Slashdot Mirror

I ran into problems getting the NASA TV streams to work under Firefox in Linux. Here are the direct links if you're in the same boat or don't want to go through javascript infested pages. I only tested the Windows Media one.

Windows Media

Real Media

Quicktime

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/

I want to watch the NasaTv coverage from the UK. I can do it from the NasaTv page on my pc, but it's a small screen, and I want to use my PC for other stuff.

Has anyone ever got http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/ to work on a PS3 ? The page comes up ok on my PS3, but the video window just shows a static picture, with no video or audio... I assume the PS3 can't do the flash video required ???

Or, is there any alternate coverage on broadcast TV in the UK ?

live

Hello from JPL...

Best place to go for coverage including links to NASA TV (live video starts at 3:30pm PDT is... http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/phoenix.

Wish us luck!

That's good to know (I hadn't heard that anywhere), though Spirit is essentially out of commission for a few more months due to winter weather, unless it gets its solar panels cleaned off by wind. Right now it's having a hard enough time just keeping warm.

let a little thing like an explosion deter me.

So just pick a place where there aren't any hurricanes. :)

At UC San Diego, scientists were able to grow nanowires directly on an inexpensive indium tin oxide conductive surface.

First I learn Newton is only an approximation...now even Einstein...is only an approximation as well. Will the real reality please reveal itself!

Here ya go

Try Something New
NASA TV Via Peer-to-Peer Streaming
NASA and Digimeld are conducting a pilot study to stream NASA TV using Digimeld's peer-to-peer streaming technology

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

The real question though is, what "object" NASA is announcing it has found after more than a 50 year search? I don't think it is related, to UFOs, but imagine if it was!

MEDIA ADVISORY : M08-089
  NASA to Announce Success of Long Galactic Hunt
WASHINGTON -- NASA has scheduled a media teleconference Wednesday, May 14, at 1 p.m. EDT, to announce the discovery of an object in our Galaxy astronomers have been hunting for more than 50 years. This finding was made by combining data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory with ground-based observations.

To participate in the teleconference, reporters must contact the Chandra Press Office at 617-496-7998 or e-mail mwatzke@cfa.harvard.edu. Live audio of the teleconference will be streamed online at:http://www.nasa.gov/newsaudio

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008/may/HQ_M08089_Chandra_Advisory.html

"Next, Mars has similarities to Earth. If it once supported life but no longer does what changed? Could that same change possibly happen to us?"

Besides the whole "no magnetic sphere" and being "too small to hold down an atmosphere" there are other things that we know about Mars already!!! Check out the below link to learn more!

http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/funzone_flash.html

As it stands, NASA operates as a wholly government-funded agency, and under its current charter, anything that results from its efforts is a Public Domain free-for-all.

Perhaps they should look at a joint funding scheme such as Australia's CSIRO, where they can patent and profit from their efforts? Just think of how much they could make just off APOD prints alone, let alone actual useful stuff!

That's pretty cool. One of the first things I did with the "digital picture frame" I got for christmas was to transcode this video of a cylindrical projection of Jupiter's atmosphere with all the bands spinning and interacting. (Found the video from APOD). Something like that would look awesome on this type of display.

It's weird that a government produced educational project like that is closed source, though.

That's pretty cool. One of the first things I did with the "digital picture frame" I got for christmas was to transcode this video of a cylindrical projection of Jupiter's atmosphere with all the bands spinning and interacting. (Found the video from APOD). Something like that would look awesome on this type of display.

It's weird that a government produced educational project like that is closed source, though.

It can definitely be done well; NOAA/NASA's "Science on a Sphere" projector creates beautiful, seamless projections on a spherical screen (using 5 Linux boxes and and four projectors, but the project itself is closed source) http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/visitor/exhibits/footprints.html

better video of the sphere in action:
http://learners.gsfc.nasa.gov/mediaviewer/sphere2/

It can definitely be done well; NOAA/NASA's "Science on a Sphere" projector creates beautiful, seamless projections on a spherical screen (using 5 Linux boxes and and four projectors, but the project itself is closed source) http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/visitor/exhibits/footprints.html

better video of the sphere in action:
http://learners.gsfc.nasa.gov/mediaviewer/sphere2/

I may be the odd man out here by supporting space & NASA (I work Orion CEV, though not a civil servant) while also being a slashdot user, but I still stand by my beliefs.

