2028 deadline for returning to the moon and what it might mean to the administration if that goal is not met. Phil Swan explained his support for the Space Show, emphasizing its focus on scientific depth and honesty in space industry coverage. The panelists then debated whether NASA could meet the 2028 target, with Marshall expressing skepticism about the timeline, while Phil suggested it might be achievable with a more conservative approach using the SLS rocket. The discussion concluded with a hypothetical bet on whether the program would meet the 2028 deadline, with most panelists expressing doubt.Marshall then presented his paper (see it on our blog at www.thespaceshow.com for this program on this date) on defending Earth and space stations from interstellar objects using large mirrors to either melt or redirect the objects. Phil suggested using a solar power satellite with laser beaming instead, as it could provide better range and dual purpose functionality. Marshall agreed to allow John Jossy to post his paper on the blog for further critique and feedback, as he is still working on it and seeking input from informed individuals. Phil also introduced the Evidence Ledger, an open-source peer review process where concepts and claims are reviewed by experts in the field.We then talked about both flight and human spaceflight training and regulations, with Marshall sharing his experience of obtaining a pilot's license in 1973 and David recounting his university flight training back in 67-68. They explored changes to FAA medical certification requirements for pilots, noting that private pilots no longer need a Class 3 medical certificate if their aircraft has a stall speed below 65 knots. The conversation concluded with a discussion about regulatory requirements for human spaceflight crew members, particularly whether they would need pilot licenses for atmospheric portions of their missions. This was answered in emails after the show but the short answer is no but covered in other regulations.Our Wisdom Team discussed the challenges and readiness of autonomous systems in space versus automotive technology, with David comparing the current state of self-driving cars to potential space systems. Phil and Marshall shared insights about space shuttle launches and Apollo missions, emphasizing the role of human pilots and the importance of thorough testing and quality engineering. The conversation highlighted the balance between perfect systems and acceptable risk levels, with Marshall noting that humans can often handle unexpected situations better than computers. The discussion concluded with Marshall's observation about the shift in focus from Mars to the moon, suggesting that solving the moon mission might be a more immediate challenge.Nearing the end of the program, we discussed the challenges and similarities between missions to the Moon and Mars, with Phil arguing that the engineering difficulties are more similar than the distances suggest. David shared updates on the Space Show's funding status, noting they are currently at 35% of their annual target. David took the opportunity to again ask listeners to support The Space Show with donations prior to the end of the year. Previous donation instructions have been provided so they are not repeated here but if one requests assistance or has questions, they can reach out to David at drspace@thespaceshow.com.David and the team discussed betting on the likelihood of Artemis III with the Program of Record making it to the Moon and back within the 2028 timeline. We talked about betting on the Polymarket, the legality facing Americans as its against the law with David wondering how people get around and do it given he hears about it all the time on various podcasts. It was suggested that Polymarket users might be using a VPN to hide their location. David said he would do some research on it for the Tuesday, Dec. 30 program, mainly out of his curiosity. John Jossy inquired about posting Marshall's papers on space mirrors and space settlements on David's blog. (Note: There is now a regulated US version of the Polymarket but you have to apply to use it and their may be a waiting list. You can find out more with a Google or AI Search for legal ways for US citizens to engage in the Polymarket).The Team wished all a Happy New Year and encouraged listeners to support The Space Show during this year's campaign.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. Olson Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Note: A PDF of his House testimony including factual and quantitative analysis is available on line & at www.thespaceshow.com for the Dec. 21, 2025 Space Show program with Mike. He testified before the House on Dec. 4, 2025.The Space Show Presents Dr. Mike Griffin, Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2025Quick Summary:Our program with guest Dr. Mike Griffin primarily focused on discussing NASA's current lunar exploration program and its challenges, with extensive testimony from Mike about the technical limitations and risks of the Artemis III plan. The participants explored alternative architectures and technical solutions, including the need for orbital flight tests and cryogenic propellant management capabilities. The discussion concluded with concerns about the program's timeline and infrastructure limitations, while emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and the need for more diverse expert participation in future discussions.David and Mike discussed the challenges and concerns surrounding NASA's current approach to returning to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that the existing plans with SpaceX and Blue Origin are unlikely to succeed. They highlighted the need for a different launch system and expressed frustration over the perceived mismanagement of the mission timeline. The conversation also touched on the potential for additional space vehicles to support lunar missions, though Mike noted that the current architecture does not require them. David introduced the evening's program and mentioned that Mike's testimony would be a key focus, setting the stage for a detailed discussion on the future of lunar exploration.Dr. Griffin testified before Congress about China's moon program and the United States' response, emphasizing that China is actively developing lunar capabilities while the U.S. lacks a coherent strategy at a special House committee meeting on Dec. 4, 2025. He criticized the Artemis III plan, arguing it cannot succeed due to technical challenges with cryogenic propellant storage and the near rectilinear halo orbit design, which leaves crews stranded for extended periods. Dr. Griffin proposed an alternative dual-launch architecture using the SLS, similar to China's approach, but acknowledged that the U.S. needs more heavy lift capacity.Mike explained that switching the program of record to a new architecture would require a significant commitment and involve multiple steps, including the new NASA administrator investigating the controversy, the president approving a change, and Congress appropriating funds. He emphasized that the current Artemis program architecture will not work and offered an alternative solution, while noting that other approaches could also succeed. I inquired about the process to switch the program of record, and our guest outlined the steps that would need to be taken, including potential sole source assignments to contractors.Our Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the technical challenges and feasibility of NASA's lunar mission concept, focusing on the difficulties of cryogenic propellant management and boil-off control in the lunar environment. Mike emphasized that the mission's current design lacks necessary expertise and experience, particularly in maintaining cryogenic temperatures for extended periods, and expressed concerns about the potential risks to crew safety. The participants agreed that the concept, as currently proposed, is unlikely to succeed within a reasonable timeframe. Marshall highlighted the specific challenge of managing heat on the sunlit lunar surface. I inquired about SpaceX's perspective regarding the challenges and risks, but Mike clarified that he could not speak for SpaceX engineers and emphasized that no amount of engineering brilliance can rescue a fundamentally flawed concept.We continued discussing concerns about the U.S. lunar exploration program and its competitiveness with China. Mike expressed frustration that the current architecture lacks sufficient delta-V and a credible lunar lander, while Ajay raised questions about the feasibility of multiple refueling missions. The discussion highlighted tensions between using cryogenic versus storable liquid propulsion systems, with Griffin advocating for storable liquids for the first crewed mission due to infrastructure limitations on the moon. The conversation concluded with his emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and his preference for a simpler, safer approach to lunar missions.Mike and Ajay discussed the challenges of refueling in space, particularly for cryogenic liquids, and the risks associated with multiple launches. They expressed skepticism about the Blue Origin architecture and the feasibility of the NRHO concept due to technical limitations and the lack of demonstrated technology. Mike emphasized that if a mission failed, the fleet would likely be grounded until the problem is understood and solved, similar to historical practices in air and spaceflight. David asked about a potential point of no return for a new mission design, but Mike suggested there isn't a definitive point where re-engagement would be impossible. He expressed concern about the U.S. not being actively involved in lunar exploration, noting that China's success is not guaranteed lunar success either.Mike further emphasized the necessity of conducting an orbital flight test to demonstrate cryogenic propellant transfer and boil-off prevention before committing to a mission that involves significant national investment. He highlighted the importance of seeing such a test to validate the technology, as calculations alone would not be sufficient. Phil noted the success of the space shuttle's test flight and asked if thorough analysis and ground tests could convince Mike to which Mike responded that the shuttle's testing was significantly more extensive than what had been proposed for Artemis. Marshall suggested building a high-quality space station as a more efficient use of national resources than a moon mission, but our guest argued that space stations should serve mission needs and not be the initial focus. John proposed the idea of constructing a propellant depot with refrigeration capabilities to support future lunar missions, which Griffin supported as a viable option for refueling architecture.Our guest discussed the technical limitations of NASA's current approach to lunar missions, emphasizing that the proposed method of refueling in Earth orbit before heading to the moon is not feasible due to the lack of cryogenic fluid management capabilities. He compared this to a hypothetical cross-country flight that requires frequent refueling, highlighting the impracticality of the current plan. Mike expressed concern that the project may eventually stall due to technological constraints, noting that previous attempts to address similar issues in NASA's history faced significant political and public backlash. He also acknowledged the challenges faced by Jared Isaacman, the new NASA administrator, in making major changes to the current plan, but declined to offer specific advice on how to navigate these challenges.We also focused on NASA's responsibility for selecting the right approach to return to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that technical decisions should not be made through public votes. David expressed appreciation for Mike's insights and mentioned plans to share the discussion on Space Show global media accounts. The conversation ended with a reminder about supporting the Space Show through various payment methods, including PayPal, Zelle, and checks, with details provided for each option.Our Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4477 Zoom: Special Space Show Msg Program | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZOOM: To Be DeterminedBroadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don't miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Michael Listner, Sunday , 12-21-25Quick SummaryOur program focused on analyzing the newly released Trump Space Policy Executive Order and its implications for NASA's moon return mission by 2028, with discussions around commercial space initiatives, infrastructure challenges, and geopolitical considerations. The Wisdom Team explored NASA's current plans, leadership changes, and the evolving role of private investment in space exploration, while examining international reactions and regulatory challenges. The conversation concluded with discussions about space governance, technological advancements, and future policy directions, including the potential for reduced launch costs and the importance of spectrum management in space policy.SummaryThe Wisdom Team discussed the newly released Trump Space Policy Executive Order, which Michael noted pushes for commercial space initiatives rather than the expensive rocket version, aiming for a moon return by 2028. David expressed skepticism about meeting this timeline without radical program changes, and mentioned Dr. Mike Griffin's upcoming appearance to share his perspective. David and Michael discussed the newly released executive order on space policy, which aims to return humans to the moon by 2028. Michael explained that the order emphasizes a sustainable and cost-effective lunar presence, including greater commercial space involvement. He noted that while the order is significant, its reception and implementation may face challenges, particularly due to potential conflicts with previous legislation. David raised concerns about the feasibility of the 2028 timeline, citing skepticism about current infrastructure and project delays. Michael acknowledged these concerns but suggested that the administration's focus on achieving this goal before the end of the president's term could drive progress.We continued talking about NASA's plans to return to the moon, with Michael emphasizing that the Space Launch System (SLS) is currently the only viable option for achieving this goal within a reasonable timeframe, despite its limitations and high costs. The group discussed the potential influence of lobbying by contractors with stakes in SLS, as well as the geopolitical considerations of competing with China's lunar ambitions. John Jossy mentioned the recent executive order requiring NASA to review major space acquisition programs, potentially opening the door to cuts or cancellations, though Michael suggested that SLS would likely continue until at least Artemis 3 or 4 due to political realities and geopolitical interests.Our Wisdom Team discussed the implications of recent changes in NASA leadership and broader space policy, with Michael sharing insights about the challenges faced by former NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine and others. They explored the future of space exploration, with Michael predicting that private investment would become more important than government funding over the next 10-15 years, leading to the formation of large space-focused conglomerates. The discussion concluded with an analysis of international reactions to U.S. commercial space initiatives, noting that many countries, particularly Russia and the European Union, are resistant to the commercialization of space and have implemented restrictive regulations to limit private sector involvement.Next, we focused on the shift towards national sovereignty in space governance, highlighted by recent conferences on regulating lunar activities and space resources. Michael noted that while the U.S. participated in these conferences, it aimed to influence rule-making rather than comply fully. Marshall brought up Elon Musk's plans for AI data centers in space, including a potential IPO and a Pentagon proposal for a $4 billion AI center. Michael clarified that regulatory hurdles, rather than legal ones, would be the main challenge for such initiatives, while also cautioning about the potential for overhyped expectations similar to those seen with space resource laws. David inquired about efforts to extend environmental protection laws to space, to which Michael responded that while such attempts occur, they often lack specific legislative backing and have faced setbacks in recent court decisions.The Wisdom Team discussed tax incentives for space investment, with Michael noting that Florida had considered such measures and federal proposals existed previously. Marshall raised concerns about SpaceX's potential market dominance following its IPO, which Michael addressed by explaining that antitrust considerations would require government approval for monopolistic behavior, though he noted SpaceX's competition with other launch companies. Michael predicted that 2025 would be a transition year for space policy, moving commercial space to a higher priority, and anticipated continued steady progress in 2026, with over 100 launches expected from Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg that year. John Jossy mentioned the upcoming 60-day timeline for issuing guidance on American space nuclear power initiatives.Michael discussed the challenges of developing nuclear propulsion systems, citing the example of DARPA's project being abandoned. He explained that the new nuclear power directive from the administration aims to move initiatives forward, with multiple agencies involved in authorization processes. David raised concerns about Congress potentially being a stumbling block to space exploration efforts, given its current focus and past legislative conflicts. Michael noted the ongoing competition between NASA authorization acts and the CHIPS Act, suggesting that the White House might find a way to align these directives.Michael went on to explain that space settlement lacks regulatory infrastructure and requires a national space policy prioritizing it, which currently does not exist. He noted that the FAA's 2015 Commercial Space Launch Act was not fully implemented, particularly regarding space resources, and highlighted the need for Congress to provide clear authorization for such activities. Marshall raised a question about the relationship between SpaceX's Starlink revenue and NASA's budget, to which Michael responded that this shift aligns with Reagan's vision for commercial space, emphasizing private innovation surpassing government capabilities.Nearing the end of our program, we focused on the current state and future of national space policy, commercial space initiatives, and technological advancements. Michael noted that the Trump administration's first-term national space policy remains in effect. The Biden administration did not replace it. The Trump pro-commercial space stance continues to influence the industry. The team discussed the potential for reduced launch costs due to increased competition, with Rocket Lab's success highlighted as a significant player in the market. They also explored the implications of the Golden Dome initiative, emphasizing its potential geopolitical and defense implications, as well as the challenges it may face in the future. The conversation concluded with an examination of upcoming technologies, such as SpaceX's Starlink and its potential impact on global communication, and the importance of spectrum management in space policy.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4477 Zoom: To Be Determined | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZOOM: To Be DeterminedBroadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Thomas A. OlsonZoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don't miss it. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

