Comments by "H. de Jong" (@h.dejong2531) on "Transporting the James Webb Telescope: How They Moved the World’s Most Valuable Object" video.

  1. No. There are technical constraints. There's only one facility in the US that can machine Beryllium, for instance, and it's not in Florida. There's only one facility that can polish the mirror, and it's not next door to the Be machining company. There's only one vacuum chamber large enough to test the JWST, and etc. The cost of transporting components is much smaller than building a new facility to create the component.
    5
  2. You're arguing from ignorance. There's a lot more space debris in low Earth orbit than at L2. Despite that, we manage to operate thousands of satellites for decades. How can we do this? It's pretty simple: most space debris is tiny. So we build spacecraft with an outer shell that consists of two layers ( a Whipple shield). Anything that hits the outer shell disintegrates on impact. It might punch through the outer shell, but the fragments won't have enough energy to penetrate the second layer. We build in lots of redundancy.
    4
  3. They had to advance the state of the art in 10 different fields to be able to build the JWST. That's not a scam, it's the inevitable cost of making progress.
    2
  4.  @FourthWayRanch  There is no dome. That whole concept is based on a translation error. In the original text, the Hebrew word raki'a is used. This word means simply "expansion." It denotes the space or expanse like an arch appearing immediately above us. In the Vulgate this was translated as 'firmamentum'. The original text does not describe a dome: that was added by the translators who created the Vulgate. God's cosmology is closer to what we know today than that of the Latin scholars of 380 AD who created the Vulgate. So there's no reason to diminish His creation by considering the heavens above a dome with lights instead of actual space with actual stars. And we have independent verification that various interplanetary spacecraft are where NASA says they are. Astronomers have seen the Voyagers using radio telescopes, confirming they really are more than 120 AU out. Radio amateurs can receive signals from spacecraft at Mars.
    2
  5.  @FourthWayRanch  What you see in all of those cases is a rocket ascending vertically, then doing a pitchover maneuver to get into a trajectory that gradually becomes parallel to Earth's surface. What you don't see is a giant explosion as the rocket hits a dome. Explain this to me: why would a commercial company spend all that money on a rocket launch only to have it splatter on a dome so he has to spend billions more to fake the service he's selling? Why do these companies make money while having only enough income to fund the satellite construction, launch and operation, not the 100 times more it would take to fake that information? There is no dome.
    2
  6. We don't have a "broken" mirror, we have one primary mirror segment that has a tiny damaged area. Impacts like these were taken into account. If a primary segment becomes too damaged, it can be tilted to make sure its distorted light doesn't enter the telescope, for instance.
    2
  7.  @FourthWayRanch  Read again what I wrote above. We have independent confirmation of spacecraft operating at Mars and beyond. Again, there is no dome. There is no evidence that supports its existence, and the only source you have is an old mistranslation that has since been proven wrong.
    1