I will first start by providing a handful of links to other advocate groups, spin-off pages, etc., then go into why I personally support it, and finally go into where I see room for improvements.

The Links
The Planetary Society
The Coalition for Space Exploration
Space.com
NASA Spin-off Library
NASA @ Home and City

Now on to why I personally support manned space: I will try to keep it short and high-level. (No particular order to the numbering)

1. Study of survival in harsh environments.
I both fear & assume that one day our planet will eventually become an extremely harsh environment to survive in. I feel that the more we know about biology and microbiology issues such as water & food purification (ISS, Shuttle Purification, Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL)) within limited and harsh environments, the better off we could be when we reach that time in our existence. (There are also many other areas of study that go along with survival than life sciences, such as human physiology.)

2. Colonization of other moons and planets.
Essentially this goes along with #1. It would be nice to have some options and prior knowledge when Earth is nearing its end.

3. Origin of our Planets.
I believe the more we know and understand about the origin of our planets the better. If we can somehow "prove" our origin and debunk the majority of Religious views I feel we will be better off. I believe Religion to be the root cause of the majority of wars and violence on this planet. I also believe that people who are barley surviving often resort to violence to help themselves survive.

4. Costs vs Return.
Here I'm just going to sum-up this page. NASA's budget is 0.7 of 1% of the nations total. We spend about $9 Billion per month killing other humans. "In 2002, the commercial space industry contributed more than $95 billion in U.S. economic activity".

4.Spin-Offs.
While it may be a sub-set of the other advantages, I still believe the majority of Spin-offs benefit humans "down here".


Where can we improve?
(Again, no particular order)

1. Public Relations.
I believe the public needs more knowledge coming from the space community about both the benefits and obstacles of space exploration. I believe many of the reasons people have a negative attitude about it is because they are ill-informed. Stop playing with space food on TV and making everything look like a cake-walk, and show the real low-level experiments being ran up there. THIS is what will inspire people!

2. Inspire our Youth.
Again, this goes along with #1. With politicians trying to get more math and science students just by cutting funds here, adding funds there (Obama, I'm looking at YOU), you still won't be motivating people to work hard and study these subjects. The one thing that actually got me (mentally) through college was my goal of working on the space program. With no motivation and inspiration, you will loose students in these subjects, not gain them!

3. Expand Robotic\Un-manned Space.
I believe that expanding our robotic side of space exploration will have an overall benefit, but needs to co-exist with the manned

I may be the odd man out here by supporting space & NASA (I work Orion CEV, though not a civil servant) while also being a slashdot user, but I still stand by my beliefs.

I will first start by providing a handful of links to other advocate groups, spin-off pages, etc., then go into why I personally support it, and finally go into where I see room for improvements.

The Links
The Planetary Society
The Coalition for Space Exploration
Space.com
NASA Spin-off Library
NASA @ Home and City

Now on to why I personally support manned space: I will try to keep it short and high-level. (No particular order to the numbering)

1. Study of survival in harsh environments.
I both fear & assume that one day our planet will eventually become an extremely harsh environment to survive in. I feel that the more we know about biology and microbiology issues such as water & food purification (ISS, Shuttle Purification, Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL)) within limited and harsh environments, the better off we could be when we reach that time in our existence. (There are also many other areas of study that go along with survival than life sciences, such as human physiology.)

2. Colonization of other moons and planets.
Essentially this goes along with #1. It would be nice to have some options and prior knowledge when Earth is nearing its end.

3. Origin of our Planets.
I believe the more we know and understand about the origin of our planets the better. If we can somehow "prove" our origin and debunk the majority of Religious views I feel we will be better off. I believe Religion to be the root cause of the majority of wars and violence on this planet. I also believe that people who are barley surviving often resort to violence to help themselves survive.

4. Costs vs Return.
Here I'm just going to sum-up this page. NASA's budget is 0.7 of 1% of the nations total. We spend about $9 Billion per month killing other humans. "In 2002, the commercial space industry contributed more than $95 billion in U.S. economic activity".

4.Spin-Offs.
While it may be a sub-set of the other advantages, I still believe the majority of Spin-offs benefit humans "down here".


Where can we improve?
(Again, no particular order)

1. Public Relations.
I believe the public needs more knowledge coming from the space community about both the benefits and obstacles of space exploration. I believe many of the reasons people have a negative attitude about it is because they are ill-informed. Stop playing with space food on TV and making everything look like a cake-walk, and show the real low-level experiments being ran up there. THIS is what will inspire people!

2. Inspire our Youth.
Again, this goes along with #1. With politicians trying to get more math and science students just by cutting funds here, adding funds there (Obama, I'm looking at YOU), you still won't be motivating people to work hard and study these subjects. The one thing that actually got me (mentally) through college was my goal of working on the space program. With no motivation and inspiration, you will loose students in these subjects, not gain them!

3. Expand Robotic\Un-manned Space.
I believe that expanding our robotic side of space exploration will have an overall benefit, but needs to co-exist with the manned

I may be the odd man out here by supporting space & NASA (I work Orion CEV, though not a civil servant) while also being a slashdot user, but I still stand by my beliefs.

I will first start by providing a handful of links to other advocate groups, spin-off pages, etc., then go into why I personally support it, and finally go into where I see room for improvements.

The Links
The Planetary Society
The Coalition for Space Exploration
Space.com
NASA Spin-off Library
NASA @ Home and City

Now on to why I personally support manned space: I will try to keep it short and high-level. (No particular order to the numbering)

1. Study of survival in harsh environments.
I both fear & assume that one day our planet will eventually become an extremely harsh environment to survive in. I feel that the more we know about biology and microbiology issues such as water & food purification (ISS, Shuttle Purification, Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL)) within limited and harsh environments, the better off we could be when we reach that time in our existence. (There are also many other areas of study that go along with survival than life sciences, such as human physiology.)

2. Colonization of other moons and planets.
Essentially this goes along with #1. It would be nice to have some options and prior knowledge when Earth is nearing its end.

3. Origin of our Planets.
I believe the more we know and understand about the origin of our planets the better. If we can somehow "prove" our origin and debunk the majority of Religious views I feel we will be better off. I believe Religion to be the root cause of the majority of wars and violence on this planet. I also believe that people who are barley surviving often resort to violence to help themselves survive.

4. Costs vs Return.
Here I'm just going to sum-up this page. NASA's budget is 0.7 of 1% of the nations total. We spend about $9 Billion per month killing other humans. "In 2002, the commercial space industry contributed more than $95 billion in U.S. economic activity".

4.Spin-Offs.
While it may be a sub-set of the other advantages, I still believe the majority of Spin-offs benefit humans "down here".


Where can we improve?
(Again, no particular order)

1. Public Relations.
I believe the public needs more knowledge coming from the space community about both the benefits and obstacles of space exploration. I believe many of the reasons people have a negative attitude about it is because they are ill-informed. Stop playing with space food on TV and making everything look like a cake-walk, and show the real low-level experiments being ran up there. THIS is what will inspire people!

2. Inspire our Youth.
Again, this goes along with #1. With politicians trying to get more math and science students just by cutting funds here, adding funds there (Obama, I'm looking at YOU), you still won't be motivating people to work hard and study these subjects. The one thing that actually got me (mentally) through college was my goal of working on the space program. With no motivation and inspiration, you will loose students in these subjects, not gain them!

3. Expand Robotic\Un-manned Space.
I believe that expanding our robotic side of space exploration will have an overall benefit, but needs to co-exist with the manned

I may be the odd man out here by supporting space & NASA (I work Orion CEV, though not a civil servant) while also being a slashdot user, but I still stand by my beliefs.

I will first start by providing a handful of links to other advocate groups, spin-off pages, etc., then go into why I personally support it, and finally go into where I see room for improvements.

The Links
The Planetary Society
The Coalition for Space Exploration
Space.com
NASA Spin-off Library
NASA @ Home and City

Now on to why I personally support manned space: I will try to keep it short and high-level. (No particular order to the numbering)

1. Study of survival in harsh environments.
I both fear & assume that one day our planet will eventually become an extremely harsh environment to survive in. I feel that the more we know about biology and microbiology issues such as water & food purification (ISS, Shuttle Purification, Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL)) within limited and harsh environments, the better off we could be when we reach that time in our existence. (There are also many other areas of study that go along with survival than life sciences, such as human physiology.)

