Slashdot Mirror


Writing in Space with a Cheap Ballpoint Pen

Roland Piquepaille writes "Some days bring big surprises. Like many people, I always believed that it was impossible to write in space with ordinary pens because ink would not flow. So imagine my astonishment when I read Pedro Duque's diary from space this morning. Pedro Duque is an astronaut since 1992. Now, he's on board of the International Space Station (ISS) since October 18, 2003. And he's writing -- from space -- with a cheap ballpoint pen, like Russians apparently always did: 'So I also took one of our ballpoint pens, courtesy of the European Space Agency (just in case Russian ballpoint pens are special), and here I am, it doesn't stop working and it doesn't "spit" or anything.' Isn't it amazing? This summary contains more details and a photograph of Pedro Duque on board ISS." Note that NASA didn't go crazy developing a pen for space. Surface tension is the important factor for all pens, not gravity.

298 comments

  1. That reminds me... by jvervloet · · Score: 0, Redundant

    on this (in)famous story about NASA's space pen.

    1. Re:That reminds me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because that's one of the links in the SLashdot story, genius?

    2. Re:That reminds me... by jvervloet · · Score: 1
      Maybe because that's one of the links in the SLashdot story, genius?

      Yes, you're right. Mea culpa. I guess this last link was added after the story moved from `the mysterious future' to 2:31 pm. Sorry about it.

    3. Re:That reminds me... by vrwarp · · Score: 1

      While the US spends thousands of dollars on creating a pen that works in space, Russia decides to use a pencil....

      --
      --vrwarp
  2. Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Informative


    The ink cartridges in some pens is pressurized.

    1. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ink does not flow by gravity, but capillar power ie it sucks :-)

      A ball pen works by the ink paste adhesive power ie it sticks.

    2. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why don't they work upside down?

    3. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Sique · · Score: 1

      Sometimes it's just something called "capillar force" (a side effect of the surface tension of the liquids, which causes liquids to get sucked into fine tubes).

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the ink moves away from the roller at the top of the pen and surface tension at the critical point where ink is dragged onto the ball is lost.

    5. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capilliary!

      or is it Caterpillar force?

    6. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Sique · · Score: 1

      Sorry. In German it's "Kapillarkraft", and I just transcribed it into English ;)

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    7. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Hint: Leo is your friend ;-)

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    8. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by swordboy · · Score: 1

      Right, but the moral of the story is that they don't need to be pressurized - the movement of the ink through the ball should provide a vaccum sufficient enough to draw the ink through the pen in zero gravity. Kinda like how you can hold fluid in a straw with a finger on top.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    9. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incidentally, the original reason for inventing the ballpoint pen was that fountain pens tend to turn into a mess at lower pressures (as when you go flying in an airplane or climb up into the mountains... the cabin is pressurized at a lower level in commercial airliners... I've actually had pens make a mess doing this). Some guy got pissed off about this, and invented the rolling ball pen that we all enjoy so much today. Not to mention fountain pens are always messy, one way or another... anyway, obviously space craft are also pressurized at less than atmospheric pressure on the ground, so you have the same problem.

    10. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just use friggen pencil

    11. Re:Sometimes there is pressure, I understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd think a pressurzied pen would be a bad idea in space. Isn't the air pressure on ISS less than 1 atmosphere, and might that not cause a pressurized pen to explode (or at least spring a leak)?

  3. Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashed! by Phoenix-kun · · Score: 5, Funny

    What's next? That astronauts didn't actually drink Tang in space? All those glasses of orange drink just so I could be like them gone to waste?

    --
    Phoenix
  4. gravity doesn't matter? by lethalwp · · Score: 4, Interesting


    if gravity doesn't matter, explain me why you can't use a sheet of paper and a ballpoint pen on a wall for more than 5 minutes ?

    1. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by BogWart · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think lack of gravity matters. In your upside down pen, gravity will pull the ink away from the ball.

    2. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because gravity is still in action on the ink when the pen is horizontal, at a guess. Writing with the pen held horizontally isn't the same as writing in microgravity - in microgravity the stickiness of the ink is more than capable of pulling more ink towards the ball as it writes, whereas with the pen held horizontally in normal G it still has to pull ink "uphill" against gravity towards the top of the ball.

    3. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1
      Gravity pulling on ink NOT EQUAL to no gravity.

    4. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by angusr · · Score: 5, Informative
      (That'll teach me to check that I'm actually logged in before posting...)

      Because gravity is still in action on the ink when the pen is horizontal, at a guess. Writing with the pen held horizontally isn't the same as writing in microgravity - in microgravity the stickiness of the ink is more than capable of pulling more ink towards the ball as it writes, whereas with the pen held horizontally in normal G it still has to pull ink "uphill" against gravity towards the top of the ball.

      It'a another example of how nearly impossible it is to extrapolate what happens in space or on the Moon from our experiences on Earth - for more examples, check out Bad Astronomy on the Apollo "Hoax"

    5. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by snipingkills · · Score: 2, Funny

      Because after five minutes you feel dumb and opt for a horizontal surface?

    6. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Yarn · · Score: 1

      Possibly because the wall is a hard surface? I used to use a concrete desk (it had a microscope on it, so it had to be heavy and immobile) and I couldn't use most ballpoints on that because the area of contact was low.

      --
      -Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
    7. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There has to be some force acting on the ink to get it to move at all. With a pen held upright, gravity and surface tension are acting in concert to get ink onto the ball. Invert the pen, and gravity is now opposing surface tension. At some critical value of g, the surface tension and gravity will be exactly equal and the ink will stay where it is. With stronger g, as on Earth, gravity will win over surface tension and the ink will be pulled away from the ball. With weaker g, surface tension will be stronger than gravity and the ink will flow normally.

      Determining this critical value probably is the sort of thing likely to win you an Ig Nobel Prize

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    8. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confused.

      Pens will work fine in outer space provided there is surface tension.

      When writing on our desks, there is a gravitational force which pulls the ink down the pen.

      When writing on the walls, the back of our pens are angled towards the floor, so after several minutes there will be no ink near the ball, hence surface tension doesn't matter. This doesn't apply in space.

    9. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      (That'll teach me to check that I'm actually logged in before posting...)


      What a ballsy way to steal my comment and get moderated up for it!

    10. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can buy pens that get around this problem. The Cross Ion is a good example; in the ink cartridge (non-pressurized), above the ink, there is what appears to be a clear gel that prevents the ink from moving. As the ink in the cartridge (The ballpoint is part of the cartridge) is used up, the gel travels down the barrel with the ink.

      The pen works perfectly well upside down, I've tried. Probably doesn't cost as much as a pressurized pen either :p

    11. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to clear up something:

      In space, there is gravity. Not as much as on the surface of the earth, but there is gravity.

      Freefall != zero G

    12. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by lildogie · · Score: 1

      > In your upside down pen, gravity will pull the ink away from the ball.

      Ergo, gravity matters, which was the poster's point.

    13. Re:gravity doesn't matter? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1
      And more proof of why the ISS is really useful. You cannot do accurate experiments about Human survival in space without being in space per se.

      Humany must expand outwards into space eventually, the faster the better.

  5. One Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh!

    Now can we please go back to checking whether fingernail clippers would still work? Sheesh. The things people can keep themselves busy with.

    Have you ever had trouble writing upside down with a ballpoint anyways?

    1. Re:One Word by tiled_rainbows · · Score: 4, Funny

      Have you ever had trouble writing upside down with a ballpoint anyways?

      yes, I have. Or, as another poster said, on a vertical surface. Also, if I put a ballpoint pen upside-down in my trouser pocket, all the ink dribbles out and gives me a blue stain on my thigh.

      Generally, I don't notice this until I'm in the shower the next morning, and mistake it for a big nasty bruise, especially if I've been out drinking the night before and can't quite remember if I fell over or not.

      I'm still waiting for NASA to solve this problem.


    2. Re:One Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm still waiting for NASA to solve this problem.

      The problem of your drinking or the pen?

      If you're talking about the pen then there are many pen manufacturers that offer pressurized pens. These work upside down. I have one, it's great for construction work because there are rarely tables and I end up writing up against the wall all the time. A normal pen can't handle it but I've been using my Fisher Space Pen for more than 5 years without a problem.

  6. Movie quote by ArbiterOne · · Score: 4, Funny
    "We spent millions of dollars developing the Space Pen program. Know what the Russians did? They used a pencil."
    1. Re:Movie quote by Madcapjack · · Score: 2, Informative
      This is an urban legend (but yes, quoted in a movie)

      http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp /

    2. Re:Movie quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and indeed cited in the frickin' headline.

    3. Re:Movie quote by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, the ball point pen was developed for early pilots, who couldn't use a quill or fountain pen, because they didn't write well, or the ink leaked too often. I think Bic developed them, and got a nice prize from the government at that time.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    4. Re:Movie quote by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      As I understand it, the ball point pen was developed for early pilots, who couldn't use a quill or fountain pen, because they didn't write well, or the ink leaked too often. I think Bic developed them, and got a nice prize from the government at that time.

      Yep, it's pretty much impossible to fly over europe for 14 hours at 30,000ft in a B-17 and expect a quill pen to work. Cold as a freezer that high. The ink would freeze unless you kept the pen next to your body.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    5. Re:Movie quote by imaginate · · Score: 1

      For god's sakes, the rebuttal to that quote is *in the article links themselves* and *still* you drag it out...

      I guess the moderators don't RTFAs either.

    6. Re:Movie quote by korielgraculus · · Score: 1

      Actually Ladislo Biro in 1938, check it out at Inventors.com

  7. Inside or outside? by suso · · Score: 1

    Are we talking about a pen that would be used in the space capsule or shuttle or outside in a vacuum?

    1. Re:Inside or outside? by dapyx · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter. The pressure created by the ink is actually superficial pressure. You should keep in mind than ink is a liquid, and that: (a) a liquid is quasi-incompressible (b) a liquid takes the shape that requires the smallest energy. The smallest superficial energy is when you have the smallest surface with the exterior, so the ink will stay sticked to the pen and won't fly into space (superficial tension). Now why does it flow toward the nib and not to the other end ? Simply because the nib has a smaller section, thus a smaller superficial is required!

      --
      I'm sorry, the number you have dialed is an imaginary number. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and dial again.
    2. Re:Inside or outside? by LightJockey · · Score: 1

      Probably inside, the pen wouldn't last long without some kind of insulation on it (really hot in the sunlight, extremely cold when there isn't any sun).. all that extreme heating/cooling would probably crumble it at the slightest touch.

      --
      Mouse, Mice. Goose, Geese. Moose... Moose?
  8. Re:gravity DOES matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't write on the wall because gravity DOES exist, forcing the ink down the wrong way. In space, since there is NO gravity, the ink isn't forced down and the surface tension of the ink helps it to "flow" (i.e. the ink wants to stay together so it follows its buddies coming out the ball, creating the "flow").

  9. Yes, but it isn't over engineered by harris+s+newman · · Score: 3, Funny

    I want a pen that has a help desk in india.

    1. Re:Yes, but it isn't over engineered by macrom · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Yes, but it isn't over engineered by realdpk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's not all that unusual to say "we" as in "our country" and mean the corporations that make up the country (as they are what controls its direction).

      "We gave the world McDonalds."

    3. Re:Yes, but it isn't over engineered by realdpk · · Score: 1

      But, it is more or less unusual for me to reply to the wrong post entirely. Huh. It's like an entire page away.

      Sorry. :)

  10. Be fair by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's writing in a space station that's pressurized and kept at around 20C. The 'space pen' was designed to work in a vacuum in a temperature range of something like -100C to +200C, as experienced on the lunar surface: try doing that with a $0.50 plastic ballpoint.

    1. Re:Be fair by ShortedOut · · Score: 1

      Like they can write anything with *any* pen with those big assed gloves on.

      Being tethered to an object traveling at 50K MPH in inner earth orbit, isn't the best time to be writing your memoirs.

    2. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like it is easy to write with space suit gloves anyway...

    3. Re:Be fair by willtsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is also a danger that the pen will break. Imagine the pain of trying to clean off the walls (& Floating) in Zero G.

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    4. Re:Be fair by jpmkm · · Score: 1

      Speed is relative. As far as they are concerned, they are still and everything is moving around them.

    5. Re:Be fair by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      That's like saying try writing on a train travelling at 50km/h

    6. Re:Be fair by sydb · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that makes them feel much better as they watch the Earth spin off into space.

      "Ha! I'm still here! All those poor humans on the surface of that planet, if only they knew that I haven't moved at all!"

      --
      Yours Sincerely, Michael.
    7. Re:Be fair by watzinaneihm · · Score: 1

      Oh well then you write with a pen inside the shuttle and when you have landed on the moon write with a pencil. Its not as if a broken pencil lead is going to fly off on the moon surface and hit a lunar goat in the ass
      Anyway what sort of paper holds up from -100 to 200C ?

      --
      .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
    8. Re:Be fair by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Of course for those cases a simple pencil would have worked - which they couldn't use in the space craft because the graphite dust might float into the electrical systems. You have to be pretty paranoid to develop a pen that can still be used in your craft after (or even during) it lost atmosphere and/or insulation.

      Huston, we have a problem. But at least our pen still works.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    9. Re:Be fair by laklare · · Score: 1

      I bought a space pen back in 1993 when I worked in a grocery store. I used it to write upside down inside the walk-in freezer (where i would sometimes be for hours). It never failed me until I failed it first (I accidentally put it through the washing machine). Best pen I ever had.

    10. Re:Be fair by kinnell · · Score: 3, Funny

      Pencils don't work at -100C because the graphite freezes.

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    11. Re:Be fair by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      "Anyway what sort of paper holds up from -100 to 200C ?"

      Space paper. Duh. :-)

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    12. Re:Be fair by TCaM · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder how well paper would hold up in those conditions.

    13. Re:Be fair by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Of course for those cases a simple pencil would have worked - which they couldn't use in the space craft because the graphite dust might float into the electrical systems.

      Pencils used to use lead instead of graphite. Not good for the schoolkiddies, but it would have caused little harm for the astronauts. Since lead is a metal instead of a compressed powder, it shouldn't have the flaking problem that could cause circuit problems. I bet a government contractor could figure out how to make lead pencils again. :)

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    14. Re:Be fair by rossdee · · Score: 1


      "Being tethered to an object traveling at 50K MPH in inner earth orbit, isn't the best time to be writing your memoirs."

      Escape velocity is around 25000 MPH so if you were travelling at 50k MPH you wouldnt be in orbit.

    15. Re:Be fair by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Oh well then you write with a pen inside the shuttle and when you have landed on the moon write with a pencil. Its not as if a broken pencil lead...

      Pencils in spacecraft are a safety hazard for the very reason you state above. Not the lunar goats, but the broken lead. Graphite is conductive. Little bits of conductive material floating about in zero-G in a spacecraft full of electronic doodads is a catastrophic short circuit waiting to happen. Yeah, they shield the critical circuits, and yeah, it'd be better if every square centimeter of a spacecraft was checked for "graphite vulnerability", but the best solution is still to have a "no pencils" rule. Solves the problem nicely.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    16. Re:Be fair by Gaijin42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um the graphite is already "frozen" because it is in its solid state.

      Its not liquid or gas is it?

    17. Re:Be fair by jdray · · Score: 1

      Not quite true. If you were in orbit and your velocity had a sudden delta to 50K MPH, ignoring the effect it would have on your person to go through that change, you'd still be in orbit. And, as the poster said, it wouldn't be the best time to be writing your memoirs. I think I'd suggest screaming, as you're about to plummet into the atmosphere and burn up like a meteor.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    18. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mark parent up +3 Informative.

    19. Re:Be fair by watzinaneihm · · Score: 1

      Duh! Exactly why I said that pencils should be used on the Lunar surface and pens used inside a shuttle.

      --
      .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
    20. Re:Be fair by kinnell · · Score: 1

      I know, I just posted the comment as a joke. I can't believe someone modded it as interesting

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    21. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      try doing that with a $0.50 plastic ballpoint.

      I'd love to. Will ypu buy me the ticket?

      Seriously, I've used pens in sub-zero temps and very few work other than pressurized pens.

    22. Re:Be fair by Kaz+Riprock · · Score: 1

      Add to the fact that everything but the ink in a Fisher Space Pen is metal and will not burn in a pure-oxygen environment...unlike a plastic ball-point pen.

      --
      Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon
    23. Re:Be fair by Feztaa · · Score: 1

      Imagine the pain of trying to clean off the walls

      Why would they bother? They're astronauts, not janitors. The only time I could see them putting any effort into cleaning ink stains off something is if the ink was obscuring some important information (such as the display sceen on a control panel or something similar).

    24. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pencils never used lead.

    25. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pencils would be dead weight until you landed and probably still more troublesome to use and maintain than a pen.

    26. Re:Be fair by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      pencils would be dead weight until you landed and probably still more troublesome to use and maintain than a pen.

      Plus, is it better to bring pencils and have a rule stating "no pencils indoors", or simply not bring pencils at all? The pencilos themselves may be simpler, but pens are a simpler solution to the overall set of problems. People are funny, aren't they?

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    27. Re:Be fair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WARNING! Lack of humour alert! BLEEP! BLEEP!

      Fucking retarded american.

    28. Re:Be fair by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Pencils never used lead.

      Not in recent history, but for thousands of years it was. Here's one of a billion Google links.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  11. Why not a felt tip? by zakezuke · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    I can imagine your typical bic pen might have issues spilling out in the event you happen to have one not oriented in the right direction on takeoff.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    1. Re:Why not a felt tip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Felt tips evaporate. You don't need felt-tip ink chemicals in the space station. Remember how felt tips dry out if you don't cap them?

    2. Re:Why not a felt tip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in space, no one can hear you evaporate

    3. Re:Why not a felt tip? by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more water based then solvent based. There are a number of them on the market, which would include crayola large tip, to nice small tips in the 5mm range. I use such pens with graph paper my self

      I would think that felt tips would be as practical as a pencil in space due to the fact that the basic idea is direct leaching of the ink stored within to paper.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  12. David Bowie's new pen commercial by bcolflesh · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Here I am floating in my tin can far above the world planet Earth is blue and my trusty pen is too!"

    1. Re:David Bowie's new pen commercial by humpTdance · · Score: 1

      Ground control to Major Tom
      Take your Pilot pen; ensure the cap is on

  13. Why wouldn't capillary action work in space? by stankulp · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's not gravity that pulls the ink through the tube.

    It's the surface tension propteries of the ink, commonly known as capillary action.

    --
    We must be alert to the danger that public policy could become captive to a scientific-technological elite. - Eisenhower
    1. Re:Why wouldn't capillary action work in space? by millette · · Score: 1

      Capilarry action? I thought that was the force behind my hair loss!

    2. Re:Why wouldn't capillary action work in space? by watzinaneihm · · Score: 1

      No. Theory is all good, but practice doesnt support it. Just try writing with a pen upside down or the pen kept horizontally (stick a paper to a wall and write on it), I bet you cant go more than a page (I tried it just now, did not last more than 3 lines). So this means that gravity against capillary action, gravity wins. But probably in space, zero gravity, capillary action might be enough to pull the ink.
      BTW: do the russians use smaller diameter refills? IIRC capillary force increases with smaller diameter, in proportion to dia to the power four or something. Of course you have smaller inkflow so compensating for the area it should be atleast diameter squared.

      --
      .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
    3. Re:Why wouldn't capillary action work in space? by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Capillary action pulls it around the ball, but you need something to keep the ink up next to the ball for that to work. In orbit, there shouldn't be any problem just shaking the thing by the non-ball end and swinging the ink down to the ball every once and awhile. Try writing again, and shake it when it stops. It'll work again, even if you kept it upside down the whole time. Without gravity working against it, it might actually work without that.

      I'm betting his pen has that gel ink stuff that sticks to itself, so it pulls itself down the tube as it's sucked out though. I tried one of them upside down and it kept working fine. Still $5 for a dozen or so at Staples.

    4. Re:Why wouldn't capillary action work in space? by j3110 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not capillary action really... it is cohesion to the ball. The ball is rotated, and the ink would rather be on paper than the ball, so the ink leaves, thus creating a void which sucks in more ink.

      There are some real space pens that don't use nitrogen pressure and can be used in both freezing cold and blistering heat because the ink is actually a near solid. The ball's friction tears off the ink as it goes, and the suction (the ball is mainly used as a valve in almost all ink pens) pulls ink in without letting air into the ink well.

      There is a folk tale about ink pens and the cold war that I can't verify. It had to do with the US spending 5 million dollars or more in research to develop a pen that was cheap and would work in space while the Russians just used pencils. If anyone can find the origin of the folk tale, or actually find evidence for this story, I'ld love to read more.

      --
      Karma Clown
  14. But pencils are still cool... by thrill12 · · Score: 2, Informative

    because they have multiple purposes. Imagine an electronic wire broke within the ISS: Using a pencil one can at least use the conducing graphite to link the two parts together again. I don't see you do this with a cheap (plastic) BIC-pen :=)
    Ofcourse, one can also break a pencil in two, and voila: TWO pencils, you colleague astronaut has one too now...

    Third option, that a pen doesn't normally provide, is the fact that a pencil can be erased more easily without nasty chemicals. Easy if you want to wipe out the last log-entry in which you were a little drunk and have written down nasty things about the flight-captain.
    When you need to draw a very fine line, one can sharpen the pencil to make it so. I don't see them sharpening a pen :)
    Concluding: regardless of the truth of the "pen doesn't work in space but pencil does" story, it is still a much more versatile tool than a pen, so it "works" better....

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:But pencils are still cool... by The+Jon · · Score: 1

      conducing graphite... ...one can sharpen the pencil

      Always a good idea to have conducting graphite pencil sharpenings floating around a space craft.

      The Jon (Serial number AGCTAGGTCAATGCTTCGAT...)

      --
      umop apisdn aw pow f,uop aseald :umop aw pow 'dn aw pow
    2. Re:But pencils are still cool... by willtsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course graphite contaminant floting in the air and sooting up the entire station is of no concern to you.

      Regarding graphite conduction, I'm sure that it would make ANY part misbehave. It would be better to use the metal shell of a pen ;-)

      --
      -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
    3. Re:But pencils are still cool... by Bendebecker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "the fact that a pencil can be erased more easily without nasty chemicals"
      But it leaves all that rubber shit from the eraser floating around.:)

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    4. Re:But pencils are still cool... by libra-dragon · · Score: 2, Funny
      But it leaves all that rubber shit from the eraser floating around.:)

      The rubber shit is to insulate the electronics from the conductive graphite.

    5. Re:But pencils are still cool... by c4ffeine · · Score: 2

      Believe it or not, i found a friend of mine sharpening pens the other day. THey get pretty sharp there. Unfortunately, sharpening them does not signifigantly improve the quality of the writing, but that's a different story. My point is, you can sharpen pens

      --
      "73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
  15. Finally, a return on our investment by humpTdance · · Score: 0, Troll
    Is this why pens and hammers cost so much at NASA?

  16. Re:Amazing Technology by hatrisc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    would you trust your research to a pencil? i wouldn't. i'd have to write it in pen when i got home, so that when the pencil fades (like my physics notes from 3 years ago), i'd still have the pen copy.

    --
    I write code.
  17. I wonder.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what agent Mulder thinks of this? Scully surely thinking that this is just another NASA invention. But Mulder? He must be up to something. Could it be the [NO CARRIER]

  18. Why don't they use pencils? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you have to write under bad conditions use a graphite pencil. Works under pretty much any condition, upside down, zero g, on wet surfaces etc etc... sharpening is out of the question but you can refill them these days so...

    1. Re:Why don't they use pencils? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you've ever written a lenghty document or drawn alot, you know that the pencil graphite can smear, or not all stick to the page. This would give you small bits of graphine floating around the capsule. Of course I still love my good old pentel, I just wouldnt use it in space

  19. Some Astronauts.... by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Funny

    Are easily amused. Oooh look at me! My pen works in space!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Some Astronauts.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea but you will never know how it feels to make such a retared statment and have flocks of people talk about it and post articles and comments on slashdot.

      Think about it, the guy is in fucking SPACE. If I took a piss in space my grandkids would hear about it.

    2. Re:Some Astronauts.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.. maybe he feels very special. Something bloody well works while its his turn to be up there!

  20. Re:reading space, as it applies to newclear power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I reported this yesterday and i was (rejected)

    overall I have learned, dont waste time submitting a story to slashdot. if you are not a part of the "core" you do not get any submissions accepted.

    Funny how I saw some of the absolute best northern lights last night and this morning and the asshats that were at the wheel of shashdot yesterday felt that it was not anything any of you wanted to hear about.

    slashdot, news for slashdot, things that are lame.

  21. No gravity to work *against* surface tension... by aquarian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Surface tension is indeed the important factor, but what you're missing is this: although gravity is not needed for the pen to write, in space it's not working against you when you try to write upside down.

    1. Re:No gravity to work *against* surface tension... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Do not try to write upside down, that is impossible. Simply realize the truth, there is no upside down.

  22. NASA spent $2.95 per pan for 400 pens by cs668 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I guess in 1965-67 business and business leaders still had some integrety.

    Fisher just developed the pens to be helpfull.

    Of course having NASA use his pens was great advertising and did give them a great run in the comercial sector.

  23. Space exploration in full retreat by amightywind · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Roland Piquepaille writes "Some days bring big surprises. Like many people, I always believed that it was impossible to write in space with ordinary pens because ink would not flow. So imagine my astonishment when I read Pedro Duque's diary from space this morning...

    In the 60's we longed to use space technology to explore other worlds, and did a great job of it. Then we decided to make spaceflight routine and do great science on orbital space stations. They would be used as stepping stones to the Moon and Mars we were told. What we got is an expensive, perpetual, and feckless welfare program for the exploration of triviality. In the 30 years since Apollo we have answered such pressing questions as: How long does it take to get sick in space while spinning on a gyroscope? Can spiders spin webs in zero g? Can ballpoint pens work in space? With the exception of planetary missions, the current space program is a complete waste.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:Space exploration in full retreat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If NASA required all companies that use technologies researched in space to have a nice little NASA logo on there, you'd be painting a different picture.

      Case in point: one of the experiments on Columbia's last mission was for International Flavors and Fragrances, taking the odor of a rose in zero-g. This was a repeat of an experiment on a previous mission with some other flower, which has resulted in new perfumes.

      If that present you gave Mommy for Mother's Day was required to have a NASA logo, you'd see how it does play into your everyday lives. (Actually, given that little boys buying presents for mommy aren't as cynical as you are, the NASA perfume would probably sell better.)

    2. Re:Space exploration in full retreat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "With the exception of planetary missions, the current space program is a complete waste."

      Then do something about it:

      www.SpaceExplorationAct.org

  24. what i'd like to know by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2, Funny

    is how he got it past security. Does he have a nail file to? Someone should lock up this terrorist! Somebody call Ashcroft!

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
  25. Re:Amazing Technology by ocelotbob · · Score: 5, Informative

    Problem with a pencil is the graphite dust. Normal gravity, graphite dust isn't an issue, it gets mostly on the paper, you don't worry about that. Now, in space, that graphite dust lingers, gets into things, makes the environment not as friendly to be in as it could be. With a pen, this is much less of an issue, as the physics of writing are a lot different.

    --

    Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  26. A little low tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Don't they have a Zaurus each instead of pen & paper?

  27. seinfeld connection by millette · · Score: 1

    Didn't this remind anyone of the Seinfeld episode with the famous Fisher Pen ?

  28. old joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember and old joke that basically outlines all of the time, money and engineering that NASA used to create a pen that could write in zero gravity.

    The punch line was that the Russians used a pencil.

  29. I think this is the explanation. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative


    The reason for using pressure in pens, it seems, is that surface tension alone may not be enough to pull a long column of ink through a narrow tube. If there is a little bubble in the column of ink, the surface tension is broken, and there is no way to pull ink past the bubble.

    The problem of a bubble in the column of ink happens on land, too, not just in space. People deal with it by just throwing the pen away. Since cheap pens cost less than 15 cents, someone may develop the habit of throwing away pens without noticing what he is doing. If a bubble develops, it is usually after the pen has had considerable use, so there is little complaint.

    In situations of varying temperature and outside air pressure, unpressurized pens may develop a bubble more easily. Pressurized ink cartridges are a little more reliable, and cost the manufacturer only a little more.

    1. Re:I think this is the explanation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I dont know about the US, but in India where we dont throw away pens that often (My dad believes that you should use a good "Hero" ink pen for life, and in general writing instruments are treated with some reverence), we just open up the pen, pull out the refill and blow into it. If even that doesnt work, remove the ball and the metal part holding it, blow air at back till ink comes out the other end and put the tip back on. Works everytime (remember to wipe ink off the hands and table).

    2. Re:I think this is the explanation. by operagost · · Score: 1

      Many disposable pens sold in the U.S. are essentially sealed, so this won't work. About the only disposable I can think of that can be disassembled like this is the Bic. I might have to buy some of those just so I can try your trick if necessary!

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:I think this is the explanation. by greenhide · · Score: 1

      I used to use this trick all the time. It's been only recently (last 10 years or so) that all ink manufacturers put a little seal at the end of the tube, so you *can't* blow through it. Pretty much any kind of cheap ballpoint can be disassembled in this fashion, that is, you can pull out the refill of practically any pen.

      My guess is that the little seal is to create a mini vacuum in the tub so the pen's less likely to leak on its own. Back in the day, when I blew through pens to get them working again, I used to get ink leaking all the time when I carried the pens around in my pants pockets. Of course, I don't tend to keep a pen in my pocket anymore, so maybe they still leak just as often.

      --
      Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
    4. Re:I think this is the explanation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. The slashdot editor is obviously wrong when he proclaims "Surface tension is the important factor for all pens, not gravity."
      Surface tension is indeed important in keeping the ink-air interface near the point of the pen (because surface tension tends to minimize the area of a surface).

      However, gravity is, in fact, a very important assistant in many pens. If you try writing on a vertical surface or on the underside of a horizontal surface, you will discover this pretty soon. A bubble will not usually form, but the ink-air interface moves back to a new potential minimum that is behind the ball. This is because, in a conventional pen, the full potential for the system includes the action of gravity on the column of ink as well as the action of the surface tension on the ink-air interface.

      Writing upside-down is of course more strenuous than any writing you can do when in free fall. But it is really quite amusing for this ignorant fellow to claim that gravity is not an important factor when using a pen, when it obviously is.

    5. Re:I think this is the explanation. by bigman2003 · · Score: 4, Funny

      In the U.S., ballpoint pens cost about 7 cents each.

      Typically, I buy a bag or two of them every year or so when they have a big bin at Staples, and throw them into the desk drawer. I usually don't have too much trouble with them, but this discussion has spurred me on to figure out how much time I should spend on trying to get one of these to work.

      I figure that it actually takes about 4 seconds of billed time to buy a new pen.

      This may be a horrible 'throwaway society' viewpoint, but I don't usually spend too much time dicking with my pen before I pull another one out of the drawer. And of course, I throw the first one away, so I don't run into the same problem with it again.

      Usually though, the issue is that I lose all my pens- not that they don't work. Eventually I end up searching through the glovebox in my car, where there is always a vast collection of pens that I have acquired from different places. Obviously there is some sort of subversive pen-exchange system out there, transferring pens around the country.

      I used to own a business where I thought it would be a good idea to give out pens to my customers. Not like a fine gift or anything, but just have stacks of them so people could take them when they wanted to. So I ordered like 5,000 of them, and started handing them out right away.

      Within the first month I got 3 or 4 calls from people telling me that my pens sucked. I figured that if they bothered to call, then they must have really sucked bad. I started testing them, and yes, they really did suck. So I ended up throwing out about 4,750 pens.

      Maybe I should have sent them to India...I can just imagine all of those potential customers blowing on the pens with my company name and logo on them. That would have been fantastic exposure, especially now that a lot of Indians are moving into the area.

      "So sir, how is it that you happened to come into (my former company name)"

      "I used to blow on your pens as a child, and I always dreamed of coming here one day...and telling you that your pens sucked."

      --
      No reason to lie.
    6. Re:I think this is the explanation. by SlayerofGods · · Score: 0
      and there is no way to pull ink past the bubble.
      ::shrug::
      You could always just shake it.
      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    7. Re:I think this is the explanation. by theonetruekeebler · · Score: 2, Informative
      It's been only recently (last 10 years or so) that all ink manufacturers put a little seal at the end of the tube, so you *can't* blow through it.

      It that seal were airtight, the pen wouldn't work. If you look close you'll see that the little seal is a fibrous material that lets air pass through. It's harder to blow-pressurize, but you can still do it. I survived an English exam like that in high school. The little tuft won't let the ink paste through, so your pen won't "bomb" on you.

      BTW the Pilot EasyTouch I'm writing this with (blue, medium point) has no such seal. Just as well because the blobs of ink tend to come from the front of this pen rather than the back.

      --
      This is not my sandwich.
    8. Re:I think this is the explanation. by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pardon my ignorance, but how the hell are you posting to Slashdot with an ink pen?

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    9. Re:I think this is the explanation. by leeward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having travelled to India about 20 years ago, that kind of thing remains a strong memory. Coming from the US where we throw away all kinds of things without a second thought, I noticed that a scrap of paper with some empty space on it wasn't thrown away, but reused. And when someone lit a match for their own cigarette, cigarettes appeared from everywhere and that one match would result in maybe 20 lit cigarettes.

    10. Re:I think this is the explanation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you're still using an old-fashioned keyboard?:)

    11. Re:I think this is the explanation. by rifter · · Score: 1

      However, gravity is, in fact, a very important assistant in many pens. If you try writing on a vertical surface or on the underside of a horizontal surface, you will discover this pretty soon. A bubble will not usually form, but the ink-air interface moves back to a new potential minimum that is behind the ball. This is because, in a conventional pen, the full potential for the system includes the action of gravity on the column of ink as well as the action of the surface tension on the ink-air interface.

      Writing upside-down is of course more strenuous than any writing you can do when in free fall. But it is really quite amusing for this ignorant fellow to claim that gravity is not an important factor when using a pen, when it obviously is.

