Slashdot Mirror


Halley's Comet Imaged As Transneptunian Object

An anonymous reader writes "The European Space Observatory has imaged Halley's Comet at the farthest point (past Neptune) in which such a 10-kilometer diameter iceball has ever been observed. To image a comet as a raven-black object, without its bright dust tail (coma), is equivalent to seeing a lump of coal at the distance between the Earth's poles and to do so in the evening twilight. The last gasp seen from Halley's Comet was 1991, when a gigantic explosion happened, providing it with an expanding, extensive cloud of dust for several months. It is not known whether this event was caused by a collision with an unknown piece of rock or by internal processes (a last 'sigh' on the way out). Halley has an orbital period just over 76 years and will return in 2062."

139 comments

  1. GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO
    By Tim Copperfield
    New York, NY - GNAA (Gay Nigger Association of America) today announced acquisition of The SCO Group for $26.9 million in stock and $40 million in gay niggers.

    GNAA today announced it has signed a definitive agreement to acquire the intellectual property and technology assets of The SCO Group, a leading provider of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, based in Lindon, Utah. GNAA's acquisition of SCO technology will help GNAA sign up more members worldwide. In addition to developing new solutions, GNAA will use SCO engineering expertise and technology to enhance the GNAA member services.

    "I'd love to see these GNAA types slowly consumed by millions of swarming microbes and converted into harmless and useful biochemicals." said an anonymous slashdot poster, blinded by the GNAA success in achieving first post on a popular geek news website, slashdot.org.

    "This GNAA shit is getting out of hand. Slashdot needs troll filters. Or better yet a crap flood mod that I can exclude from my browsing. Seriously, a good troll is art, what you dumb fucks are doing is just plain stupid." said spacecowboy420.

    macewan, on linuxquestions said "Thanks for that link to the SCO quotes page. My guess is that they want to be bought out. Hrm, think they want GNAA to buy them??"

    After careful consideration and debate, GNAA board of directors agreed to purchase 6,426,600 preferred shares and 113,102 common shares (the equivalent of 150,803 ADSs) of SCO, for an aggregate consideration of approximately US$26.9 million and approximately $40 million for gay niggers that were working in Lindon, Utah offices of The SCO Group.

    If all goes well, the final decision is to be expected shortly, followed by transfer of most SCO niggers from their Lindon, UT offices to the GNAA Headquarters in New York.

    About GNAA
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
    gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

    Are you GAY ?
    Are you a NIGGER ?
    Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

    Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website

    Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

    If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
    If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here.

    About S

  2. OMG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    How tragically romantic... oh my... movie at 9. Hilarity ensured.

  3. Question by ufoman · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I still want to know how they discoverd the red spot on Jupiter back in 1699?

    --
    The following statement is false.
    The previous statement is true.
    Welcome to my world.
    1. Re:Question by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The spot was discovered by Robert Hooke in 1664. The spot is HUGE (large enough to hold to Earths) and back in the 15'th centurty it was much brighter. The red spot in the southern hemisphere has been there for about 400 years and is starting for fade.

    2. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      > large enough to hold to Earths

      Huh? What the fuck does THAT mean? Did you mean to use the word, "two"? Are you seriously THAT fucking illiterate?

    3. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      How DARE you mod me down as flamebait, you fucking pricks! Fuck with me and I'll kick you in the cunt and use you as a waterski!

    4. Re:Question by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The spot was discovered by Robert Hooke in 1664. The spot is HUGE (large enough to hold to Earths) and back in the 15'th centurty it was much brighter.

      Really? You have some idea of of how the GRS appeared 200 years before Hooke (in the mid seventeenth century) inferred the rotational period of Jupiter? The earliest definitive observations of the GRS, btw, are those of Heinrich Schwabe (1831)

    5. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he meant "Earths" as in "multiple planets". You know, because an s denotes plurality.

      Also, the use of the word "Earths" implies that not only can it hold two or three, it can hold many. It's a descriptive method of magnitude in this case.

      Illiterate assrod.

    6. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Scripted for easier reading:

      {engage sarcastic dick mode}
      REALLY?? You have some idea of how the GRS appeared 200 years before Hooke (in the mid seventeenth century) inferred the rotational period of Jupiter? The earliest definitive observations of the GRS, btw, are those of Heinrich Schwabe (1831)
      {disengage sarcastic dick mode}

    7. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      The used a clever device which makes tiny things appear to be larger. However, the quality of the telescopes they used back then were probably not as good as telescopes you can find for $80 these days.

    8. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      {engage sarcastic dick mode}
      To save bandwidth, it would be better to put the open tag at the top of the page and the close tag at the bottom of the page.
      {disengage sarcastic dick mode}

    9. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, a clever device which makes tiny things appear larger is called a microscope a clever device which makes distance things appear nearer is called a telescope

    10. Re:Question by peterpi · · Score: -1, Troll

      I bet there's a red spot on uranus.

    11. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Yeah cuz you forgot to get rid of the Klingons!