NASA'S NEW LEADERSHIP AND PRIVATE SPACE Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Bob Zimmerman discusses Jared Isaacman's confirmation as NASA administrator and an executive order prioritizing commercial space. Zimmerman predicts Isaacman might cancel the crewed Artemis II mission due to safety concerns with the Orion capsule, signaling a shift away from government-run programs like SLS toward private enterprise. NUMBER 7

SHOW 12-19-25 THE SHOW BEGINS WITH DOUBTS ABOUTGAVIN NNEWSOM  ON THE AMPAIGN TRAIL FOR 2028... LA 1900 WEST COAST WEATHER AND PORTLAND'S DECLINE Colleague Jeff Bliss, Pacific Watch. Jeff Bliss reports that Nordstrom Rack is leaving downtown Portland, citing high vacancy rates, crime, and homelessness. He also details a massive atmospheric river bringing heavy rain to the West Coast and dangerous Tule fog in California, while analyzing Gavin Newsom's presidential prospects amidst state economic struggles. NUMBER 1 CHINA'S CHIP THEFT AND AI WARFARE RISKS Colleague Brandon Weichert, The National Interest. Weichert discusses China's attempts to upgrade older ASML machines and reverse-engineer chips to bypass sanctions. They also review 2025 lessons, noting that AI in military war games tends to escalate conflicts aggressively toward nuclear options, warning that China may fuse AI with its nuclear command systems. NUMBER 2 ITALY'S ECONOMIC STABILITY AND DEMOGRAPHIC CRISIS Colleague Lorenzo Fiori, Il Giornale. Lorenzo Fiori reports that Italy's economy is stabilizing, with debt under control and bond spreads narrowing close to Germany's levels. While northern Italy remains industrialized, the south suffers from depopulation and climate change. Fiori emphasizes the urgent need for government policies to boost Italy's declining birth rate. NUMBER 3 NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION AND RUSSIAN SANCTIONS Colleague Henry Sokolski, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center. Sokolski criticizes the lifting of sanctions on Russian banks for nuclear projects and highlights the dangers at the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia plant. He warns against potential deals allowing Saudi Arabia and South Korea to enrich uranium, arguing this brings them dangerously close to bomb-making capabilities. NUMBER 4 LANCASTER COUNTY AND A HOLIDAY SPENDING SLUMP Colleague Jim McTague, Author and Journalist. Reporting from Lancaster County, Jim McTague observes a sluggish Christmas shopping season, with consumers buying practical items like gloves rather than expensive packages. While tourist venues like Sight & Sound Theaterremain busy, he predicts a mild recession in 2026 due to rising local taxes and utility costs. NUMBER 5 THE URGENCY OF SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM Colleague Veronique de Rugy, Mercatus Center. Veronique de Rugy argues Social Security must be reformed before trust funds run dry in the 2030s. She contends the system unfairly redistributes wealth from young workers to increasingly wealthy seniors and advocates for capping benefits or means-testing rather than raising taxes or allowing across-the-board cuts. NUMBER 6 NASA'S NEW LEADERSHIP AND PRIVATE SPACE Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Bob Zimmerman discusses Jared Isaacman's confirmation as NASA administrator and an executive order prioritizing commercial space. Zimmerman predicts Isaacman might cancel the crewed Artemis II mission due to safety concerns with the Orion capsule, signaling a shift away from government-run programs like SLS toward private enterprise. NUMBER 7 SPACE BRIEFS: ROCKET LAB AND MARS RIVERS Colleague Bob Zimmerman, BehindtheBlack.com. Zimmerman highlights Rocket Lab's record launches and Max Space's new inflatable station module. He notes a European satellite report on sea levels omitted "global warming" references. Additionally, he describes Martian drainage features that resemble rivers and cites a study claiming AI algorithms are exposing children to harmful content. NUMBER 8 THE FALL OF THE REPUBLIC: SULLA TO CAESAR Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts traces the Republic's fall, starting with the rivalry between Marius and Sulla. Sulla'sbrutal proscriptions and dictatorship traumatized a young Julius Caesar. Watts explains that Caesar eventually concluded the Republic's structures were broken, leading him to seize power to enforce rights, which his assassins misinterpreted as kingship. NUMBER 9 NERO, AGRIPPINA, AND THE MATRICIDE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Professor Watts details the pathology of the Roman emperorship, focusing on Agrippina's maneuvering to install her son Nero. Watts describes Nero's eventual assassination of his mother using a collapsible ship and his pivot to seeking popularity through rigged Olympic victories in Greece before losing control of Rome. NUMBER 10 THE YEAR OF FOUR EMPERORS AND FLAVIAN RULE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. Watts analyzes the chaos following Nero's death, where Vespasian seized power after a brutal civil war that burned Capitoline Hill. The segment covers the Flavian dynasty, Titus's destruction of Jerusalem, and Domitian's vilification, concluding with Nerva's coup and the adoption of Trajan to stabilize the succession. NUMBER 11 THE BARRACKS EMPERORS AND THE ANTONINE PLAGUE Colleague Professor Edward J. Watts, University of California at San Diego. The discussion turns to the "barracks emperors," highlighting Trajan's expansion into Dacia and Hadrian's infrastructure focus. Watts describes Marcus Aurelius's Stoic governance during constant warfare and a devastating smallpox pandemic, which forced Rome to settle German immigrants to repopulate the empire. NUMBER 12 SUPREME COURT CHALLENGES TO TARIFF POWERS Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Professor Epstein analyzes potential Supreme Court rulings on the President's use of emergency powers for broad tariffs. He predicts the Court may find the interpretation unconstitutional, creating a logistical nightmare regarding the refund of billions in collected revenues and addressing the complexity of overturning Article I court precedents. NUMBER 13 EXECUTIVE POWER AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES Colleague Professor Richard Epstein, Hoover Institution. Epstein discusses a Supreme Court case regarding the President's power to fire members of independent boards like the FTC. He fears Chief Justice Roberts will side with executive power, a move Epstein views as an "unmitigated disaster" that undermines the necessary independence of agencies like the Federal Reserve. NUMBER 14 ECONOMIC SLOWDOWN AND CONSUMER SPENDING Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Gene Marksreports on a US economic slowdown, citing contracting architectural billings and falling hotel occupancy. He notes that while the wealthy continue spending, the middle class is cutting back on dining out. Marks attributes inflation to government money circulation and discusses proposals for mandated retirement contributions. NUMBER 15 AI ADOPTION IN BUSINESS AND CONSTRUCTION Colleague Gene Marks, The Guardian. Marks argues that AI is enhancing productivity rather than replacing humans, despite accuracy issues. He highlights AI adoption in construction, including drones and augmented reality for safety. Marks notes that small businesses are eager for these technologies to improve efficiency, while displaced tech workers find roles in smaller firms. NUMBER 16

In this episode, G and Nessa unzip Tom and Lauren's first trip to the Sexpartment.  They unpack their very first lifestyle night, the visit that started as “we're just looking” and quickly turned into a crash course in pushy single guys and hard boundaries. With zero prior experience with anyone else, the couple who once printed erotic stories to read to each other in bed found themselves dressed way too sexy for an adult bookstore run, dodging a persistent single male who couldn't take “no” for an answer from anyone, and bolting out with cold feet.  And let's not forget laughing about their new mantra: “just no anal.” The chaotic night sparked ghosted text chains, a full re-evaluation in the car, and the realization that club marketing (sexy 30-somethings everywhere) doesn't always match reality. Tom and Lauren tell G and Nessa how that awkward evening forced crystal-clear communication, sparked Lauren's bi-curiosity, taught them not to cock-block other couples, and ultimately became the messy-but-beautiful origin story of their growth in the lifestyle—complete with SLS hot-date excitement for every new city and the admission that they still sometimes miss blatant flirting cues. Email your questions to Nessa here to be part of "Ask Nessa". Please subscribe on your favorite podcast platform. You can catch us on SLSRadio every Wednesday at 4pm Eastern Time. You can find tons of amazing lifestyle show on FullSwapRadio, including our show, Every Wednesday at 6:30pm and Midnight Eastern Time. We are now hosts on the Swinger Society Discord Server as well. If you have your own sexy stories, please call our hotline and share them with us and our audience. 844-4-Hump-Day If you have any questions for us, please email us at humpdayquickies@gmail.com Visit our website as well.  HumpDayQuickies.com Please follow us on all the social platforms: Twitter - HumpDayQuickies Instagram - HumpDayQuickies FaceBook - HumpDayQuickies TikTok - HumpDayQuickies We are adding new content as quickly as we can!

The Space Show Presents Dr. Casey Handmer, Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2025Short Summary:The meeting focused on discussing the Artemis program's challenges and complexities, with particular emphasis on comparing NASA's current architecture with SpaceX's Starship capabilities for lunar missions. The group explored various technical and political considerations, including orbital refueling requirements, safety constraints, and the potential for China to establish a lunar presence before the U.S. They also discussed broader topics such as the feasibility of Mars missions, the challenges of powering data centers in space, and the need for NASA reorganization to remain competitive in the global space race.Detailed Summary:David and Casey discussed the challenges and complexities of the Artemis program, emphasizing the need for simplification and focusing on delivering only what is essential to achieve the lunar mission. Casey highlighted the importance of reducing complexity, similar to the Apollo era's lunar orbit rendezvous approach, and noted that congressional funding often prioritizes parochial interests over strategic goals. They also touched on the potential for China to establish a lunar presence by 2029, suggesting that the U.S. needs to accelerate its efforts to remain competitive.Casey criticized the current NASA architecture for returning to the moon, particularly SLS, Orion, and Gateway, arguing they are inefficient and costly, while Starship offers a more viable alternative. Phil challenged Casey's views, questioning whether halting funding for Orion and SLS is the right move, and they debated Starship's current capabilities, with Casey defending SpaceX's engineering expertise and Phil citing his own calculations showing Starship lacks sufficient delta-V for orbital flight. Marshall suggested that Test Flight 13 could demonstrate Starship's orbital capabilities, potentially resolving the debate.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the comparison between SpaceX's Starship and NASA's SLS/Orion programs, focusing on orbital refueling capabilities and safety constraints. Casey argued that even if Starship demonstrates orbital refueling, NASA would continue funding SLS due to political reasons, while Phil suggested canceling SLS if Starship meets safety constraints and achieves 100+ ton propellant transfers. The discussion highlighted concerns about Starship's refueling requirements and success rates, while emphasizing the challenges of orbital refueling compared to satellite deployment. Bill noted that launch success probabilities might improve over time, but Casey emphasized the timing issues and marginal requirements in the Artemis program.The group discussed the differences between SpaceX's and NASA's approaches to space exploration, with Casey emphasizing the efficiency and innovation at SpaceX's Starbase in Texas. All discussed the challenges of boil-off in rocket fuel tanks, noting that while it is a concern for liquid hydrogen, it is not a significant issue for methane. They also explored the possibility of using Falcon Heavy instead of the SLS and Orion for lunar missions, with Ajay suggesting that Falcon Heavy could be a more cost-effective and safer option. Casey agreed, stating that using Falcon Heavy and Dragon could simplify and potentially reduce the risks of the Artemis program.The Wisdom Team discussed the Artemis program and its viability for returning to the moon, with Casey explaining that while many in the industry doubt the current approach, the program remains a government policy with congressional approval. David raised concerns about the lack of technical expertise at the highest levels of NASA and questioned how to effectively advocate for program changes, noting that Congress may not fully grasp technical details. Casey suggested that successful completion of the HLS contract by SpaceX could influence future decisions, while Marshall highlighted the potential for embarrassment and increased urgency if China achieves a moon landing before the US.Casey expressed concerns about China's potential lunar claims and the need for U.S. space dominance, while David inquired about the blowback from Casey's blog post criticizing NASA's Orion space capsule as garbage. Casey explained that the post was well-received and based on NASA's own internal watchdog reports, highlighting past NASA failures. Phil suggested creating an Office of the Inspector General for SpaceX and Blue Origin due to perceived lack of oversight, to which Casey responded that existing oversight bodies like NASA's OIG and FAA can already address issues with NASA-funded programs.The Wisdom Team discussed the accuracy of refueling estimates for the Starship rocket, with IG analysis showing 16 refuelings compared to SpaceX's estimate of 8-12. Casey noted that while most people working on the Starship program lack expertise in making these calculations, the actual number of qualified experts worldwide is less than 10. The discussion then shifted to alternative landers for the HLS program, including a potential intermediate human-rated lander from Blue Origin that would be larger than the Mark I but smaller than the HLS version, though Casey and others questioned its viability due to launch and fuel efficiency challenges.Next, we focused on the feasibility of human missions to Mars, with Casey explaining that while significant progress has been made since 2025, achieving a self-sustaining city on Mars would require approximately 10,000 additional Starship missions beyond initial landings by 2035. Casey noted that life support systems for Mars missions are technically feasible, citing nuclear submarines as a precedent, and suggested that while faster transit times would be desirable, they are not essential for mission success. The conversation concluded with a discussion about advanced propulsion systems, with Casey proposing antimatter propulsion as a potential future technology that could enable human exploration beyond Mars, though he acknowledged that such developments are not currently in the near-term plans of space agencies.David brought up questions about the feasibility of AI data centers in low Earth orbit, with Casey expressing skepticism and suggesting that ground-based solutions near Starlink gateways would be more cost-effective and efficient due to latency and infrastructure constraints. Ajay emphasized the potential of thorium-based molten salt reactor nuclear power plants for data centers, citing their lower cost and easier construction compared to space-based options. Casey countered that building enough nuclear reactors to meet the energy demands of AI data centers on Earth is unlikely, and highlighted the need for further computational analysis to determine the viability of space-based solutions.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of powering data centers, with Casey noting that while it's possible to build a 10 gigawatt data center in 18 months, there's no way to power it that quickly. Marshall suggested using Starlink satellites to provide computing power, while others emphasized the need for reliable communication infrastructure. The conversation then shifted to the future of the Starliner program, with Casey expressing doubt about its viability due to ongoing technical issues and financial losses. The discussion concluded with a brief exploration of the high costs associated with Mars sample return missions, which Casey attributed to the complex coordination between multiple agencies and contractors.Casey discussed the challenges at JPL, highlighting how bureaucratic inefficiencies and lack of incentives for cost-saving measures have led to expensive and delayed missions, such as the Mars Rover, which cost $2.4 billion and was 12 years late. He noted that JPL has laid off 1,500 people and is struggling due to reduced project work, while commercial space has taken over many traditional NASA roles. Casey emphasized that NASA and JPL lack fiscal discipline compared to private industry and suggested that the agency needs reorganization or new missions to remain relevant.Casey discussed the urgent need to enhance NASA's operational capacity to ensure U.S. strategic interests are not compromised by other nations, emphasizing that decades of neglect have created a dire situation that requires significant effort to address. He also shared his work on synthetic fuel production, inspired by the need for a primary materials supply chain on Mars, and highlighted the challenges and opportunities in developing this technology using solar power. The conversation included discussions about refining processes for metals and the potential for innovation in energy production, with Casey encouraging interested individuals to join his team or pursue their own ventures in this field.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4469: Brian Clegg, author of The Multiverse When One Universe Isn't Enough” | Friday 05 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Brian CleggZoom: Brian Clegg, author of The Multiverse When One Universe Isn't Enough”Broadcast 4470 Zoom: OPEN LINES | Sunday 07 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion. Join us with Zoom phone lines Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

  Download CPSolvers App here RLR CPSolvers   In this new SLS episode, Maryana presents a case to Austin, Oumaima, and David as they navigate the waves of subacute inflammation and abdominal pain.

Episode 31: The Bliss of ItNovember 2025‘Main Topic': Our November 2025 Bliss Cruise Sexual Summary. We once again survived and have sizzling tales to tell. Plus, we talk about what to expect onboard, breakdown common myths of cruising and the Celebrity Line vs the Royal Caribbean ships.   ‘What Have We Done Lately': A Halloween weekend in Pittsburgh with great friends that included an NFL Steelers game. And of course, the Bliss Cruise in all its Glory. The best time you will ever have in the Lifestyle. ‘Where We Are Going Next': The Special Holiday Meet & Greet scheduled on December 5th, 8pm at "Grasshopper Off The Green" in Morristown NJ. The Official Event is listed on SLS. Our annual New Year's Eve party is shaping up to be another epic event. Plus, talk of two group trips for 2026. The “Kraken Resort” in Houston, Texas and “The Red Room” in Nashville, Tennessee. And don't miss the opportunity to join us on the April 2027 Bliss Cruise! Our special Cabins are going fast so book NOW to get ‘Prime' Cabin locations while they last. Go to our Events Page 2, for Bliss Cruise Bookings with a 'Special Perk' or click this 'lynx': Events/Trips/CruisesVisit us at https://www.LifestyleLynx.com for related Adult Events, Cruises, Resorts, Clubs, Parties, Swinger Websites and more...

Blue Origin is fresh off an incredible few weeks—a successful second launch and first landing of New Glenn, followed by an exciting unveil of upgrades to the vehicle, including an enormous new version, New Glenn 9x4.This episode of Main Engine Cut Off is brought to you by 32 executive producers—Lee, Natasha Tsakos, Fred, Will and Lars from Agile, Ryan, Stealth Julian, Pat, Heiko, Kris, Jan, Better Every Day Studios, Theo and Violet, Matt, Josh from Impulse, Russell, Joel, Warren, Joonas, Joakim, Tim Dodd (the Everyday Astronaut!), Donald, David, Frank, Steve, The Astrogators at SEE, and four anonymous—and hundreds of supporters.TopicsBlue Origin's New Glenn rocket came back home after taking aim at Mars - Ars TechnicaJeff Bezos on X: “Good overview of the landing. We nominally target a few hundred feet away from Jacklyn to avoid a severe impact if engines fail to start or start slowly. We'll incrementally reduce that conservatism over time. We are all excited and grateful for yesterday…”New Glenn Update | Blue OriginBooster 18 suffers anomaly during proof testing - NASASpaceFlight.comSenate Commerce Committee schedules hearing on Isaacman renomination - SpaceNewsLawmakers writing NASA's budget want a cheaper upper stage for the SLS rocket - Ars TechnicaThe ShowLike the show? Support the show on Patreon or Substack!Email your thoughts, comments, and questions to anthony@mainenginecutoff.comFollow @WeHaveMECOFollow @meco@spacey.space on MastodonListen to MECO HeadlinesListen to Off-NominalJoin the Off-Nominal DiscordSubscribe on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Pocket Casts, Spotify, Google Play, Stitcher, TuneIn or elsewhereSubscribe to the Main Engine Cut Off NewsletterArtwork photo by JAXAWork with me and my design and development agency: Pine Works

Send us a textAbout Eef van der Worp, BOptom, PhD, FAAO, FIACLE, FBCLA, FSLSEef van der Worp is an educator and researcher. He received his optometry degree from the Hogeschool van Utrecht in the Netherlands (NL) and has served as a head of the contact lens department at the school for over eight years. Eef received his PhD from the University of Maastricht (NL) in 2008. He now runs his own research & education consultancy 'Eye-Contact-Lens' which is based in Amsterdam (NL), and gives courses on ‘How to Present'.He is a fellow of the AAO, BCLA and the SLS, a lifetime fellow of IACLE and a honorly life member or the Dutch contact lens association ANVC. And he is on the education committee for a number of conferences, including the Global Specialty Lens Symposium (GSLS) in the US and the Dutch Contact Lens Conference (NCC) and Dutch Optometric Society meeting (OVN). He is a board member of the BCLA journal Contact Lens & Anterior Eye.Eef is adjunct assistant Professor at Pacific University College of Optometry (Oregon, USA), and adjunct Professor at the University of Montreal University College of Optometry (CA) and he is lecturing extensively worldwide and is a guest lecturer at a number of Universities in the US and Europe.---If you're considering or have ever considered getting a virtual team member for your practice check out hiredteem.com, mention The Myopia Podcast when signing up for a $250 dollar discount off of your first month's teem member.https://hireteem.com/myopia-podcast/

In today's episode of The Root of the Matter, I sit down with Jennifer Rankin, owner of Wonder Oral Wellness, to explore a question I get almost daily:“What toothpaste should I use?”And more importantly…“Does it actually help my teeth remineralize?”Jennifer's story is one of my favorites because it is so real. She started out as a customer who was simply trying to help her child avoid a cavity and ended up buying the company that changed her family's oral health. Yes, really.Together, we unpack:

Bob Zimmerman reports that Blue Origin's New Glenn orbital rocket successfully completed its second launch, including landing the first stage and demonstrating reuse capability comparable to Falcon 9. New Glenn, larger than Falcon 9, is scheduled for upgrades with more powerful BE4 and BE3U engines, making it nearly comparable to NASA's costly and expendable SLS rocket. Rocket Lab set a new annual launch record with 15 successful orbital launches, surpassing Russia's frequency, and has conducted suborbital HASTE launches for military testing. India is upgrading its largest LVM rocket's upper stage for multiple restarts, essential for its space station and crewed missions. The US State Department opposes a proposed European Union space law seeking to impose EU regulations on companies from other nations, potentially discrediting the EU if passed. Finally, NASA has hired startup Catalyst to attempt a daring robotic rescue of the decaying Swift telescope. 1862 

