Domain: tass-survey.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to tass-survey.org.
Comments · 11
-
Re:200 light years
At 200 light years from a supernova, we would be fine. It'd need to be about 30 or so to be a pain.
Source? I got your source right here: http://www.tass-survey.org/richmond/answers/snrisks.txt
-
Re:Resolution
You're missing something about the relative distances and resolution of the observing telescope.
This is the best we have at the moment:
the shadow of a lander is just visible
relevant earlier AskSlashdot -
Re:No
Perhaps you're thinking of the previously mentioned http://www.tass-survey.org/richmond/answers/lunar
_ lander.html which includes some images from the slide show at http://www.lpi.usra.edu/publications/slidesets/apo llolanding/ApolloLanding/apollolanding_index.shtml -
exactly what you asked for
These are the best photos available: http://www.tass-survey.org/richmond/answers/lunar
_ lander.html#apollo -
Re:This is pretty dumb.Yup, I agree.
For reference, here is some basic information about the different time scales.
-
Re:Actually I am wondering... (use tinfoil hat!)
We don't have the resolution to see the landers themselves, but we can see their Shadows if we try hard enough.
-Jesse -
The Amateur Sky Survey
There are some interesting photos and information on Tom Droege's TASS site. Not sure how active they are at the moment, but there are some knowledgeable people there.
-
I stand correctedApparently, I should look before I reply.
<Emily_Latella_Mode>
Nevermind.
</Emily_Latella_Mode> -
Clementine pics
It is correct that Hubbles resolution on the moon is on the order of 100's of meters. Obviously it can not resolve an American flag. However, the Clementine probe captured some imagesof what appear to be a the launch crater from a lunar module. Of course, this brings the United States Navy into the conspiracy if you choose not to believe it...
-
Live by the comet, die by the comet.
-
PostgreSQL and Large Tables on Linux
PostgreSQL on Linux handles large tables pretty well. It breaks each table into 1Gb segments to get round the 2Gb file size limit. We chose 1Gb as it was a nice round figure, which makes it easy to organise the tables when they get really big.
When they do become huge, you can then move the segments onto different filesystems to ease the load (although currently this is not a simple task). This also applies to indices.
I know of a few large databases out there using PostgreSQL, but one I have access to is the TASS project (http://www.tass-survey.org), which currently has about 28Gb of astronomical data.
The largest database I have is currently 5Gb, but that's primarily limited by disk space and not by postgresql.