2. Colonization of other moons and planets.
Essentially this goes along with #1. It would be nice to have some options and prior knowledge when Earth is nearing its end.

3. Origin of our Planets.
I believe the more we know and understand about the origin of our planets the better. If we can somehow "prove" our origin and debunk the majority of Religious views I feel we will be better off. I believe Religion to be the root cause of the majority of wars and violence on this planet. I also believe that people who are barley surviving often resort to violence to help themselves survive.

4. Costs vs Return.
Here I'm just going to sum-up this page. NASA's budget is 0.7 of 1% of the nations total. We spend about $9 Billion per month killing other humans. "In 2002, the commercial space industry contributed more than $95 billion in U.S. economic activity".

4.Spin-Offs.
While it may be a sub-set of the other advantages, I still believe the majority of Spin-offs benefit humans "down here".


Where can we improve?
(Again, no particular order)

1. Public Relations.
I believe the public needs more knowledge coming from the space community about both the benefits and obstacles of space exploration. I believe many of the reasons people have a negative attitude about it is because they are ill-informed. Stop playing with space food on TV and making everything look like a cake-walk, and show the real low-level experiments being ran up there. THIS is what will inspire people!

2. Inspire our Youth.
Again, this goes along with #1. With politicians trying to get more math and science students just by cutting funds here, adding funds there (Obama, I'm looking at YOU), you still won't be motivating people to work hard and study these subjects. The one thing that actually got me (mentally) through college was my goal of working on the space program. With no motivation and inspiration, you will loose students in these subjects, not gain them!

3. Expand Robotic\Un-manned Space.
I believe that expanding our robotic side of space exploration will have an overall benefit, but needs to co-exist with the manned

I may be the odd man out here by supporting space & NASA (I work Orion CEV, though not a civil servant) while also being a slashdot user, but I still stand by my beliefs.

I will first start by providing a handful of links to other advocate groups, spin-off pages, etc., then go into why I personally support it, and finally go into where I see room for improvements.

The Links
The Planetary Society
The Coalition for Space Exploration
Space.com
NASA Spin-off Library
NASA @ Home and City

Now on to why I personally support manned space: I will try to keep it short and high-level. (No particular order to the numbering)

1. Study of survival in harsh environments.
I both fear & assume that one day our planet will eventually become an extremely harsh environment to survive in. I feel that the more we know about biology and microbiology issues such as water & food purification (ISS, Shuttle Purification, Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL)) within limited and harsh environments, the better off we could be when we reach that time in our existence. (There are also many other areas of study that go along with survival than life sciences, such as human physiology.)

2. Colonization of other moons and planets.
Essentially this goes along with #1. It would be nice to have some options and prior knowledge when Earth is nearing its end.

3. Origin of our Planets.
I believe the more we know and understand about the origin of our planets the better. If we can somehow "prove" our origin and debunk the majority of Religious views I feel we will be better off. I believe Religion to be the root cause of the majority of wars and violence on this planet. I also believe that people who are barley surviving often resort to violence to help themselves survive.

4. Costs vs Return.
Here I'm just going to sum-up this page. NASA's budget is 0.7 of 1% of the nations total. We spend about $9 Billion per month killing other humans. "In 2002, the commercial space industry contributed more than $95 billion in U.S. economic activity".

4.Spin-Offs.
While it may be a sub-set of the other advantages, I still believe the majority of Spin-offs benefit humans "down here".


Where can we improve?
(Again, no particular order)

1. Public Relations.
I believe the public needs more knowledge coming from the space community about both the benefits and obstacles of space exploration. I believe many of the reasons people have a negative attitude about it is because they are ill-informed. Stop playing with space food on TV and making everything look like a cake-walk, and show the real low-level experiments being ran up there. THIS is what will inspire people!

2. Inspire our Youth.
Again, this goes along with #1. With politicians trying to get more math and science students just by cutting funds here, adding funds there (Obama, I'm looking at YOU), you still won't be motivating people to work hard and study these subjects. The one thing that actually got me (mentally) through college was my goal of working on the space program. With no motivation and inspiration, you will loose students in these subjects, not gain them!

3. Expand Robotic\Un-manned Space.
I believe that expanding our robotic side of space exploration will have an overall benefit, but needs to co-exist with the manned

We went to the moon and didn't find oil.

I don't need no understanding.

It's ironic that one of your examples was purifying water. Guess who researches that?
  http://www.nasa.gov/missions/science/f_water.html

the NASA/JPL spacecraft was Marinner 9, the USSR spacecraft was Mars 2 and 3 in 1971 http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/past/mariner8-9.html

"Firmware" updates have been occasionally uploaded to the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft when necessary.

According to NASA documentation, the SRB Range Safety system is operated by encoded signals.

From the description in the document, it sounds like one coded signal to 'arm' and a second coded signal to 'fire'. I'd bet that due to the nature of the system, it's transmission method will be so simple that it rarely needs to be tested and as such gives little opportunity for homicidal black-hat analysis.

Finally, I'll also bet that the codes are as top-secret as to-secret can be (as in: Get caught with this and you'll disappear forever). It wouldn't surprise me if the codes are created and handled by just one person on the day of use and never used again. Or perhaps two people where only one person knows the arm code and the other the fire code before the system is finally set.

However it's done, I'd like to think that a hell of a lot of thought went into system security ;)

They've been working on this for a while, actually: See - http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/improvingflight/supersonic_jousting.html That particular project was wrapped up.. but maybe the plan to expound upon it =)

You're right, they don't...
Overview - [1] [2]
Chicxulub - [1] [2]
Shiva - [1] [2]
Boltysh - [1] [2]
And probably more, such as the Silverpit crater, although that's a bit more debated.

And don't forget about NASA's Get Away Special (GAS) program on the Shuttle. Standardized containers carry experiments. That program was initiated in the mid 1970s. I know there are both closed and "exposure" options, but I don't recall if they allow deployments. Pro'lly not.

Around 30 years ago NASA was messing with the Multimission Modular Spacecraft (MMS), which was in use for 10+ years. Some 10 years ago there was a lot of activity around the highly modular SMEX-Lite bus for smaller missions. On the other side of the pond, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. has been doing cheap, highly modular spacecraft buses since the early 1980s. The US DoD and its various contractors have played with the idea at various times in the last couple of decades as well, most recently in the guise of "operationally responsive space" and "plug-and-play spacecraft". Needless to say, the concept is not particularly new. It just waxes and wanes in popularity depending on what kind of tradeoffs between mission cost and mission performance are acceptable.

Around 30 years ago NASA was messing with the Multimission Modular Spacecraft (MMS), which was in use for 10+ years. Some 10 years ago there was a lot of activity around the highly modular SMEX-Lite bus for smaller missions. On the other side of the pond, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. has been doing cheap, highly modular spacecraft buses since the early 1980s. The US DoD and its various contractors have played with the idea at various times in the last couple of decades as well, most recently in the guise of "operationally responsive space" and "plug-and-play spacecraft". Needless to say, the concept is not particularly new. It just waxes and wanes in popularity depending on what kind of tradeoffs between mission cost and mission performance are acceptable.

Around 30 years ago NASA was messing with the Multimission Modular Spacecraft (MMS), which was in use for 10+ years. Some 10 years ago there was a lot of activity around the highly modular SMEX-Lite bus for smaller missions. On the other side of the pond, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. has been doing cheap, highly modular spacecraft buses since the early 1980s. The US DoD and its various contractors have played with the idea at various times in the last couple of decades as well, most recently in the guise of "operationally responsive space" and "plug-and-play spacecraft". Needless to say, the concept is not particularly new. It just waxes and wanes in popularity depending on what kind of tradeoffs between mission cost and mission performance are acceptable.

I'm not sure about the veracity of your statements, but I would conjecture that the blueprints would be nothing more than very cool wallpaper as most craft built to date have been ad hoc creations to house specific instruments with specific needs. The new design will no doubt save money but the instruments will now have to be shoe-horned into that architecture. And that may very well work for the most part.

In addition, here is a site that people should be aware of. It is a database of all the NASA tech that has been spun off into private industry. For instance, JPL developed shake testers to test spacecraft and instruments for their ability to withstand launch stress. Now JPL buys their shake testers from a an outside company.

The experiment that ths data was based on was discussed in this /. article last month ago:

http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/04/26/1232259.shtml

Which referred to the article at NASA:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/25apr_cvx2.htm?list832167

At least it's not a total dupe.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970603.html

matfud

You know, I've never understood why they didn't take the idea behind MacGyver and run with it in the same way you've mentioned those show about all those other professionals. How come there has never been a show about engineers? As of late, CSI has been exceptional and unique in portraying folks trained in science who applying it in exciting ways to uncover mysteries and provide insights. But imagine telling the story of how "Spirit" and "Opportunity" were designed and following the drama of the Mars Exploration Rover from testing, construction, launch, en route, landing, and finally exploration of the red planet. There is a story worth telling behind amazingly beautiful pictures like this that are so familiar and identifiable by at the same time so utterly alien.

well, let's see what googles, shall we ...

Wikipedia for Kids:
http://schools-wikipedia.org/
Article on Wikipedia for Kids:
http://www.marrowbones.com/commons/technosocial/2007/12/wikipedia_for_kids_teaching_a.html
NASA for Kids:
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forkids/kidsclub/flash/index.html

and yes, if you want kids books, ask a librarian at the library, imho

We have the infrastructure to heat/cool the planet now, needing nothing more complicated than a quarry. http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/EDDOCS/franklin.html Use white gravel to reflect a percentage of the sun's output back into space. Use black gravel to absorb a percentage of the sun's output and retain it as heat. A layout of black or white gravel could be used to balance out any excess energy gain/reflection from a power satellite's ground station. Lucky for me, I just read "The High Frontier" by Gerard K. O'Neill, and "Mining the Sky" by John S. Lewis. Both have sections dealing with orbital power generation. I enjoyed them both.

Space is big. Really, really big. Satellites are small. I'm not really sure how many we have in orbit, but it was ~4000 10 years ago, and who knows how many now but we're still talking about a tiny fraction of a percent coverage.

Now the greenhouse effect is always at a tipping point since most radiation is held in or out by water vapor, which is why a CO2 increase will throw things off balance - I think you are implying that satellites will do the same thing. They will, just let me know when we have billions of tons of them (hint: that's decades away)

Lamgley,
Paper E3,
Paper 161 and even a 110MB video of students
programming FPGAs at NASA

It's probably a big supply bag.

Interesting paper, unluckily when I look at figure #4 the discrepancy between the temperature curve and most others I have seen jumps out. eg look at the graphs here, http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/ most of which show much higher recent temperatures then Lassen does.
Further reading shows the same problems that lots of studies (both pro and con) of solar effects on global climate, selective filtering and using statistics (lies, lies and statistics in the words of Sam Clemens).
Anyways it did inspire me to do some more research and most authours are in agreement with Lassen up till the 20th century when the warming generally gets more and more out of phase with the solar cycle.
It is a real problem trying to find time to research this, there are a lot of variables, especially in the filtering methods.
Unluckily Lassen doesn't really show why varying solar cycle lengths would affect the TSI (total solar insolence) but it does appear you are partially correct. Part of the current warming trend is solar induced and I'd guess if the solar trend reverses then the warming trend will slow down and possibly stall for a bit.
The problem is we are still left with the fact that we are adding CO2 to the atmosphere at an accelerating rate and CO2 green house properties are pretty basic science.
Anyways thanks for the link to an interesting paper.

Apparently the trick is not too close and not too far. Low orbits bring down the sat due to grav differences.
OTH, if you are too high or orbit is wrong, then earth plays with it as well.

Thanx for pointing that out. I like to learn.

Hate to break it to you, but so-called "picosats" have already been launched. They are indeed in the 1kg mass range. You're also right that "femtosats" are on the cards. See here for one of the more popular mass classification schemes. I'm eagerly awaiting the appearance of the first "yoctosat"...

Urm? This is a new one. See pretty pictures here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/. You also missed the time frame on the extreme predictions - about 50 to 100 years out. So far, what little predictions have been made have turned out to be too conservative.