SHOW 11-21-25 CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR THE SHOW BEGINS IN THE DOUBTS ABOUT UKRAINE FIRST HOUR 9-915 HEADLINE: Las Vegas Shifts Focus with Formula 1 and Lower-End Tourism; California Politics Hit by Indictments GUEST: Jeff Bliss Jeff Bliss reports that the Formula 1 race on the Las Vegas city circuit is attracting major spectacle and high-end tourism, though the city is also attempting recovery by catering to lower-income demographics, evidenced by positive activity at the Excalibur Casino, while facing major competition from a new Indian casino near Bakersfield, California, operated by the Tahone tribe and twice the size of Caesars Palace. In California, Governor Gavin Newsom's former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, and four others were indicted on 23 counts of fraud. Additionally, an investigation into the Palisades fire revealed that state workers ordered the LA Fire Department to back off a previously burned area that rekindled, allegedly to protect endangered plants. 915-930 HEADLINE: Industrial Policy and Tariffs Lack Coherence; Removal of Food Tariffs Implies Inflationary EffectGUEST: Veronique De Rugy Veronique De Rugy discusses US industrial policy, noting the trade deficit has increased despite tariffs, and the administration's decision to remove tariffs on food items—goods not produced domestically—is seen as an implicit admission that tariffs contribute to the "affordability crisis" because tariffs are a tax primarily borne by American consumers. The goals behind tariffs have shifted from fighting China to raising revenue, and the largest tariff exemption is for computer parts, indicating an understanding that tariffs could contradict other goals like energy abundance. De Rugyargues that US economic power stems from innovation and a willingness to invest, making industrial policy involving tariffs and seeking foreign investment largely unnecessary and potentially harmful. 930-945 HEADLINE: Mixed US Economic Signals: Strong GDP Contrasts Low Consumer Sentiment; AI Adoption Increases GUEST: Gene Marks Gene Marks discusses the US economy, noting that third-quarter GDP growth is estimated near 4%, contrasting sharply with record-low consumer sentiment in a "tale of two economies" where salaried workers receiving pay raises of 5–7% are outpacing 3% inflation and continuing to spend, while hourly workers struggle. Despite job growth in construction, leading indicators like the architectural billings index show contraction for 11 months. In technology, 88% of major companies are adopting artificial intelligence, though scaling remains limited, with AI already replacing low-level programmers and enhancing customer service. Agentic AI, capable of performing complex tasks, is predicted to impact fields like accounting and marketing by 2027–2028. However, Marks argues that most current major corporate layoffs stem from typical corporate bloat and mismanagement rather than AI, at least not yet. 945-10 SECOND HOUR 10-1015 HEADLINE: Lancaster County Economy Booms Despite Low Consumer Confidence; Local Entrepreneurs ThriveGUEST: Jim McTague Jim McTague reports that the economy in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, is strong, suggesting it mirrors the greater US economy despite reports of low consumer confidence, observing robust traffic at tourist destinations like Kitchen Kettle Village, a shopping locale established in 1954, with spending largely supported by well-off boomers. Local entrepreneurs are experiencing great success—a dealer selling eclectic electric lamps in Park City Mall is already earning $4,500 per week at the start of the holiday season, and high volume at Costco, where the Amish are major buyers, further indicates available disposable income. McTague concludes that the real economy on Main Street is strong and likely headed for a blockbuster Christmas season. 1015-1030 HEADLINE: Climate Change Threatens Iconic Italian Cheeses; Southern Drought Reduces Milk Production Quality GUEST: Lorenzo Fiori Lorenzo Fiori reports that climate change is threatening Italian food production, particularly cheese, due to drought and heat waves in the south, especially the Puglia region, where stressed cows are reducing milk production and impacting specialty cheeses like mozzarella and burrata. Milk cannot be shipped from the north because local water and hay are essential to the unique flavor of southern cheese. Fiori emphasizes that Italian food is a famous brand precisely because it belongs to its territory, criticizing pre-prepared sauces found in Brussels as inauthentic carbonara, which must be made fresh. In Milan, Christmas preparations are underway, with shop windows decorated festively and street lights scheduled to be switched on December 7th. 1030-1045 HEADLINE: Private Space Advances (Blue Origin, Rocket Lab) Challenge NASA SLS, EU Space Law CriticizedGUEST: Bob Zimmerman Bob Zimmerman reports that Blue Origin's New Glenn orbital rocket successfully completed its second launch, including landing the first stage and demonstrating reuse capability comparable to Falcon 9. New Glenn, larger than Falcon 9, is scheduled for upgrades with more powerful BE4 and BE3U engines, making it nearly comparable to NASA's costly and expendable SLS rocket. Rocket Lab set a new annual launch record with 15 successful orbital launches, surpassing Russia's frequency, and has conducted suborbital HASTE launches for military testing. India is upgrading its largest LVM rocket's upper stage for multiple restarts, essential for its space station and crewed missions. The US State Department opposes a proposed European Union space law seeking to impose EU regulations on companies from other nations, potentially discrediting the EU if passed. Finally, NASA has hired startup Catalyst to attempt a daring robotic rescue of the decaying Swift telescope. 1045-1100 THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 HEADLINE: McFaul: Autocrats Are on the Rise; US Must Unite Allies and Attract Global Talent to CompeteGUEST: Michael McFaul Michael McFaul's book Autocrats Versus Democrats argues that Putinism is driven by anti-Western ideology, making Putin a risk-taker, and McFaul believes the US erred by lacking a robust response and failing to provide arms after the 2014 Crimea invasion, stressing that helping Ukraine win is essential to inspire Russian democrats. He asserts that the appeal of autocracy is growing globally and advises that the US must align democracies against autocrats while advocating for human rights, citing the need to support imprisoned publisher Jimmy Lai. Long-term strategy requires the US and its allies to unite, as they are collectively stronger economically and militarily than autocracies, and McFaulstrongly recommends attracting international talent by reversing restrictive immigration policies, calling it a great strength the US is currently losing. 1115-1130 1130-1145 1145-1200 FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 HEADLINE: US-Saudi Nuclear Deal Raises Proliferation Concerns; Military Micro-Reactors Retreat from Front Lines GUEST: Henry Sokolski Henry Sokolski states that Saudi Crown Prince MBS's goal is to obtain a bomb option, and while the new US-Saudi agreement does not include assistance with nuclear fuel production, a reactor still provides the necessary "cover" used by countries like Iran. MBS has made clear he will acquire a bomb if Iran does, regardless of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Sokolski also discusses the US military's Janus program for small reactors, initially conceived for vulnerable front-line bases but pushed back to remote areas like Alaska and the lower 48 due to concerns about drones and vulnerability. Finally, the US may be moving toward nuclear socialism—government ownership of commercial reactors, potentially funded by Japan—to encourage commercialization even without secured market contracts. 1215-1230 1230-1245 HEADLINE: Scenario: Russia Attacks NATO Member Estonia; Europe's "Kantian Dreams" and Lack of Readiness Prevent Article 5 Response GUEST: Jakub Grygiel Jakub Grygiel analyzes the German book If Russia Wins, which outlines a scenario where Russia attacks NATO member Estonia around 2028 following a stalled conflict in Ukraine, capturing Narva and an island before halting its advance and creating confusion within NATO. Europeans, living in "Kantian dreams of eternal peace," prioritize a quick end to the conflict and fear escalation, and the scenario posits that the US President decides a World War III over a "tiny piece of land" is not worthwhile, leading Estonia to forego invoking NATO's Article 5 out of fear of alliance rejection. Grygielnotes that decades of demilitarization leave Europe unprepared for war, highlighting that US reinforcements could take 45 days to move and societies lack the political will to fund necessary rearmament.

Send us a textIf you are starting our your Myopia practice, Dr. Elise Kramer and Dr. Stephanie are definitely crushing it in marketing their Myopia practice. Listen this episode to get great tips!About Dr. Woo:Dr. Woo is an adjunct professor at Midwestern University. Dr. Woo enjoys lecturing around the world on the subject of contact lenses and anterior segment ocular disease. Dr. Woo owns the Contact Lens Institute of Nevada, a clinic dedicated entirely to custom contact lenses.  The Contact Lens Institute offers revolutionary technology such as the EyePrintProsthetic and sMap scleral topography to assist in complex clinical cases. In her spare time, Dr. Woo is an avid wine collector and is a Level 2 WSET Sommelier. More About Dr. Woo:Here are some links:www.clinevada.comwww.drstephaniewoo.comwoou.orgSocial media:@drstephaniewooHere is a free PDF that I created for doctors who want some tips on how to start a specialty practice: https://www.drstephaniewoo.com/11-tipsHere is the 8 week coaching programed Dr. Stephanie Woo provides: https://www.drstephaniewoo.com/optometry-consultingAbout Dr. Elise Kramer:Dr. Elise Kramer is a residency-trained optometrist in Miami FL who specializes in ocular surface disease and regular and specialty contact lens fitting.Her Doctorate degree was awarded in Optometry from the Université de Montréal in 2012 where she received a grant from the Scholarship Program of the Québec Ministry of Education for short-term university studies outside of Québec. Receipt of this scholarship award is based on academic performance. In the summer of her second year, she participated in a humanitarian mission in Laayoune, Morocco where she helped hundreds of impoverished people by giving them free eye examinations and glasses corresponding as closely as possible to their prescription.During her fourth year, she completed her internship in ocular disease at the Eye Centers of South Florida and went on to complete her residency at the Miami VA Medical Center. Her time there included training at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, the nation's top eye hospital. After her residency, Dr. Kramer became a fellow of the Scleral Lens Education Society (SLS) and now serves as the Public Education Chair for the SLS. Dr. Kramer is a member of the American Optometric Association (AOA), the British Contact Lens Association (BCLA), the International Association of Contact Lens Educators (IACLE) and a Fellow of the American Academy of Optometry (AAO). She is also the Delegate of International Relations for the Italian Association of Scleral Lenses (AILeS).  Dr. Kramer has published several important articles and reviews and participates in clinical research trials. She enjoys lecturing all around the world in several different languages about ocular surface disease and specialty lenses. She strives to assist each patient with quality and advanced eye care whether he or she requires a basic eye exam or specialized eye or vision care. Where to find her:Dr. Kramer's IG to https://www.instagram.com/drelisekramer/Private Practice: Miami Contact Lens Institute:

Satan's Little Season eschatology has become a popular alternative to the dispensational mainstream that has corrupted evangelical Christianity. Compared to the Judaizing beliefs of dispensationalists, SLS seems like it aligns more with reality. But is it true? Things are not what they seem, and people who believe in SLS eschatology don't realize that these beliefs are only about 30 years old, and that they originally trace to the Jesuits. Today we will debunk Satan's Little Season eschatology using the objective foundation of God's word. Those who choose to be honest with God's word will learn, and those who choose to remain paranoid, relying on self-determined speculations will not learn. * 00:00 - Introduction* 14:18 - What is Satan's Little Season?* 21:35 - What SLS Gets Right* 45:17 - The Sovereignty of God* 1:28:07 - The History of Satan's Little Season* 2:32:38 - Biblical Refutation: The Book of Daniel* 3:01:59 - Biblical Refutation: The Book of Revelation* 3:15:20 - Biblical Refutation: The Millennium * 3:54:59 - Biblical Refutation: 2 Thessalonians 2* 4:10:04 - Biblical Refutation: Recapitulation* 4:58:41 - Historical Proofs* 5:52:34 - Final Thoughts This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.danceoflife.com/subscribe

It was November 1967, and NASA was preparing to launch the Saturn V rocket for the very first time.

Want to monetize your skills as a teacher? Book a free 1:1 with us to see if we can help.   "How do we make research meaningful for the classroom? What really helps students acquire grammar? Can apps ACTUALLY support second language learning?" These are some of the questions we tackled in our conversation with Dr. Shawn Loewen.  Shawn Loewen is Professor of Second Language Studies at Michigan State University, where he directs the doctoral program in SLS. His research focuses on instructed second language acquisition, the research-practice gap, and mobile-assisted language learning. He is the author of several influential books and serves as associate editor of The Modern Language Journal. His new book, "Edited Volume in Instructed SLA" is out now.    In our discussion, we dive into: whether the explicit vs implicit debate matters if people can actually learn languages on "those apps" pattern recognition and why some learners “just get it” task-based language teaching vs. Instructed SLA why most institutions don't really know what their approach to learning is  leveraging AI and technology for learning  bridging the gap between researchers and teachers the limits and potential of communicative language teaching   FOR MORE FROM DR. SHAWN LOEWEN: 1. His book "Edited Volume in Instructed SLA" 2. Connect on LinkedIn 3. His publications  4. His website   Support Teacher Talking Time: Do you help students prepare for the TOEFL test? Check out My Speaking Score - an AI platform with data-driven feedback to help students get 26 on TOEFL speaking. Trusted by over 100,000 TOEFL test takers. My Speaking Score: https://www.myspeakingscore.com/   Thank you for listening. Your support has been overwhelming and we couldn't do what we do without you. We hope this podcast serves as an effective CPD tool for you.   Collaborate with us: Want to integrate your brand with our podcast in an effort to improve language education? Reach out here: info@learnyourenglish.com    RESOURCES TO HELP YOU: 1. Join our Substack community.  2. Book a free 1:1 chat with us to strategize your teaching business.  3. Follow the LYE YouTube Channel 4. Learn how to monetize your teaching skills with TAP  5. Download our free guides for teacherpreneurs. 

