Slashdot Mirror


Yale Students Capture Asteroid On Film

netringer writes: "Two Yale University students used the WIYN 0.9-meter telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory to capture a series of still images of asteroid 2002 NY40 on August 15-16, two nights before it made a close flyby of Earth. The still images were made into a cool digital movie that shows the asteroid streaking across the sky over a period of two hours. According to an AP story the students were supposed to looking at some binary stars when they decided to look a the asteroid instead."

145 comments

  1. But how? by flewp · · Score: 2, Funny

    How does one capture an asteroid on film? Seems like it would break right through it. I mean, afterall, it's hurtling down from space, so it's going really fast and it's really hot.

    --
    WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    1. Re:But how? by jx100 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I have really gentle hands

    2. Re:But how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, my arse? What a bunch of faggot moderators we have here today...

      get a life, stop wazzing off up your dogs and go outside...

    3. Re:But how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whassup? Wasted all your mod points modding up shite like the parent? Got none left to mod down the trolls?

  2. I also got some pictures! by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 5, Funny

    I also took a picture of the asteroid about to hit earth... Here it is

    --
    Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    1. Re:I also got some pictures! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am Dubya. Who's yo daddy? Mine made me president.

    2. Re:I also got some pictures! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quick there's a dead white Jew with money go get him.

      FACE

    3. Re:I also got some pictures! by Frank+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      Not only did you take a pic of the asteroid, but there seems to be undeniable proof that UFO's do exist! Good work man.

    4. Re:I also got some pictures! by cryptor3 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm surprised CNN didn't use that same Asteroid Impact image that they've used on almost every "near miss" asteroid story...
      Like here
      here
      here
      here
      here
      and even here

    5. Re:I also got some pictures! by Callamon · · Score: 2

      What I find funniest about that image is the fact that the asteroids in those articles were all less than about 2 miles in diameter. However, the one in the picture has got to be at least 800-1000 miles in diameter based on the visible curvature of the earth, and the apparent thickness of the atmosphere.. That size asteroid wouldn't wipe out a country or just make life extinct, it would rip right down to the planet's core, and maybe even create a new (small) moon.. :)

  3. That has to fake by AnimalSnf · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's not what it looked like in Armageddon.

  4. That was no asteroid!! by DoctorFrog · · Score: 4, Funny
    I played the movie several times, and there's only one conclusion. That thing was obviously accelerating and decelerating under power!

    It seemed to be keeping time to "blue Suede Shoes" too, but that's probably just a coincidence. Probably...

    1. Re:That was no asteroid!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all rigged, just like everything else at Yale. Did you know George Pataki and George Bush were friends at Yale?

    2. Re:That was no asteroid!! by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      I played the movie several times, and there's only one conclusion. That thing was obviously accelerating and decelerating under power!

      No, those gaps are there to insert commercials.

      Don't you know anything about science?

  5. Fools. FOOLS! by PeteyG · · Score: 1

    Have you people no mercy, linking directly to the movie? As morning rolls 'round, the National Optical Astronomy Observatory servers are going to get a royal beating.

    Thank goodness it's the middle of the night, else I wouldn't have been able to snag such a neat-o .mov. Thank you, insomnia!

    --
    no thanks
  6. We need more eyes on the skies by marcsiry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The state of near-earth asteroid detection is pretty pitiful. We need years of warning if we're to divert an asteroid, not days.

    Asteroid hunting should be part of the basic curriculum for astronomy programs, if it isn't already. Multiply a half dozen students by every university in the world and you've suddenly increased our detection capacity by several orders of magnitude.

    --
    Marc Siry || interactive media professional, motorcycle enthusiast ||
    1. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's too much grade inflation.

    2. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by scrod · · Score: 1

      Of course it's just as important to develop a practical means to actually deflect the asteroid away from Earth's orbit.

    3. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by IXI · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Multiply a half dozen students by every university in the world and you've suddenly increased our detection capacity by several orders of magnitude.

      Wouldn't help much if they are looking at the sky with naked eyes. I bet the bottleneck is the number of appropriate telescopes not the number of watching eyes.

      --
      He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
    4. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you a cyclops?
      Seriously, I don't need to know the exact
      date of my death.

    5. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by coryboehne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If I'm correct wouldn't it be near impossible to tell if we really were on a collision course with an asteroid? After all, we are used to seeing video like this of a passing asteroid, and due to the fact that they are passing we are able to perceive movement relatively easily, however were it bound straight for earth the object would not appear to move, only to slowly get bigger and brighter.

    6. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oh sod off, you prole!

      If you want to have a decent university education there's no alternative to Yale, Harvard, Cambridge (UK) or Oxford (UK). If you can't afford it, you're better of not having a university degree at all.

    7. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by __aakpxi9117 · · Score: 0

      There's a little something called the doppler effect. When an object is moving torwards you, it's light waves are compressed, therefore shifting the color.

      Because it this, it's quite easy (with proper equipment) to detect the direction, and speed of an object.

    8. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by p3d0 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Two things:
      1. Asteroids that will hit us are not travelling straight at us. You seem to be under the impression that the earth is motionless, or perhaps that we're sitting on some sort of record player that makes us revolve about the sun while the asteroid comes carreening straight for us. The truth is that asteroids (and everything else in the solar system) are in elliptical orbits around the sun. It's a matter of determining whether the asteroid's orbit will intersect ours. In fact, an asteroid coming straight along our line of sight would almost surely miss us.
      2. Regardless, you don't find an asteroid that's going to hit us by looking for ones coming straight at us. You look at their orbit long in advance, calculate where it will be weeks/months in the future, and see if it's within a dangerous distance of Earth.
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    9. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by shoppa · · Score: 2
      Asteroid hunting should be part of the basic curriculum for astronomy programs, if it isn't already.

      Traditional asteroid hunting is a truly obsessive-compulsive kind of thing. I mean, it's good that somebody does it, but the last thing we want to do is turn introductory astronomy courses into the sort of brainwashing exercise it would take to produce these people.

      Besides, many of the existing asteroid hunters undoubtedly don't want any more competition.

    10. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by AJWM · · Score: 2

      1.Asteroids that will hit us are not travelling straight at us. [...] In fact, an asteroid coming straight along our line of sight would almost surely miss us.

      Nope. The concern is the net vector, not the individual vectors of Earth and asteroid. For it to hit us, the net vector has to be toward us -- therefore straight along our line of sight. Same principle flying or driving -- the vehicles that are moving relative to a spot on the windshield are not the ones you have to worry about, it's the ones that look like a spot on the windshield (and getting bigger) that are the ones that'll hit. (Ditto for side windows.)

      Now, if you're talking about months or years in advance, then yes, because of the curvature of the orbits it won't be on a direct vector at that time. Just when it's too close to do much about it.

      --
      -- Alastair
    11. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by Eccles · · Score: 1

      Of course it's just as important to develop a practical means to actually deflect the asteroid away from Earth's orbit.

      Only if we actually find one. If there aren't any, you don't need the deflector. If there are, then you have all the justification you need for spending massive amounts on deflection tech. So go for as much detection budget as possible first.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    12. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by p3d0 · · Score: 1
      The concern is the net vector, not the individual vectors of Earth and asteroid. For it to hit us, the net vector has to be toward us...
      Ok, but we're not talking about flying or driving here; we're talking about orbital mechanics. For something to hit us, it must be on an intersecting orbit, and those do not follow direct line-of-sight until near the end, unless the object is moving very quickly. In either case, we have little hope to make any difference, as you say.

      However, I do think my claim that it would "almost surely miss us" was far too strong, and probably should have been more like "might not necessarily hit us". :-)

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    13. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Asteroids that will hit us are not travelling straight at us....you don't find an asteroid that's going to hit us by looking for ones coming straight at us. You look at their orbit long in advance

      Yes, but that would make Star Trek confusing.

      Ensign: "Captain: It is coming *strait* at us!"

      Captain: "In that case, relax Ensign. It does not mean anything."

    14. Re:We need more eyes on the skies by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      LOL Thanks. I needed that.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  7. Yeah right by Nept · · Score: 2, Funny

    I could do this in MS Paint and Adobe Premiere in a half an hour... what the heck. Move a white pixel across a grey background...

    --
    "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
    1. Re:Yeah right by acidnept · · Score: 1

      and make them blink...you forgot make them blink

    2. Re:Yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously it's a fake but look at all the attention their getting...
      I' think I'll try it..

  8. Hmph! by I+Love+this+Company! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Making "still images" into a digital movie. Back in my day, if we wanted to see heavens, we had to use Galileo's original telescope model from 1610! And we didn't have movies; each frame had to be hand drawn and the whole stack had to be manually flipped to create motion. Kids today!

    --

    "All art is quite useless."

    --

    "All art is quite useless." -- Oscar Wilde
    1. Re:Hmph! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And those great CAD programs, for putting a dot on the screen, and making it move in motion.

    2. Re:Hmph! by flewp · · Score: 2, Funny

      And you liked it, damnit!

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    3. Re:Hmph! by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 3, Funny

      Telescope, Schmeloscope! In my day if you wanted to see an asteriod you had look up and squint really hard. I once squinted so hard I could see the Red Spot on Jupiter and individual stars in Andromeda. But then my eyes popped.

      You kids and your "telescopes" have it easy.

  9. I could animate some gifs that look more real by dcstimm · · Score: 2, Funny

    I could animate some gifs that look more realistic than that movie:-) But I would add an explosion or something at the end to scare people:-) (and some space ships) Very cool though!

    1. Re:I could animate some gifs that look more real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i was thinking the same thing... i'm like, that's pathetic!

  10. if their professor is anything like mine by yuri82 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    i bet their professor gave them an F...

    --
    Who is this Karma guy and why is he bad ??
    1. Re:if their professor is anything like mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They go to Yale, no work neccessary to get an A. It's all your fault for not being born rich. Then you would be busy doing no work for straight As, too.

  11. Finally.. by batobin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally, astronomy for people such as myself with small attention spans. This is huge! It's just what the science needs to gain entire new audiences.....whoah! Something shiny!

  12. Me too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I took a picture of an ass-on-steroids: here

    1. Re:Me too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WINNAR!!!111

  13. The movie by Tribbles · · Score: 4, Funny

    foreach $frame (0..100) {
    $image = newImage(128, 128);
    $image.plotRandomStars();
    $image.plot(10 + $frame, 10 + $frame);
    $image.write();
    }

    1. Re:The movie by SubtleNuance · · Score: 1

      youd have random 'jumpy stars', what you want is:

      $image = newImage(128, 128);
      $image.plotRandomStars();
      foreach $frame (0..100) {
      $image.plot(10 + $frame, 10 + $frame);
      $image.write();
      }

    2. Re:The movie by Tribbles · · Score: 2

      But yours would'nt clear the screen...

      I'd already thought of this:

      sub plotRandomStars()
      {
      srand(123456);
      foreach (0..500) {
      $image.plot(rand() & 127, rand() & 127, rand() & 255);
      # Assuming grey-scale image
      }
      }

      It's kinda Perl, but won't work...

    3. Re:The movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're going to too much trouble, no need to clear the screen. Just cover the asteroid with a black pixel, and check to see if there's a star under you before you draw it, if so you don't have to black out that location.

    4. Re:The movie by driverEight · · Score: 1

      Do you know the trouble with Tribbles?
      He (she) refuses to be impressed with a simple yet elegant soluition to a problem. Would a real live time lapse movie be any better?

      --

      It's not the size of your .sig that matters, it's how you use it.

  14. More links... by countach · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is a link offering more info on NY40, and some more info here. And there is a video here.

  15. insubordination will not be tolerated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    the students were supposed to looking at some binary stars when they decided to look a the asteroid instead.
    Sounds rebellious and free-thinking if you ask me.. I think they should be interned lest they cause a revolution.

    Kids who don't do what they're told and know how to use a telescope? Why, next they'll be using the telescope to plan the trajectory of ICBMs!

    Their professors should report them under the TIPS program, especially in the event of a student holding a temporary visa, to ensure a quick, appeal-free exile.

    1. Re:insubordination will not be tolerated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds like a plan to me! and now i must wait for 2 minutes to pass so i can submit this,
      waiting.
      waiting..
      waiting...

      ah... much better!

    2. Re:insubordination will not be tolerated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True 'nuff. Learning about asteroids is just a prelude to manipulating them as a terrorist weapon.

    3. Re:insubordination will not be tolerated by hitzroth · · Score: 1

      TIPS? The Impending Police State? Lovely.

      --
      In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
      --VonNeumann
    4. Re:insubordination will not be tolerated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose you are implying that this act of insubordination is justified by some meaningful or useful results of their "research". All they really did was waste some time. Hooray for wasting time and money!!!

  16. I thought it was pretty cool by gasgesgos · · Score: 1, Interesting

    i wonder how many sattelites get smashed by these metoer showers each year...

    1. Re:I thought it was pretty cool by scrod · · Score: 1

      Probably none. The earth is very, very big, and asteroids and satellites are very, very, very small.

  17. Damn, it's Quicktime by phr2 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Is there such thing as a Quicktime viewer with source code, that runs under Linux? I have mplayer installed but it only knows about mpeg and avi. Yeah, I know there's a closed-source viewer available from Apple, but I won't run stuff without source.

    1. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, slashdot doesn't support open source, so you're shit out of luck.

    2. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime by gasgesgos · · Score: 1

      a tad bit paranoid about other companies using your computer to do god-knows-what to it? and no, i dont know of any quicktime viewers for linux. you can always watch it on someone else's computer. it's cool, but you're not missing much. that picture from "asteroids" pretty much sums it up.

    3. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime by kasperd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It plays just fine in xanim. IIRC the source for xanim is available.

      --

      Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
    4. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime by ralphj · · Score: 0

      I have mplayer installed but it only knows about mpeg and avi. Mplayer plays this little movie perfectly, and plays a hell of a lot more than just avi's and mpegs. See mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/codecs.html for more info.

    5. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime by kubla2000 · · Score: 2

      Xine plays quicktime movies now.

  18. Re:Alt movie by coryboehne · · Score: 3, Informative

    A slightly higher quality movie is available at astropage Slashdot them too!! lol.... You know someday the government is going to start calling the slashdot effect a weapon of mass denial..

  19. It is a FAKE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw that on my Atari 2600, the only thing missing was the little triangle shaped space craft blowing it up. Clearly those are screenshots from my Atari 2600.

  20. Re:Damn, it's Quicktime-Don't worry, I have .gif by coryboehne · · Score: 2

    you're welcome ;)

    ny40.gif no worries about that evil closed source software now is there? LOL..

  21. DUDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I can see Uranis, please move your asteroid. "

    You are an asteroid! Move Uranis!

  22. Even better =) by I+Love+this+Company! · · Score: 3, Funny

    CLS
    SCREEN 13
    REM ASTEROIDS ROOL~!

    FOR i% = 1 TO 320 STEP 1
    PSET (i%, 150)
    NEXT i%

    END

    --

    "All art is quite useless." -- Oscar Wilde
    1. Re:Even better =) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      screen 12

      10 pset (i,200)
      20 i=i+1
      25 IF i > 400 THEN i = 0
      30 CLS
      35 PRINT "DANGER!! DANGER!!"
      40 GOTO 10

  23. Re:DUDE you're getting a dell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or is that Dude! You're going to hell!

  24. Re:THAT'S A JOKE YOUR MORON MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you're mother is my gardener, she often likes to suck my hose
    so why don't you go fuck he in the ass and then maybe she will teach you some of her abilities at cock sucking and hopefully you'll be able to please you're dad when he get home from his job as a gay whore
    you can suck his cock using you're new skills while your mom applies the cream to his tired and streched out ass hole

  25. HA HA HA... THAT'S NOT FUNNY LOSER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and i just added you to my foes list, so expect future flames such as this in the futre fool

    1. Re:HA HA HA... THAT'S NOT FUNNY LOSER by gasgesgos · · Score: 1

      it was never intended to be funny, it's a legitimate question, i'm asking if anyone knows, because i would like to. so bug off...

    2. Re:HA HA HA... THAT'S NOT FUNNY LOSER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. Re:THAT'S A JOKE YOUR MORON MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, not that gardner, the other one, the fat 70 year old bloke who gives you candy if you clean his tool with your tongue, the one who gives candy if you'll let him instead of the nurses wipe your arse when you shit yourself. You know the one, unless your little retard brain has already forgotten. Hey, fag boy, get a life, and clean that turd out of you little faggot moustache.

    'Tard.

  27. ho ho ho, mod parent up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's one of the best lines i've heard all day

  28. here's the gif ;-) by tanveer1979 · · Score: 5, Informative

    here is gif of the same in case you dont like quicktime ;-) hurray

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
    1. Re:here's the gif ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i like the gif better than the lousy movie!

    2. Re:here's the gif ;-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why doesn't it look anything like the original? The direction is different, the shape is different, and the stars are different.

      I think this was a screen shot from Quake II

  29. Re:THAT'S A JOKE YOUR MORON MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you little shit, you think you're funny? i just talked to your dad, i know you bit his cock last night, that's ok though, just keep practicing on your transvestite mom and you'll be ok
    and i just talked to the gardener at my retard home, he says his tail pipe could use a good wash and he heard that you give rim jobs like a pro, so he's coming over to your house tonight
    now lets see, you dad's cock will be in your ass, and your cock will be in your dog's ass, so ya, i guess you'll have your mouth free to give the old guy a good scrubing, he's pretty dirty though, so make sure you get the job done right, we don't want your dad to get sick when he fucks his ass the next day

    I'm going to sleep, we'll continue this contest of wits tommorow.

  30. Re:Alt movie by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

    Why the hell is the high quality version a GIF file?

  31. That's very nice, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did they find the Blair Witch?

  32. Meta: How the f is this offtopic? by anonymous+cupboard · · Score: 1

    Most offtopic mods, I end up metamoding to "Unfair", the parent comment is on-topic because it related to how people can see the movie attached to the original article.

    1. Re:Meta: How the f is this offtopic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was probably moded offtopic because it had to do with quicktime viewers and the article had to do with asteroids.

      I would have probably rated it "Score:5, Funny" just to cause a ruckus though.

  33. My video of their web server versus Slashdot... by Scoria · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... resembles a small asteroid passing through Earth's atmosphere.

    --
    Do you like German cars?
  34. Grade Inflation My Ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ah, the sweet smell of envy...

    It's not our fault that you only have money to study at a state university with all the other slugheads who're only a one step up from the white trailerpark trash.

    1. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Vengie · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Ah, the sweet smell of envy... It's not our fault that you only have money to study at a state university with all the other slugheads who're only a one step up from the white trailerpark trash.


      Shut up, you loser.
      Yale does NOT have grade inflation (you're thinking of Harvard's president summer's concern about it, where it doesnt really exist. You take a school full of overachievers and sometimes you just have to give them A's).

      Furthermore, no actual ivy league student would be this fucking classless.

      get a life.
      --
      When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
    2. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vengie is the last person anyone wants to hear speak on behalf of the Ivy League. He's an all-around mistake and everyone knows it. He came to Slashdot to TRY and make friends, as no one in real life would ever befriend such a self-centered snob. Sorry, Vengie, we don't buy.

    3. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by the+gnat · · Score: 2

      Furthermore, no actual ivy league student would be this fucking classless.

      Actually, after a few drinks most Ivy League students are just as classless as any state schooled kid. And yes, we do have grade inflation, same as almost all prestigious colleges right now. Yale provides a superior education only to those students willing to work for it. The rest just have well-padded resumes.

    4. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Chan01 · · Score: 1

      yale is for aristocratic kids whose parents are alumni. nothing more.. berkeley is far superior to yale.

    5. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Vengie · · Score: 2

      true.
      i refine my earlier post.
      none of the ivy league students that actually post to slashdot would be this classless.

      --
      When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
    6. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Vengie · · Score: 1

      hi.
      i went to a public school in new jersey
      my parents went to state/city colleges
      my grandparents didnt go to colelge
      *piss off*

      --
      When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
    7. Re:Grade Inflation My Ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're clearly an admissions mistake. get over it.

  35. That's it? by JBv · · Score: 1

    A white dot moving between other white dots?

    I was expecting to see craters!!!!

  36. Re:THAT'S A JOKE YOUR MORON MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe you meant "contest of tits"

  37. Just a typo (Re:But how?) by IXI · · Score: 1

    How does one capture an asteroid on film?

    This is just a typo. The correct headline is: "Yale Students Capture A Steroid On Film"

    --
    He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
  38. Links to more video, still photos by north.coaster · · Score: 4, Informative

    The folks at Yale were not the only ones looking at the sky that night. SpaceWeather.com has some links to other images here.

    /Don

  39. Good lord, people by p3d0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I have never seen so many unfunny posts modded "Funny" in one place. Please mods, set yourself some standards for humour!

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  40. Is it for real??? by billmaly · · Score: 1

    I would think that over 2 hours, we would see some rotation in the stars. PERHAPS this is explained by accurate tracking by the telescope...I'm not an astronomer, so I don't know. Still, any long term shot I have seen of the sky at night shows star rotation as the earth moves.

    1. Re:Is it for real??? by LMCBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, telescopes track the sky. They have to, because astronomers like to look at really faint things, so they have to expose for a long time.

      If the telescope has an equatorial mount (like the 0.9 m WIYN telescope they used), then you don't get any field rotation while tracking. A horizontal mount (like almost all recently-built telescopes have) does give you field rotation, but the computer can simply counter-rotate the detector to correct for it.

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    2. Re:Is it for real??? by billmaly · · Score: 2

      Well then color me ignorant. Good info, thanks.

  41. Re:THAT'S A JOKE YOUR MORON MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "you're mother is my gardener"

    You are mother is my gardener?

    huh?

    Stupid ignorant futureless fuck doesn't even know his own language. Pathetic.

  42. Another shiny astronomy thing by cstrom · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://astrowww.astro.indiana.edu/personnel/strom/ saturn/

    Contains movies of Saturn's moons that I made back when I was a grad student.

    1. Re:Another shiny astronomy thing by batobin · · Score: 1

      But it's not moving. I lost interest in like 5 seconds. :)

    2. Re:Another shiny astronomy thing by cstrom · · Score: 1

      You have to scroll down to see the movies. Or just use this link: http://www.astro.indiana.edu/~durisen/saturn/sat.m pg.

    3. Re:Another shiny astronomy thing by batobin · · Score: 1

      Ooooooooohhhhh. Cool. :)

  43. i like the gif bette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I aggree, why the hell didn't they quicktime it.

  44. In response.... by p_trekkie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...to everyone who commented on how faked the movie looks.

    Yes, you could do the same with photoshop... Or better, just look at Star Wars. But most asteroids (and most everything within the solar system other than the planets) are nothing more than little dots on a black field. Contrary to popular belief, much of astronomy is not about pretty pictures.

    As for the stars not moving, I'm not familiar with the set up of the Kitt Peak telescope, but they most have some sort of sidereal rate drive motors installed. There isn't much astronomy one can do with a streak.

    1. Re:In response.... by topham · · Score: 2

      Never mind that the movies were likely put together by hand, if only to verify they were ok. They could have been corrected for rotation at the time and the frame could have been trimmed down in size.

  45. Those rowdy Yale students! by Mupp252 · · Score: 1

    "According to an AP story the students were supposed to looking at some binary stars when they decided to look a the asteroid instead."

    Isn't that always the case? Man, those star gazers are a rebelious bunch!

  46. Re:Alt movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because GIF is lossless, foo'!

  47. Satellite damage by BigFig · · Score: 1

    satellites smashed by asteriods? - probably none, as they usually don't come close enough.
    Meteoric dust (mostly stuff that is blown off comets) is much more of a problem. Even though they are usually less than 1mm in diameter, they are travelling at speeds up to 75km/second! They can and have caused damage to satellites. The most satellite operators can do when a meteoric storm is predicted (ie the Perseids and Leonids) is to turn their solar panels to be edge-on (=smaller target), close the doors over their sensors, and cross their fingers.

  48. Pretty lame by pease1 · · Score: 2
    I saw this on the CNN website and thought it was a lame shot at some publicity... I saw similar animations done by amateurs within hours of the close approach.

    Nice job for some students, but enough for national press attention? Slow news day for slashdot, I guess.

  49. Hmmm by The+Dobber · · Score: 1

    Looked like the first 5 secs of the opening sequence to Star Trek (TOS)

  50. Astronomers slacking off by Gudlyf · · Score: 2, Funny
    "According to an AP story the students were supposed to looking at some binary stars when they decided to look a the asteroid instead."

    I can see how it all transpired now...

    "No guys, I said we should use the telescope to check out pieces of ass...but I guess this is cool too."

    --
    Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
  51. I've got a plan! by Enygma42 · · Score: 0

    While the rest of you are just sitting there going doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo doo de doo de doo........

    --
    "hehe, website" - Homer Simpson
    1. Re:I've got a plan! by EEgopher · · Score: 0

      I've got a better idea: please post more often funny man. Thinking of orbits colliding makes my brain twist. Kind of like imaginary power components in electromagnetics. What is really going to matter is whether or not we could survive 10-20 years of bad weather after it hits. Like stone-trolls we would become, with eyes that bulge and skin like pearly flourescent bulb. We would name all our children Gollum. I recommend overdosing on Tavist.

      --
      hi, I like pancakes -.-- -.-- --..
  52. Re:Alt movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /. is an implement of teh terrar and needs to be rooted out wherever it is hides

  53. Duran Duran is gonna sue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rocks (rocks rocks)
    Rocks on film (film film)

  54. I work across the hall from these guys . . . by Betelgeuse · · Score: 4, Informative

    . . . and they were on a long-ass observing run and decided it would be fun to take some exposures of the asteroid. The movie on the NOAO site doesn't really do the original images justice, but our sysadmin won't let me put up a larger animation in order to see if our system can survive a slashdotting.

    --
    I couldn't tell if you were experimenting with poor-man's cryogenics or looking for the orange sherbet.
  55. Re:Alt movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you suggesting we root slashdot?

  56. Look closely. by sharkey · · Score: 2

    It's a bowling ball! Didn't anyone else spot the finger-holes?

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  57. going off target by waldeaux · · Score: 2

    ... it's considered REALLY bad form to not stick to your proposed research project on shared telescopes where you have to apply for time. I don't know how the WIYN handles proposals, but the general KPNO one from a few years back wanted (among other things to justify the scientific program) your target list, etc. While you have control over what gets observed at the time of observation (because seeing conditions change and might cause you to shift priority), switching over to something else "just because" could result in your NOT getting time the next time you want it!

    (I got extra lucky once and got an extra night on the 0.9 Coude Feed because the people scheduled next cancelled! The hardest part was convincing America West to let me change my no-change no-refund ticket that this was an insanely improbable circumstance - I kept telling them that it was easier to win the lottery. :-) When they found out I was a grad student working on my thesis, they were really REALLY nice about it.)

    1. Re:going off target by ChrisDolan · · Score: 2

      That's an exaggeration. People go off their proposal all the time. That's about the only way gamma ray bursts get captured.

      Plus, it happens quite often that:
      * The night is not of high enough quality for your project (e.g. cirrus on a photometry project)
      * Your targets set an hour before dawn or rise an hour after sunset
      * The TAC gives you time when the moon is within 10 degrees of your target (been there, done that)

      WIYN generally has a fair bit of free time. Wisconsin has implemented a "Grad Student Queue", about a night or two per year for experimental projects. Its good practice for younger students and sometimes leads to published papers.

      I'd rather win the lottery than get an extra night of Coude Feed time. Getting a free night or a half night is not as unlikely as you describe. The 2.1m telescope only is only oversubscribed by a factor of 2.23 according to the March NAOA newsletter (http://www.noao.edu/noao/noaonews.html) (meaning almost half of the applicants are granted time) which is MUCH better odds than the lottery.

    2. Re:going off target by Betelgeuse · · Score: 2

      * Your targets set an hour before dawn or rise an hour after sunset

      This was the case here. They had plenty of objects to observe for the first part of the night, but had nothing to observe for the second half. They tried desperately to find some "real science" targets, but in the end realized that "real science" could be done with a time series of an asteroid (and it made for a cool movie).

      --
      I couldn't tell if you were experimenting with poor-man's cryogenics or looking for the orange sherbet.
  58. Hmmm...reply to the original thread nextime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would have been far more beneficial if you had responded to the orginal thread instead of starting a new one.

    I was forced to read it because your post contained the words "ass" and "fuck".

  59. About the WIYN 0.9m telescope by ChrisDolan · · Score: 3, Informative

    For the curious, are are some factoids about that telescope.

    * There is NO film involved. This telescope has been purely digital for quite a while.

    * It was the KPNO 0.9m until it was sold to the WIYN (Wisconsin, Indiana, Yale and NOAO) consortium. since NOAO runs Kitt Peak, this means that the telescope used to be 100% accessible to US astronomers, and now 60% of its time is dedicated to observers at WI, IN and Yale (which is cool for them!).
    * As off the last time I checked, it boasts shared use of the biggest digital camera on the mountain: 8192 x 8192 pixels (on 8 2048x4096 chips)
    * It was built in the early 70's IIRC. It is run by a PDP-11 with Forth software.
    * For some of it's computer parts, there are no more spares anywhere. When they die, it's upgrade time.
    * It is right next to the WIYN 3.5m telescope
    * The dome roof gets frozen open or shut in the winter sometimes, despite being in southern Arizona.

    * I spent about two weeks at that telescope, about half of which was cloudy...
    * Here's the type of picture that 8192x8192 camera can take (before a lot of postprocessing): the Orion Nebula (shrunk to 1270x948) http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/thesis/trap.gif
    * It has a pretty nice stereo system, but not as nice as the one at the 3.5m telescope (Klipsch speakers!)
    * It's a fun telescope to use.

  60. well fair enuff ... by valmont · · Score: 2
    ... and frankly, i really am not looking forward to the day astronomy becomes more than just white dots on black background, i like those dots to remain just that ... dots. grmf.

  61. wow by Chan01 · · Score: 1

    wow that was the most amazing video i have seen in my life... (*cough, ahem cough, something in my throat*)

  62. Laser shooting satallites anyone?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone?
    anyone?

    -gwbush

  63. OW! MY SIDES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    damn you and your subtle wit!

  64. NASA's Pitiful efforts? by geoswan · · Score: 2
    Last June there was a closer near miss, of a smaller asteroid, that was only detected after its closest approach to Earth. This article commented on the press hysteria over the failure of

    however, some of the press coverage has been sensationalistic. Some either decry that the object was found after closest approach (rather than before) or express concern about the "blind spot" otherwise commonly known to astronomers as the daytime sky.

    The NASA page he cites says the plan is to map all the major near Earth asteroids by 2008. How is this pitiful? If extinction class rocks hit us every 10^7 or 10^8 years, how much time can we budget to defend ourselves against the next one? What if it took 10^2 years? Would that be an unreasonable amount of time to be confident we had detected most of them?

    The rock last week was about 100 meters in diameter. Tunguska is estimated to have been 60 meters in diameter. Since the mass goes up as the cube of the diameter this one would have been about five times as powerful as Tunguska. The planetary.org article I linked to says one that size strikes us every couple of millenia. Is this program a failure if we can't detect and divert the next Tunguska sized rock? The article says the Tunguska strike was as powerful as the blast from a 16 megaton H-bomb. It said it devastated 2000 square kilometres. That would be a square about 42 kilometers on a side. Ie. Bigger than Monaco, smaller than NYC.

    16 megatons? Rick Green's glossary of cold-war terms defined a "small-theatre nuclear exchange" as "Curtains for the actors after just one act, hence the prefix 'small theatre'". Sure, this could be devastating for lots of people, if it too didn't land somewhere relatively deserted, like northern Siberia. But civilization would survive, even if it landed on Hollywood.

    The planetary.org article said 25% or more of the rocks that have hit Earth may have been long period comets. Figuring out how to detect and deflect long period comets that might hit the Earth would be much more difficult. Maybe so much more difficult we shouldn't waste any resources trying?