Why does NASA publish all the results/data it gets?What ever happened to SpinSat - did it work?What are the benefits of saying a commercial space development program is funded privately?Does Star Trek's adherence to naval tradition have roots in NASA or earlier real organizations?Why does NASA's Juno spacecraft only have a one year primary mission?Why did NASA set up a computing facility in Bermuda in the Mercury epoch?Why does NASA and other space agencies seem to rarely if ever complain over the state of the budget?“UK schoolboy corrects Nasa data error” - what precisely was the “error”?Would NASA be financially self-sufficient if it could keep all revenues from patents?What does this paper say is wrong (quantitatively and procedurally) with WISE & NeoWISE asteroid data?Why NASA hosts many of their reports public, while ESA/JAXA/ Roscomos doesn't?How accurate is the following claim about NASA, from the movie Martian?
iPhone receives SMS from Info
How can I run a realistic open-world game with vast power differences, without resulting in constant TPKs?
Why are branches relative in many 8-bit CPUs?
Draw the Ionising Radiation Hazard Symbol
What mathematics activities get students physically moving?
How to customize drupal 8 breadcrumb
Password generator in python
Dynamically getting the complex number in a color wheel via moving mouse?
Does milk make cakes lighter or tougher?
What does ゴン part in イノゴン mean?
Do one quarter of Swedes named 'Ali' have a criminal record?
Did Russia's economy boom between 1999 and 2013?
Is there any job security for tenured academics in Denmark?
How to deal with an employee who is requesting a demotion?
Sump pump automated battery backup
Enumeration with direct and indirect properties
Does a Paladin with the Divine Health feature destroy a Green Slime?
Can the diameter be controled by the injectivity radius and the volume?
Alternative to IrfanView
Messed up my .bash_profile remotely, can't ssh back in
Why can't sonic booms be heard at air shows?
Puzzling is a Forte of Mine
Translation of "Love makes it grow" in Latin for my tattoo
Why did we never simplify key signatures?
Why does NASA publish all the results/data it gets?
What ever happened to SpinSat - did it work?What are the benefits of saying a commercial space development program is funded privately?Does Star Trek's adherence to naval tradition have roots in NASA or earlier real organizations?Why does NASA's Juno spacecraft only have a one year primary mission?Why did NASA set up a computing facility in Bermuda in the Mercury epoch?Why does NASA and other space agencies seem to rarely if ever complain over the state of the budget?“UK schoolboy corrects Nasa data error” - what precisely was the “error”?Would NASA be financially self-sufficient if it could keep all revenues from patents?What does this paper say is wrong (quantitatively and procedurally) with WISE & NeoWISE asteroid data?Why NASA hosts many of their reports public, while ESA/JAXA/ Roscomos doesn't?How accurate is the following claim about NASA, from the movie Martian?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
I was curious about why NASA publishes all the results/data from its operations. Does the USA have a law that mandates it or is it a voluntary contribution to the world?
nasa law
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I was curious about why NASA publishes all the results/data from its operations. Does the USA have a law that mandates it or is it a voluntary contribution to the world?
nasa law
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
$endgroup$
57
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
39
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
15
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
3
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
3
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I was curious about why NASA publishes all the results/data from its operations. Does the USA have a law that mandates it or is it a voluntary contribution to the world?
nasa law
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I was curious about why NASA publishes all the results/data from its operations. Does the USA have a law that mandates it or is it a voluntary contribution to the world?
nasa law
nasa law
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 2:41
RonJohn
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
4073 silver badges12 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 15:33
PhoneixSPhoneixS
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
4631 gold badge4 silver badges8 bronze badges
57
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
39
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
15
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
3
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
3
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05
|
show 2 more comments
57
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
39
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
15
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
3
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
3
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05
57
57
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
39
39
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
15
15
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
3
3
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
3
3
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05
|
show 2 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It's required to by the legislation that created it, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 203. (a) The Administration, in order to carry out the purpose of
this Act, shall--
(1) plan, direct, and conduct aeronautical and space activities;
(2) arrange for participation by the scientific community in planning
scientific measurements and observations to be made through use of
aeronautical and space vehicles, and conduct or arrange for the
conduct of such measurements and observations; and
(3) provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.
Emphasis mine.
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I drive by it every day... We do it for the benefit of all:
Really though, the government has a vested interest in making sure we (the United States) remain a technology leader in the world because it's good for the economy. Private industry is usually too risk-averse to undertake basic research with no current applications even though the payoff can sometimes be huge.
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Because they're scientists, and publishing your results is what scientists do. There's a reason why the final step of basically every research methodology used in academia is "publish your results" (and I'm only saying "basically every" because I'm not an expert on the field of research methodologies, so while it's possible that there's one obscure one out there that doesn't, it doesn't seem likely to me).