The Space Show Presents Open Lines Sunday, Nov. 9, 2025Brief Summary: The program began with discussions about the delayed New Glenn rocket launch due to weather concerns, followed by conversations about space policy, regulations, and the future of the International Space Station. The group explored various space exploration programs and technologies, including NASA's Orion program, commercial space stations, and potential human settlements on the Moon and Mars. They concluded by discussing upcoming launches, space policy uncertainties, and more.Detailed Summary:Our program began with a discussion about the New Glenn rocket launch, which was delayed due to weather conditions. Bill Gowan provided updates on the launch window and weather concerns. David discussed potential changes to the Space Show which might include plans to post videos on YouTube for a broader audience. The Space Show (SS) Wisdom Team also touched on upcoming Space Show guests and programming changes for 2025. Ryan Watson, a caller, joined the discussion to share his concerns about the FAA's new regulations on rocket launches and the current state of air traffic control.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed an article by Casey H. that critically assesses NASA's Orion program, highlighting concerns about cost, schedule, and technical issues. Bill shared this article with the participants, noting his interest in further investigating these concerns. David mentioned inviting the author back to his show for a future discussion which will be Dec. 2. Peter raised questions about the future of the International Space Station (ISS), expressing concern about its planned deorbiting in 2030. Marshall explained that the ISS, like any aircraft, experiences stress and wear over time, making its continued operation unsafe beyond a certain point. He suggested that the modular design of the ISS could allow for partial reuse in a new station or other projects. David noted that space biomed researchers would like to see the ISS continue due to its valuable contributions to medical research, but he expressed doubt about its extension given budget constraints and the high cost of maintenance.The Wisdom Team discussed the future of the International Space Station (ISS) and its potential replacement with commercial space stations. Doug cited a high cost per paper ($700,000) produced by ISS research, questioning its value for American taxpayers. Phil and Doug agreed that NASA should focus on Moon and Mars programs rather than extending ISS operations, as commercial space stations are unlikely to become commercially viable without NASA funding. Bill inquired about the potential value of relocating ISS to a resource-rich location, but Doug expressed skepticism about the feasibility and cost of such an operation.The Wisdom Team discussed the value and necessity of maintaining a human presence in space, particularly focusing on space stations, the Moon, and Mars. Doug expressed skepticism about the economic benefits of space stations, emphasizing the potential for national prestige and military applications, though he questioned whether these justify human presence in orbit. The conversation shifted to the long-term potential of establishing human settlements on the Moon and Mars, with Phil and Doug agreeing that such endeavors would require a long-term perspective and careful consideration of each step. John Jossy highlighted Elon Musk's focus on infrastructure and transportation for Mars, while also noting the need to address the question of human reproduction in space. Bill shared an update about a recent incident involving Chinese astronauts being stranded at their space station due to debris damage.The Wisdom Team took on the challenge to discuss hardware incompatibility between different space programs, particularly regarding the Chinese space station, with Bill suggesting that an adapter similar to the Apollo-Soyuz test flight project could be a solution. They also explored the Artemis program's future, with Phil expressing optimism about its success despite public perception issues regarding cost, while Doug and Marshall discussed the potential for SpaceX's Starship to eventually replace the Artemis program, particularly for missions beyond Artemis III.Next, the Wisdom Team discussed the upcoming New Glen launch, with Phil expressing confidence in its engineering capabilities and potential to compete with SLS. Doug highlighted Blue Origin's Blue Moon program as a significant alternative to SpaceX's Starship, noting its hydrogen upper stage for lunar resource utilization. David raised concerns about the lack of constants in current space policy and the challenges of planning in such an uncertain environment, while Peter suggested that private industry might be more reliable than government policies due to their focus on profitability.Our Wisdom Team discussed several key topics related to space exploration and technology. They examined the potential for data centers in space, with some skepticism about the feasibility due to thermal and cost constraints. The conversation also covered the upcoming New Glenn launch and NASA leadership candidates, with particular focus on Jared Isaacman's potential appointment as NASA administrator.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4459 ZOOM Bob Zimmerman returns | Tuesday 11 Nov 2025 700PM PTGuests: Robert ZimmermanZOOM. Bob is back and policy and news plus a look at space 2025.Broadcast 4460 Hotel Mars: Dr. Matthew Graham, an astronomer at the California Institute of Technology | Wednesday 12 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Matthew GrahamDr. Graham discusses the slow consumption of a star by a black holeBroadcast 4461: ZOOM Dr. Daniel Whiteson | Friday 14 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. Daniel WhitesonZoom: Dr. Whiteson discusses his book “Do Aliens Speak Physics?”Broadcast 4462: Zoom: Dr. Doug Plata | Sunday 16 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Doug Plata Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Finding YourFirst Connection: Swinger Apps, TikTok Drama & a Naughty Halloween StoryIn thisepisode of The Swingers Couch Podcast, we're diving into what every newswinger is searching for — how to find real, respectful connections online.We'll walk you through the best swinger apps, how to stay safe, and how tocreate a profile that actually gets attention. Then, we react to a viral TikTokvideo claiming that ‘swinging means you're unhappy in your relationship' — andtrust us, we've got thoughts!After thebreak, we turn up the heat with a spooky-sexy Halloween story that proves thelifestyle can be full of thrills, chills, and a whole lot of passion —especially when trust and curiosity meet behind the masks.”**

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,China's spacefaring ambitions pose tough competition for America. With a focused, centralized program, Beijing seems likely to land taikonauts on the moon before another American flag is planted. Meanwhile, NASA faces budget cuts, leadership gaps, and technical setbacks. In his new book, journalist Christian Davenport chronicles the fierce rivalry between American firms, mainly SpaceX and Blue Origin. It's a contest that, despite the challenges, promises to propel humanity to the moon, Mars, and maybe beyond.Davenport is an author and a reporter for the Washington Post, where he covers NASA and the space industry. His new book, Rocket Dreams: Musk, Bezos, and the Inside Story of the New, Trillion-Dollar Space Race, is out now.In This Episode* Check-in on NASA (1:28)* Losing the Space Race (5:49)* A fatal flaw (9:31)* State of play (13:33)* The long-term vision (18:37)* The pace of progress (22:50)* Friendly competition (24:53)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Check-in on NASA (1:28)The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon . . . It's really hard.Pethokoukis: As someone — and I'm speaking about myself — who wants to get America back to the moon as soon as possible, get cooking on getting humans to Mars for the first time, what should I make of what's happening at NASA right now?They don't have a lander. I'm not sure the rocket itself is ready to go all the way, we'll find out some more fairly soon with Artemis II. We have flux with leadership, maybe it's going to not be an independent-like agency anymore, it's going to join the Department of Transportation.It all seems a little chaotic. I'm a little worried. Should I be?Davenport: Yes, I think you should be. And I think a lot of the American public isn't paying attention and they're going to see the Artemis II mission, which you mentioned, and that's that mission to send a crew of astronauts around the moon. It won't land on the moon, but it'll go around, and I think if that goes well, NASA's going to take a victory leap. But as you correctly point out, that is a far cry from getting astronauts back on the lunar surface.The lander isn't ready. SpaceX, as acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy just said, is far behind, reversing himself from like a month earlier when he said no, they appear to be on track, but everybody knew that they were well behind because they've had 11 test flights, and they still haven't made it to orbit with their Starship rocket.The rocket itself that's going to launch them into the vicinity of the moon, the SLS, launches about once every two years. It's incredibly expensive, it's not reusable, and there are problems within the agency itself. There are deep cuts to it. A lot of expertise is taking early retirements. It doesn't have a full-time leader. It hasn't had a full-time leader since Trump won the election. At the same time, they're sort of beating the drum saying we're going to beat the Chinese back to the lunar surface, but I think a lot of people are increasingly looking at that with some serious concern and doubt.For what it's worth, when I looked at the betting markets, it gave the Chinese a two-to-one edge. It said that it was about a 65 percent chance they were going to get there first. Does that sound about right to you?I'm not much of a betting man, but I do think there's a very good chance. The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon, they haven't done this. It's really hard. They're much more secretive, if they have setbacks and delays, we don't necessarily know about them. But they've shown over the last 10, 20 years how capable they are. They have a space station in low earth orbit. They've operated a rover on Mars. They've gone to the far side of the moon twice, which nobody has done, and brought back a sample return. They've shown the ability to keep people alive in space for extended periods of times on the space station.The moon seems within their capabilities and they're saying they're going to do it by 2030, and they don't have the nettlesome problem of democracy where you've got one party come in and changing the budget, changing the direction for NASA, changing leadership. They've just set the moon — and, by the way, the south pole of the moon, which is where we want to go as well — as the destination and have been beating a path toward that for several years now.Is there anyone for merging NASA into the Department of Transportation? Is there a hidden reservoir? Is that an idea people have been talking about now that's suddenly emerged to the surface?It's not something that I particularly heard. The FAA is going to regulate the launches, and they coordinate with the airspace and make sure that the air traffic goes around it, but I think NASA has a particular expertise. Rocket science is rocket science — it's really difficult. This isn't for the faint of heart.I think a lot of people look at human space flight and it's romanticized. It's romanticized in books and movies and in popular culture, but the fact of the matter is it's really, really hard, it's really dangerous, every time a human being gets on one of those rockets, there's a chance of an explosion, of something really, really bad happening, because a million things have to go right in order for them to have a successful flight. The FAA does a wonderful job managing — or, depending on your point of view, some people don't think they do such a great job, but I think space is a whole different realm, for sure.Losing the Space Race (5:49). . . the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. . . There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moonHave you thought about what it will look like the day after, in this country, if China gets to the moon first and we have not returned there yet?Actually, that's a scenario I kind of paint out. I've got this new book called Rocket Dreams and we talk about the geopolitical tensions in there. Not to give too much of a spoiler, but NASA has said that the first person to return to the moon, for the US, is going to be a woman. And there's a lot of people thinking, who could that be? It could be Jessica Meir, who is a mother and posted a picture of herself pregnant and saying, “This is what an astronaut looks like.” But it could very well be someone like Wang Yaping, who's also a mother, and she came back from one of her stays on the International Space Station and had a message for her daughter that said, “I come back bringing all the stars for you.” So I think that I could see China doing it and sending a woman, and that moment where that would be a huge coup for them, and that would obviously be symbolic.But when you're talking about space as a tool of soft power and diplomacy, I think it would attract a lot of other nations to their side who are sort of waiting on the sidelines or who frankly aren't on the sidelines, who have signed on to go to the United States, but are going to say, “Well, they're there and you're not, so that's who we're going to go with.”I think about the wonderful alt-history show For All Mankind, which begins with the Soviets beating the US to the moon, and instead of Neil Armstrong giving the “one small step for man,” basically the Russian cosmonaut gives, “Its one small step for Marxism-Leninism,” and it was a bummer. And I really imagine that day, if China beats us, it is going to be not just, “Oh, I guess now we have to share the moon with someone else,” but it's going to cause some national soul searching.And there are clues to this, and actually I detail these two anecdotes in the book, that all of the flags, the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. We know from Buzz Aldrin‘s memoir that the flag that he and Neil Armstrong planted in the lunar soil in 1969, Buzz said that he saw it get knocked over by the thrust in the exhaust of the module lifting off from the lunar surface. Even if that hadn't happened, just the radiation environment would've bleached the flag white, as scientists believe it has to all the other flags that are on there. So there are essentially really no trace of the Apollo flags.There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moon, and the first one, which was planted a couple of years ago, or unveiled a couple of years ago, was made not of cloth, but their scientists and engineers spent a year building a composite material flag designed specifically to withstand the harsh environment of the moon. When they went back last summer for their farside sample return mission, they built a flag, — and this is pretty amazing — out of basalt, like volcanic rock, which you find on Earth. And they use basalt from earth, but of course basalt is common on the moon. They were able to take the rock, turn it into lava, extract threads from the lava and weave this flag, which is now near the south pole of the moon. The significance of that is they are showing that they can use the resources of the moon, the basalt, to build flags. It's called ISR: in situ resource utilization. So to me, nothing symbolizes their intentions more than that.A fatal flaw (9:31). . . I tend to think if it's a NASA launch . . . and there's an explosion . . . I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.In the book, you really suggest a new sort of golden age of space. We have multiple countries launching. We seem to have reusable rockets here in the United States. A lot of plans to go to the moon. How sustainable is this economically? And I also wonder what happens if we have another fatal accident in this country? Is there so much to be gained — whether it's economically, or national security, or national pride in space — that this return to space by humanity will just go forward almost no matter what?I think so. I think you've seen a dramatic reduction in the cost of launch. SpaceX and the Falcon 9, the reusable rocket, has dropped launches down. It used to be if you got 10, 12 orbital rocket launches in a year, that was a good year. SpaceX is launching about every 48 hours now. It's unprecedented what they've done. You're seeing a lot of new players — Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, others — driving down the cost of launch.That said, the main anchor tenant customer, the force driving all of this is still the government, it's still NASA, it's still the Pentagon. There is not a self-sustaining space economy that exists in addition or above and beyond the government. You're starting to see bits of that, but really it's the government that's driving it.When you talk about the movie For All Mankind, you sort of wonder if at one point, what happened in that movie is there was a huge investment into NASA by the government, and you're seeing that to some extent today, not so much with NASA, but actually on the national security side and the creation of the Space Force and the increases, just recently, in the Space Force's budget. I mean, my gosh, if you have $25 billion for this year alone for Golden Dome, the Missile Defense Shield, that's the equivalent of NASA's entire budget. That's the sort of funding that helps build those capabilities going forward.And if we should, God forbid, have a fatal accident, you think we'll just say that's the cost of human exploration and forward we go?I think a lot about this, and the answer is, I don't know. When we had Challenger and we had Columbia, the world stopped, and the Space Shuttle was grounded for months if not a year at a time, and the world just came to an end. And you wonder now if it's becoming more routine and what happens? Do we just sort of carry on in that way?It's not a perfect analogy, but when you talk about commercial astronauts, these rich people are paying a lot of money to go, and if there's an accident there, what would happen? I think about that, and you think about Mount Everest. The people climbing Mount Everest today, those mountain tourists are literally stepping over dead bodies as they're going up to the summit, and nobody's shutting down Mount Everest, they're just saying, well, if you want to climb Mount Everest, that's the risk you take. I do wonder if we're going to get that to that point in space flight, but I tend to think if it's a NASA launch, and it's NASA astronauts, and there's an explosion, and there's a very bad day, I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.The thing is, if it's SpaceX, they have had accidents. They've had multiple accidents — not with people, thank goodness — and they have been grounded.It is part of the model.It's part of the model, and they have shown how they can find out what went wrong, fix it, and return to flight, and they know their rocket so well because they fly it so frequently. They know it that well, and NASA, despite what you think about Elon, NASA really, really trusts SpaceX and they get along really well.State of play (13:33)[Blue Origin is] way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days . . . Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time.I was under the impression that Blue Origin was way behind SpaceX. Are they catching up?This is one of the themes of the book. They are way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days, they're pushing ahead with Starship, their next generation rocket would be fully reusable, twice the thrust and power of the Saturn V rocket that flew the Apollo astronauts to the Moon. Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time. They might be launching again soon within the coming weeks or months, hopefully by the end of the year, but that's two. They are so far behind, but you do hear Jeff Bezos being much more tuned into the company. He has a new CEO — a newish CEO — plucked from the ranks of Amazon, Dave Limp, and you do sort of see them charging, and now that the acting NASA administrator has sort of opened up the competition to go to the moon, I don't know that Blue Origin beats SpaceX to do it, but it gives them some incentive to move fast, which I think they really need.I know it's only a guess and it's only speculation, but when we return to the moon, which company will have built that lander?At this point, you have to put your money on SpaceX just because they're further along in their development. They've flown humans before. They know how to keep people alive in space. In their Dragon capsule, they have the rendezvous and proximity operations, they know how to dock. That's it.Blue Origin has their uncrewed lander, the Mark 1 version that they hope to land on the moon next year, so it's entirely possible that Blue Origin actually lands a spacecraft on the lunar surface before SpaceX, and that would be a big deal. I don't know that they're able to return humans there, however, before SpaceX.Do you think there's any regrets by Jeff Bezos about how Blue Origin has gone about its business here? Because obviously it really seems like it's a very different approach, and maybe the Blue Origin approach, if we look back 10 years, will seem to have been the better approach, but given where we are now and what you just described, would you guess that he's deeply disappointed with the kind of progress they made via SpaceX?Yeah, and he's been frustrated. Actually, the opening scene of the book is Jeff being upset that SpaceX is so far ahead and having pursued a partnership with NASA to fly cargo and supply to the International Space Station and then to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, and Blue Origin essentially sat out those competitions. And he turns to his team — this was early on in 2016 — and said, “From here on out, we go after everything that SpaceX goes after, we're going to compete with them. We're going to try to keep up.” And that's where they went, and sort of went all in early in the first Trump administration when it was clear that they wanted to go back to the moon, to position Blue Origin to say, “We can help you go back to the moon.”But yes, I think there's enormous frustration there. And I know, if not regret on Jeff's part, but certainly among some of his senior leadership, because I've talked to them about it.What is the war for talent between those two companies? Because if you're a hotshot engineer out of MIT, I'd guess you'd probably want to go to SpaceX. What is that talent war like, if you have any idea?It's fascinating. Just think a generation ago, you're a hot MIT engineer coming out of grad school, chances are you're going to go to NASA or one of the primes, right? Lockheed, or Boeing, or Air Jet, something like that. Now you've got SpaceX and Blue Origin, but you've got all kinds of other options too: Stoke Space, Rocket Lab, you've got Axiom, you've got companies building commercial space stations, commercial companies building space suits, commercial companies building rovers for the moon, a company called Astro Lab.I think what you hear is people want to go to SpaceX because they're doing things: they're flying rockets, they're flying people, you're actually accomplishing something. That said, the culture's rough, and you're working all the time, and the burnout rate is high. Blue Origin more has a tradition of people getting frustrated that yeah, the work-life balance is better — although I hear that's changing, actually, that it's driving much, much harder — but it's like, when are we launching? What are we doing here?And so the fascinating thing is actually, I call it SpaceX and Blue Origin University, where so many of the engineers go out and either do their own things or go to work for other companies doing things because they've had that experience in the commercial sector.The long-term vision (18:37)That's the interesting thing, that while they compete . . . at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common . . .At a talk recently, Bezos was talking about space stations in orbit and there being like a million people in space in 20 years doing economically valuable things of some sort. How seriously should I take that kind of prediction?Well, I think a million people in 20 years is not feasible, but I think that's ultimately what is his goal. His goal is, as he says, he founded Amazon, the infrastructure was there: the phone companies had laid down the cables for the internet, the post office was there to deliver the books, there was an invention called the credit card, he could take people's money. That infrastructure for space isn't there, and he wants to sort of help with Elon and SpaceX. That's their goal.That's the interesting thing, that while they compete, while they poke each other on Twitter and kind of have this rivalry, at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common, and that's lower the cost of access to space and make it more accessible so that you can build this economy on top of it and have more people living in space. That's Elon's dream, and the reason he founded SpaceX is to build a city on Mars, right? Something's going to happen to Earth at some point we should have a backup plan.Jeff's goal from the beginning was to say, you don't really want to inhabit another planet or celestial body. You're better off in these giant space stations envisioned by a Princeton physics professor named Gerard O'Neill, who Jeff Bezos read his book The High Frontier and became an acolyte of Gerard O'Neill from when he was a kid, and that's sort of his vision, that you don't have to go to a planet, you can just be on a Star Trekkian sort of spacecraft in orbit around the earth, and then earth is preserved as this national park. If you want to return to Earth, you can, but you get all the resources from space. In 500 years is that feasible? Yeah, probably, but that's not going to be in our lives, or our kids' lives, or our grandkids' lives.For that vision — anything like that vision — to happen, it seems to me that the economics needs to be there, and the economics just can't be national security and national prestige. We need to be doing things in space, in orbit, on the moon that have economic value on their own. Do we know what that would look like, or is it like you've got to build the infrastructure first and then let the entrepreneurs do their thing and see what happens?I would say the answer is “yes,” meaning it's both. And Jeff even says it, that some of the things that will be built, we do not know. When you had the creation of the internet, no one was envisioning Snapchat or TikTok. Those applications come later. But we do know that there are resources in space. We know there's a plentiful helium three, for example, on the surface of the moon, which it could be vital for, say, quantum computing, and there's not a lot of it on earth, and that could be incredibly valuable. We know that asteroids have precious metals in large quantities. So if you can reduce the cost of accessing them and getting there, then I think you could open up some of those economies. If you just talk about solar rays in space, you don't have day and night, you don't have cloud cover, you don't have an atmosphere, you're just pure sunlight. If you could harness that energy and bring it back to earth, that could be valuable.The problem is the cost of entry is so high and it's so difficult to get there, but if you have a vehicle like Starship that does what Elon envisions and it launches multiple times a day like an airline, all you're really doing is paying for the fuel to launch it, and it goes up and comes right back down, it can carry enormous amounts of mass, you can begin to get a glimmer of how this potentially could work years from now.The pace of progress (22:50)People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space . . .How would you characterize the progress now than when you wrote your first book?So much has happened that the first book, The Space Barons was published in 2018, and I thought, yeah, there'll be enough material here for another one in maybe 10 years or so, and here we are, what, seven years later, and the book is already out because commercial companies are now flying people. You've got a growth of the space ecosystem beyond just the Space Barons, beyond just the billionaires.You've got multiple players in the rocket launch market, and really, I think a lot of what's driving it isn't just the rivalries between the commercial companies in the United States, but the geopolitical space race between the United States and China, too that's really driving a lot of this, and the technological change that we've seen has moved very fast. Again, how fast SpaceX is launching, Blue Origin coming online, new launch vehicles, potentially new commercial space stations, and a broadening of the space ecosystem, it's moving fast. Does that mean it's perfect? No, companies start, they fail, they have setbacks, they go out of business, but hey, that's capitalism.Ten years from now, how many space stations are going to be in orbit around the earth?I think we'll have at least one or two commercial space stations for the United States, I think China. Is it possible you've got the US space stations, does that satisfy the demand? People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space for their scientists, for their engineers, for their pharmaceutical companies that want to do research in a zero-G environment. I think it's possible that there are, within 10 years, three, maybe even four space stations. Yeah, I think that's possible.Friendly competition (24:53)I honestly believe [Elon] . . . wants Blue to be better than they are.Do you think Musk thinks a lot about Blue Origin, or do you think he thinks, “I'm so far ahead, we're just competing against our own goals”?I've talked to him about this. He wishes they were better. He wishes they were further along. He said to me years ago, “Jeff needs to focus on Blue Origin.” This is back when Jeff was still CEO of Amazon, saying he should focus more on Blue Origin. And he said that one of the reasons why he was goading him and needling him as he has over the years was an attempt to kind of shame him and to get him to focus on Blue, because as he said, for Blue to be successful, he really needs to be dialed in on it.So earlier this year, when New Glenn, Blue Origin's big rocket, made it to orbit, that was a moment where Elon came forward and was like, respect. That is hard to do, to build a rocket to go to orbit, have a successful flight, and there was sort of a public high five in the moment, and now I think he thinks, keep going. I honestly believe he wants Blue to be better than they are.There's a lot of Elon Musk skeptics out there. They view him either as the guy who makes too big a prediction about Tesla and self-driving cars, or he's a troll on Twitter, but when it comes to space and wanting humanity to have a self-sustaining place somewhere else — on Mars — is he for real?Yeah, I do believe that's the goal. That's why he founded SpaceX in the first place, to do that. But the bottom line is, that's really expensive. When you talk about how do you do that, what are the economic ways to do it, I think the way he's funding that is obviously through Starlink and the Starlink system. But I do believe he wants humanity to get to Mars.The problem with this now is that there hasn't been enough competition. Blue Origin hasn't given SpaceX competition. We saw all the problems that Boeing has had with their program, and so much of the national space enterprise is now in his hands. And if you remember when he had that fight and the breakup with Donald Trump, Elon, in a moment of peak, threatened to take away the Dragon spacecraft, which is the only way NASA can fly its astronauts anywhere to space, to the International Space Station. I think that was reckless and dangerous and that he regretted it, but yes, the goal to get to Mars is real, and whatever you think about Elon — and he certainly courts a controversy — SpaceX is really, really good at what they do, and what they've done is really unprecedented from an American industrial perspective.My earliest and clearest memory of America and space was the landing on Mars. I remember seeing the first pictures probably on CBS news, I think it was Dan Rather saying, “Here are the first pictures of the Martian landscape,” 1976, and if you would've asked me as a child then, I would've been like, “Yeah, so we're going to be walking on Mars,” but I was definitely hooked and I've been interested in space, but are you a space guy? How'd you end up on this beat, which I think is a fantastic beat? You've written two books about it. How did this happen?I did not grow up a space nerd, so I was born in 1973 —Christian, I said “space guy.” I didn't say “space nerd,” but yeah, that is exactly right.My first memory of space is actually the Challenger shuttle exploding. That was my memory. As a journalist, I was covering the military. I'd been embedded in Iraq, and my first book was an Iraq War book about the national guard's role in Iraq, and was covering the military. And then this guy, this was 10 years ago, 12 years ago, at this point, Elon holds a press conference at the National Press Club where SpaceX was suing the Pentagon for the right to compete for national security launch contracts, and he starts off the press conference not talking about the lawsuit, but talking about the attempts. This was early days of trying to land the Falcon 9 rocket and reuse it, and I didn't know what he was talking about. And I was like, what? And then I did some research and I was like, “He's trying to land and reuse the rockets? What?” Nobody was really covering it, so I started spending more time, and then it's the old adage, right? Follow the money. And if the richest guys in the world — Bezos Blue Origin, at the time, Richard Branson, Paul Allen had a space company — if they're investing large amounts of their own personal fortune into that, maybe we should be paying attention, and look at where we are now.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

