lemming

Korolev is the father of the Soviet rocket program, argubly its most important person, somewhat akin to von Braun in the USA. He's a designer of R7, direct predecessor of Soyuz that is still flying people to space. You know the shape when the boosters/first stage of Soyuz disconnect from the central stage? It's called Korolev's cross to this day. It's definitely named after the scientist. And anyway, russians didn't have a king, they had a tzar.

By the way, while logged in, you can switch the user to a guest on the same instance. That way, you can easily switch between a logged-in and logged-out view. I don't know what it would do to your filters. I guess it won't help you, but might be usefull anyway.

I realised I have a sort of explanatory image at hand.

It has a part that is embedded in a mitochondrial membrane and works as a rotor. The other part is sticking out from the membrane and is responsible for synthesis of ATP from ADP and phosphate. An off-axis part of the rotor pushes the stator, it changes shape and pushes ADP and phosphate together, until they fuse to ATP.

To make the rotor move, it makes use of membrane potential. One side of the membrane has a lot more H⁺ (just protons, really) than the other. The excess H⁺ want to go to the other side. The membrane doesn't let them through. It is hydrophobic on the inside, so it does't let through anything charged (like H⁺) or polar (like water). This is the potential and it has quite a lot of energy. ATP synthase lets the H⁺ through by binding them to the rotor in the membrane in a particular place and releases them in another in such a way that forces the rotor to turn almost a full turn before they can leave and stops it from rotating the other way. As mentioned, the rotation is transfered to the stator, changing its shape and thus creating ATP. As a side note, multiple H⁺ are bound on the rotor along its circumference, so each rotation is powered by the potential energy of multiple protons.

Of course, it's a bit more complicated than that, but I don't think there's anything downright wrong or misleading in what I wrote. I hope I managed to make it understandable. Also, I recommend animations of the synthase on youtube.

One suggestion for securing your base before leaving is to make a construction tank. Tanks can be driven remotely and have equipment grid. You can put personal roboport in there and use it as your clumsy impersonation for building outside your roboport coverage from anywhere.

Huh, good point, I never thought about that. Makes sense. I only ever heard about options to get shares when the company becomes publicly traded. Of course, publicly traded is what I meant.

Do the owners also get money based on the shares?

Which shareholders do you mean? SpaceX is private company, no shares.

Launch vehicle development by NASA is by their own admission slower and more expensive. It's no coincidence that the whole industry started moving forward much faster when a driven private company with financial interests at heart and without strong dependence on politicians started their own serious development.

As for the tax money paid to SpaceX, NASA simply bought services. They also helped with development. But whatever the expenses were, they were much lower than they would be if NASA did it the old way. By the way, the old way is similar, but instead of SpaceX, the money went to Boeing, Lockheed Martin etc. and there wasn't a limit on how much money it will be in advance. Now you know that if the costs exceed the agreed sum, it won't be paid by public money, but by the company. As seen with Starliner, which went so badly that Boeing said they are never doing fixed-price contracts ever again. They are used to the excess money paid from the public budget. In exchange for these advantages to the public, SpaceX can use the vehcle developed unther the contract on their own, without NASA. Therefore you can get missions such as Polaris, Inspiration4 or Axiom. Your opinion on these may be different, but I think private missions and influx of private money into spaceflight is good for spaceflight in general. It makes it more financially sustainable and more efficient.

That's the case for most species.

As a very specific and highly functional example of critical viral proteins in other organisms, there wouldn't be any placental mammals without viruses. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placenta

Mammalian placentas probably first evolved about 150 million to 200 million years ago. The protein syncytin, found in the outer barrier of the placenta (the syncytiotrophoblast) between mother and fetus, has a certain RNA signature in its genome that has led to the hypothesis that it originated from an ancient retrovirus: essentially a virus that helped pave the transition from egg-laying to live-birth.

I actually don't know. I didn't dig into it, I just read an article about Russians praising Starlink bought through third parties used at the front. It seemed similar enough to other captured communications previously shown as accurate. But it doesn't definitively prove anything for sure. It could've easily been propaganda from any involved party.

Based on some old tweets, I think Musk believes Putin wants to use nuclear weapons. Then, the army put some pressure on him to keep supporting Ukraine, but he is still also working on his own. I'm sure he could block the Starlink terminals Russian army is using, if he wanted to try, for example.

I don't, Musk is too influential. And honestly, I don't think there needs to be much concern about space launch part of the business. I'm under the impression that it is already regulated enough to be relatively safely under control. And I would be sad to see it taken away from SpaceX and probably even Musk specifically. He is an incredible idiot and dangerous person, but the progress they did and triggered in others is undeniable and I'd like to see it continue.

But Starlink is a completely different matter. Private company strongly lead by a single, somewhat crazy person, is very dangerous. I think few people expected it to be such a game changer in the beginning, I certainly didn't. But it is important and very influential. Maybe ideal would be if it was controlled by the government, if it had the final say in geopolitical decisions etc., but the profits (or some part), development and such remained in the hands of SpaceX. Well, some international body as isolated from political influence as possible would be even better, but there's no chance of that happening.

Oh, thank you. I stopped reading when it started to talk about someone else 9 years later, I thought it would be some other controversy. I wish he crowdsourced the $150 though. I wonder how many citations it could have gotten...