Also because they're legally obligated to do so by the rules of their government funding, as pointed out in Organic Marble's answer.
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
NASA is not a stand-alone thing. It is the civilian part of the space industry, and partially, the military industry of the USA. They work together.
For example: they publish the photos, what the Hubble made. This is very useful for the whole humanity. But the same (or very similar) technologies are used in spy satellites, too. Only the watch not the sky, but the Earth. Of course nothing is known about their capabilities and results. Not even the engineering details of the Hubble are public - only its results.
Most countries have some law enforcing the access of the tax-payers to the results of their tax. This can be avoided on national security reasons, but it needs to have a reason. The law of the USA probably doesn't enforce to publish the results for the whole world, but it is practically impossible to narrow, for example, the availability of the Hubble photos to the USA citizens. It has also much better PR to openly publish it.
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
|
show 9 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38892%2fwhy-does-nasa-publish-all-the-results-data-it-gets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It's required to by the legislation that created it, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 203. (a) The Administration, in order to carry out the purpose of
this Act, shall--
(1) plan, direct, and conduct aeronautical and space activities;
(2) arrange for participation by the scientific community in planning
scientific measurements and observations to be made through use of
aeronautical and space vehicles, and conduct or arrange for the
conduct of such measurements and observations; and
(3) provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.
Emphasis mine.
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's required to by the legislation that created it, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 203. (a) The Administration, in order to carry out the purpose of
this Act, shall--
(1) plan, direct, and conduct aeronautical and space activities;
(2) arrange for participation by the scientific community in planning
scientific measurements and observations to be made through use of
aeronautical and space vehicles, and conduct or arrange for the
conduct of such measurements and observations; and
(3) provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.
Emphasis mine.
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
It's required to by the legislation that created it, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 203. (a) The Administration, in order to carry out the purpose of
this Act, shall--
(1) plan, direct, and conduct aeronautical and space activities;
(2) arrange for participation by the scientific community in planning
scientific measurements and observations to be made through use of
aeronautical and space vehicles, and conduct or arrange for the
conduct of such measurements and observations; and
(3) provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.
Emphasis mine.
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
$endgroup$
It's required to by the legislation that created it, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 203. (a) The Administration, in order to carry out the purpose of
this Act, shall--
(1) plan, direct, and conduct aeronautical and space activities;
(2) arrange for participation by the scientific community in planning
scientific measurements and observations to be made through use of
aeronautical and space vehicles, and conduct or arrange for the
conduct of such measurements and observations; and
(3) provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissemination
of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.
Emphasis mine.
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 16:02
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
88.7k4 gold badges272 silver badges378 bronze badges
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
add a comment
|
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
9
9
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
I suspect that provision came in response to the Soviet Union's activities during the Cold War which were much more secretive. I remember hearing in a documentary or two about how the United States felt it important to at least appear to be transparent about what all was being developed... an effort to show that what was being built and done was for peaceful purposes. I'll see if I can find a source on that, unless you know one off the top of your head. :-)
$endgroup$
– Brad
Sep 18 at 21:08
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
$begingroup$
@Brad Well, it was the Eisenhower administration - they also had the "open skies" plan.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Sep 18 at 21:15
11
11
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
$begingroup$
"appropriate dissemination" means not classified. Which afaik, a fair amount of NASA's cargo was/is. So, it ain't "all" of it, not by a long shot.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 7:00
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I drive by it every day... We do it for the benefit of all:
Really though, the government has a vested interest in making sure we (the United States) remain a technology leader in the world because it's good for the economy. Private industry is usually too risk-averse to undertake basic research with no current applications even though the payoff can sometimes be huge.
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
I drive by it every day... We do it for the benefit of all:
Really though, the government has a vested interest in making sure we (the United States) remain a technology leader in the world because it's good for the economy. Private industry is usually too risk-averse to undertake basic research with no current applications even though the payoff can sometimes be huge.
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
I drive by it every day... We do it for the benefit of all:
Really though, the government has a vested interest in making sure we (the United States) remain a technology leader in the world because it's good for the economy. Private industry is usually too risk-averse to undertake basic research with no current applications even though the payoff can sometimes be huge.
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I drive by it every day... We do it for the benefit of all:
Really though, the government has a vested interest in making sure we (the United States) remain a technology leader in the world because it's good for the economy. Private industry is usually too risk-averse to undertake basic research with no current applications even though the payoff can sometimes be huge.
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 5:03
AaronAaron
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
6403 silver badges11 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
$begingroup$
Venturestar, DC-X...
