# data[].attributes.body
Today in class we watched another episode of Cosmos. This time, it was about how light moves throughout the universe. It talked about how light takes time to reach places, and therefore how the image of stars we see from thousands of light years away, is just an image of what the star looked like at the time that that light left the star. Some of the stars we see in the sky may be dead by now, but we are just now seeing the light that they emitted while it was still living.

# data[].attributes.body
Today in class we watched an episode of Cosmos. It was about the discoveries of different laws and equations that different scientists made when defining gravity. In particular, it focused on Isaac Newton and Edmond Halley. It also talked about how a scientist named Oort successfully predicted a cloud of comets at the edge of the solar system, called the Oort Cloud. The main point of the episode was how Isaac Newton discovered the laws of orbits, and how Edmond Halley helped to get that information published, and used it to predict the return of a Comet, now called Halley's comet.

# data[].attributes.body
Bum movie. No good. Rotten Tomato. Here's what you get with gravity; A newfound hatred for Sandra Bullock and about half the brain cells you had before the movie. Keep your Hollywood special effects out of space from now on. Gravity had so many scientific mistakes that it was distracting from the movie (which isn't necessarily a bad thing considering it's an awful movie but I digress.) Let's begin with the runaway space junk. The odds of the space junk hitting another manned spacecraft are insurmountable, however the space junk ended up hitting both another satellite and the Explorer. Sketchy, but not impossible. What is impossible was that the space junk was moving fast enough to catch up with the Explorer from behind. In one line of orbit, everything inside that orbit has to be moving at the same speed. If one thing begins to move faster, it's inertia will overpower the gravitational force upon it and send it into space on a tangent to its orbit. Another mistake was the scene where George Clooney and Sandra Bullock are bothe holding on to opposite ends of a rope. The rope in this case remains taught. There is physically no reason for the rope to remain taught, as there is no force that is pulling Sandra Bullock and George Clooney apart (although there should be.) In reality, the rope would become taught as George Clooney drifted to the length of the rope, and then recoil back in due to tensile force or whatever. Also, when George Clooney let go, he would not have drifted into the abyss in real life. He would have stayed right there next to the space station. Sure he would be moving through space, but by the shuttles frame of reference he would stay completely still, because he was orbiting at the same velocity as the station when he was holding on the rope, and there was no acceleration force on him when he let go. All in all, this movie did do some good. It basically proved that the moon landin did in fact happen and was not a Hollywood scam, because if it was Hollywood would have butchered it and made it far less realistic.

# data[].attributes.body
Yesterday in Class, we continued watching Apollo 13 into day 3. This is the first movie that we watched for 3 classes. I believe this to be because it stars Tom Hanks. Every movie that Tom Hanks stars in is mad long. Saving Private Ryan was 2 hours and 50 minutes. Forrest Gump, 2 hours 20 minutes. Cast Away, 2 hours 23 minutes. Apollo 13 clocks in around 2 hours and 20 minutes. Why is it that movies starring Tom Hanks are so long? I believe that directors do not intend for the movies to last so long, but because Tom Hanks is able to put so much detail into his character, the director is able to capitalize on it and create more depth in the storyline through the character. This of course adds up and gives the movie more drama, more depth, and more minutes. Think of Saving Private Ryan, and the men's pool they have on what the Captain did before the war. Had this aspect of the movie not been added, the plot would not have been affected, and the movie would be about 20 minutes shorter. However, adding this gave depth to TOm Hanks character, and gave the viewer a reason to believe in the captain's mission. This is why movies starring Tom Hanks take so long.

# data[].attributes.body
In Class, we watched more of Apollo 13. There was a scene where the spacecraft started leaking oxygen into space, and yu could actually see the cloud of oxygen. On Earth, you would not be able to see a cloud of oxygen because the rest of the atmosphere has a lot of oxygen too, and it would infuse with the other air. In space, The oxygen was all there was in a vacuum, meaning it could not dilute with other air around it.

# data[].attributes.body
In class, we watched the beginning of Apollo 13. It was interesting to see how many precautions need to be taken for the astronauts before they go into space. The amount of training and health precautions are a lot. This is probably because, unlike the pilots in The Right STuff, the pilots of the Apollo missions are in space for a much longer time and have to control the spacecrafts themselves.

# data[].attributes.body
In class, we watched Wall-E. There was a scene that shows the effects of propulsion in space. Wall E was holding a fire extinguisher and was able to move around in space by shooting it in the opposite direction of where he wanted to go. In Earth, we could not do that because the effect of the propulsion would be tiny because of our weight, but in space, where we are weightless, we could be thrusted infinitely. This follows Newton's rule that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

# data[].attributes.body
I really liked the arrival movie. A lot of times, movies show aliens coming to Earth with the intention of destroying everything (independence day, independence day 2, independence day wannabe's), but this movie is more realistic, because it portrays the aliens like us. Well, they look very different from us, but they come to earth in the pursuit of science and discovery, which is hopefully what we would do if we were able to travel to a life harboring planet. It was also interesting to see about how the aliens perceive time as a nonlinear sequence, expanding on the idea of time being a dimension.

# data[].attributes.body
We watched a short movie about people who believe that we never actually landed on the moon. Their arguments were not very well thought out, as most of the evidence they used was true, but there was a completely good explanation for it. For example, they talked about how there was no dust being kicked up back onto the lunar lander after it landed. However, the lack of air on the moon would account for that, as in order for dust to float around in the air, there has to actually be air. In conspiracy theories like this one, people often choose bits and pieces of evidence that help their case, but ignore evidence that hurts it.

# data[].attributes.body
In the second part of this movie, they actually showed scenes of them on the moon. A few of the effects they added that would happen on the moon were correct. For example, they accounted for the fact that a loose spacesuit would expand when put in a vacuum, as the pressure inside of the suit would be greater than the pressure outside of the suit. They also added some scenes where the gravity appeared to be less, but only when they were running across the camera. There were also some things that were wrong, like the mud cracks that had Mr. Duffy ABSOLUTELY LIVID.

# data[].attributes.body
This movie was cheese lol. Something I noticed was that they planned on keeping the rocket in whole all throughout it's journey to the moon and back. Typically what we do now is release a capsule from the rocket and travel in that, but what they planned to do was use the rocket to land on the moon and take off from the moon again. I would also take much less fuel to launch the rocket off of the moon, because of the reduced gravity and no air friction.

# data[].attributes.body
Today in class we watched part of a movie. I honestly have no idea what the name of the movie was, but it was about the candidates who were trying to be the first American in space. I thought that it was interesting how the selection process was so long, and there were so many physical and mental tests, but in the end the person being sent up did nothing. I wonder if in longer lasting missions in space, like orbiting the earth several times or going to the moon, the pilot actually has a majority of control over the spacecraft, or if all the functions are delegated to ground control like they were in this case.

# data[].attributes.body
On Friday we watched part of a movie called rocket man. The movie was about the beginnings of the NASA rocket program, and how hard it was to get a rocket to launch successfully. It documented the progress of NASA's rocket building up until the point that they were able to land a man on the moon. Usually when learning about rockets and space missions, you start with the moon landing, or maybe the first satellites. It was fascinating to learn about what rockets were like before that, and baffling to see how rarely they actually worked

# data[].attributes.body
Today in class we watched cosmos. It was an episode about the evolution of life. There is a part where they talk about what life may be like on other worlds. They theorized that there could be life on titan, that has adapted to survive on different elements, unlike the ones that we survive on. I thought this was really interesting, because in the search of life, we always look for water. But earth life only needs water because there's water on earth, so life adapted to that. On Titan, where there is liquid methane, life could have adapted to survive in that.