Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Not obviously. If we're going to quibble over details, we might as well do it properly. The astro- root can also translate as a non-stellar celestial body, since at the time the word meaning was established, the planets were considered "wanderer" stars. Also, asteroids are not stars, but bear a related etymological root.

Cosmos, on the other hand, derives from the entire universe. Obviously, the universe surrounds us completely, but if you're willing to call someone in LEO a cosmonaut, I'm not certain you couldn't say the same about someone driving a car on the planet's surface to the grocery store to buy milk. Both are traveling through the cosmos. Where's the cutoff? Earth escape velocity? Solar escape velocity? Galactic escape velocity? People in LEO just aren't going fast enough.

I have no qualms about calling the flight personnel of the Apollo program "astronauts", as their goal was to reach another celestial body, even if it was not literally a star, and several of them actually made it there. "Selenauts" would also have been appropriate.

But since 1972, we have only been sending humans as far as LEO. Maybe "lacunauts" would be better for those in space, but not traveling to other celestial bodies?



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: