Slashdot Mirror


Laser-Scanning U.S. Landmarks

MeanMF writes "The New York Daily News reports in this article that the National Park Service is creating detailed 3-D maps of national monuments such as the Statue of Liberty and Mount Rushmore using high-resolution laser scanners. Their goal is to create highly-accurate blueprints that can be used to reconstruct the monuments if they are damaged by a terrorist attack or other means." The same story is also available at Yahoo!.

5 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Replace them? by Encomium · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would we really want to replace them though? Seems to me this would be like rebuildign the World Trade Centers exactly like they were, and noone is suggesting that, so why would monuments be different?

    1. Re:Replace them? by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Seems to me this would be like rebuildign the World Trade Centers exactly like they were, and noone is suggesting that, so why would monuments be different?
      A couple of definitions might help:
      Monument 1. A structure, such as a building or sculpture, erected as a memorial. 2. An inscribed marker placed at a grave; a tombstone. 3. Something venerated for its enduring historic significance or association with a notable past person or thing: the architectural monuments of ancient Rome; traditions that are monuments to an earlier era. 4 a. An outstanding enduring achievement: a translation that is a monument of scholarship. b. An exceptional example: "Thousands of them wrote texts, some of them monuments of dullness" (Robert L. Heilbroner). 5. An object, such as a post or stone, fixed in the ground so as to mark a boundary or position. 6. A written document, especially a legal one.
      World Trade Center 1. An ugly office building.
      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
  2. Re:Important by Edgy+Loner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Rather than destruction, think maintainence. After all the biggest threat to these structures is age. Documenting their condition now gives a benchmark to comapre against future conditions. That will make it possible to detect slow changes.

  3. It's about the SYMBOLISM by Trillian_1138 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree, to some extent, that the idea of replacing the Statue of Liberty, Mt Rushmore, the Capitol Building, or any other well-known national monument as exactly as possible is slightly silly. The comment made about replacing a car after a crash, and not wanting to replicate all of the origonal dings and scratches is somewhat reasonable.

    But I think you're missing the point about the symbolism and memories contained in these monuments. If my car was totaled, I would be sad not only because I would have lost simply a means of transportation, but I would have lost a location where memories were made. Driving on the highway while friends taunted the 18 year-old engine ("Wow! It hit 55! You think it can get to sixty?"), packing 7 people into a 2-door hatchback, etc. I'd miss all that had happened in the car, as well as the car itself.

    Likewise, losing the Statue of Liberty to terrorists, a giant space-crane, Godzilla, or whatever won't simply mean there's new real-estate open on Liberty Island. It'll mean a national monument that watched over hundreds of thousands of immigrants, saw the USA through two World Wars, a presidential assasination, putting people on the moon, the Cold War, Vietnam, etc, etc, etc, will be gone.

    I use the Statue of Liberty as an example because I think it's America's 'best' and 'most important' monument. I don't particularly care for Mt. Rushmore (I think it's vaguely creepy), and the Capitol Building doesn't impress me much. The Statue of Liberty represents ideals that America hasn't always been great holding true to, I admit. I'll be the first to criticize the current administration and have no problem pointing out ways we've screwed up in the past. We've fucked up a lot, both internaly and with the rest of the world, and I'm sure we'll continue doing it. But I think the Statue of Liberty, or the Lincoln Memorial, or the Jefferson, or the Washington represent what is, has, and (I _really_ hope) will continue to be great about the USA.

    So. I don't think mapping these monuments down to a quarter inch is 'silly' or 'stupid' or a 'waste of time.' Having recently visited New York and seen Lady Liberty up close, and still strongly remembering my 8th grade clase trip to Washington D.C., I would be heartbroken if any of a number of our national monuments fell. I can't honestly say I would support rebuilding the Statue of Liberty exactly as she stood. It would be kind of weird, I recognize that.

    But I definatly think we should have the option. At the very least, it will allow for faithful 3D models to be replicated. Maybe someday my kids will be able to walk through a 3D model of New York City _exactly_ the way it stood on September 10th, 2001.

    So maybe these 3D models will be completely useless, either because the monuments will not be attacked or because people won't want to rebuild them exactly the same.

    But I think it would be a horrible shame not to have the option.

    -Trillian

  4. Re:We should scan Dubya by Have+Blue · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Too late.