In episode #97 we talk about Rodrigo TX, Rome Collyer new part, The Nine Club Hotline and much more! Become a Channel Member & Receive Perks: https://www.youtube.com/TheNineClub/joinNew Merch: https://thenineclub.com Sponsored By: AG1: Get a FREE Welcome Kit worth $76 when you subscribe, including 5 AG1Travel Packs, a shaker, canister, scoop & bottle of AG Vitamin D3+K2. https://drinkag1.com/nineclub LMNT: Grab a free Sample Pack with 8 flavors when you buy any drink mix or Sparkling. https://drinklmnt.com/nineclub Woodward: Save $100 off summer camp with code NINECLUB. https://www.woodwardpa.com Bear Mattress: Delivered to your door with easy setup. Use code NINECLUB for 40% off your order. https://www.bearmattress.com Monster Energy: Monster Energy's got the punch you need to stay focused and fired up. https://www.monsterenergy.com Skullcandy: Feel the music with Skullcandy's custom-tuned audio—from the lyrics in your soul to the bass in your bones. https://www.skullcandy.com Yeti: Built for the wild, Yeti keeps you ready for any adventure. https://www.yeti.com Richardson: Custom headwear for teams, brands, and businesses crafted with quality in every stitch. https://richardsonsports.com éS Footwear: Get 20% off your purchase using our code NINECLUB or use our custom link. https://esskateboarding.com/NINECLUB Get 3 months of Full Self-Driving (Supervised) or $250 in Tesla Credits, or $400 off Solar Panel installation with my referral link: https://ts.la/chris39639 Find The Nine Club: Website: https://thenineclub.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thenineclub X: https://www.twitter.com/thenineclub Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thenineclub Discord: https://discord.gg/thenineclub Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/nineclub Nine Club Clips: https://www.youtube.com/nineclubclips More Nine Club: https://www.youtube.com/morenineclub I'm Glad I'm Not Me: https://www.youtube.com/chrisroberts Chris Roberts: https://linktr.ee/Chrisroberts Timestamps (00:00:00) Nine Club Live #97 (00:02:30) Happy Halloween (00:05:15) Exposure contest this weekend Nov 1-2 (00:09:30) Halloween Hellbomb (00:23:00) Nineclub Hotline Powell Surpeme (00:40:00) Nineclub Hotline young skaters in SLS takeovers, but not the main event? (00:53:30) Washcloths (01:03:00) Rome Collyer No worries Red Bull part (01:17:00) Rodrigo TX Adidas (01:26:00) Menikmati Rodrigo TX (01:40:00) Who would you like to see in a video? (01:53:00) Wrapping up and thank you Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Space Show presents Phil Swan, Friday, 10-24-25Quick recapThe program focused on economic and technological aspects of space exploration, particularly Mars voyages, with Phil Swan presenting his analysis of kinetic energy costs and the need for long-term strategic planning. The discussion covered various propulsion technologies, cost considerations for different rocket systems, and the potential for in-situ resource utilization on Mars. The group explored concepts like mass drivers, lunar industries, and the economic viability of Mars cyclers, while emphasizing the importance of developing cost-effective solutions for human space travel and long-term settlement on Mars and the Moon.Detailed Summary: Phil Swan, the lead principal engineer for the Atlantis project, presented his recent Mars Society Conference talk, focusing on the economic aspects of kinetic energy for Mars voyages. He emphasized the need for a long-term strategy that makes Mars valuable to humanity, beyond just the initial journey. The discussion touched on the historical reluctance to use terms like “colonization” due to negative connotations, and Phil noted the importance of understanding the economics of kinetic energy in space travel. The program also included updates on podcast availability and ways to support the Space Show.Phil discussed the importance of developing a sophisticated space strategy that combines high-level merit with institutional capacity to support it. He compared humanity's expansion across Earth to potential space exploration, noting that exponential thinking is necessary to set realistic goals and expectations for space travel. Phil emphasized the need to apply exponential thinking to space problems rather than relying on linear thinking, as this approach could lead to more accurate timelines for reaching celestial destinations like the Moon and Mars.Phil referenced the technological advancements required to reach the Moon and Mars, highlighting the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous as a pivotal innovation. He emphasized the need for new technologies to enable human settlement on Mars and addressed the challenge of long-term value recognition for such endeavors. Our guest proposed a staged approach to Mars exploration, outlining key stages like “Boots on Mars,” “Research Outpost,” “Expansionist Drive,” and “Keystone Industries,” each with its value proposition and enablers. He concluded by identifying the high cost of interplanetary transportation as a significant barrier to progress, emphasizing the need for cost-effective solutions to make Mars exploration feasible.The group discussed the concept of Mars cyclers, with Phil explaining that they would serve as infrastructure for repeated Mars travel, though questions remained about their economic viability and technical feasibility. They explored the idea of self-sustaining biospheres on Mars cyclers and Mars bases, with Phil noting that technology would play a crucial role in maintaining these environments. The discussion concluded with Phil addressing the question of Mars's independence, comparing it to the interdependence between continents and suggesting that Mars would eventually become more self-supporting over time, though it would initially rely on supplies from Earth.We also discussed the need for more advanced propulsion technologies beyond chemical rockets, such as nuclear plasma or fusion rockets, to enable more efficient space travel. Phil highlighted the challenge of securing funding for long-term space exploration projects compared to immediate investments like Starlink, attributing this to society's short-term focus. Marshall and Phil agreed that governments might be better at making long-term investments, while David noted cultural differences in budgeting practices, particularly between the U.S. and China. Phil suggested that future space missions could serve as a test to compare different economic and political systems, similar to the Cold War moon race, which he argued was won by the American free-market system. John Hunt observed that the lack of competition from the Russian space program in the 1970s led to a reduction in space technology development in the U.S.Our guest presented a slide showing the delta V requirements for various destinations in the solar system, emphasizing the need for cheaper and faster transportation methods. He discussed the potential for using aerobraking and the economic benefits of lunar industries producing products for low Earth orbit. John Jossy suggested considering near-Earth asteroids for mining, which Phil acknowledged as a viable option with lower delta V requirements. The group also touched on the economics of low Earth orbit and the potential for lunar materials to be used in space industries.Phil explained the concept of delta-v and air braking, noting that while aero braking reduces the need for fuel, some mass is still required for the heat shield and other landing equipment. He discussed a paper titled “Cost vs. Delta V” that outlines the methodology for converting air braking delta-v into an equivalent rocket-based delta-v. Phil then presented a graph illustrating the relationship between delta-v and cost per kilogram for various missions, highlighting that costs scale exponentially with delta-v requirements. He noted that reusable rockets and infrastructure-based solutions could potentially reduce costs and provided examples of how different launch systems performed compared to the cost curve.The group discussed the cost-effectiveness of different rocket technologies, particularly comparing the Space Launch System (SLS) to Falcon Heavy. Phil noted that while Falcon Heavy was slightly more cost-competitive for some missions, SLS was still a viable technology that offered good value for its Delta V capabilities. John Hunt highlighted the issue of low production quantities for SLS, which limited cost savings from experience curve effects. The discussion concluded with an examination of Mars mission costs, with Phil presenting estimates for sending humans to Mars, including the cost of crew, provisions, and life support systems.Phil presented a detailed analysis of Mars mission costs, highlighting that a round-trip mission would cost $38 trillion, but could be reduced to $2.7 trillion through in-situ resource utilization and a Mars propellant plant. The discussion clarified that the Europa Clipper mission was launched by Falcon Heavy, not SLS, and Phil agreed to review the cost numbers later. Phil also explained the energy efficiency advantages of mass drivers compared to rockets, suggesting that Mars should consider implementing mass drivers for future space operations.Phil then presented a detailed analysis of mass drivers, discussing their potential for Mars and Earth-based applications. He explained the physics and economics of mass drivers, highlighting their cost advantages over rockets for Mars missions. The group discussed technical challenges, including G-forces and atmospheric entry, with Phil addressing concerns about safety zones and aiming. The conversation ended with a brief discussion on human transportation to Mars, noting the need for further exploration of options beyond cargo transport.Our guest discussed the challenges of improving human space travel to Mars, focusing on reducing costs and enhancing comfort and safety. He suggested increasing the mass budget, improving ecosystems, and using more efficient propulsion methods like mass drivers. David inquired about nuclear propulsion, but Phil explained that it may not be practical due to the weight of radiators compared to solar panels. They also discussed the limitations of current mass driver technologies, such as SpinLaunch, which can only replace the first stage of a rocket and cannot achieve the necessary delta V for Mars travel. Phil emphasized the need for a 1,000-fold cost reduction to enable long-term human settlement on Mars and the Moon.As we were moving to the end of the program, Phil discussed the challenges and inefficiencies of using aircraft carrier electromagnetic catapults for launching rockets into space, explaining that such systems would be too expensive and impractical compared to traditional rockets. He also explored the concept of linear motor launchers for space travel, noting that while they could potentially compete with rockets for long-distance missions like Mars travel, they are not cost-effective for low Earth orbit missions. The discussion highlighted the importance of developing a long-term strategy for lunar and Martian exploration, as well as the need for better institutional and public evaluation of complex space travel ideas.Audio is posted at www.thespaceshow.com for this date and Substack, doctorspace.substack.com. Video is also posted on the Substack site for this program.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4455 ZOOM: Arkisys CEO David Barnhart | Sunday 02 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:ZOOM, Dave Barnhart, CEO of Arkisys updates us with interesting news and developments Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Bob Zimmerman Criticizes NASA's Artemis Lunar Program as a "Management Disaster" Focused on Beating China Bob Zimmerman with John Batchelor Bob Zimmerman criticized NASA interim administrator Sean Duffy for focusing on SpaceX being "behind schedule," distracting from NASA's own delay of the Artemis mission to 2028 at the earliest. He called the Artemis plan an "unwieldy management disaster" designed haphazardly to give the SLS rocket a mission. The political push to beat China by 2028 creates a dangerous "one-time stunt." Zimmerman argues the private sector (SpaceX) is the real future of US space endeavors. 1941

Bob Zimmerman Criticizes NASA's Artemis Lunar Program as a "Management Disaster" Focused on Beating China Bob Zimmerman with John Batchelor Bob Zimmerman criticized NASA interim administrator Sean Duffy for focusing on SpaceX being "behind schedule," distracting from NASA's own delay of the Artemis mission to 2028 at the earliest. He called the Artemis plan an "unwieldy management disaster" designed haphazardly to give the SLS rocket a mission. The political push to beat China by 2028 creates a dangerous "one-time stunt." Zimmerman argues the private sector (SpaceX) is the real future of US space endeavors. 1953

SHOW 10-22-25 CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR HK 1925 THE SHOW BEGINS IN THE DOUBTS ABOUT XI. FIRST HOUR 9-915 Colonel McCausland Discusses Postponed Budapest Summit, Gaza Ceasefire Instability, and Pentagon Information Control Jeff McCausland with John Batchelor Colonel McCausland explained the Budapest summit postponement, noting Putin demands Ukrainian surrender before a ceasefire. He considered Tomahawks an escalation of firepower, but not a game-changer, with delivery now on hold. McCausland described the Gaza ceasefire as precarious, lacking discussion or plan for Hamas disarmament, which he views as the necessary "red line" for stability. He criticized the Pentagon's new policy blocking journalists from soliciting unauthorized information as an attempt by Secretary Hegseth to control information flow and increase opacity. 915-930 Colonel McCausland Discusses Postponed Budapest Summit, Gaza Ceasefire Instability, and Pentagon Information Control Jeff McCausland with John Batchelor Colonel McCausland explained the Budapest summit postponement, noting Putin demands Ukrainian surrender before a ceasefire. He considered Tomahawks an escalation of firepower, but not a game-changer, with delivery now on hold. McCausland described the Gaza ceasefire as precarious, lacking discussion or plan for Hamas disarmament, which he views as the necessary "red line" for stability. He criticized the Pentagon's new policy blocking journalists from soliciting unauthorized information as an attempt by Secretary Hegseth to control information flow and increase opacity. 930-945 Steve Yates Discusses Australia-US Alliance Strength and Political Turmoil Affecting APEC Summit Steve Yates with John Batchelor Steve Yates confirmed the Trump-Albanese meeting was a net positive, accelerating AUKUS and securing a rare earth deal that addresses supply access. He noted the political turmoil in Beijing, highlighted by uncertainty over Xi Jinping's APEC attendance. This instability is abnormal and reinforces China's unstable political foundation. Yates suggested this instability should push allies to rely more on the first island chain as a reliable balance. 945-1000 Rick Fisher Reports on China's Reusable Rocket Deluge and US Moon Race Political Pressures Rick Fisher with John Batchelor Rick Fisher reported that China has 27 reusable space launch vehicle projects underway, predicting a "deluge" of cheap space services to compete with SpaceX. He noted that President Trump is alarmed that China may win the second race to the moon. Trump pressured NASA Administrator Duffy to open the Human Landing System competition to Blue Origin, signaling that politics and winning the race are paramount, regardless of competitor viability. China's first reusable booster test could occur before year-end. SECOND HOUR 10-1015 Colonel Newsham Discusses Promising US-Australia Rare Earth Deal and Canberra's Dual Strategy Toward China Grant Newsham with John Batchelor Colonel Grant Newsham discussed the promising US-Australia rare earth deal, noting Australia has vast mining capabilities to provide an alternative to China's dominance. China's threat to use export controls might spur free nations to develop alternative supply chains. Newsham noted Canberra is playing a "neat trick," maintaining a firm defense alliance with the US (AUKUS) while maintaining profitable economic ties with Beijing, reflecting an underlying "softness" toward China. 1015-1030 Colonel Newsham Discusses Promising US-Australia Rare Earth Deal and Canberra's Dual Strategy Toward China Grant Newsham with John Batchelor Colonel Grant Newsham discussed the promising US-Australia rare earth deal, noting Australia has vast mining capabilities to provide an alternative to China's dominance. China's threat to use export controls might spur free nations to develop alternative supply chains. Newsham noted Canberra is playing a "neat trick," maintaining a firm defense alliance with the US (AUKUS) while maintaining profitable economic ties with Beijing, reflecting an underlying "softness" toward China. 1030-1045 China's Property Crisis, Deflation, and Structural Obstacles to Consumption Anne Stevenson-Yang with John Batchelor Anne Stevenson-Yang discussed how the persistent property crater has severely dragged down fixed asset investment. Beijing aims to boost the economy via consumption, but the Chinese system is structurally built to communicate only with producers, not average consumers. Furthermore, the deflationary environment encourages people to delay purchases, waiting for lower prices. She views the Five-Year Plans mainly as an "amazing relic" used internally to motivate the sprawling government bureaucracies. 1045-1100 General Zhang Youxia Allegedly Leads PLA Purges Amid Internal CCP Power Struggle General Blaine Holt with John Batchelor General Blaine Holt reported that the purge of nine flag officers was allegedly executed by General Zhang Youxia, not Xi Jinping. Zhang, a top general, began the purges out of fear of becoming a target himself, indicating an internal "civil war" within the CCP factions opposing Xi. Zhang has secured elite military units loyal to him and the People's Liberation Army (PLA), rather than solely the Party, stabilizing the military amidst the turmoil. Zhang's life is at risk if Xi prevails.THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 Peter Berkowitz Analyzes Precarious Gaza Ceasefire and Deep Internal Political Tensions in Israel Peter Berkowitz with John Batchelor Peter Berkowitz stated the Gaza ceasefire is precarious and phase one is incomplete until all deceased hostages' remains are returned, aligning with Israeli public and governmental sentiment. Hamas may be stalling negotiations to rearm. Berkowitz noted sharp internal tensions in Israel, driven by opposition to Netanyahu, resentment over judicial reform, and economic exhaustion from military service. He finds it unlikely that the peace plan, which requires Hamas disarmament, will be fully realized. 1115-1130 Peter Berkowitz Analyzes Precarious Gaza Ceasefire and Deep Internal Political Tensions in Israel Peter Berkowitz with John Batchelor Peter Berkowitz stated the Gaza ceasefire is precarious and phase one is incomplete until all deceased hostages' remains are returned, aligning with Israeli public and governmental sentiment. Hamas may be stalling negotiations to rearm. Berkowitz noted sharp internal tensions in Israel, driven by opposition to Netanyahu, resentment over judicial reform, and economic exhaustion from military service. He finds it unlikely that the peace plan, which requires Hamas disarmament, will be fully realized. 1130-1145 GOP Voters Found More Moderate on Fiscal Issues and Driven by Cultural Anti-Progressivism, According to New Analysis Ryan Streeter with John Batchelor Ryan Streeter discussed findings showing Republican voters are more moderate than portrayed, especially on entitlement cuts. They prioritize a healthy economy and law and order. Isolationism is not prominent, though they oppose excessive foreign spending. MAGA Republicanism is defined primarily by cultural issues, like anti-progressivism and concern over immigration, often outweighing economic policies like tariffs. Streeter concludes that rank and file voters are not as radical as national politics suggest. 1145-1200 GOP Voters Found More Moderate on Fiscal Issues and Driven by Cultural Anti-Progressivism, According to New Analysis Ryan Streeter with John Batchelor Ryan Streeter discussed findings showing Republican voters are more moderate than portrayed, especially on entitlement cuts. They prioritize a healthy economy and law and order. Isolationism is not prominent, though they oppose excessive foreign spending. MAGA Republicanism is defined primarily by cultural issues, like anti-progressivism and concern over immigration, often outweighing economic policies like tariffs. Streeter concludes that rank and file voters are not as radical as national politics suggest. FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 Simon Constable Reports on Rising Commodity Prices Driven by Data Center Demand and European Political Turmoil Simon Constable with John Batchelor Simon Constable reported significant commodity price increases (copper up 14%, gold up 48%), driven by demand for data centers and AI. He criticized European reluctance to build needed data centers, stressing their necessity for the digital future. Constable noted President Macron fears Marine Le Pen's National Rally due to growing support stemming from concerns over unfettered immigration. He also criticized the UK Labour party's plan to tax professionals like dentists and doctors, predicting they will leave the country. 1215-1230 Simon Constable Reports on Rising Commodity Prices Driven by Data Center Demand and European Political Turmoil Simon Constable with John Batchelor Simon Constable reported significant commodity price increases (copper up 14%, gold up 48%), driven by demand for data centers and AI. He criticized European reluctance to build needed data centers, stressing their necessity for the digital future. Constable noted President Macron fears Marine Le Pen's National Rally due to growing support stemming from concerns over unfettered immigration. He also criticized the UK Labour party's plan to tax professionals like dentists and doctors, predicting they will leave the country. 1230-1245 Bob Zimmerman Criticizes NASA's Artemis Lunar Program as a "Management Disaster" Focused on Beating China Bob Zimmerman with John Batchelor Bob Zimmerman criticized NASA interim administrator Sean Duffy for focusing on SpaceX being "behind schedule," distracting from NASA's own delay of the Artemis mission to 2028 at the earliest. He called the Artemis plan an "unwieldy management disaster" designed haphazardly to give the SLS rocket a mission. The political push to beat China by 2028 creates a dangerous "one-time stunt." Zimmerman argues the private sector (SpaceX) is the real future of US space endeavors. 1245-100 AM Bob Zimmerman Criticizes NASA's Artemis Lunar Program as a "Management Disaster" Focused on Beating China Bob Zimmerman with John Batchelor Bob Zimmerman criticized NASA interim administrator Sean Duffy for focusing on SpaceX being "behind schedule," distracting from NASA's own delay of the Artemis mission to 2028 at the earliest. He called the Artemis plan an "unwieldy management disaster" designed haphazardly to give the SLS rocket a mission. The political push to beat China by 2028 creates a dangerous "one-time stunt." Zimmerman argues the private sector (SpaceX) is the real future of US space endeavors.

Vantor, formerly Maxar Intelligence, has been awarded a contract to support the US Space Force (USSF) in tracking high-interest objects that pass through "blind spots" in space. Researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) and Texas A&M University have secured a $1 million grant from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research for cislunar tracking. The European Space Agency (ESA) is adding a new numerical health index to its yearly Space Environment Report, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Torsten Kriening from SpaceWatch.Global brings us the latest from the Secure World Foundation's 7th Summit for Space Sustainability in Paris. Selected Reading Vantor Awarded Space Force SDA Contract for Tracking of Space Objects RPI Awarded Air Force Grant to Monitor Growing Traffic Between Earth and Moon- News Sounding the alarm: ESA introduces space environment ‘health index' It wasn't space debris that struck a United Airlines plane—it was a weather balloon - Ars Technica Lynk and Omnispace Announce Plans to Merge to Deliver Next-Generation Global Direct-to-Device (D2D) Connectivity NASA stacks Artemis 2 moon mission's Orion capsule atop SLS rocket ahead of 2026 launch- Space Eutelsat Communications: First Quarter 2025-26 Revenues Coming Soon: ESA Student Internships 2026 ispace Secures Toyota's Support for Next-Generation Small-Sized Rover Development Share your feedback. What do you think about T-Minus Space Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show.  Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Technieuws Microsoft beëindigde vorige week officieel de ondersteuning voor Windows 10 | TPM 2.0 omzeilen voor Windows 11 11de lancering van Starship werd een succes | SLS vs. Starship voor Artemis Wet die politieke advertenties sterk beperkt is vanaf vrijdag actief. California keurt wet goed die AI-companions reguleert. Apple kondigt nieuwe iPad, instap MacBook Pro 14” en Vision Pro met M5 aan | Apple levert geen oplader meer bij Macbook Pro M5 | Qualcomm’s mobiele en laptop chips zijn veelbelovend Europa verplicht minimaal één USB-C-poort op opladers. Sony bevestigd komst van Horizon Zero Dawn film | Amazon bestelt twee seizoenen rondom God of War | Ghost of Tsushima anime-serie op Crunchyroll Reportage: De link tussen bordspellen en video games (2/4): Pac-Man Deep dive(s) Nederlandse regering zet topman van chipfabrikant Nexperia op non actief vanwege wanbestuur | NFC chip in de iPhones | Een reconstructie van de ‘nationalisering’ | Hoe nu verder | De Amerikaanse regering nam in augustus 10% van de aandelen van Intel over Sinds 9 oktober moeten SEPA-transfers in de Eurozone instant uitgevoerd worden zonder meerprijs t.o.v. een gewone overschrijving.

Graeme Davis, president of Baha Mar Resort, talks with James Shillinglaw of Insider Travel Report during ILTM North America, held earlier this month, about what's new and what's planned at his signature property in Nassau, the Bahamas. The Jazz Club at Baha Mar is now featuring a full schedule of performances and Leola, Celebrity Chef Scott Connant's new Italian restaurant, is in previews getting ready to open later this fall. There's also a new Podcast studio opening at Baha Mar and a fourth hotel—being added to the Grand Hyatt, SLS and Rosewood in the complex—is under construction just down the beach. For more information, visit www.bahamar.com.  All our Insider Travel Report video interviews are archived and available on our Youtube channel  (youtube.com/insidertravelreport), and as podcasts with the same title on: Spotify, Pandora, Stitcher, PlayerFM, Listen Notes, Podchaser, TuneIn + Alexa, Podbean,  iHeartRadio,  Google, Amazon Music/Audible, Deezer, Podcast Addict, and iTunes Apple Podcasts, which supports Overcast, Pocket Cast, Castro and Castbox.  

From toxins and harsh soaps to polluting plastics, oral care was long overdue for an upgrade. You don't need harsh ingredients for a healthy smile, so they said no to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), fluoride, parabens, GMOs, artificial flavors, colors, and preservatives—forever. Meet Vladimir Vukicevic, co-founder and CEO of Better & Better. Justin and Vlad unpack bright and shiny toothpaste and oral care ideas together on this episode!

What happens when the ones we love most pass away—but don't really leave? Joey from Greensboro, North Carolina, shares his chilling yet heartfelt encounters with his late father. After his dad's passing from melanoma in 2015, strange activity began filling their home. First, it was the unmistakable sound of his father's whistle—a sound his dogs always recognized. Joey heard it, and soon after, so did his girlfriend from across the house. Then came the voice. Joey's father called his name. His mother also heard it that very same day. Even the family's dog seemed to sense his presence, often sitting and staring silently at the urn that held his ashes. But the most shocking proof came years later. A friend brought over an SLS camera during a casual paranormal experiment. What they captured stopped Joey cold: a figure sitting in the exact spot where his dad's favorite recliner once sat. When Joey reached out, the figure reached back. For Joey, it wasn't about fear—it was confirmation. His father was still there, watching, protecting, reminding them that love doesn't die. #RealGhostStories #Afterlife #ParanormalEvidence #GhostCaughtOnCamera #FamilySpirit #GuardianSpirit #GhostStoriesOnline #HauntedHouse #ParanormalActivity #FathersSpirit Love real ghost stories? Don't just listen—join us on YouTube and be part of the largest community of real paranormal encounters anywhere. Subscribe now and never miss a chilling new story: