Domain: nasa.gov
Stories and comments across the archive that link to nasa.gov.
Comments · 16,365
-
Re:Second Post!seriously, though, will these engines really require that much less fuel mass?
Yep. Check out the breakthrough propulsion physics page at NASA. Propellant grows exponentially with speed--so, to go twice as fast, you're needing along the lines of four times the propellant--unless you can develop better tech, and have four times the thrust from a different type of propellant. (To bring more propellant, you have to bring the propellant to make the propellant move, and.....)
-
Re:the plasma drive
i seem to recall hearing something similar to this quite a while ago, it was about ion drives
That was on the deep space probes (DS1 was the first test, I believe). The rather wonderful Astronomy Picture of the day had a piccie of it with a description a while ago.
As for the difference: they look pretty similar to my untrained eye. -
some good strategies for all of usI typically don't like SCO's strategies and positions, but it looks like this could be a good win-win for everyone. I think SCO has some good ideas here, as it looks like they are tackling some of Linux's shortfallings HEAD-ON.
Win-win #1
"Building the Linux clustering capacity to be in line with SCO's NonStop Clusters technology"
Linux redundancy is currently limited to a few nodes - SCO claim they will increase this to 12. This will help Linux get accepted into more mission critical applications, where redundancy is a necessity.
Win-win #2
"Beefing up Linux's symmetric multiprocessing capabilities."
We all complained about Mindcraft. SCO deserves credit for deciding to put effort in to fix this.
Win-win #3
"Managing multiple Linux servers as well as applications from a single console as if they were a single system."
Four telnet terms on a screen? Seriously, I wonder to what extent this will be integrated? SGI and others have a similar tool available, enlightenDSM. Linux *really* needs this kind of configuration tool for it to be accepted into the high-end server market.
Win-win #4
"Improving security
..."
Although the article doesn't indicate to what extent this effort will be, it's certainly a good move. Since when did you hear the other vendors claim they are working on improving security issues. Maybe SCO will help fund the linux kernel security auditing project?
Well. Good thoughts SCO. I think they have got the right direction, and im sure 20 years of *nix experience will give some mature input into the "Beloved" OS ;) -
Link to Pilot Reports of radio interference
ASRS (The Aviation Safety Reporting System) is a program run by NASA for pilots and other aviation workers to, without fear of reprisal, report safety issues. They have a fine website at http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov This document is a collection of raw reports relating to electronic interference with navigational instruments. Makes an interesting read.
-
Link to Pilot Reports of radio interference
ASRS (The Aviation Safety Reporting System) is a program run by NASA for pilots and other aviation workers to, without fear of reprisal, report safety issues. They have a fine website at http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov This document is a collection of raw reports relating to electronic interference with navigational instruments. Makes an interesting read.
-
Uses of electronic nose:
- Industrial processes
- Environmental toxins and pollutants
- Space station air quality
- Medicine / body functions
- Food processing
- Military enviromnent
- Toxicology
- Quotidiano: Researchers developing an electronic nose
- JSOnline: Electronic nose takes on a higher profile
- Electronic Nose Club
- Electronic Nose Inspects Cheese, Hints At Human Sense of Smell Caltech Microelectronic Research Group
- Warwick-Southampton Electronic Nose Group
- Isoen2000 Olfactory and Electronic Nose 2000
- Press Releases: Electronic Nose Sniffs Out Fresh Fruit
- Electronic Nose Workshop
- Food Explorer Electronic Nose
- Electronic Nose User Forum
- An Electronic Nose For Business, NSF, NASA, and Others
- Wired: Electronic Nose
-
eNose and iSmellSomeone needs to get a prototype eNose and a prototype iSmell, and chain them together in a recursive loop so both can hone their skills, though the final result might be like in the Matrix:
- "But how do you know that that's what Tasty Wheat really tastes like? Maybe it's just what the computers think it tastes like. Maybe that's why so many things taste like Chicken, because they don't know how it's supposed to taste!"
Kevin Fox -
Re:Rad-hard?
You are correct. It is not rad-hard and will experience Single Event Effects (SEE) and eventual lifetime problems (Total Ionizing Dose or TID induced). But the fact of the matter is that "Rad-hard" is not necessarily required to properly operate in space. All devices have radiation effects characteristics which are measurable. You would be surprised at how well commercial off the shelf (COTS) devices perform in space. Many devices have event rates for SEEs (bit upsets, processor hangs, etc.) on the order (average) of years per event...Not a big deal when you consider that software problems often cause bigger problems. For more information, visit www.innocon.com/rad_effects.html or http://flick.gsfc.nasa.gov/radhome.htm
-
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Re:Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe SOHO hotshots page has a description and some better movies of the event.
The TRACE spacecraft took some nice (but large) movies. Look here, here, and here.
This is offtopic, but if you want to learn more about how SOHO recovered, look here.
---
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Robert Jacobson
Flight Operations Team member - SOHO -
Dear SlashdotI am starting a project to fly to the moon. I don't really know how to do it but, by golly--I am going to do it! I do not want to spend over $800 on this project. I have bought a book from Barnes and Nobles called Amateur Rocketry: Launching Humans into Low Earth Orbit . Total cost so far: $4.99. Please link to my web page at http://www.dansproject.com/flytothemoo n.html. Please link to my page because it will be a nice moral boost for me if I get slashdotted before I even get started.
p.s. Do you have any information where I can get a free counter for my website?
-- -
Sound Frequency != EM FrequencyA lot of people seem to be a little bit confused about frequency.
First off, sound frequency is the frequency of vibration in a medium. Examples are voice in air and sonar in water.
Electromagnetic Frequency is the frequency of the EM wave. Examples are UV (suntan), Infrared (remote control), regular light, AM, and FM.
they are totally different!
-
Re:Bothers me greatly
Try this but you won't get much while earth wether pridiction is far better then solar wether it is still pritty lame and probably always will be. Try reading "Chaos" sometime.
-
PictureCheck out http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap00 0608.html for a very cool false-color X-ray image of the sun showing "[an] active region generating the explosive events"
Also watch http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ every day for the astronomy picture of the day (almost always interesting, and sometimes root window art)
-
PictureCheck out http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap00 0608.html for a very cool false-color X-ray image of the sun showing "[an] active region generating the explosive events"
Also watch http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ every day for the astronomy picture of the day (almost always interesting, and sometimes root window art)
-
Watch it in Real-Time
The ISTP site has a nice page that links to all the instruments that will be studying this in real-time. For those who want to watch the Ionosphere, try the SuperDARN Ionospheric Radars real-time page. (Gratuitious Plug - This is my page).
-
Watch it in Real-Time
The ISTP site has a nice page that links to all the instruments that will be studying this in real-time. For those who want to watch the Ionosphere, try the SuperDARN Ionospheric Radars real-time page. (Gratuitious Plug - This is my page).
-
Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe Solar and Helliospheric Oberservatory (SOHO) has really some really nice observations of this CME, including movies made with various instruments. SOHO orbits at the L! point so that it can make constant observations of the Sun.
I'm sure glad that they were able to pull SOHO out of its problems, it sure does make some nice observations.
-
Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe Solar and Helliospheric Oberservatory (SOHO) has really some really nice observations of this CME, including movies made with various instruments. SOHO orbits at the L! point so that it can make constant observations of the Sun.
I'm sure glad that they were able to pull SOHO out of its problems, it sure does make some nice observations.
-
Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe Solar and Helliospheric Oberservatory (SOHO) has really some really nice observations of this CME, including movies made with various instruments. SOHO orbits at the L! point so that it can make constant observations of the Sun.
I'm sure glad that they were able to pull SOHO out of its problems, it sure does make some nice observations.
-
Direct Links to SOHO Observations of the CMEThe Solar and Helliospheric Oberservatory (SOHO) has really some really nice observations of this CME, including movies made with various instruments. SOHO orbits at the L! point so that it can make constant observations of the Sun.
I'm sure glad that they were able to pull SOHO out of its problems, it sure does make some nice observations.
-
Re:We ALL KnowHere are some other comparative linguistics: Seriously,
-
*spits out coffee* HUH?!!!!!!
In an article from NASA@Today.gov, astronomers are concluding that monstrous black holes weren't simply born big but instead grew on a measured diet of gas and stars controlled by their host galaxies in the early formative years of the universe...
They just figured out that huge black holes aren't born, they're grown?
Oh come on, I have a book in my library, "The Universe And Beyond", by Terence Dickinson, who describes the way in which quasars and large black holes grow in mass by consuming gas and stars. This book was first printed in 1986.
I knew this the moment I knew quasars were thought of as large black holes. It's quite simple and logical.
Over billions of years, monstrous black holes - either the ones at the centers of galaxies, or the quasars found in "emperor" (usually superdence eliptical) galaxies, are fed by the inward spiral of gas, rocks and stars. Quasars are obviously formed by a game of Galactic Darwinism in which one bigger black hole swallows another and adds it to its own mass, and they also feed on stars like crazy, drawing even big or fast moving stars nearby, into a degenerate orbit. Stars and gas.
I knew this ages ago. C'mon. This ain't news :) Although the concrete evidence may be the news here, the concept is not.
========================
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack, -
I would tell, but government will kill me.
The truth about gravity is very interesting. However, my knowledge cannot be passed on to you because my life holds greater value than the dissemination of this info (from my point of view). I apologize for my selfishness, but must point out that this what society has taught me.
Search here. -
Lots of fun with BATSEI've had lots of fun with the BATSE instrument onboard this observatory. On May 19, 1998, I was at the Nordic Optical Telescope at La Palma, Canary Islands. BATSE came up with some rough coordinates for a Gamma Ray Burst during that day. When darkness came, the BeppoSAX satelites came with more accurate coordinates, and we took a few exposures of the sky. My first thought when I saw the images was that it would be almost impossible to find anything there, there were lots and lots of stars, and all we where looking for was another tiny dot. Nevertheless, one of the other guys on the team found it, it was the 7th Gamma Ray Burst Optical Counterpart that was discovered. More about it here. I can tell you it was exciting.
I had another attempt after getting some coordinates in January this year as well, but failed to find anything.
Bye, CGRO, you've been a great instrument.
-
Re:You know you're turning into a geezer when...
Skylab was from the REAL MACHO days of NASA. They couldn't do anything wrong.
When Skylab was launched (check out this link) it lost a solar panel. The photo on that link is Skylab clearly missing a wing! What happened was during the launch vibration shook the missing solar panel until it deployed. It was ripped off the Saturn V/Skylab stack by *atmospheric drag* taking a meteorite shield and fouling up the other solar panel. The first people to live on Skylab had to clear the remaining solar panel so it could deploy, and rig a sunshade to bring temperatures in the laboratory down to bearable levels.
And, not to be completely offtopic, today's Astronomy Picture of the Day has a good page about the Compton re-entry.
-
Re:You know you're turning into a geezer when...
Skylab was from the REAL MACHO days of NASA. They couldn't do anything wrong.
When Skylab was launched (check out this link) it lost a solar panel. The photo on that link is Skylab clearly missing a wing! What happened was during the launch vibration shook the missing solar panel until it deployed. It was ripped off the Saturn V/Skylab stack by *atmospheric drag* taking a meteorite shield and fouling up the other solar panel. The first people to live on Skylab had to clear the remaining solar panel so it could deploy, and rig a sunshade to bring temperatures in the laboratory down to bearable levels.
And, not to be completely offtopic, today's Astronomy Picture of the Day has a good page about the Compton re-entry.
-
Alternate storyHere is the UPI story.
Quick, everybody,
/. NASA so they can't do the final burn like they need to. With any luck it will hit a city where either Metallica, Madonna, or the RIAA happens to be. -
Re:VIKING RESULTS: fizzing with pure O2A) there were no superoxide peaks on the chemical analyses
What chemical analyses? Viking's instruments were aimed at the detection of life, not oddball inorganic chemicals. Check the Viking 1 Lander Experiment List:
The Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer measured the volatile substances given off when surface dirt was roasted, but superoxides aren't volatile.
The biology experiments (GEX/LR/PR) were the ones that gave the weird results, but were designed to detect organic compounds (PR) or microbes (LR, GEX).
The X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (XRFS) could only detect elements, not their molecular composition.
The other instruments like RPA or NMS only worked during the landing, not on the surface.
b) as the original poster said, such chemicals are not consistent with our current understanding of Martian surface and atmospheric chemistry. They would have given up their oxygen (or reacted with other substances) millions of years ago. they are highly reactive, and Mars, with its thin atmosphere, gets more UV than the earth's surface
On the contrary, you're near the proposed solution. Yes, the super-oxides break down easily, but they are likely produced by the UV light, eventually reaching an equilibrium point. Bingo! Super-oxides in the dirt.
Reference: Viking Project Information
-- -
Re:VIKING RESULTS: fizzing with pure O2A) there were no superoxide peaks on the chemical analyses
What chemical analyses? Viking's instruments were aimed at the detection of life, not oddball inorganic chemicals. Check the Viking 1 Lander Experiment List:
The Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer measured the volatile substances given off when surface dirt was roasted, but superoxides aren't volatile.
The biology experiments (GEX/LR/PR) were the ones that gave the weird results, but were designed to detect organic compounds (PR) or microbes (LR, GEX).
The X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (XRFS) could only detect elements, not their molecular composition.
The other instruments like RPA or NMS only worked during the landing, not on the surface.
b) as the original poster said, such chemicals are not consistent with our current understanding of Martian surface and atmospheric chemistry. They would have given up their oxygen (or reacted with other substances) millions of years ago. they are highly reactive, and Mars, with its thin atmosphere, gets more UV than the earth's surface
On the contrary, you're near the proposed solution. Yes, the super-oxides break down easily, but they are likely produced by the UV light, eventually reaching an equilibrium point. Bingo! Super-oxides in the dirt.
Reference: Viking Project Information
-- -
M$ on IoEarth orbit may be too close for those scofflaws. I suggest a prime, undeveloped chunk of free real estatein orbit around the beautiful planet Jupiter! Spectacular views, no antitrust laws, and you can't beat the weather!
-
M$ on IoEarth orbit may be too close for those scofflaws. I suggest a prime, undeveloped chunk of free real estatein orbit around the beautiful planet Jupiter! Spectacular views, no antitrust laws, and you can't beat the weather!
-
Re:Now as long as they don't crash it...Oh, man (no pun intended)...
for the first time ever all three KEY positions were female : Sarah A. Gavit = the mars project manager Suzanne E. Smrekar, 37, the lead mars scientist Kari A. Lewis= the mars project's chief engineer
These women were the DS2 microprobe project manager, scientist and chief engineer, respectively. They had nothing to do management-wise with either Mars Polar Lander or Mars Climate Orbiter. DS2 was a $30M program, compared with $320M (your number, but close) for MPL/MCO.
Your other comments and sweeping generalizations (re women, IQs, etc) are repulsive.
Visit here to get some accurate information on MCO and MPL, or contact JPL Media Relations at (818) 354-5011. I'm sure Mary Hardin would love to discuss your views on the Mars program and women.
JPL's Open House is this weekend (June 3-4) as well. Why not get the data in person?
-
VIKING RESULTS: PLEASE READCrashing it is not the worst they can do. They can deliberately bury and misinterpret their own data.