      Are you sure the phenomena you describe are not caused by gravity acting against the ink? IN other words, a ballpoint on earth will not write upside down because gravity pulls the ink away form the ball, not because gravity is no longer pulling the ink to the ball. The aforementioned astronaut seems to have proven your theory incorrect.

    12. Re:I think this is the explanation. by danila · · Score: 1

      Why throw the pen away? Just swing it around you or open it and blow in the tube. It would work. If it still doesn't work, you can remove the tip, blow again and place the tip back, but it can be a bit messy and is generally too much trouble.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  30. Re:As the old fable goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the headline:

    Note that NASA didn't go crazy developing a pen for space.

    There's even a Snopes link in there to the debunked story, if you were to actually click on it.

    I've heard of not reading the article before, but at least try to read the headline.

  31. fucking moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    read snopes once in a while, you pathetic follower

  32. BICs are cooler though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can pop out the middle bit, stick some wet paper in it and hey presto - a blowdart gun!

    Alternatively you could really piss off your fellow astronauts by putting the lid in your mouth and sucking, making a really annoying whistling noise...

    My choice of office stationary in space would be a bottle of Tippex - hours of fun painting everything white then scratching it off.

  33. Obviously not you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The amusing anecdote you "remember" is urban folklore. Read the last link in the article.

    1. Re:Obviously not you... by azzy · · Score: 1

      /.ers that read articles? Ha! just another case of urban folklore, they don't exist.

  34. Re:Morons: Try writing upside down by gnixdep · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pfft! who's the moron!

    If we have the pen upside-down, the nib won't be on the paper!

  35. One word: by chiph · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microgravity.

    What happens to all the pencil shavings and eraser crumbs?

    Chip H.

  36. Re:Amazing Technology by angusr · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The graphite dust won't linger long; even in microgravity it's going to end up somewhere due to air circulation, static charge attracting it to something, or a whole host of other mechanisms. It's most likely to end up in an astronaut's lungs or in the air filters. It's not really a problem in either location (your lungs handle worse every day thanks to internal combustion engines and everybody's dead skin) but what is more of a worry is that graphite is a conductor. While dust is unlikely to cause a problem, a whole broken point might be enough to cause a short.

    And that's not a good thing to have in an environment dependent on technology...

  37. Re:Morons: Try writing upside down by Monofilament · · Score: 1

    having zero gravity is different than having the pen's ink being pulled the opposite direction of the way it is trying to be sucked towards (through "capilary action" as has been referenced in other comments).

    and well some of those pens that don't write well upside down .. write like crap when you have them oriented correctly anyways ..

    I sooo hate cheaply made pens (not meaning you can buy a good pen at a low price)

    --


    Who makes you Sig?
  38. Re:Morons: Try writing upside down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, you are stupid. There is a thing on this planet called gravity. The writing upside down witht he effect of gravity can be greater than the surface tension of the ink pulling through the tube. Since there is no gravity in space, the surface tension still exists, thus making the pen work. Your experiment does not factor this in, thus the people with brains did not do this "simple" experiment. Take your fucking ballpoint and stab your self in the eye. Not go suck off a sailor and get herpes. Assfuck.

  39. Pencils, anyone? by markom · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Russians have used pencils for ages in their space research. It works in pretty much any condition. No ink flow...

  40. Re:Who's REALLY Smart? by SirASCII · · Score: 0

    Apparently, who ever RTF2ndA, this excludes you. Looks like someone also deleted their java debugger registrar...

  41. Re:As the old fable goes by aszaidi · · Score: 1

    > NASA spent millions of pounds and many man years developing a pen that writes in space.

    Must be one huge pen. How they ever got it in space is a wonder.

    Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't realise you were British.

    This Sig will self-destruct in 3 se....

  42. Another childhood belief has been smashed by screwthemoderators · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Apparently astornauts only ate "astronaut ice cream" on the first manned spaceflight. And US President is appointed by the Supreme Court, not by winning an election, not even of a "representative" electoral college.

    1. Re:Another childhood belief has been smashed by operagost · · Score: 1

      The horse is dead, carted off to the Kal-Kan plant, and fed to Fido. Enough of the trolling.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  43. Re:Amazing Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you'd use a chinagraph instead ..... that's non-conductive and quite tenacious. Though it probably is more temperature-sensitive than graphite.

  44. Re:fp? by Ads+are+broken · · Score: 1

    You fail it, Norwegian knobgobbler!

  45. Re:As the old fable goes by Suppafly · · Score: 1

    NASA spent millions of pounds and many man years developing a pen that writes in space. The Russians took a pencil :)

    Except that's not true.. It always fun to make fun of Americans even if you have to make up stories though I guess.

  46. ISS held in place by gravity... by f1ipf10p · · Score: 0

    I wonder does it matter which way he holds the pen?

    The whole space station is held in orbit by gravity. The pull is still there, it just seems very weak compared to the "1g" we feel down here...

    btw - Crayons should work too.

    --
    ~8^]
  47. Followed immeadiately by. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU FAIL IT!!!

  48. You missed the point entirely! by screwthemoderators · · Score: 2, Funny

    Billions of dollars have been siphoned to US technology companies, to precisely those companies in the districts of the senators and representative who voted for this "feckless welfare program." It has served the purpose it was designed for quite well. Are you some sort of Pinko Commie or what? ; )

    1. Re:You missed the point entirely! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has served the purpose it was designed for quite well.

      Quibble. Technically NASA was designed to put man in space, it evolved into a high-tech jobs program (but that doesn't invalidate your basic point). Such is the nature of government bureaucracies.

      ----

      This quibble is brought to you by "Quibbles'R'Us"

  49. Re:As the old fable goes by tgd · · Score: 1

    You have to admit that as both a government and as a society we're awfully good at doing things that are worthy of making fun of us.

    NASA spending millions to develop a space pen may not be true, but it certainly sounds like something NASA would do. Thats the key component on a humorous witty comment like the original poster made.

  50. Re:As the old fable goes by beattie · · Score: 1

    Where I come from NASA spends dollars, not pounds.

  51. it is not only the surface tension by Maimun · · Score: 1
    Surface tension is the important factor for all pens, not gravity.
    I cannot agree. My ballpoint pen (el cheapo model, one with transparent body) stops when, for instance, I have to write something in the corridor and the only thing to put the paper against is the wall. It takes several sentences in this position in order to make the ink flow uneven (I lack the word, I mean there are interruptions) and eventually it stops. I can restore normal operation then by blowing air into the hole on pen's top.

    Seriously, try it.

    1. Re:it is not only the surface tension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It takes several sentences in this position in order to make the ink flow uneven (I lack the word, I mean there are interruptions)

      intermittently, perhaps?

    2. Re:it is not only the surface tension by Ralp · · Score: 1

      "sporadic"?

    3. Re:it is not only the surface tension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think "intermittently" is the word you're looking for in the third sentence ("stopping and starting at intervals" - Webster's NW Dictionary 2nd ed.)

      Don't mean to be annoying - thought you might want to know.

  52. Re:In soviet russia... by Madcapjack · · Score: 0, Redundant
    This is an urban legend and simply untrue.

    http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp /

  53. People from NASA are dummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should use a pencil instead... its cheap and works, like russians did on the beginning.

  54. lack of news by lonb · · Score: 0

    ok, apparently there is a huge lack of news. oh lord, let there be a car accident or a functining fission reactor.

    --
    "Ain't I a stinka..." - Bugs
  55. Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    A pencil is the ultimate space pen. It writes because the graphite flakes off and sticks to paper, which will happen in a vacuum as well as at 1 bar.

    1. Re:Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by operagost · · Score: 1

      The graphite (or the entire lead) can easily flake off and land in your nose, eye, or sensitive equipment. Graphite is conductive.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the wood dust and shavings when you sharpen it (of course, wood is not conductive).

    3. Re:Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by DanDwig · · Score: 1

      Pencil wood burns, Graphite burns. Not a good idea in an oxygen rich enviroment. The all metal pen with nonflammable ink strikes me as a good idea.

    4. Re:Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, now you've got me wondering what they used instead of paper. Paper burns. This will drive me nuts all weekend.

    5. Re:Try doing that with a $0.10 pencil instead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paper burns. But the right sort of paper won't flake into bits of dust and debris that is easily ignited.

  56. Re:Who's REALLY Smart? by Suppafly · · Score: 1

    I remember when the Americans invested over a billion dollars into researching a pen that would work in space.

    Considering that is just a myth, it'd be a hard thing to remember.

  57. Re:Amazing Technology by Mrs.+Neutron · · Score: 2, Informative

    Now according to the Snopes article, the main problem was tips breaking off pencils and floating around. Graphite dust would not have been a problem, because I believe they were using lead pencils.

    (Granted, it would be an issue today if pencils are used in space, but in those days, it wasn't.)

    --

    ~~~~~

    Pet Peeve: Perscription drug advertising to the general public.

  58. Pens fade too. by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    If you want it to last, type it up!

    1. Re:Pens fade too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but, as we've seen before, no media is garunteed. there was an article a while back about cds not working after a while, floppy disks well...., anything else, you might as well pray that it doesn't get destroyed. the only true way for you to save something, is to remember it and publish it, and hope that crazy amounts of copies are bought, so that the stuff is spread throughout.

  59. But, in a way, it *is* true.. by adeyadey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "We spent millions of dollars developing the Space Pen program. Know what the Russians did? They used a pencil."

    Its almost too neat not to be true, and in a way it is! Ok, in fact it was an independant company that spent $1 million on developing a "space" pen, and not NASA themselves, but in the end the US did spend the money, whereas the Russians were happy with the low-tech solution, although of course they took advantage of the high-tech solution once the money was spent.

    The above Russian/US comparison probably holds up better today than the 60's - currently the US is spending $3 billion/year on the (white elephant) Shuttle, whereas the Russians are keeping the ISS running at under $100 million a mission.

    Below is a related extract from a piece posted on www.space.com, by Robert Zubrin - an advocate of reform in the US space program - interesting reading...

    In the recent Columbia hearings, numerous members of congress continually decried the fact that the US space program is "stuck in Low Earth Orbit." This is certainly a serious problem. If it is to be addressed adequately, however, America's political leadership needs to reexamine NASA's fundamental mode of operation.

    Over the course of its history, NASA has employed two distinct modes of operation. The first, prevailed during the period from 1961-1973, and may therefore be called the Apollo Mode. The second, prevailing since 1974, may usefully be called the Shuttle Era Mode, or Shuttle Mode, for short.

    In the Apollo Mode, business is conducted as follows. First, a destination for human spaceflight is chosen. Then a plan is developed to achieve this objective. Following this, technologies and designs are developed to implement that plan. These designs are then built, after which the mission is flown.

    The Shuttle Mode operates entirely differently. In this mode, technologies and hardware elements are developed in accord with the wishes of various technical communities. These projects are then justified by arguments that they might prove useful at some time in the future when grand flight projects are initiated.

    Contrasting these two approaches, we see that the Apollo Mode is destination driven, while the Shuttle Mode pretends to be technology driven, but is actually constituency driven. In the Apollo Mode, technology development is done for mission directed reasons. In the Shuttle Mode, projects are undertaken on behalf of various internal and external technical community pressure groups and then defended using rationales. In the Apollo Mode, the space agency's efforts are focused and directed. In the Shuttle Mode, NASA's efforts are random and entropic.

    Imagine two couples, each planning to build their own house. The first couple decides what kind of house they want, hires an architect to design it in detail, then acquires the appropriative materials to build it. That is the Apollo Mode. The second couple polls their neighbors each month for different spare house-parts they would like to sell, and buys them all, hoping to eventually accumulate enough stuff to build a house. When their relatives inquire as to why they are accumulating so much junk, they hire an architect to compose a house design that employs all the knick-knacks they have purchased. The house is never built, but an adequate excuse is generated to justify each purchase, thereby avoiding embarrassment. That is the Shuttle Mode.

    In today's dollars, NASA average budget from 1961-1973 was about $17 billion per year. This is only 10% more than NASA's current budget. To assess the comparative productivity of the Apollo Mode with the Shuttle Mode, it is therefore useful to compare NASA's accomplishments between 1961-1973 and 1990-2003, as the space agency's total expenditures over these two periods were equal.

    Between 1961 and 1973, NASA flew the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, Ranger, Surveyor, and Mariner missions, and did all the development for the Pioneer, Viking, and Voyager missions as well. In addition, t

    --
    "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    1. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Russians were not satisfied with a cheap solution (if by cheap you mean pencil). They too had concerns about the graphite fragments going everywhere. The "space pen" was not simply an issue of being able to write. Such a writing instrument also could not jeopardize other things on the space craft.

      (This public workstation won't let me log in. That's why this is posted as an AC. Contact david DOT slashdot AT endeavorcomputing.com if you have further questions.)

    2. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and guess what? The US also took advantage of the research after the money was spent, just like you claim those smart Russians did. NASA didn't spend a dime to develop that pen, as you yourself say. This is the beauty of the system we call "capitalism". It may be that hundreds of companies were working on space pens, but only Fisher managed to pull it off. The actual R&D cost could have been much, much higher. Yet because we live in a capitalist society, individuals are free to explore alternatives, only being rewarded if they're successful. Thus, research is channeled into those areas with the greatest prospects for success, commercial and otherwise; Fisher made lots of money from his invention. So the system worked. You couldn't say that about the Soviet Union at any time. It also turned out to have some important benefits, like not turning into kindling in a 100% atmosphere environment.

      Kudos to the submitter for including that link; it's an urban legend I myself believed up until now, and it's refreshing to hear the real story (not like I'd ever bother finding out the truth myself).

    3. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by adeyadey · · Score: 1

      Oh, sure, I am not defending the Soviet system - which is why, say, the X-Prize is a better model for getting C.A.T.S. than the current beurocratic NASA strategy. Let entrepreneurs do the work of making a "747" for space..

      The "space pen" may not be true, but NASA has wasted money on plenty of other stuff - for instance $20+ million on a "space toilet", when cheaper designs were available..

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    4. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      whereas the Russians were happy with the low-tech solution
      No they weren't. Read the damn Snopes article. The Russians also used the space pens.
    5. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by adeyadey · · Score: 1

      I did. They brought the space pens (I dunno if they got them for $2.95 like NASA, but I guess they got them cheap) but they didnt bother to develop them before that..

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    6. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by orac2 · · Score: 1

      In today's dollars, NASA average budget from 1961-1973 was about $17 billion per year. This is only 10% more than NASA's current budget.

      I like many of the points raised here, but this one is perhaps a little misleading. The window chosen, 1961-1973, does correspond to the Apollo Era (from Kennedy's mandate to Apollo 17's departure from the lunar surface), but it does not correspond to the funding associated with the Apollo Mode described.

      Funding rapidly increased in the early 1960's to support the R&D and infrastructure needed for Apollo, peaking in 1965 at about 4% of the federal budget. By then it looked the elements needed to compete in the space race were in place, so developing new hardware for e.g. Mars expeditions became a tough sell. Apollo 8's orbit of the moon also established that the US was likely to win, further reducing the pressure for funding. By 1974 NASA's funding had been slashed to about 1% of the federal budget.

      By including the years after funding collapsed, when the agency was coasting on already developed and purchased hardware (which, as well as spacecraft, included ground equipment and facilities, such as the Vehicle Assemby Building, today literally falling down around engineers' ears), the cost of an Apollo Mode NASA is artificially lowered, and hence you wind up with your "only 10% more than NASA's current budget" conclusion. In reality, to sustain an Apollo Mode NASA, funding has to be significantly more than 110% of NASA's current level.

      --
      "Just once, I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets." -- The Brigadier, Dr. Who
    7. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by adeyadey · · Score: 1

      Well, the choice of dates in not arbitrary - it starts with "We will go to the moon", and ends with "bye bye moon". The fact is that NASA did a lot of exploration and development in that period - not just Apollo, but the Mariners, etc - amazing technological steps in a short time. With that later reduced funding they were designing pioneer & voyager - also great achievements. Even if the funding was more evenly spread 90-2003, the fact remains they seem to have achieved less, especially in terms of manned exploration. $3 billion this year on the Shuttle, and no launches..

      --
      "You lied to me! There is a Swansea!"
    8. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by babbage · · Score: 1

      That Zubrin essay is fantastic, thanks for posting it. Do you have the original URL for it?

      For more material like this, it's worth reading his book The Case for Mars, which pretty much covers (a slightly earlier version of) the same turf, but at greater length & so in greater detail. He makes a very strong case for why the current shuttles & stations space program is such a waste of resources, and how easy it could be -- cheap, safe, and reliable -- to set up a long term, long duration Martian exploration program.

      Where he describes the Apollo program as an impressive but hollow "footsteps & photographs" publicity stunt, the Martian plan as laid out would send advance supply ships to establish a beachhead, then once things are up & running with that mission, send along a manned version of the same ship. That crew would be able to spend months on the martian surface, and additionally would be setting up the foundation for the next mission, and that next mission would bring supplies for the one after it, and so on in this fashion. Eventually there could be a chain of bases on the Martian surface, each autonomously harvesting basic supplies (oxygen, water, raw materials for construction, etc) so that ramping up from these medium duration excusions to more permanent settlement should be feasible on the order of decades.

      Finish reading this book, and then look at all the wasted effort going into the current space plan, and it's baffling why we aren't being more ambitious. Even if we're not thinking along the lines of Zubrin's grand plan for martian exploration & settlement, we could at least be thinking a bit more grandly than our own backyard. On some level, I've been hoping that some Chinese engineers have been reading Zubrin's books and writings, so that their space program can do this if nobody else will. National pride be damned, someone ought to be doing this, and if it's China instead of the United States, that's fine by me -- we squandered our lead, and deserve to be shown up now.

    9. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Actually, the problem with a pencil is that you really don't want little flammable bits of wood shavings and graphite floating around your closed environment, if you can at all avoid it.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    10. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Ozymandias1350 · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't. Everyone loves the story of the space pen vs. the pencil, and how the Russians were perfectly happy with their pencils... when that's simply not true. The Russians were very *unhappy* with pencils. See, what happens as you write with a pencil? The point breaks off. Now you have a chunk of conductive material (graphite) floating around in free fall with lots of electrical switches. Not to mention interesting airways known as "nostrils". And, of course, when the tip breaks off you have to create a new tip by sharpening the pencil - creating graphite dust and sawdust or wood shavings that are impossible to contain. As for Zubrin, he's write but he's also wrong; he's been stuck on the "back to expendable hardware" kick for years. The problem is not the Shuttle paradigm, the problem is lack of will. Carried to its logical conclusion, the shuttle paradigm *is* better because it allows you to reuse hardware, gives greater flexibility, and allows you to conduct missions without spending years of effort designing and testing systems you'll never use again. It simply requires a greater outlay of capital in the initial stages. Besides, suppose we do go back to expendable models. OK, we get to Mars... then what? Go back to the government, replaced every four years and always on the lookout for more bread and circuses to say "OK, there's that multi-billion dollar project completed - let's do another one!" Yeah, that'll fly.

    11. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on people, lets be serious. Fisher spent 1 million dollars "perfecting the ballpoint pen". This really had nothing to do with building a space pen. He simply realized that adding a pressurized cartridge to his "perfect ballpoint" would make it work well in space.

      I just spent 200,000 dollars to paint my house (granted the house was most of that cost).

    12. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by orac2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the choice of dates in not arbitrary

      I didn't say they were arbitrary, just inappropriate to answering the question of "How much does Apollo Mode cost?"

      Also, I agree it is clear that NASA today is not getting the biggest bang per buck possible -- but this is largely because of the dramatically lower year on year funding, something masked by the 1961-1973 window. This reduced funding meant (the shuttle is an excellent case in point) that high development cost but low operating cost designs had to be abandoned in favor of lower development cost but higher operating cost designs in order to get anything built at all.

      The collapse in funding guaranteed inefficiency and failure, in both the hardware and culture of NASA, so it's a little disengenious to ask why NASA can't do Apollo Mode stuff even though its funding today is comparable to the average over the entire 1961-1973 period.

      It's like filling a car's tank up at the start of a long journey and then only dribbling in a small amount of fuel every 50 miles or so. Even though the overall average fillup for the first and second halves of the journey is very similar (the big fillup at the start gets spread out over all the small fillups in the first half of the journey), you shouldn't be surprised that at the end of your, say 1,000 mile, journey you're out of gas, whereas at the 500 mile mark you still had a healthy reservoir. You could conclude that (a) your fuel efficiency had dropped or (b) including large fueling peaks in your averaging window can be misleading.

      If you're still uncertain, look at the funding graph on page 102 of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's Report. I think anyone would agree that after looking at that graph that using averages is an inappropriate tool to compare Apollo-Mode funding to Shuttle-Mode funding.

      --
      "Just once, I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets." -- The Brigadier, Dr. Who
    13. Re:But, in a way, it *is* true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...NASA also did not bother to develop them before that. What distinction are you attempting to make? The two space programs acted symmetrically!

  60. no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

    Surface tension is the important factor for all pens, not gravity.
    Really? How about we do a little experiment then. Take a pen, and write on a wall. Or maybe even write something upside-down.
    Soon, you'll find that the pen doesn't work. Why? Because ink is being actively pulled away from the ball by gravity. All his ability to write in space does is prove that the ink doesn't have to be pulled to the ball, so long as its not pulled away from it. Makes sense - the ink is just wandering around inside the cartridge, and still bumps into the ball. I'll buy that.
    Additionally - I don't suppose you'd care to explain to us perhaps what causes surface tension in the first place? Would the water in a glass stay in the glass - with the least amount of surface possible - if it was in a zero-gravity environment?
    Someone is not rocket-scientist material...

    1. Re:no, gravity *is* important by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      Surface tension in a liquid applies to the liquid, not other objects that might contain the liquid.

      In microgravity, water pulls itself into a sphere, because of surface tension (a sphere provides the minimum surface area for a given volume).

      The water will push itself out of the glass in the act of forming the sphere and happily float through the air as a slightly oscillating sphere. It looks rather cool, actually.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    2. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1

      Would the water in a glass stay in the glass - with the least amount of surface possible - if it was in a zero-gravity environment?

      Your analysis is completely flawed. First off, in a glass, water does NOT have the lowest surface area. You have to remember that any interface has a surface energy (water/air, water/glass, etc.) A sphere will have the lowest surface area to volume, which is why we see water form up into balls in space where there are no essentially no external forces.

      The explantation given previously was fine. But there still is a person here who is decidedly "not rocket-scientist material."

    3. Re:no, gravity *is* important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone is not rocket-scientist material...

      And that someone seems to be you...

    4. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      SIGH. No, water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible. A liquid will ALWAYS have such. Gravity dictates the threshold of possibility, idiot.
      And completely flawed, even when its just that one portion you didn't grasp? Whatever. Write with a pen on a wall. Then tell me gravity has nothing to do with it. My point was that it wasn't a big deal because gravity doesn't necessarily need to pull the ink to the ball, so long as it isn't pulling the ink away from the ball. I was quite clear on that, even. Gravity does in fact play an important role. It keeps the water in the glass, and it keeps the pen from working when writing sideways or upsidedown.

    5. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1

      Your definition of surface area is skewed. If you mean surface area exposed to the air. Fine. In a glass, it has less surface area exposed to the air. Hell, why not seal it up in a piece of glass and make it have not air in there. Wouldn't that be spectacular. There is still surface area.

      Let's do some easy math. A sphere with radius 1 cm. That makes the volume and surface area as follows
      V = [4 pi (1 cm)^3]/3
      SA = 4 pi (1 cm)^2
      V/SA = (1 cm)/3 = 0.333333 cm

      Ok, you with me? Now consider a cube (in free space for now, just to demonstrate my point). Let's say it has the same volume as the sphere. That means that each side of the cube is ([4 pi (1 cm)^3]/3)^(1/3). So,
      V = [4 pi (1 cm)^3]/3
      SA = V^(2/3)
      V/SA = V^(1/3) = ([4 pi (1 cm)^3]/3)^(1/3) = 1.612 cm

      Wow, the cube has a lot more surface area than the sphere for the same volume. In free space with no other forces, the only thermodynamic terms you have will be a bulk energy (energy due to the "enclosed" atom, their interactions with each other. this is per volume) and a surface energy (the interaction of atoms on the surface with the second phase, be it air, glass, metal, wax, or whatever combintation of materials you can imagine.) This surface energy term is why water will completely wet some materials (say a rock) and will ball up on others (say a freshly waxed car).

      The only thing that changes when you put something in a glass, is that you add a different surface energy term. Let's say that you take you free standing cube and put it in a cube shaped glass. The bulk energy doesn't change, because the shape is the same. The surface energy does change, because before you had all faces of the cube interacting with air, now 5 are interaction with glass. Why do you get a miniscus? Better yet, why will it sometimes curve upward, sometimes curve downward? This is because the interaction with the material the glass is made of is either favorable (water likes material, somewhat more than it likes itself in the bulk form) and you get it curving upward, or it is unfavorable (water likes itself much more, it would like to ball up it possible, into a sphere if it weren't for gravity) and you get it curving downward.

      Gravity just adds another parameter to the problem. So in the absence of gravity, if water doesn't like glass, it will ball up into a sphere and eventually leave the glass surface. What gravity does for us is force the water to stay in contact by the glass. Because, if the water wants to ball up to reduce it's interface and bulk energy, it also has to increase it's potential. Because of that, in the presence of gravity, there will be a midway point typically between completely wetting a surface and balling up into a tight sphere on the surface.

      My point about your analysis being completely flawed only refered to the question posed about water in a glass at zero gravity. The other portion of the post (which was basically you just thinking through the correct explanation provided by the previous comment because you could believe it without writing it down or something) that was fine. There is a competion between gravity, surface energy and bulk energy, which determines what happens. I agree.

      I am however a bit confused as to why you would call me an idiot, when you can't grasp the fact that a cube (or cylinder, the analysis is the same) has more surface area than a sphere for a given volume. My point is that just because the surface is not exposed to air, doesn't mean that the surface doesn't exist. I wasn't even commenting at all on the first portion of your post, which is why i quoted the part in question to start out with. If you read my previous post (preferably with your head out of your ass) you'll notice i don't mention anything about gravity or ball point pens because i wasn't commenting on that.

    6. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      Lets try one more time. I'll even quote myself.

      SIGH. No, water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible. A liquid will ALWAYS have such. Gravity dictates the threshold of possibility, idiot.

      ok, that last line again - with feeling. Gravity dictates the threshold of possibility, idiot

      It DOES have the least surface area possible. ALWAYS. Gravity just throws in its 2 cents to help the water decide what is "possible." Did I define "surface area" anywhere? Who's post are you reading and thinking is mine?

      Now if -you- would actually read my posts, you might not need to babble. You said my whole analysis was completely wrong - now you say " don't mention anything about gravity or ball point pens because i wasn't commenting on that." Well guess what - I was commenting on that. Thanks for admiting you're not reading what I'm writing. Lets look at the only senetence in which I used the words "water" and/or "glass," shall we?

      Would the water in a glass stay in the glass - with the least amount of surface possible - if it was in a zero-gravity environment?

      Its called a rhetorical question. The answer is obviously no - and leads to the point I was making. A point, btw, that you would probably agree with if you weren't so insistant upon being an idiot.

    7. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      "There is a competion between gravity, surface energy and bulk energy, which determines what happens. I agree."

      Holy crap - see? I knew you would agree. You just, for whatever reason, don't grasp the concept of a "rhetorical question," and you don't think that I know the difference between a cylinder and a sphere. I assumed since your response was 500 pages long (note: its called sarcasm) that page 498 was like pages 1-497...I got bored and skipped to the end. Pointless ramblings tend to do that to people (mine do all the time). I guess score is 1 idiot point for me, 2 for you now.

      You obviously didn't understand what I was trying to say with the water in a glass thing - though oddly enough, you say you agree with what it demonstrates. Here on earth, gravity wins out (just like in a ball point pen). The water stays in the glass. In space, the water leaves the glass. In a sealed container, like a ballpoint pen, that isn't necessarily an option. So the ink flows around in the pen, not having any particular idea where to go specifically (note: just humour in general). It randomly bumps into the ball point occassionally, tossing some of itself aside on to the escape hatch. Gravity isn't necessary for the pen to work, but it can certainly keep it from working.

      Lets see if you can get this example: sugar isn't necessary for my car engine to work, but it sure as hell can keep it from working. Sugar therefore, for a properly working pen, is very important. One need not take it into effect as much as gravity (gravity always being present here on earth, sugar not always being flung into gas tanks) but it still is important. Damn important - to keep from harming the intended functioning.

    8. Re:no, gravity *is* important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (grumble) OK, tied score now.

      "Sugar therefore, for a properly working pen, is very important" should obviously be "Sugar therefore, for a properly working car, is very important."

    9. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1

      Wow, you're quite beligerant and stubborn also. All I was trying to point out was the fact that the reason that water doesn't stay in a glass at zero g, is because without external forces placed upon it, it will minimize its surface area to volume ratio and form into a sphere. And also that a glass is most certainly not a minimization of surface area as you claim. Perhaps you could show me a simple calculation that would show how you decided to define surface area, or is it just arbitrary such that the definition makes whatever you say correct? The reason it adopts the shape of the glass is because gravity has a distinctly larger contribution to the overall energy than the surface energy. So it is able to adopt a configuration which conforms to the glass because the potential energy contribution is much greater that the additional energy required to generate the glass/water interface. This has been quite an interesting discussion, but in the future, perhaps you could include some other insults besides idiot. Being called an idiot is becoming quite tedious. Perhaps try ignoramus, dimwit, imbecile, or my personal favorite nincompoop. Maybe you should put a thesaurus on your christmas list or just use one of the many online options. Certainly this would have given me incentive to not bother trying to straighten your thinking out.

    10. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      "idiot" is an easy word to use here - just as people become idiots when they get in a car, they become idiots when they comment at slashdot. Note also that this was the second use of it (so its not as if it should be called overused at this point), and it served the effect of completing my rebutal. Had I used "nincompoop" the first time, I would have had to use it the second time - strickly for cempleteness, mind you.

      but we digress - the point is that you simply misunderstood the original example I gave, and have gone on and on about it. We're pretty much in agreement everywhere else (we're both babbling, for instance...). From my viewpoint, the whole disagreement is simply due to you not understanding that the water/glass/no-gravity thing was an example of what you have said you agree with. You just didn't get the connection. I've looked it over to see if I perhaps could have used a better example, but - no, that's a pretty good one. It encompasses all I was trying to casually point out 100 years ago.

    11. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1
      In a sealed container, like a ballpoint pen

      A ballpoint pen is certainly not a closed container. It has to have at least one opening if not more likely two (pop open a bic, it should be fairly obvious). And the ink is not very likely to "flow" around seeing as it is quite viscous and confined within a relatively small capillary. I don't really care about this argument anymore since i was never really commenting on ballpoint pens in space, but more to question how you decided to define this magical surface area that was "minimized" in a glass. That's the only part that i found funny is that you stand by that statement so vigorously. Tell me something, if you were to fill an upside down glass with water (with it's "minimum surface area" as you stated) and lifted the glass, would it still have that minimum surface area, or would it be more? Gosh, i'll have to do the experiment to find out... If your comments were intended to be humorous, i apologize for not getting it. Frankly, you're not very funny and your sarcasm just comes off as stupidity.

    12. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1

      The point is not that i misunderstood. The problem is that what your wrote was different from what you meant. Which is fine. Language can be quite fickle.

    13. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      Would the water in a glass stay in the glass - with the least amount of surface possible - if it was in a zero-gravity environment?

      The answer remains an obvious "no," and in the context of the rest of the original post, makes the intended point. In your last post (previous to this one) you comment on my sticking to that point - well, yeah - water still stays in the glass here on earth. Gravity still wins (thereby being fairly important, really). That I can at least continue to say with a clear conscience. On the other hand, you continue to say you understood/understand my original point, when you obviously did/do not. If you understood that it was a rhetorical question, why did you answer it? Do you really think I needed/wanted to have the cause of surface area explained, and then related to gravity? No - I neither needed nor wanted it. They were obvious rhetorical (meaning: no need to answer, because it is obvious). Gravity is important. It can easily prevent the pen from working, in most the positions one could hold it in.

      Back to space (pens, not our brains): a pen in space doesn't have gravity to deal with really. The claim that only surface tension is important (and that gravity specifically was not) was rather rediculous.

    14. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1
      Here's the only reason that i commented at all. You started out by saying:

      Would the water in a glass stay in the glass - with the least amount of surface possible - if it was in a zero-gravity environment?

      Implying to me that you think in a glass water has minimized its surface area. Ok, fine. I say that's not so, and you reply with:

      No, water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible. A liquid will ALWAYS have such.

      Well, now it's not just implied. You straight out say something which is obviously false. So i felt that one might benefit from noticing that the surface area is minimized in the form of a sphere and not in any other shape. Apparently you took that as an insult and proceeded to defend your honor, so to speak, by arguing about the whole pen/space issue, which i was never concerned with. I just found it humorous that you would argue quite vigorously that this was true. Perhaps in the second post you meant to say that in a glass water will minimize its potential energy as opposed to surface energy (i.e. surface area).

    15. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      OMG, you still don't get that? I thought we got past that sentence.

      ...least amount of surface area possible. As I've already said 897million times, the key word there is "possible." Gravity dictates, on earth, what is possible. Water in a glass does indeed "have the least amount of surface area possible" because, as you have said (geeze..do you even read *your* stuff?) there is more than one force at work determining what the surface area can/will be.

      The water wants to have the least amount of surface area it can. Big mean ol gravity steps in though and says "ha! you must do as I say" and forces it to the bottom of the glass. The water still has the least surface area *possible*, because the realm of possibility is being dictated by gravity. Same with the pen - the ink in the pen goes away from the ball when you hold it upside down.

      Damn - I thought we were making progress here. Thanks for destroying my hopes. Guess that's what I get for being an optimist. Sigh.

      Since I know you are great with examples, here's one: I am currently dating the greatest (or least, take your pick) # of supermodels possible. That which is "possible" in such a situation is dictated by a few things:

      my looks

      my income

      my assets (ie, $1mill in income with no assets is not as good as $500thou in income with $100mill in assets)

      my education

      my charisma, charm, etc

      my pedigree/background

      actually running into/talking to a supermodel.

      So say I was a good looking guy that was a senior solaris admin at a financial corp. Then lets say I was on my way up an elevator, and in stepped a supermodel - why? who knows. So my income isn't what she'd really like, and I'm only "good looking," but she finds me funny, and I sing her a few songs and write her a poem. Then she decides to date me.

      Viola! Not impossible, really. Highly unlikely, but that's just because its more complex than water in a glass. The point is that I can be super rich, super hot, super charming, super educated, blah blah - but if I don't actually come in *contact* with a supermodel, I can't ever date one. The other factors are important, but less so (some might even be lacking, so long as I have most). Without contact though, its impossible.

      Back to the glass - gravity dictates the surface area that is possible. What is also really important is the shape of the container! Lots of important factors.

      But in the end, "water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible. A liquid will ALWAYS have such." Do I REALLY need to go into such detail and explanation to suit your pride? Yeesh. More than one factor is in play. We live in this thing called a "universe" where there is this whole environment thing...outside forces exert control over things. "strong" forces, "Weak" forces, "use the force, Luke," all over the place. A vast, complex universe that, in the end, culminates into exactly what will happen. The water doesn't assume the shape it does from personal choice - it assumes said shape because of the environment it is in. Otherwise, lots of folks would simply "choose" to be dating Angelina Jolie, working with Linus, and owning a large highly-connected island. While these things are not impossible, there are all sorts of things that need to occur first...and in the end, it will be "gravity" that brings us back to earth from our trip in the clouds. Nice tie-up. Wow, pat myself on the back.

      Note that I also think its cute that once I mentioned your pride, you mentioned my honor. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I guess ;) But I might just be mentioning this because I'm an ass sometimes. Who knows! [grin]

    16. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      2 more quikc comments:

      That's a pretty crazy implication you took from what I said. I asked a rhetorical question. In no way is there an indication in that question that water has minimized its surface area. It has minimized it so much as is possible (what with that darn gravity thing), but that simple question justifies no such implications. Yes - omg - there is a geometric shape (sphere) that would have less surface area. Unfortunately for the water, it is impossible for it to assume that shape in its current situation. How very sad :(

      Second - how about I actually make this complicated and point a high-speed fan into the glass? Crap - the water just went everywhere, and the glass flew against the wall and broke. Does that mean gravity was unimportant? Err...no. Just another factor/force, babe. More than one is determining what shape the water will hold. What if I put the glass on a hotplate and raised it to 213 degrees? There it goes again, changing its shape. Damn water!!!

    17. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      From dear old webster...

      "Main Entry: possible
      Pronunciation: 'pa-s&-b&l
      Function: adjective
      Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin possibilis, from posse to be able, from potis, pote able + esse to be -- more at POTENT, IS
      Date: 14th century
      1 a : being within the limits of ability, capacity, or realization b : being what may be done or may occur according to nature, custom, or manners
      2 a : being something that may or may not occur b : being something that may or may not be true or actual
      3 : having an indicated potential
      synonyms POSSIBLE, PRACTICABLE, FEASIBLE mean capable of being realized. POSSIBLE implies that a thing may certainly exist or occur given the proper conditions . PRACTICABLE implies that something may be effected by available means or under current conditions . FEASIBLE applies to what is likely to work or be useful in attaining the end desired ."

    18. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dab68 · · Score: 1
      Take the hypothetical case where you have infinite (or even extremely large) surface energy between your liquid and glass. The liquid would ball up and only touch the glass at one point at the base (and sure it would probably bounce around). Would you not agree that this is a possible configuration? It is possible, although unlikely. It's also possible that the water hovers in mid air. It's possible, although not what you would call probable. But thank you for the wonderful lesson in semantics.

      Tell me, if i put a small drop of water in a huge glass (with a wide base), will it always form a small film on the bottom of the glass, regardless of the material i choose? Will it never ball up in the center? I mean, gravity is big, bad, and mean, right?

      Oh wait, i really don't care. I know the answer. And you probably do too, but that doesn't really matter. You're really boring me, so let's just say, you are the master of the universe and i am obviously completely wrong because i don't care about working with linus or whatever other dreams computer programers have.

    19. Re:no, gravity *is* important by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      quick and easy: "size of glass" is a factor. "Amount of water" is a factor. "Gravity" is a factor. "Shape of glass" is a factor. "Hard water? soft water?" is a factor. Blah blah. As you said - unimportant.

      the important point is that "water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible." Given the right amounts of surface area and water, VIO-FREAKIN-LA, you're near a sphere there. Given 4 oz of water in an 8 oz "glass," (ie, those things we drink out of), you won't have a sphere. Gosh darn water! Why won't it make up its mind...

      oh yeah - that's because no matter how many factors we bring up, more factors still exist! And bringing up new and exciting factors has NOTHING to do with the fact that "water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible." Ya take all the freakin factors, line em up in a row, and the mommy duck goes "quack!" BOOM - your answer. Regardless the factors though, "water in a glass DOES have the least amount of surface area possible." Factors, factors, factors. More factors please! Lets make this so far away from the point its beyond-silly.

      And yes - thank you. I am master of the universe. However - you made a bad implication again. I wouldn't be working with linus - I'd be a carpenter. No money in it, unfortunately :( Granted though, this implication was FAR less unfounded. I just said "lots of folks." I am not "lots of folks," I'm me. I was trying to appeal to the general /. freak.

  61. MOD PARENT UP! by mrtroy · · Score: 1, Redundant

    This is Ground Control to Major Tom You've really made the grade And the papers want to know whose pen you use Now it's time to write in the capsule if you dare

    --
    [I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wait till you have mod points you piece of shit; thats what they are there for; moderation is not for loudmouths like yourself.

    2. Re:MOD PARENT UP! by Botunda · · Score: 1

      I have mod points and I was going to mod you down but they down have a mod for dick! Can someone please put in a dick mod!!!

    3. Re:MOD PARENT UP! by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Now that'd be some interesting spam. Dick mods. I think my dick could use an extra heat sink. Maybe some neon lights.

  62. What a breakthrough! by moonboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    See, space exploration is still teaching us new things. What a breakthrough!

    --

    Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
  63. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by sharkey · · Score: 4, Funny
    All those glasses of orange drink just so I could be like them gone to waste?

    You really could use this.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  64. Pencils work better by harrouet · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why using pens when pencils work out of the box ?

  65. Not really new by skypro · · Score: 1

    Paper Mate in the late 1960's used to advertise that their pens (pressurised cartriges) were used by NASA in space. These were the same pens that they sold on the street.

  66. Re:In soviet russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA. NASA spent $1180 on the pens. They don't even have to tax to get that kind of money. With numbers under a billion, they just sorta let the numbers figure themselves out.

  67. Whats a pen? by didipickles · · Score: 2, Funny

    I learned how to write in school. But I don't think I have used that skill since then...

    --
    --Still waiting for that awsome sig to just leap out at me..--
  68. Interesting fact... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    India doesn't import pens. In their culture pens are treated with a degree of respect and they have a large homegrown market for high quality pens.

  69. Don't go knocking the "Space Pen"... by Charlie+Bill · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...it truly is a thing of wonder. Not much biger than your standard NATO round, mine continues to write as it did the day I got it twelve years ago. (Obviously I'm not writing with it all that much, but a true testament to the ink used).

  70. Why in Space? by cablepokerface · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can easily experiment writing without gravity. Or didn't you guys buy Windows XP?

  71. What other lies has NASA hidden the truth from us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I beleive those moon landing hoax web sites, If NASA is willing to perpetrate a 40 year lie about something as simple as ball point pens, you can bet your sweet a$$ that either (a) the moon landing was a hoax or (b) aliens transported the apollo lander to the moon in a ufo.

  72. Re:In soviet russia... by Doomdark · · Score: 1

    So I read, from the good old 'Programming Pearls' book. It was example case to guide people to first consider simplest solutions, and good one at that.

    --
    I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
  73. STOP MODDING PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    His link and added it to the store AFTER it had been posted... give the guy a break

  74. If that was the point of the mission... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could have just jumped down an elevator shaft whilst writing a note to get the same end result - and it would have been a much cheaper experiment. ;-)

  75. OK, it has to be said... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia, pen writes with you!

    You must admit, it's actually somewhat on topic this time!

  76. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by ryanvm · · Score: 1
    What's next? That astronauts didn't actually drink Tang in space?
    No, they did. You can read it in John Glenn's diary notes from his return trip into space:

    "The Prune Tang worked, but the Depends didn't."
  77. Yeah, DUH! by 3seas · · Score: 1

    of course its surface tension, like liquid sticks together with itself and some liquid like ink sticks to surfaces too (otherwise your words would roll off the paper.... DUH!)

    But its gravity that causes ink to fall back away from a pen point, so yeah what we really have with those specially designed space pens is really earth pens that can write upside down in the gravity of earth.

    Its all about what space you are talking about and of course marketing...

    How many bought a space pen while having absolutely no possibility of ever getting into outerspace to find out if they were sold a defective product?

    And some still believe the moon landing was a fake.... Hmmm, like there is some reason to not believe? DUH!

    1. Re:Yeah, DUH! by monkeydo · · Score: 1

      They can also write underwater, through grease, and at very low temperatures. On Earth or in space they still have advantages over the ordinary ballpoint.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  78. My own space pen by galtsavenger · · Score: 1

    I actually use the Millenium space pen from Fischer pens.

    It will never run out of ink, writes in a vacuum (thanks to a pressurized ink cartridge), writes underwater, at extreme temperatures. Kinda cool. Will I ever write in those conditions. Not likely, but for the price, a pen that will never run out of ink is worth it.

    1. Re:My own space pen by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      How does it NOT run out of ink?

    2. Re:My own space pen by galtsavenger · · Score: 1

      Well the actual line is that it will never run out of ink in my lifetime. If it does they refill it for free. I believe it has to do with their ink formula - it looks like rubber cement. Check the website for further details.

  79. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by DavidBrown · · Score: 2, Funny

    What's next? That astronauts didn't actually drink Tang in space? All those glasses of orange drink just so I could be like them gone to waste?

    Those glasses of orange juice didn't to go waste. They went to your waist.

    --
    144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
  80. And what I really wonder... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    How does fire look without gravity? I mean, standard open flame always directs itself upwards by heating air and making it lighter than surrounding, making it flow upwards. But what, if there's enough air, but no "upwards"? A ball of fire that lasts until it uses up all available oxygen? Some odd fractal? Somebody ask the astronauts to light a match for a moment and send us a movie!

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:And what I really wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think i have seen it once in a documentary, it looks almost like a ball.
      I think (it was some time ago so i don't remember exactly), the small flames tend to go out because of a lack of oxygen because there is no air circulation caused by the heat anymore.

      I am not entirely certain about this one but I think that i remember it correctly and at the moment it seems to make sense to me.

    2. Re:And what I really wonder... by NumLk · · Score: 2, Informative

      This has been tested using a candle on (I believe) one of the first Shuttle missions in the early '80s. Essentially, the flame is a sphere, instead of the traditional oval-ish shape. As long as a slight air current is present (which is on a shuttle due to the ventilation system, and movement in general), the flame will remain lit. If the candle is placed in a sealed container, it will consume the oxygen in the immediate vicinity of the flame, then extinguish. Interestingly, if oxygen is reintroduced to the vicinity of the wick in a short period of time, the flame will reignite. The lack of air current prevents the wick from cooling below the point necessary to sustain combustion as quickly as it would in a traditional environment.

      --
      Children in the backseats don't cause accidents. Accidents in the back seats cause children.
    3. Re:And what I really wonder... by momus_radar · · Score: 2, Informative

      A ball of fire that lasts until it uses up all available oxygen?

