40th Anniversary of Apollo 17. Last time we set foot on the moon.
Two generations have grown up where men on the mooon was just something they read about in history books.
Because I can't read, yo. Delete this shit.
Bust out the checkbook, 1.5 billion. It's not a must have destination.
My tan would fade.
this whole voyager thing is fucking amazing. it's not an important step like when we landed on the moon, but dammit....a human construct is finally leaving our little safe bubble in the universe, and it's entering outer space....REALLY outer space
i have no idea what data it will be able to collect...or even IF there is important data to collect....but the simple fact we are about to know "what's out there?" it's fucking emotional
pretty sure this is the only time in the past century we can use the phrase "here be dragons" with its full meaning
That one is more of a Voyager 2 sort of thread, if you know what I mean.
p.s. Millie is packin
And Helium 3. Fusion fuel goodness.Nothing on the moon except rocks, bro
Sir Patrick Moore, astronomer and broadcaster, dies aged 89
RIPBritish astronomer and broadcaster Sir Patrick Moore has died, aged 89, his friends and colleagues have said.
He "passed away peacefully at 12:25 BST this afternoon" at his home in Selsey, West Sussex, they said in a statement.
Sir Patrick presented the BBC programme The Sky At Night for over 50 years, making him the longest-running host of the same television show ever.
He wrote dozens of books on astronomy and his research was used by the US and the Russians in their space programmes.
And lots and lots of cheese.
Motherfucking gouda and shit.
Stuff like this is why i am tired of repeatedly going to Mars all the time.
The river stretches more than 400 kilometers from its ‘headwaters’ and flows into a large sea.
It is the first time astronomers have seen a river system this large and in such high resolution anywhere beyond Earth, according to the European Space Agency.
I don't think a moonbase would be pointless at all. A space elevator is a really neat idea and all, but we don't have the materials to actually build one. We also don't have the social structures in place to maintain or secure one. We do have those things for a moonbase though.
It's not really an argument between best and second best, it's more of a decision between possible and impossible.
If I were writing a book I'd go with space elevator. If I were lobbying Congress I'd go with military moonbase.
A big shame.
A self sustaining base on the moon would allow many various sciences to have gigantic leaps forward. You also reduce the amount of expenses not having to eject rockets out of the atmosphere. The initial cost would be staggering, but as soon as you can start mining asteroids it would easily be made back up.
A self sustaining base on the moon would be great if it could manufacture useful things that would otherwise need to be lifted to orbit from Earth.
They can do asteroid mining / processing at a Lagrange Point Orbit and save energy from take off and landing. Then just deliver the resources where they are needed.
The actual need for a moon base is small though. A moon base might be constructed at some point in the future for tourism or as a "hey look what we can do" kinda thing when the price of such a venture drops.
Asteroid mining would be essential to lower the price of such an endeavor and should be the focus of any serious manned space exploration projects imo.
So how, precisely, can we test whether we exist? Put simply, researchers are building their own simulated models, using a technique called lattice quantum chromodynamics. And while those models are currently able to produce models only slightly larger than the nucleus of an atom, University of Washington physics professor Martin Savage says the same principles used in creating those simulations can be applied on a larger scale.
"This is the first testable signature of such an idea," Savage said. "If you make the simulations big enough, something like our universe should emerge."
The testing method is far more complex. Consider the Cornell University explanation: "Using the historical development of lattice gauge theory technology as a guide, we assume that our universe is an early numerical simulation with unimproved Wilson fermion discretization and investigate potentially-observable consequences."
To translate, if energy signatures in our simulations match those in the universe at large, there's a good chance we, too, exist within a simulation.
Wouldn't a lunar base be necessary if we ever wanted to get helium-3 off the moon? Of course, we'd need to develop fusion first for that to really be needed.
Last edited by Blide; 12-14-2012 at 03:00 AM.
A lunar base would also be a great way-station for asteroid exploitation.
Besides, I'd imagine a lot of mining / processing can be automated. I very much doubt it would take a large portion of any asteroid mining complex for human operators meaning the entire thing would no.
A moon base isn't something required for early space exploration efforts.
Either way, private companies are starting with asteroids and pulling them into orbit to mine them. Even if you were to set up a base on the moon it would be tricky to mine the asteroids on the moon because you'd have to pretty much crash them into the moon then collect them.
They can get fuel from asteroids, but if asteroid mining / manned space exploration does become big, then the need for a moon base as a fuel station would grow.
I don't think this is a situation where there should be people/countries investing crazy amounts of money on a moon base before there is a demand for asteroid mining / manned space exploration. We might end up failing at mining so bad that the moon base will not currently be necessary.
Last edited by Eomer; 12-14-2012 at 04:17 PM.
The Obama administration will have to respond to a petition to begin construction of a Death Star by 2016, now that the appeal has gathered a critical number of signatures.
The "Star Wars"-inspired petition was posted on the White House's "We the People" site on Nov. 14, and today it passed the 25,000-signature threshold required for an official reply.
"Those who sign here petition the United States government to secure funding and resources, and begin construction on a Death Star by 2016,"
Close one recently
A newfound asteroid gave Earth a close shave early today, zipping between our planet and the moon just two days after astronomers first spotted it.
I'd be more interested in setting up permanent stations at Lagrange points than on the moon.
That looks like an original series Star Trek set.
Mount Sharp sure as shit doesn't look 3 miles high.
It's probably been asked at some poine but I missed it, is Curiosity capable of sending video or due to the distance it must travel is it limited to still shots?
The thing to remember is that the rover has limited bandwidth to transmit data back and while it might be cool, video is going to have limited usage from a scientific perspective...at least when you're observing static features like rocks.
I'm sure this was mentioned on the old forum and isn't particularly new news. But for those that aren't aware -- we have the potential for an AMAZING comet viewable in the northern hemisphere late this year (2013). Current projections suggest it may become brighter than the full moon.
Comet ISON Could Outshine Moon
Comet is gonna fragment and we're gonna be pelted with house-sized hail.
Giant balls of flaming ice falling from the sky to vengefully smite the decadent. Those Mayans knew what was up.
Pretty interesting, meteorite that is 2.1 billion years old has been linked to being from the crust of Mars and has 10x more water in it then any other found.
I'm sure they'll figure out some cool use for it, at some point.
Just waiting to get the Ansible online...
looks like they upped the # of planets- potentially- in this galaxy to over 100 billion according to a new study in The Astrophysical Journal published last wednesday.
oh and i hope that comet does NOT break up, be Sweet to see a decent comet tail for once in my life.
as for rotating ships...read a book that IF the math in the book is right, to generate 1/3rd gravity, rotating a ship less than 3 times a minute, the diameter of the ring would have to be approximately 292 meters in diameter rotating once every 40 seconds..
why less than 3 times a minute? motion sickness, you could make a smaller ring, rotate faster, but that would limit the pool of passengers/pilots.
it's a simple math equation overall, i just have not checked that math
Last edited by Lenardo; 01-07-2013 at 07:23 PM.
Carl Sagan knew that shit 30 years ago.
Biiiilions and biiiilions.
Even if it's our best guess, it's still just a wild fucking guess man. There may be a "goldilocks zone" for the entire galaxy when it comes to planet formation for some (literally) unknown reason. Or there may not. Confirmed exoplanets is the important bit!
Planets or Dwarf Planets? Pluto was the king jimmy rustler
Pluto only rustled jimmies because the vast majority of Americans associated Pluto with the Disney character, no other country gave a fuck about Pluto's downgrade to a dwarf planet.
It was a pretty poor definition, but to say that Pluto (and Charon and all the other icy bodies) should be defined the same as the large rocky bodies is not proper.
Pluto is just a huge fucking comet more then anything, that's sure as fuck what it would look like if something came along and forced it into a much closer orbit with the sun.
I'm surprised Syfy hasn't done a movie yet about that. Pluto is knocked from it's orbit, turning it into a GIANT comet...ON A COLLISION COURSE WITH EARTH! Starring SG-1's Michael Shanks.
At the end of the day, Michael Brown made a pretty good point: there's no official definition of what a continent is either. Would people freak out if Greenland was upgraded or those filthy Aussies get knocked down a peg? Probably. With astronomical objects as we discover more and more about our galactic neighborhood there's bound to be ones that don't fall neatly in to categories. From planets without stars, to borderline brown dwarfs orbiting stars, to moons with their own moons, we're going to find some weird shit out there.
It was either restrict the definition of what a planet is somewhat so that Pluto wouldn't count, or include it and come to terms with the fact that we'll have dozens if not hundreds of "planets" in short order. They tried to find a middle ground. That left a lot of people on either side unhappy.
I don't really give a shit, personally.
They should have just let Pluto be grandfathered in. I think that would have been the proper compromise.
here you can find a good explaination about why Pluto was demoted, done by your local sexiest astrophysicist
The only reason Pluto was recognized as a planet is plain dumb luck. The others weren't visible or at least weren't in the area that Tombaugh was searching. I don't think that Pluto should be "grandfathered" just because of dumb luck. And again, if you argue it should be simply because it was found before the others, than Ceres should be grandfathered as a planet too.
I'm with Eomer.
How many objects in scientific classification are 'grandfathered' in? I have to imagine that classification of certain species changes so often that it's a huge mess.
Let's grandfather in Phlogiston as an element.
At the end of the day all it comes down to is arguing over semantics and definitions. We made definitions based only on what we see when the reality is in the future we are going to probably find some extremely bizarre things when it comes to stellar formations(hot jupiters for example).
If anything I think the idea of our solar system having dozens and dozens of planets instead of only a couple unique snow flakes really ruslted the jimmies of the IAU. Though I can only imagine in the future we will find systems with dozens and dozens objects(Mercury size or so or bigger) in them. I mean who is to say a star can only have a handful of planets? Look at Jupiter for example, it has dozens and dozens of moons. Smallest being only a mile and a half in diameter yet its considered a moon.
Last edited by Big Phoenix; 01-09-2013 at 02:58 PM.
Well, as long as Vanity Fair says it's not going to, I feel better.
Still a 1 in a million chance it can hit.
Nothing new really, but further confirmation that there's probably around 17 billion Earth-sized planets in our galaxy alone. However the vast majority of those are way inside or way outside the habitable zone. Flip side to that, though, is that we have no idea how many Earth sized moons there may be as well. There could be a lot of gas giants in the habitable zone, with Earth sized moons (not that they'd necessarily be good candidates for life, though) Further, only now is it possible for Kepler to start confirming planets that orbit similar to Earth around a star similar to ours, since it needs to see three transits. So we might all of the sudden see a flood of planets in habitable zones, whether they be Earth-like or gas giants or whatever.
That one IS new. Basically the first Earth analogue, if confirmed.
Could you imagine the shit storm it would set off if Apophis destroyed the vast majority of our satellites? Fuckers laugh at me for having a land line but I won't be stuck out if that comes to pass, I can totally call and talk to my grandmother or my aunt.
GPS would be fucked, Satellite phones would be fucked, the vast majority of television (not all, yay for local stations), due to heavy dependance on GPS flights might entirely be grounded, international communications would be fucked as mentioned. It would be some heavy duty shit, the big question is how could one get rich preparing for such a disaster in case it happened.
edit: ah, my bad, didn't see that it was addressed
It's not solely about power. It's about distance. Geo-synchronous orbit is 42,000 km up. Even at the speed of light (300,000 km/sec), communications signals bouncing back and forth four times for voice calls causes pretty large latency, so it's not practical.That would be pretty sweet if it were true (since basically you'd never lose coverage) but AFAIK the transmitter in your phone isn't powerful enough for that. That's not to say it couldn't severely fuck up communication networks, but the impact would be on a large scale (international communications would be pretty boned I think).
Last edited by Eomer; 01-15-2013 at 01:29 AM.
Why didn't they move the rover closer to that metal spoke or whatever is so you can get a better look at it?
Might not be able to navigate those rocks, or it might be in the process of getting there. Fuckin' thing takes forever to move, man.
stuff like this spring an interesting question: if by chance we find an alien device on mars, something that proof intelligent life is out there somewhere, what do you think will be the general reaction ? indifference ? wild panic ? some kind of global social "growup" like Star Trek ?
My expectation would be: authoritarian secrecy (not conspiracy nutter stuff), general indifference, a burst of cashflow into aerospace R&D.
I'm not even a conspiracy nut. But if the NASA rover finds spaceship parts on Mars I don't think we're gonna have an Oprah Special telling us about it. I don't think wars will end because we have a sudden, global, Pale Blue Dot epiphany. I think the information would be there but it wouldn't be widely publicized, widely understood, or widely credited. And most people wouldn't care too much even when they're aware of it.
Because honestly, there are wonders and mysteries in the world in plenty already. Most of us don't give a shit about any of that.
Last edited by Iannis; 02-09-2013 at 12:29 PM.
Given how much we litter on our own planet and in our own orbit, is anyone really surprised we're already dumping on Mars?
5 rapebux that, in the end, it'll be something boring.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)