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 19 at 7:06
15
15
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
No, the US government has a vested interest in making sure its citizens think it remains a technology leader. Whether they also delude themselves is just a side effect. The "we haven't already invented it, therefore it doesn't work" attitude which used to pervade some parts of NASA didn't benefit anybody.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Sep 19 at 9:27
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
$begingroup$
@jwenting I'm not sure what you are trying to say, but in case you are trying to give examples of the private sector taking financial risk by doing basic research, then you should be aware that those are not example of that (because examples rarely exist). If you type those two names into Wikipedia, both articles mention within the first sentences that the government was involved, presumably mostly financially.
$endgroup$
– Nobody
Sep 19 at 17:01
4
4
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@alephzero Perhaps "technology leader" wasn't the most accurate choice of words, because I don't want to take away from the success of other countries. We are certainly still very competitive in many fields, and basic research (by many more organizations than just NASA) contributes to that. Regarding the "attitude"; there are jaded engineers everywhere, but it is not the norm in my experience.
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
$begingroup$
@Nobody no, those are examples of things where NASA prevented advances in science and engineering, after massive investments by private industry.
$endgroup$
– jwenting
Sep 20 at 15:44
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Because they're scientists, and publishing your results is what scientists do. There's a reason why the final step of basically every research methodology used in academia is "publish your results" (and I'm only saying "basically every" because I'm not an expert on the field of research methodologies, so while it's possible that there's one obscure one out there that doesn't, it doesn't seem likely to me).
Also because they're legally obligated to do so by the rules of their government funding, as pointed out in Organic Marble's answer.
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Because they're scientists, and publishing your results is what scientists do. There's a reason why the final step of basically every research methodology used in academia is "publish your results" (and I'm only saying "basically every" because I'm not an expert on the field of research methodologies, so while it's possible that there's one obscure one out there that doesn't, it doesn't seem likely to me).
Also because they're legally obligated to do so by the rules of their government funding, as pointed out in Organic Marble's answer.
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Because they're scientists, and publishing your results is what scientists do. There's a reason why the final step of basically every research methodology used in academia is "publish your results" (and I'm only saying "basically every" because I'm not an expert on the field of research methodologies, so while it's possible that there's one obscure one out there that doesn't, it doesn't seem likely to me).
Also because they're legally obligated to do so by the rules of their government funding, as pointed out in Organic Marble's answer.
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Because they're scientists, and publishing your results is what scientists do. There's a reason why the final step of basically every research methodology used in academia is "publish your results" (and I'm only saying "basically every" because I'm not an expert on the field of research methodologies, so while it's possible that there's one obscure one out there that doesn't, it doesn't seem likely to me).
Also because they're legally obligated to do so by the rules of their government funding, as pointed out in Organic Marble's answer.
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
answered Sep 19 at 0:58
nick012000nick012000
3113 bronze badges
3113 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Welcome on the site! Afaik NASA is more engineers than scientists.
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 1:06
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
$begingroup$
Yeah, they publish garbage like "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus".
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:16
6
6
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh the number of people is irrelevant. NASA does scientific research and those efforts are invariably led by scientists.
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Sep 19 at 7:20
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
$begingroup$
@peterh I don't know for sure, or where even I would find reliable numbers, but I would have said the opposite. Much of the engineering is contracted, while NASA does the research (with the possible large exception of the SLS which is a somewhat controversial topic).
$endgroup$
– Aaron
Sep 19 at 21:12
2
2
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
$begingroup$
Publishing results is standard for most scientists in academia, unless engaged in commercially-sensitive work. But (unfortunately) is is still not standard for scientists to publish all of their data. That data is what they use to continue publishing, and to keep ahead of their academic competition. There are going moves to insist on releasing public data, but that more often comes from the funder end (who want the data to be used widely) than from the scientists, who often have strong incentives to keep it to themselves. NASA operates on a more open model.
$endgroup$
– Michael MacAskill
Sep 19 at 23:47
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
NASA is not a stand-alone thing. It is the civilian part of the space industry, and partially, the military industry of the USA. They work together.
For example: they publish the photos, what the Hubble made. This is very useful for the whole humanity. But the same (or very similar) technologies are used in spy satellites, too. Only the watch not the sky, but the Earth. Of course nothing is known about their capabilities and results. Not even the engineering details of the Hubble are public - only its results.
Most countries have some law enforcing the access of the tax-payers to the results of their tax. This can be avoided on national security reasons, but it needs to have a reason. The law of the USA probably doesn't enforce to publish the results for the whole world, but it is practically impossible to narrow, for example, the availability of the Hubble photos to the USA citizens. It has also much better PR to openly publish it.
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
NASA is not a stand-alone thing. It is the civilian part of the space industry, and partially, the military industry of the USA. They work together.
For example: they publish the photos, what the Hubble made. This is very useful for the whole humanity. But the same (or very similar) technologies are used in spy satellites, too. Only the watch not the sky, but the Earth. Of course nothing is known about their capabilities and results. Not even the engineering details of the Hubble are public - only its results.