    12. Re:Question by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1
      It would be nice to read the actual notes of Hooke and Cassini-- as the Enclyclopedia Britannica is unsure of the details

      Its discovery in the 1660s is attributed to Gian Domenico Cassini or Robert Hooke.
      and the Wikipedia seems to attribute the discovery to Galileo. In fact, it seems that these sources may have been backtracking-- the Great Red Spot is rather stable (having been described in detail, in the early 19th century), Galileo, Hooke, and Cassini observed Jupiter with crude telescopes capable of resolving such detail, ergo, one of these three astronomers must have been the first to observe the GRS.
      If anyone has access to primary text material pointing to 17th century observations of the GRS, feel free to post them.
    13. Re:Question by crb11 · · Score: 1

      The uncertainty seems to be (according to more than one source I've found) that both discovered it independently at about the same time. Hooke probably first, but Cassini published and took credit. Cassini's complete papers were published as 'Oeuvres diverses' in 1730 - earlier references may be in the papers of the Academie des Sciences (for Cassini) or the Royal Society (for Hooke). Another line of enquiry may be through the work of WF Denning: I found this paper online which talks about his analysis of the spot including a historical analysis (see start of page 22 in that link), and footnote 28 to that chapter (see this document) is a paper which should probably point to the primary sources. In response to the question 'was the red spot known about in the 1660s?' every source I've checked, including the Chambers Biographical Dictionary and a history by John Gribbin, gives the attribution of the discovery to Hooke and/or Cassini - that's sufficiently many independent sources I trust that I'm not inclined to doubt them all.

    14. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.. you are mistaken..... telescopes dont affect any perception of distance (near/far) at all... so unless you believe that the tiny visage of Jupiter, which subtends less than 3/4 of 1/60th of a degree in the sky is not made to appear larger by a telescope, why dont you shut your stanky rat hole?

    15. Re:Question by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the links. Pity that the historical sources are not online, though. The Denning book does mention that the Great Red Spot came into "striking prominence" in 1878, implying that the GRS is far from static. The Great Red Spot varies from 30 Mm to 40 Mm from decade to decade.

      This Usenet post argues that the observational history of the spot is muddled. Still, without ready access to primary source material, I feel I'm flogging a dead horse.
      I do have a general science text from the 1830s that, in its description of Jupiter fails to mention the spot--highlighting the banded nature of Jupiter instead. But that sort of evidence is quite weak.

    16. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HUH? I'm not taking issue with the statement's intent (ie. earths implying multiple planets), I'm taking issue with his misue of the word "to" (in "to earths") instead of the word "two" (in "two earths").

      Too bad you posted your would-be "correction" as an anonymous coward, which prevents me from passing the "illiterate fuck" sign and let you hang it over your shoulders in shame. It's also a shame you'll probably not even bother coming back to read this follow-up. But that's fine, because I am content in the knowledge that for as long as you live, you'll live out your days as illiterate fuckwad, extraordinaire.

  4. Makes me think of 2061... by krymsin01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Reading this made me think of the comet rendevous in 2061. I doubt that I'll live to see something like that actualy accomplished.

    What we need is another space race, some incentive to get there. My guess is that the next space race will be for resources, metals, chemicals, etc.

    --
    stuff
    1. Re:Makes me think of 2061... by adeyadey · · Score: 1

      Do you think the ESA Rosetta comet chaser will be ready by then?

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    2. Re:Makes me think of 2061... by pope1 · · Score: 1
      I hope my kids, or thier kids, get to see it come back. I only vaguely remember seeing it when i was a kid, living in a suburb of DC with all the light polution made it that much more difficult.

      --
      /* * pope1 */
    3. Re:Makes me think of 2061... by Snowdrake · · Score: 1

      I actually never managed to see Halley during that time. Saw Hale-Bopp for weeks, though, and that was hella cool. In any case, I'm only 25, so seeing it in '62 doesn't seem like such a stretch.

    4. Re:Makes me think of 2061... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that the next space race will be for resources, metals, chemicals, etc.

      Sorry to break your dreams, but actually it takes so much fuel to get there that it won't be enconomical.

  5. 2062? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Depending on how things go next November, we may not be around in 2062 to see it.

    1. Re:2062? by annisette · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well said, I wonder if he lost would he actually give up the office.

      --
      I eat my grapes at room temperature, cuz the cold ones hurt my teeth
    2. Re:2062? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Well, if next November doesn't work out the way you hope, why don't you kill yourself and make your prophecy come true?

    3. Re:2062? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Yeah, 'cause when the hippies take over, and we go back to living in fricking tents without electricity or a reliable food supply, our lifespans will shrink to about 40 years or so.

      *key joni_mitchell music*

      Hey man, that's the circle of life dude, ya know what I'm sayin'? That's the only way to save mother earth.

      **fade music out**

    4. Re:2062? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Give me a fucking break you dumbass... this isn't a liberal vs conservative talk here... this is a "Bush is the worst friggin president ever" talk. Oh well, at least when the "hippies take over", Cheney's investments in Halliburton will still be paying off BIG TIME for him.

    5. Re:2062? by nagora · · Score: 1
      I wonder if he lost would he actually give up the office.

      You mean "if he lost again".

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    6. Re:2062? by annisette · · Score: 1

      Thanks for reminding me, history has and will be made by this guy and I cannot see any good. "A little revolution now and then is a good thing" Thomas Jefferson

      --
      I eat my grapes at room temperature, cuz the cold ones hurt my teeth
  6. Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is not known whether this event was caused by a collision with an unknown piece of rock or by internal processes (a last 'sigh' on the way out).

    If they were able to image it, it seems they knew where it was, by mapping where it was going. If it had collided with something, it's trajectory would have changed.

    So does this give us new insight as to how comets die? And if they die, how are they still comets? How does the solar system replenish its comet supply?

    --
    Everything seemed to be going so nice
    'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    1. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by annisette · · Score: 1

      good question perhaps we should check other intersolarsystem comets and their orbit relationship with Neptune, perhaps an astroid collision may make more. Lots of ice there.

      --
      I eat my grapes at room temperature, cuz the cold ones hurt my teeth
    2. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by anthonyrcalgary · · Score: 1

      A large expulsion of matter can change the trajectory too.

      The Oort cloud has trillions potential comets, and their orbits are occasionally disturbed enough to send a few sunward.

      Comets die when they don't have enough volatile material to throw out a cloud when they approach the sun.

      --
      When someone might yell at me, it has to be OpenBSD.
    3. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by krymsin01 · · Score: 1

      Comets are formed when solar nebulae condense. On a cosmic time scale, this is happening all the time. The effects of gravity will work its magic on their orbits, a few of them might find their way into our neighborhood. A good source for information about this is at http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comets

      --
      stuff
    4. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by tloh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even if the event was caused by internal processes, trajectory changes are still possible due to Newton's 3rd law of motion. A last 'sigh' may not generate as much momentum as a collision, but it should still have enough impulse to make determination of the exact nature of the event non-trivial.

      Should we be worried about the solar system replenishing its comets? I don't think running out of comets should concern us Earth dwellers that much. In fact, it would be best to have as few of them as possible unless we want to go the way of the dinosours. Our technology gives us an edge over our Cretaceous-dwelling friends, but the resources needed for a comet defense force seem outrageous when you consider all the problems on Earth that need money, political will, and man power. Besides, Bruce Willis & gang are better suited for...well, almost anything else. damn! that movie sucked!

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    5. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by kgbspy · · Score: 1

      So does this give us new insight as to how comets die?

      Forgot to d/l the latest Windows XP patch. Got blaster worm. Rebooted every 60 seconds and suffered from periodic DoS attacks as a result of RPC vulnerability.

      At least, that's probably what they mean by 'internal processes'.


      --
      ~
      ~
      ~
      -- INSERT --
    6. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      Our technology gives us an edge over our Cretaceous-dwelling friends, but the resources needed for a comet defense force seem outrageous when you consider all the problems on Earth that need money, political will, and man power.

      For all that extra brainpower we still can't seem to overcome stupidity.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    7. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by geeber · · Score: 1

      When I first read the post, I thought they were saying that Haley's comet exploded. But if you read the articles that were linked, they say that comet 57P/du Toit-Neujmin-Delporte exploded, not Haley's comet. So I am a little confused as to what exactly the explosion of 57P/du Toit-Neujmin-Delporte has to do with Haley's comet. Other than the date and the posters ability to provide gratuitis links and confuse the issue.

    8. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by Ixohoxi · · Score: 1

      Of course, other astrophysical forces could have been responsible. It didn't have to be a local impact event - ever heard of gravity waves? Regardless, I don't appreciate such closed speculation within science.

      --
      What's a second? An hour? A day?
      It has much more to do with
      the Earth's rotation than with cesium.
    9. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      My thoughts exactly. They talk about Haley's comet being seen at a large distance and then provide links to another comet breaking up. Other than both being comets I don't see the relevance.

    10. Re:Couldn't have been a collision, methinks by flewp · · Score: 1

      I think it's painfully clear. Haley's comet has WMD and has already shown a willingness to use them by blowing up the other comet. We must destroy it before it comes back in 2062.

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
  7. In case of slashdotting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here's the image, in case it gets /.'ed:

    . . . . . .
    . , . . . . (the 2nd one)
    . . . . . .

    1. Re:In case of slashdotting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That cleaned up pretty well!

    2. Re:In case of slashdotting... by HarryCallahan · · Score: -1

      And in case Goatse gets /.'ed / \

    3. Re:In case of slashdotting... by HarryCallahan · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      I mean
      <0>
      / \

    4. Re:In case of slashdotting... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's morse code for "So long and thanks for all the fish."

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    5. Re:In case of slashdotting... by Temporal · · Score: 1

      Funny... the first thing I thought when I saw the real image was "I should post an ASCII-art version of this with the title 'In case it gets slashdotted'." Then I read the comments, and find this at the top. I wonder how many other people thought the exact same thing.

  8. IF I EVER MEET YOU I WILL KICK YOUR ASS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    you heard.

  9. What's the fun... by supersam · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... in seeing a comet without its dust tail??

    1. Re:What's the fun... by error502 · · Score: 1

      What's the fun in seeing a comet *with* its dust tail?

    2. Re:What's the fun... by supersam · · Score: 1

      it's the same as the difference in seeing a peacock and a peahen! :-)

    3. Re:What's the fun... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's human curiosity, what allowed us to survive and evolve through ages. Give us some knowledge buried under a giant rock and we'll put huge efforts in removing that rock.
      The same applies to the comet's tail: there's a chance to learn something by making observations without the comet tail hiding things.

    4. Re:What's the fun... by iMMersE · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmmm, we didn't have "human curiosity" before we "evolved through [the] ages".

      We had "ape curiosity", or as some scientists call it, "wow-that-ground-sure-looks-better-than-these-tree s curiosity."

      --
      codegolf.com - smaller *is* better.
  10. I'll take it up with Mark Twain... by toxic666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    and see if he is any more impressed than me. Perhaps he'll be more concerned about a 1 in 909,000 chance of an impact than he was about his odds of winning a frog jumping contest.

  11. There once was a man from nantuckoff by perthstyle · · Score: -1

    blah blah blah, fuck off.

  12. Cool Fact by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Almost 1000 years ago, Halley's Comet was overhead during the Battle of Hastings in the year 1066. That long ago, the comet was said to have virtually filled the sky it was so bright. It must have been perceived as a powerful omen.

    1. Re:Cool Fact by toxic666 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wll, at least sometime around the Battle of Hastings. It appeared near Easter, 1066 and Harold was warned it was a BAD OMEN. Hastings was in September or October, 1066. The Bayeux Tapestry (yes, I've seen it) records the events and the comet appears well before the battle above Harold's minions warning him.

      So shove your Cool Fact urban legend. Not even the Middle Ages records support your ignorant claim.

    2. Re:Cool Fact by toxic666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sorry I did not flame this comment with the vehemence it deserves. I'm a blood-loyal American of bavarian descent, but respect and study other cultures. The Bayeux Tapestry records the events quite well, or at least better than any other extant records. Harold and his Anglo-Saxon advisors saw the comet around Easter, 1066, well before the battles that shaped the future of England began. Prior to that, he had been washed ashore on the Norman coast and pledged allegiance to William of Normandy in return for safe passage home. The comet was seen as an EVIL OMEN. As far as 1066 fighting went, the Anglo-Saxons first fought Norseman in what is now northeastern England and sustained serious losses. They were then defeated at Hastings after a brutal fight. The Norman cavalry won the day, and some it may have been the stirrup (pictured in the Tapestry) that won the day. And no, it is not certain that Harold was killed by an arrow in the eye. There is no definitive evidence of how Harold died. The comet -- as depicted in the Tapestry -- is not a major event. It is significant in that it appeared before the battles that consumed the entire year, culminating in the Norman Conquest. View the evidence and get a clue.

    3. Re:Cool Fact by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      What's with the venom? Having investigated further, I see that I was wrong. Halley's Comet appeared SHORTLY before the actual Battle of Hastings. But what's an urban legend about this, I'm not sure I understand? It WAS there in 1066 and it WAS huge.

      And you capitalize "BAD OMEN" as if to negate something I said? Did I say it was a good omen?

      I'm sorry that I was slightly off in my post (I freely acknowledge this), but come on, no reason to get bent out of shape.

    4. Re:Cool Fact by HoppQ · · Score: 1

      The comet was seen as an EVIL OMEN. Look, was it really that EVIL or BAD that you need to type it in all caps, twice?-)

      --
      My sig will be released in 2015 third quarter. Rating pending.
    5. Re:Cool Fact by HoppQ · · Score: 1

      Goddammit that omen really is EVIL, caused me to press submit instead of preview... Just ignore me like you usually do.

      --
      My sig will be released in 2015 third quarter. Rating pending.
  13. Astonishing by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They can pick out such a small dark object at that distance. Makes me hope that maybe one day the Star Trek scenes where Picard asks Data for range to object and then has it on screen in living colour at 50 million Kilometres may one day become a reality.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:Astonishing by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      Hey I'm still waiting for the voice activated computer and cheap fusion power.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    2. Re:Astonishing by toxic666 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and make sure you get the Jeffries Tubes in balance while boundcing an inverse tachyon beam off the target. Then Q will show up and make sure you don't cause an inverse graviton time distortion and suck us all into anti-nowhere.

      How about getting a life that is remotely possible, like writing cheap knock-offs of Windoze viruses.

    3. Re:Astonishing by dmaxwell · · Score: 1

      Well, we have three Trek shows named after a place or ship. There's Deep Space 9, Voyager, and Enterprise. I think this trend will continue with Berman and Braga's next creative masterpiece. Star Trek Deus Ex Machina. Tune in every week to see how they modify the transporter, holodeck, warp nacelles, or the deflector dish on the Deus Ex Machina to get out the latest jam. Marvel at the richly detailed Treknobabble! That chief engineer and science officer sure are smart!

    4. Re:Astonishing by mraymer · · Score: 1
      "Yeah, and make sure you get the Jeffries Tubes in balance while boundcing an inverse tachyon beam off the target. Then Q will show up and make sure you don't cause an inverse graviton time distortion and suck us all into anti-nowhere." How about getting a life that is remotely possible, like writing cheap knock-offs of Windoze viruses.

      Hello, toxic666. I thought I'd just point out the irony in demonstrating more than passing knowledge of Star Trek while you insult a post that referenced Star Trek...

      --

      "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    5. Re:Astonishing by nomel · · Score: 1

      To keep up with the good journalists who wrote this article, shown with "...or nearly 1000 million times fainter...", or at nature.com with their "...thousandth of a millimetre across..." and "...rated at a millionth of a milliamp...", you should state 50 million as some obscure number, such as 50000 thousand, or 50000 kilomiles, or 5000 10000 miles. Come on man, keep with the times.

    6. Re:Astonishing by Gigantic1 · · Score: 1

      >>>

      Here...let me clear this up a bit: this Star Trek thang'. See, in it's original form, Star Trek isn't about technology, it'a about people - people who are adventurers (rabid adventurers) who just happen to use technology to help them get where they are going. So, we see guys like Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. hammering about God's Creation looking for Alien Love, Perfect Logic and down-home Georgia cookin' - in that order. Nevertheless, they are on a quest, and whether you agree with them, or not, is not the issue: it's the struggle that's important. Ain't that always true?

      Now, the new Star Trek: these guys are fags. Far from adventurers, these guys would rather be whakin' off on the holodeck "in search of themselves" instead of doing something important - like exploring the unknown in search of...whatever. Hey...Humanity has never really liked these types and, be assured, that they would never be allowed to pilot a Starship that represents Earth (with a capital "E"). No, the types of people like Picard and Data will always be relegated to the work they do best - Shopkeepers and Book-Keppers, respectively. Meanwhile, guys like Jordi and Worf will be relegated to the realms of "Class B Science Fiction Writer" and "WWF Pro Wrestler", respetively.

      And the women on the "Next Generation Star Trek"? God help us all. What...I get to choose from a withering lump of feelings (i.e., Diana Troi) or a ravaging Bulldike with a mental condition (i.e., that security bitch - Tasha Yar)? Oh boy, makes my wanger hard!

      See, Humanity IS prety smart! So - thank God - a type like Picard will never converse with a type like Data aboard a Starship: ever.

  14. Comets, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Dear Dr. Pepper,
    I am writing to you because I am in need of legal assistance. I am currently charged with murder, burglary, terrorism, and a wide variety of charges. The story behind these accusations is somewhat longwinded, but I will attempt to describe it below:

    It all started when I was a child. I was the victim of sexual abuse by a deranged, obese, elderly babysitter. This man would babysit for me when my parents went on long vacations. As soon as they left, my normally cozy home turned into a sordid den of gay rape and bestiality. The old man, who by coincidence shared the name Ike with another famous gay man from a different troll, would act normally for a few hours after my parents departed. Soon, however, he would ask me to come sit on the sofa with him and watch television. While we watched the good old sitcoms on television, he would slowly move his wrinkled old hand onto my leg. I was too small and too scared to object, and he wouldn't have cared anyway, so I ignored him and continued to watch the TV. He massage my legs, moving in higher and higher circles with his warm, delicate touch. Eventually he would come to my buttocks, where he would slide his weathered hands into my shorts and continue his massage. At this point it would become very difficult for me to watch my shows, as he would squeeze my tender young asscheeks while breathing heavily (I think the sexual excitment presented some problems for him and his pacemaker). At some point, he would flick off the TV and pull my pants off, then my shirt. His semi-bald head glistened in the afternoon sun, and his white hair was matted to his head with his sweat. He would turn me over, and continue his massage. I didn't look back at him as we would get angry if I did anything other than staring ahead and pretending that nothing was happening.

    Zzzzzzzzip! His zipper, with its sound easily susceptible to onomatopoeia, flew open. A few seconds later, his shining manhood flew outwards. My young asshole would clench in nervous anticipation of his anal invasion with his nine hard, throbbing, inches of man-meat. I could hear his weazing breath as he coughed some saliva onto his penis, rubbing it to make up for its geriatric lack of virility. While he aroused himself for his rectal piracy, he slid a finger into my clenched anus. Initially, the pain seemed unbearable; however, as time went on, I gradually relaxed and even came to shove my small boyish behind back onto his intruding finger, aching for prostate stimulation. Soon it was time: he withdrew his finger, and prepped his hard manhood for its intestinal odyssey into my backdoor. My bay breath quickened, and thoughts of his cragged, veined old manhood filled my mind like a Kreskin's semen in BSD's dying bowels. I felt a warm touch against my cheeks, and soon the head of his mantruder was nestled inside of my gripping sphincter. I gasped as his throbbing virility inched into my rear passages. Slowly but surely all of his nine inches invaded my bum, and I was left impaled on him. As I mentioned, he was quite obese, so his flabby, pasty stomach with its green varicrose veins were pressed against my young back. At this point my eyes bugged out of my head as his cock buggered into my asshole. Soon the pumping began: there was some pain, and while it did multiply as time went on, the pleasure grew too, but at an exponential rate. Taking into account other factors, the overall satisfaction could be measured by the equation S(x) = GAMMA(x) - 20x, where GAMMA is the standard gamma function. As you can see, it would be only a short time (about 6 seconds) before I was in throes of esctacy. Alas; all good things must come to an end, and soon Ike was ready to shoot his seed deep into my poop chute. As his semen shot forth into the deep, moist unknown, I moaned "Oh yes!" with such a force that I could have burst through a brick wall and dispensed sugary beverages such as Kool-aid and Capri-Sun. His steaming stringy semen oozed its way in reverse through my dig

  15. The real reason for the telescope by KingRob · · Score: 3, Funny

    ESA's sekret plan is to point that baby at the Apollo landing site and prove once and for all, those lying Amerikanischer Schweinhund never made it to the moon!