I've never said this before, but please consider modding this up so it make it to 'hot links'. This thread is getting 'old', and few will see this information otherwise
I wish I'd seen this article before, because it seems that *everyone has forgotten the truth about the Viking I and II findings regarding the life on Mars experiments:
In short strokes: Most of the tests were positive as NASA fully admits (but sometimes buries) several researchers associated with the experiments have reported the horror at NASA when the results came in -- "We can't publish this! We'll look like fools." Please remember this was a billion dollar mission planned at a time (70's) when a billion dollars was a lot mpore money than it is today, andthat these experiments were widely peer-reviewed around the world, and considered solid until they yielded positive results
I wish I could provide you with links to why the individual results were disqualified, but the NASA website containing most of my old links is gone or merged. (It shouldn't take more than 10-15 of poking around to find new ones, but if I don't post this comment fast, it will die unseen.) However, here's what Jame s E. Tillman , who was
on the Viking Meteorology Science Team and was Director of the Viking Computer
Facility (at the University of Washington in Seattle) said at a national Prime
Computer Users Group meeting in Orlando FL, 1984:
"As to specific results, the consensus is that no evidence for life was
found even though the biology experiments reacted in a strongly
positive way. The reason for the reaction is that the Martian soils
contain compounds that liberate oxygen in the presence of water."
"The soils will liberate oxygen"? What is the justification for this assumption. None, except for post-facto guesswork. In fact, you'll find the specific chemistry cited to 'dismiss' the experiments is inconsitent with more moderns estimates of Martian soil composition and surface dynamics. Further each of the three positive experiments (deliberately designed to complement one another and prevent error) is dismissed for a very different reason.
Finally, I think that the 'atypical' kinetics that was used to discredit one experiment (positive results as a little water was added, but later tailing off) is *exactly* what we should have expected. Water may be a limiting factor for life on mars (or it may not) but after tens of millions of years, we should expect that microscopic life in a dry part of the surface would find water toxic in excess anounts. Hence - early rapid positive results, followed by a die off.
It is also possible that there are other limiting factors to growth, so the microbes reponded positively until they hit 'the wall' on another substance... like stored short term high energy compound (e.g. ATP in earth life) or even food (quick energy foods like sugars)
I urge you to go to NASA's websites and read for yourself. This is no great 'cover-up' the info is all there for you to consider. The 'embarrassing parts' are harder to find (broken links, disappearing archives, etc,) but they are not conscientiously buried. -
VIKING RESULTS: PLEASE READCrashing it is not the worst they can do. They can deliberately bury and misinterpret their own data.
I've never said this before, but please consider modding this up so it make it to 'hot links'. This thread is getting 'old', and few will see this information otherwise
I wish I'd seen this article before, because it seems that *everyone has forgotten the truth about the Viking I and II findings regarding the life on Mars experiments:
In short strokes: Most of the tests were positive as NASA fully admits (but sometimes buries) several researchers associated with the experiments have reported the horror at NASA when the results came in -- "We can't publish this! We'll look like fools." Please remember this was a billion dollar mission planned at a time (70's) when a billion dollars was a lot mpore money than it is today, andthat these experiments were widely peer-reviewed around the world, and considered solid until they yielded positive results
I wish I could provide you with links to why the individual results were disqualified, but the NASA website containing most of my old links is gone or merged. (It shouldn't take more than 10-15 of poking around to find new ones, but if I don't post this comment fast, it will die unseen.) However, here's what Jame s E. Tillman , who was
on the Viking Meteorology Science Team and was Director of the Viking Computer
Facility (at the University of Washington in Seattle) said at a national Prime
Computer Users Group meeting in Orlando FL, 1984:
"As to specific results, the consensus is that no evidence for life was
found even though the biology experiments reacted in a strongly
positive way. The reason for the reaction is that the Martian soils
contain compounds that liberate oxygen in the presence of water."
"The soils will liberate oxygen"? What is the justification for this assumption. None, except for post-facto guesswork. In fact, you'll find the specific chemistry cited to 'dismiss' the experiments is inconsitent with more moderns estimates of Martian soil composition and surface dynamics. Further each of the three positive experiments (deliberately designed to complement one another and prevent error) is dismissed for a very different reason.
Finally, I think that the 'atypical' kinetics that was used to discredit one experiment (positive results as a little water was added, but later tailing off) is *exactly* what we should have expected. Water may be a limiting factor for life on mars (or it may not) but after tens of millions of years, we should expect that microscopic life in a dry part of the surface would find water toxic in excess anounts. Hence - early rapid positive results, followed by a die off.
It is also possible that there are other limiting factors to growth, so the microbes reponded positively until they hit 'the wall' on another substance... like stored short term high energy compound (e.g. ATP in earth life) or even food (quick energy foods like sugars)
I urge you to go to NASA's websites and read for yourself. This is no great 'cover-up' the info is all there for you to consider. The 'embarrassing parts' are harder to find (broken links, disappearing archives, etc,) but they are not conscientiously buried. -
VIKING RESULTS: PLEASE READCrashing it is not the worst they can do. They can deliberately bury and misinterpret their own data.
I've never said this before, but please consider modding this up so it make it to 'hot links'. This thread is getting 'old', and few will see this information otherwise
I wish I'd seen this article before, because it seems that *everyone has forgotten the truth about the Viking I and II findings regarding the life on Mars experiments:
In short strokes: Most of the tests were positive as NASA fully admits (but sometimes buries) several researchers associated with the experiments have reported the horror at NASA when the results came in -- "We can't publish this! We'll look like fools." Please remember this was a billion dollar mission planned at a time (70's) when a billion dollars was a lot mpore money than it is today, andthat these experiments were widely peer-reviewed around the world, and considered solid until they yielded positive results
I wish I could provide you with links to why the individual results were disqualified, but the NASA website containing most of my old links is gone or merged. (It shouldn't take more than 10-15 of poking around to find new ones, but if I don't post this comment fast, it will die unseen.) However, here's what Jame s E. Tillman , who was
on the Viking Meteorology Science Team and was Director of the Viking Computer
Facility (at the University of Washington in Seattle) said at a national Prime
Computer Users Group meeting in Orlando FL, 1984:
"As to specific results, the consensus is that no evidence for life was
found even though the biology experiments reacted in a strongly
positive way. The reason for the reaction is that the Martian soils
contain compounds that liberate oxygen in the presence of water."
"The soils will liberate oxygen"? What is the justification for this assumption. None, except for post-facto guesswork. In fact, you'll find the specific chemistry cited to 'dismiss' the experiments is inconsitent with more moderns estimates of Martian soil composition and surface dynamics. Further each of the three positive experiments (deliberately designed to complement one another and prevent error) is dismissed for a very different reason.
Finally, I think that the 'atypical' kinetics that was used to discredit one experiment (positive results as a little water was added, but later tailing off) is *exactly* what we should have expected. Water may be a limiting factor for life on mars (or it may not) but after tens of millions of years, we should expect that microscopic life in a dry part of the surface would find water toxic in excess anounts. Hence - early rapid positive results, followed by a die off.
It is also possible that there are other limiting factors to growth, so the microbes reponded positively until they hit 'the wall' on another substance... like stored short term high energy compound (e.g. ATP in earth life) or even food (quick energy foods like sugars)
I urge you to go to NASA's websites and read for yourself. This is no great 'cover-up' the info is all there for you to consider. The 'embarrassing parts' are harder to find (broken links, disappearing archives, etc,) but they are not conscientiously buried. -
Manned Flight to Mars
Anybody interested in what NASA thinks a manned flight to Mars would be like should take a look at this (warning-BIG pdf file). Heavy reliance is placed on the use of local resources, ie. the idea put forward by Bob Zubrin in "The Case for Mars". The report is fascinating but remember it's complete vapourwear. Nobody is putting up money for this, now or in the forseeable future.
-
NASA's Breakthru Propulsion Physics experiments
NASA has a research group that focus on all aspects of physics that *could* lead to the developement of superluminal drive technology.
They recently accepted some proposals for experiments that will receive a grant from NASA. One of them, number 5, is essentially the same we are talking about in this discussion.
BTW, do take a look at the BPP site and "Warp drive When" page, if you didn't have already.
Ciao,
Rob! -
NASA's Breakthru Propulsion Physics experiments
NASA has a research group that focus on all aspects of physics that *could* lead to the developement of superluminal drive technology.
They recently accepted some proposals for experiments that will receive a grant from NASA. One of them, number 5, is essentially the same we are talking about in this discussion.
BTW, do take a look at the BPP site and "Warp drive When" page, if you didn't have already.
Ciao,
Rob! -
Re:What about GRAVITY?!?!
Time to get out the cluestick....
Whack, Whack, Whack
Where are you getting your information that Mars is larger?
Here is the data sheet at Nasa. Notice that the radius, mass and density are all smaller than earth, so in what way is Mars larger? The mass is ~1/10, the radius is ~1/2 and the density is ~3/4.
-
Re:How long before it makes Mars breathable.Actually, Nasa already has a bacterium that produces methane.
Because this special type of bacteria naturally produces methane, it may be used to start a new colony on Mars. It could also be used to produce an environment close to Earth's. Methane is a greenhouse gas, which means it can warm the surface.
Nasa let us walk on the Moon in bulky, expensive spacesuits in the 60s. Its mission for this millenium should be to make Mars habitable! Terraform Mars! -
Re: internationality
>Now, if the station is international, how can national NASA enter into any unilatera; contracts regarding ISS?
Short answer: because the station is not owned in common; each nation retains ownership of the modules it builds.
Long answer: Station operations are governed by a suite of bilateral agreements signed in 1998 among NASA, RSA (Russia), CSA (Canada), ESA (European Union), and NASDA (Japan). These agreements specify down to the tenth exactly how much usage of each module each of the partners is entitled to [for instance, the Russians have 100% usage of their modules; the Americans have 97.7% use of theirs; but Japan and Europe have smaller percentages, mainly because they can't launch their own elements]. Most of the "financial" arrangements among the partners are handled by barter, e.g. we agree to provide X module in return for Y launch vehicle or J station support service or K slots for an astronaut from our program.
In the case of this ISS multimedia deal, essentially what is happening is that NASA is getting a third party (Disney) to pony up for the provision of expensive cameras and transmission equipment (ISS support) in return for the usual temporary embargo allowing them exclusive public use of the images. This equipment will actually be available to all partners to a certain extent.
Effectively NASA is providing something for the ISS without paying for it.
---- -
Re:One drawback to disneyI think anybody over 5 foot 7 (let's see, that's about 170 cm) is automatically disqualified.
That was true in the days of Apollo, but doesn't apply to shuttle crew anymore. Mission specialists can be anywhere between 58.5 and 76 inches (149 to 193 cm). Pilots must be at least 64 inches (163 cm) tall. Find out more here .
-
PDS image format
The images can be viewed in NASA PDS format...
Viewers and tools are here:
http://www-pdsimage.jpl.nasa.gov/PDS/
By the way, when you go to that page linked in the /. story (once it's not /.'ed...), there's three main choices for the images...the one on the right is the new stuff that was released.
-- -
In related news,In related news, NASA has announced a $10,000 prize for the first discovery of evidence of alien life within the images. Distributed.net's Jeff Lawson said he plans to participate in the project, code-named "redplanet colonyfind five". $1000 of the prize money will go to the winner, and $1000 will go to the winner's team (or to his cow if he doesn't have a team). $6000 to a non-profit organization, which will be decided by vote, but is likely to be Microsoft due to a confusing but popular abbreviation of the Mars Society's name.
Distributed.net will use the remaining $2000 to pay for efforts toward its next project, a non-commercial system that will compete with geek news site Slashdot for control of a dangerous weapon that Slashdot owner Rob Malda is rumored to not only have invented and built, but have tested repeatedly on friendly webmasters. World Wide Web leaders have previously met to decide whether it is better for one group to entirely control the weapon or for there to be a balance of power between two or possibly more groups, but no conclusion was agreed upon. The United States, where both Slashdot and distributed.net are located, has not yet signed treaties banning all tests of the weapon.
--
-
Re:Cydonia?The Mars Global Surveyor was sent specially to photograph the area as JPL got tired of all the constant "Face On Mars" stuff - these MGS pictures were released some time ago.
As was suspected by most scientists, the face is just a photographic artifact, due to lighting conditions, low resolution and extensive image processing of the original Viking picture, similar in nature to the famous, but non-existant "Martian Canals".
It's a pity De Palma didn't seem to bother to read this before creating lost oppurtunity that was "Mission to Mars"...