Most countries have some law enforcing the access of the tax-payers to the results of their tax. This can be avoided on national security reasons, but it needs to have a reason. The law of the USA probably doesn't enforce to publish the results for the whole world, but it is practically impossible to narrow, for example, the availability of the Hubble photos to the USA citizens. It has also much better PR to openly publish it.
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
NASA is not a stand-alone thing. It is the civilian part of the space industry, and partially, the military industry of the USA. They work together.
For example: they publish the photos, what the Hubble made. This is very useful for the whole humanity. But the same (or very similar) technologies are used in spy satellites, too. Only the watch not the sky, but the Earth. Of course nothing is known about their capabilities and results. Not even the engineering details of the Hubble are public - only its results.
Most countries have some law enforcing the access of the tax-payers to the results of their tax. This can be avoided on national security reasons, but it needs to have a reason. The law of the USA probably doesn't enforce to publish the results for the whole world, but it is practically impossible to narrow, for example, the availability of the Hubble photos to the USA citizens. It has also much better PR to openly publish it.
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
$endgroup$
NASA is not a stand-alone thing. It is the civilian part of the space industry, and partially, the military industry of the USA. They work together.
For example: they publish the photos, what the Hubble made. This is very useful for the whole humanity. But the same (or very similar) technologies are used in spy satellites, too. Only the watch not the sky, but the Earth. Of course nothing is known about their capabilities and results. Not even the engineering details of the Hubble are public - only its results.
Most countries have some law enforcing the access of the tax-payers to the results of their tax. This can be avoided on national security reasons, but it needs to have a reason. The law of the USA probably doesn't enforce to publish the results for the whole world, but it is practically impossible to narrow, for example, the availability of the Hubble photos to the USA citizens. It has also much better PR to openly publish it.
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
edited Sep 20 at 4:18
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 16:05
peterh says reinstate Monicapeterh says reinstate Monica
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
2,6463 gold badges18 silver badges35 bronze badges
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
|
show 9 more comments
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
17
17
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
$begingroup$
Regarding openly publishing to the world, I've seen in foreign-language forums how enthusiastically some people out there follow NASA and its science. I've seen people say that it's an American endeavor but they feel like they're a part of it. That is indescribably wonderful, and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool. (I feel the same when, e.g., China puts a lander on the moon, or Japan takes shots at an asteroid. There's just something international about space science.)
$endgroup$
– Greg
Sep 18 at 20:51
11
11
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
$begingroup$
@Greg "and maybe an under-appreciated PR tool." The Eisenhower administration knew exactly what it was doing in this case.
$endgroup$
– RonJohn
Sep 19 at 2:13
2
2
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
$begingroup$
Why do you think the engineering details of the Hubble aren't available? Granted, it's probably not that easy to find specific details, but I'd guess that that's more because very few people would actually be interested in the details.
$endgroup$
– jamesqf
Sep 19 at 2:16
4
4
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
$begingroup$
"Nothing is known of their capabilities" well, until the president tweets them all out.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
Sep 19 at 7:55
1
1
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
$begingroup$
@jamesf Afaik there is no such thing that "all hubble details document". What we call Hubble, is in fact a complex network of various hardware/software products, deployed by a huge mass of various companies USA-wide. It depends on their preferences and their NASA contract, how do they publish their details. The unfortunate custom in that industry, that they don't publish anything, or at most very little. It is even so for an infrared TV controller, how would it be done differently for technologies used now to watch the Russians/Chinese?
$endgroup$
– peterh says reinstate Monica
Sep 19 at 10:21
|
show 9 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38892%2fwhy-does-nasa-publish-all-the-results-data-it-gets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
57
$begingroup$
"Why NASA publish all the results/data it gets?" Why not?
$endgroup$
– Sean
Sep 19 at 1:17
39
$begingroup$
How do you know that all data is published?
$endgroup$
– copper.hat
Sep 19 at 4:58
15
$begingroup$
They don't. "Even though Congress's intention in forming NASA was to establish a purely civilian space agency, according to David a combination of circumstances led the agency to commingle its activities with black programs operated by the U.S. military and Intelligence Community." – NASA's Secret Relationships with U.S. Defense and Intelligence Agencies
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Sep 19 at 6:53
3
$begingroup$
It's interesting that there seems a significant difference between ESA and NASA with respect to releasing images immediately after acquiring them. For example, there was a big discussion about ESA's decision to delay the Rosetta images at the time sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/…
$endgroup$
– user2705196
Sep 19 at 12:22
3
$begingroup$
I'm still waiting for SpinSat results from 2014...
$endgroup$
– SF.
Sep 19 at 14:05