    1. Re:The real reason for the telescope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The Chinese have already built a take away over the site so they will be wasting their time

    2. Re:The real reason for the telescope by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1, Funny

      Indeed. The American flag on the site was actually planted by the Illuminati.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    3. Re:The real reason for the telescope by brock+bitumen · · Score: 1

      forget the moon, that's like trying to see the hand in front of your face in broad daylight, er sunlight, as it were. it's the Sitchin 12th planet they're searching for, it should be within sight, or back, in a couple hundo years too

  16. I saw it in '86. by idiotnot · · Score: -1, Troll

    It'd be nice to live until I can see it again. Of course, if I get some dread disease, I'll just truck to Aricebo and take a look through the glass....

    Still doesn't cover the "getting hit by a truck" possiblity. Damn.

    1. Re:I saw it in '86. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really that stupid ?

      Arecibo is a RADIO telescope.

      There is no "glass".

      I suggest removing the "not" from the end of your username.

    2. Re:I saw it in '86. by Nerull · · Score: 2, Informative

      Considering the fact that Aricebo is a radio telescope, i don't think you'll get much of a view. (well, aside from the fact that the telescope itself is quite a view...)

    3. Re:I saw it in '86. by idiotnot · · Score: 1

      Hrmmph. Paranal It's 4am and I'm at work. It happens.

    4. Re:I saw it in '86. by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Informative
      Truck? Unless you live in Peurto Rico you will need either a boat or a plane.

      In other news: Aricebo is a radio telescope.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  17. Slightly over-hyped by panurge · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Everything else has been removed from the picture. In effect, in order to see the comet you have to know exactly where it is, and what all the other things are in the vicinity. It also took a lot of observation (hours) to get the picture.

    It's a remarkable achievement, and shows what can be done with Earth-based telescopes, but it seems to be more proof of concept than practical.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:Slightly over-hyped by MartyC · · Score: 5, Informative

      True. Halley's Comet is ideal for this kind of observation because it has one of the most accurately known orbits of all comets of this kind of orbital period.
      But you shouldn't see this as just a comet finding exercise (though it does prove the capabilities of the VLT rather well).
      By analysing the image further it will be possible to determine whether there is any activity at this distance, or a residual dust cloud. Depending on what filters they used for the observation, they might be able to compare the "colour" of the nucleus with that observed by the spacecraft back in 1986 and look for changes. This might indicate a change in surface conditions at large distances form the sun.

      --
      -- "Sponges grow in the ocean. I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be if that didn't happen."
    2. Re:Slightly over-hyped by panurge · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do understand this. I was referring to the claims for tracking of TNOs.

      --
      Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    3. Re:Slightly over-hyped by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Back in the old days science was 95% imagination, 5% data.

      Now it's 5% imagination, 5% data, and 90% computation.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    4. Re:Slightly over-hyped by Mooncaller · · Score: 1

      The comet was imaged as part of a much larger survey of transneptunian objects. Its the survey thats the science. Finding Halleys Comet provides two very important things. First, because the comet is in a predictable location and has a perdictable brightness, its imaging will provide a baseline for calibrating the survey processes. Second, the imaging creates a great news story to keep the public interested in astronomy.

  18. just to clarify by MartyC · · Score: 4, Informative

    That should be European Southern Observatory (www.eso.org).

    --
    -- "Sponges grow in the ocean. I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be if that didn't happen."
  19. If i was standing on the comet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic


    do you think i could see my house ?

  20. Explosion didn't involve Halley? by meowsqueak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hmmm, I read that as a 'gigantic explosion' involving Halley's Comet, however it seems to involve Comet 57P/du Toit-Neujmin-Delporte according to one of the linked articles. Did I miss something?

    1. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by rworne · · Score: 4, Informative

      No you didn't, the Slashdot article is wrong. Halley's was only mentioned in the last sentence, and only then to show that it is Comet 1P.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    2. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by Peyna · · Score: 1

      According to the article on astrobio.net it was Halley's: Observations have since been made of Comet Halley as it moves away from the Sun, documenting a steady decrease of activity. When it reached the distance of Saturn, the tail and coma had disappeared completely, leaving only the 5 x 5 x 15 km avocado-shaped "dirty snowball" nucleus. However, Halley was still good for a major surprise: in 1991, a gigantic explosion happened, providing it with an expanding, extensive cloud of dust for several months. It is not known whether this event was caused by a collision with an unknown piece of rock or by internal processes (a last "sigh" on the way out).

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by pangu · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot, you mean you actually read the article?!

    4. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by joshua.robinson · · Score: 1

      "Every time you share on a P2P network, God kills a kitten. Please think of the kittens" 17000 kittens killed this year and counting

      --
      Whats A sig anyway
    5. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by richie2000 · · Score: 1
      The link in the write-up is wrong, but the text is correct (or at least taken verbatim from the first linked article):
      However, Halley was still good for a major surprise: in 1991, a gigantic explosion happened, providing it with an expanding, extensive cloud of dust for several months. It is not known whether this event was caused by a collision with an unknown piece of rock or by internal processes (a last "sigh" on the way out).
      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    6. Re:Explosion didn't involve Halley? by Bombcar · · Score: 1
      "Every time you share on a P2P network, God kills a kitten. Please think of the kittens"

      17000 kittens killed this year and counting

      Don't
      worry!

  21. Incorrect link or error in the article by shanen · · Score: 4, Informative

    The link that is described as referring to an event involving Halley's Comet is talking about a different comet. I should poke around for events actually involving Halley's, but I'll just settle for saying that I don't recall hearing anything unusual as it wandered away, and I'm actually rather skeptical we could see so much of it at that time (though the latest imaging is an impressive accomplishment).

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  22. Hey... by tomkit · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    sexy.

  23. Media Implications by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1, Funny
    I've been complaining about the signal to noise ratio in the media for a while. Can you picture what this technology could do to CNN coverage, or (gasp) Slashdot?

    No wait, it requires a long exposure to the signal. No improvement for all of the "All the news in the blink of a hyperactive ferret on vivarin's eye" culture.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Media Implications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I've been working on a similar system for Slashdot, but for some strange reason I haven't been able to get any signal out of it yet... I'll keep you posted if I make any progress. --jon

  24. Is it only me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or are there others who doubt if it is really good ol' Halley? Or atleast speculate how the astronomer's community can claim with any accuracy that it is Halley.

    The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it.
    - George Bernard Shaw

    1. Re:Is it only me... by Queuetue · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing, but I'm pretty sure that scientists *know* where halley's comet is - along with every other cataloged chunk of rock or metal in the solar system - within a certain degree of accuracy.

      This article is about how "cool" it is that they managed to get a picture of it, not that they could find it.

  25. OK... by advocate_one · · Score: 1, Funny

    If they can image a piece of coal some 20,500km away... can they please try and find those black socks I lost on the beach at Scunthorpe last year???

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    1. Re:OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I have your socks. They were a tasty treat.

      mmmm

    2. Re:OK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You actually took your shoes off in Scunthorpe? You must have balls(or soles) of steel!

  26. I knew it!! a dancing mouse by snooo53 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Anyone else see the dancing mouse in the lower left hand corner? I swear, those darn magic eye pictures take me *FOREVER* to see....

    --
    The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.
    1. Re:I knew it!! a dancing mouse by CCIEwannabe · · Score: 1

      Nope. No dancing mouse. I did see a sail boat however...

  27. Knock before entering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Halley has an orbital period just over 76 years and will return in 2062."

    I plan on being out of town that year.

  28. Re:sexy by naztafari · · Score: 1

    All who are in favor of renaming the comet to "Halle Berry's Comet", say Aye!

  29. Here's an even better image... by naztafari · · Score: 1

    That one's to fuzzy. Here's a clearer image of Halle's Comment...

  30. Chong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    At least chong will get some damned respect once the hippies take over.

  31. Is it just me, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    are aren't you supposed to get off at D Ramp?

    Bitch.

  32. Wrong by pork_spies · · Score: 1

    As I distinctly remember observing Halley with the naked eye in March 1996 then the /. take on all this is simply wrong.

    1. Re:Wrong by Christianfreak · · Score: 1

      uh ... no '96 would have been the Hal-Bop comet, not Hailey's

    2. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Wrong...

      you saw Hale-bopp

      Ding dong.

    3. Re:Wrong by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      That was Hale-Bopp, not Halley's Comet.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    4. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Halley's was '86. Dumbass.

    5. Re:Wrong by pork_spies · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, I realised after I'd posted that I'd just made a fool of myself. I did see Hailey's comet though - must have been winter 86? I remember showing to the gf, who was distinctly unimpressed.

    6. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was Hale-Bopp comet

    7. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One, it's not "Hailey's" but "Halley's" (and it rhymes with valley, not daily). Two, it's "Hale-Bopp" not "Hal-Bop".

  33. I saw it last time by EnglishTim · · Score: 1

    I saw it last time it came close - I must have been 12 or 13. If I can make it to 89 without my eyesight failing too much, I hope to see it again, and by that time I hope I'll

    a) Have a decent-sized telescope
    b) Not live in London where you can't see a damn thing in the night sky

    1. Re:I saw it last time by LoadWB · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That sounds about right for me as well. I remember that Hardees was selling these mini telescope things to use to see it in the night sky. I lived in North Dakota at the time and the clear nights (I seem to recall seeing it in the winter) were perfect for viewing. Being 17 miles from the nearest city's lights also helped. It was actually quite awesome and I believe I still have the telescope in a box somewhere... though I doubt it, or for that matter Hardees, will survive to 2062.

      I wish I could accurately describe the telescope... it was a hinged box with two sides that expanded into three flaps each, and on the two flat sides (top and bottom, if you will) it had plastic lenses. A rubber band was inside the thing connected to some of the three flaps (without obscuring the view-path) to make it contract into its box-like shape. You then squeezed it together to expand it in order to focus on the comet. You could squeeze it completely flat, in which shape it looked much like an asterisk (in the old Apple ][ or TI-99/4A character set sense.)

      It worked great for viewing Halley's Comet, as well as the girl who lived across the street from me. Ahhhh, how I remember the sweet, pubescent, acne-riddled, youthful love :)

    2. Re:I saw it last time by EnglishTim · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Did you have a look at Mars last week? I did, but only through this tiny collapsable telescope a friend gave me. It was very difficult to find Mars in the first place as fully extending the telescope focuses it at somewhere past infinity so the deal was:

      a) try and find something in the distance to focus on (not easy at nighttime - luckily the sillhouette of the trees against the bright yellow London night sky sufficed)
      b) try for ages to get the damn thing pointing in the right direction
      c) Try not to look too suspicious as you're doing it - standing in the street at night looking around with a telescope pointed at a 30degree angle looks rather pervy to the casual observer...

      In the end, I got a look at Mars, it looked like this:

      .

      except it was pink.

      In other words, It was big enough to just about tell it was circular in shape, but that was about it. I wished I'd had my Dad's telescope with me, it wasn't the greatest thing on earth, but it had 60x magnification, rather than the 15x - odd that my little telescope has...

    3. Re:I saw it last time by RobertB-DC · · Score: 3, Funny

      In the end, I got a look at Mars, it looked like this:

      .

      except it was pink.


      I'm happy to report that I was able to run your image through a high-tech image-enhancement system. To further aid in visualization, the edge definition has been increased as well.

      Here is the new image:

      o

      Hope this helps!

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    4. Re:I saw it last time by EnglishTim · · Score: 1

      I can even see the canals! This computer trickery is amazing!

  34. Obligatory? by Fresnik · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new... ehm... comet overlo.. I'm sorry, I can't do this.

  35. No heavens gate comments? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No heavens gate comments? I am dissapointed....

  36. In Mr. Halley's dressing room... by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1
    Reporter: Mr. Halley, if we could just get a word. As we all know, you made your last appearance in 1991...

    Mr. Halley: Get the hell out of here! I aint appearing again until 2062, and that's that! No interviews, no nothing! Hey, it takes me 76 years to prepare for these shows, and I don't need somebody ruining my concentration...

    --

    They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
  37. Hey, Timothy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot's open for business, too! That wasn't Halley's comet that broke-up in '91 -- READ the stories you cite.

  38. It's not like imagine that lump of coal at all by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd put money on it in fact being impossible to view a lump of coal at that distance. In fact, I propose someone do a lump of coal viewing test. These people can get away with all sorts of silly analogies to make themselves seem impressive and nobody calls their bluff.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  39. Sigh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not even the editors RTFA.

  40. here's a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Instead of using kilometers and other metric measurements, why not give me measurements which MEAN SOMETHING TO ME? The only reason scientists use metric is to make themselves look smarter.

    I say give me that in units Americans will understand. If the damn thing's five miles across, just say so.

    1. Re:here's a thought... by Toutatis · · Score: 1

      Forgive them. It's just ignorance.

      They don't know that you (Anonymous Coward) are American. So they put it in the cryptic metric system.

  41. not Halley's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Halley's comet didn't explode. Read the article!

  42. 10km doesn't seem so big by at_kernel_99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    here's a stoopid question:

    How long is halley's comet going to last? If its a little 10km diameter object thats not only melting on each pass, but breaking up as well, how many times can it survive its lap of the sun?

    Inquiring Minds want to Know!

    1. Re:10km doesn't seem so big by robogun · · Score: 1

      No one knows, but here is an article which addresses this issue.

  43. Linked article does not say Halley exploded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It clearly says comet 57P in a series in which Halley is comet 1P.

    READ THE ARTICLE, EDITORS. :P :P :P

  44. shouldn't that be 2067 ? by smeenz · · Score: 1

    um.. 1991 + 76 != 2062...

    or did I miss something important somewhere?

    1. Re:shouldn't that be 2067 ? by mph · · Score: 1
      or did I miss something important somewhere?
      Yep. The last time it was near the earth and sun was 1986. 1986 + 76 == 2062. The event mentioned in 1991 was several years after it was in our neighborhood (and, by implication, it was the nature of that event that made it relatively easy to see at that distance).
    2. Re:shouldn't that be 2067 ? by smeenz · · Score: 1

      ahhhh that makes sense :)

  45. Children of Haley.... by obdulio · · Score: 1

    It was 1986, we would invite our girlfriends to "see the Haley" at the beach.

    I wonder how many children of Haley are around....

    --
    PENAROL: Seras eterno como el tiempo y floreceras en cada primavera.