      Yup. That's about right.

  81. Ice Cream by brakk · · Score: 1

    I saw that about ice cream on some space show on discovery last night. It was about black holes and hosted by the guys that do the Myth Busters show. They would give space facts between show and commercial.

  82. Solviet Russia by KevetS · · Score: 0, Troll

    In Solviet Russia, the pens write on you!

    Yes, even in space.

    --
    This is my United States of whatever.
  83. 24 October 2003 by Basehart · · Score: 1

    Pedro Duque's diary from space I am writing these notes while doing a spacewalk without a spacesuit. Why is that important? As it happens, I've been working in space programmes for seventeen years, eleven of these as an astronaut, and I've always believed, because that is what I've always been told, that a spacesuit is required while working outside a spaceship. "See, you can breath space", they said. "you can even take your t-shirt off, you'll be ok", they said.

  84. When ballpoint pens were new... by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    ...one of the things that people marvelled at was that they would write under water.

  85. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by realdpk · · Score: 1

    Those glasses of orange juice didn't to go waste. They went to your waist.

    And then they became waste.

  86. I've got a Fisher space pen by fishbot · · Score: 1

    Details here

    Although I'm not sure if they're called space pens because they are used in space or because they are shiny and silver, they do work really rather well. Mine worked well when writing on report sheets upside down under machines in the factory, or in the wet outside.

    Note that I only use past tense because I managed to lose the pen. Bah. I bet they can't invent one immune from that!

    1. Re:I've got a Fisher space pen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A piece of string?

  87. Type not write by mnmn · · Score: 1

    Please tell me again why they dont use laptops?

    I understand there were no laptops in the 60s when they sent the first people up. but wouldnt the new picturebooks be lighter than a writing pad plus a paper?

    And with the new digital cameras, we should be getting much higher resolutions of pictures we see around.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
  88. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by fenix+down · · Score: 1

    Ah, Christ, don't tell me that's an ugly chick pissing herself. ...

    Fuck you.

  89. MOD DOWN REDUNDANT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of you, the guy you replied to, and the six moderators that modded you both up, *none* of you apparently bothered to even read the writeup, much less the articles. Your link was, in fact, cited by the writeup. Near the bottom. Where is says "Note that NASA didn't go crazy developing a pen for space." Oi. Slashdot has reached a new low.

    1. Re:MOD DOWN REDUNDANT by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      "Slashdot has reached a new low"

      A new low - I'm so ashamed!

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    2. Re:MOD DOWN REDUNDANT by Madcapjack · · Score: 1
      Of you, the guy you replied to, and the six moderators that modded you both up, *none* of you apparently bothered to even read the writeup, much less the articles. Your link was, in fact, cited by the writeup. Near the bottom. Where is says "Note that NASA didn't go crazy developing a pen for space." Oi. Slashdot has reached a new low.

      1. I, but apparently not you, read and posted this just after the headline was put up, and at that time, you fat assed egotistical little terd, the amendmant to the headline was not yet posted, and therefore my posting was not redundant, but relevant. Did I forget to mention that you are a pompous busy-body who has nothing better to do than to criticize other people over silly things? Your post was not worth the electricity and server space it consumed.

      2. If Slashdot is so low, then go away. It might help.

  90. Re:Morons: Try writing upside down by mapinguari · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, duh, there's an easy solution. Turn the paper upside-down too!

  91. This brings new meaning to 'The Write Stuff' by First+Person · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not to be Cross, but Captain Parker's use of a Waterman in orbit is no Bic deal.

    --
    Given one hour to live, the student replied: "I'd spend it with professor FP who can make an hour seem like a lifetime."
  92. Capillary action has been detailed for HOW long?! by csoto · · Score: 0

    I mean, come on!

    A lot of shit aerospace contractors come up with is just a scam. Velcro, on the other hand, is magical!

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  93. Bah. by dcmeserve · · Score: 1
    In December 1967 he sold 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each.

    I'm sure the gov't still found *some* way to spend $500 each on them.

    --
    "Orthodoxy is unconsciousness" - Orwell
  94. I don't understand. by gunix · · Score: 1

    what's wrong with an ordinary non-ink pencil?
    I must be stupid....

    --
    Evolution of Language Through The Ages: 6000 BC : ungh, grrf, booga 2000 AD : grep, awk, sed
    1. Re:I don't understand. by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >what's wrong with an ordinary non-ink pencil?
      >I must be stupid....

      In a low gravity situation, graphite dust is a problem. Wood pencils are no good because you sure as hell don't want shavings from sharpening them. Mechanical pencils would be okay, but you'd have to use something other than ordinary graphite. I use mechanical pencils, and I've been on a quest for years, for one that doesn't just snap the lead every time I write. I ended up with a Faber Castell 1.2mm pencil made of sapient pearwood. Hard to find the lead but it solves the problem for me. The only other mechanical pencils that I've found to be worth a damn are the Staedtler drafting pencils and the .9 version of the Pentel Twist-Erase.

      But I don't work in an environment without gravity, or around machinery where a single particle of dust might turn me into cold space junk or a fireball.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  95. Re:As the old fable goes by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  96. This has already been covered on Seinfeld... by stevobi · · Score: 1

    "What kind of pen is that?" "This pen?" "Yeah." "This is an astronaut pen. It writes upside down. They use this in space." - Jerry and Jack Klompus, in "The Pen"

  97. what? by appleLaserWriter · · Score: 1

    the ink isn't good enough?

  98. um, because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    barbarella is sitting on their lap tops?

  99. Pen? by sewagemaster · · Score: 1

    Who said the penis..uh pen isn't mightier than the sword? Remember, the inventor of astroglide is a rocket scientist!

  100. The real rationale for the Space Pen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Was that it had 12 different (pressurized) ink color cartridges available. Back before astronauts were just using laptops, they had to color-code their reports. These days, they've dropped some of the stranger colors (e.g. turquoise), but they do make a very cool extra-fine with a tungsten ball, and a bold which is much wider than the average ballpoint. Plus it's nice to have a pen that's small enough to fit into your pants pocket, yet tough enough to sit on and small over and over

  101. Guess what! by Mattwolf7 · · Score: 1
    To everyone who says there is no gravity is space:

    Why do the planets orbit around the sun? Why does the space shuttle stay around earth? You only float in orbit because your space shuttle is in free fall all the way around earth! Even I know this !

  102. uhh whats wrong with a pencil by muckdog · · Score: 1

    Perhaps NASA didn't waste million of dollars space pens because Oggle the Warrior discovered rubbing coal on the cave wall back in 200,000 BC. Number 2 graphite technology isn't that far off.

    Besides pencils are better for NASA for those times you realized you forgot to convert from metric to english units and have to erase a few lines.

    1. Re:uhh whats wrong with a pencil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm so glad ou can read.

  103. Like shaving in space... by BookRead · · Score: 1

    During the Apollo era they spent a lot of time and energy trying to figure out how to shave in space. They spent oodles of $$ designing vacuum assisted electric razors and such. Finally on one of the Apollo missions just before landing they bravely tried their experiment. Turned out regular shaving cream and razors worked just fine. Doh! The moral of the story is that MS Word is a word processor written to NASA specs...

  104. russian pencils by drwho · · Score: 1

    I remember reading somewhere that NASA spent millions trying to develop a zero-G pen, whereas the russian just used pencils. Hrm.

    1. Re:russian pencils by yogkarma · · Score: 1

      yes i know this and was going to post same mesage and got your reply here.
      one more thing when every thing is computer based why you need paper and pen any way.?
      Is there any requirment in NASA or other space agency to write on paper..?

  105. The point of the 'Space Pen' by butane_bob2003 · · Score: 1

    is to work in a vacuum as well as zero gravity. There is no problem with a regular ball point pen (well, a modern one) inside a space craft at zero G, it's taking the pen outside (to do graffiti on the side of the ship of course!) that doesn't work. What generally happens in a vacuum is that the ink tries to force its way past the ball, for obvious reasons. Nasa probably never spent a dime developing such a pen, I'm not sure how often they anticipated needing to use a ballpoint pen during a space walk. I dont think astronauts carry clipboards with them outside the space craft. If there were a need, i'm sure they would do perfectly well with a large grease pencil, one large enough to grip with the cumbersome space suit gloves.

    --


    TallGreen CMS hosting
  106. Re:Did you know? by FictionPimp · · Score: 0

    I wasn't being redundant, I was being an ass. we really need a sarcasm tag.

  107. On logging by sean.peters · · Score: 1
    Easy if you want to wipe out the last log-entry in which you were a little drunk and have written down nasty things about the flight-captain.

    I realize you were joking... but organizations that require you to log stuff generally prohibit the use of pencil for just this reason.

    Sean

  108. they didn't stop at Staples on their way to ISS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The pens they have on the space station or space shuttle aren't just 'any old pen' picked up at the store. Everything that goes up has to be tested for toxicity, smell (some things off-gas and that sucks in a closed environment- you can't just open the window to get fresh-smelling air), and a million other safety related things.
    A lot more goes into supplying the station/shuttle than people outside of NASA ever hear about. just fyi...

  109. Re:Oh no, another childhood belief has been smashe by divide+overflow · · Score: 1

    "The Prune Tang worked, but the Depends didn't."

    You can keep your Prune Tang. I'm having Poon Tang. Tastes great, less filling, fewer calories. I note that many slashdotters just can't get any no matter how hard they try.

  110. soo-soo by MacFreek · · Score: 1

    I got one of those "air-space" developed pens (you can buy them as a gift). The trick is that the ink is pressurized. Well, it's soo-soo. It did work on wet bathroom tiles, but just any pen it stoped when it was half-full.

    No, I just prefer the solution the Russians are said to use: no fancy pressured pens. They just used plain crayons...those work great.

  111. it's not that either, its air pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ball has little pits in it. These pits pump ink out of the tip of the pen. Once this ink goes away, this leaves a space which would be a perfect vacuum, except there is all this ink behind with air pressure behind it. So the air pressure pushes more ink to the front of the pen.

    I guess it's sort of a siphon.

  112. Jacking off in space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, I wonder if anyone on Mir ever cranked the wank in zero-G. Not that I would admit if I did. But talk about having bragging rights for the "longest throw". Hmmmm.... you know, space porn would be intersting.

  113. Re:Amazing Technology by Random832 · · Score: 1

    "lead pencils"? you mean, with actual lead, as in the element 'Pb'? I think you're mistaken... it's possible that you think that "graphite" is some special kind of pencil material, rather than the standard

    --
    We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
  114. The Ballpoint was DESIGNED for This. by Mooncaller · · Score: 1
    History of technology is writen with a ballpoint pen.

    I can't remember all the tangeled details, but basicaly, the ball point was designed to be used by fighter pilots. I seem to remember that it was a Russian who came up with the original design. Pilots use to write with pencils, but pencils have drawbacks. I think it was BIC ( a French Company?) who first licenced the technology. The fact that it was usable in space was known at that time. Pental, then created the "Space Pen" to get around patens. They then went on an adertisment blitz, leveraging NASAs need to use American products. The Ad blitz was a very Microsoftish attempt to remove knowledge of the original Ball Points abilities from the public psychy.

  115. Re:Two eras. Four failures. 17 lives lost. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic?

    I was commenting on the dichotomy of the 2 eras in NASA mentioned at:

    comment #7299548

    taken to the ultimate, logical conclusion.

    Billions of dollars were spent.
    America and the rest of the 'first world' (mostly) benefitted from the fruits of the American space program.

    But that benefit came at a price.

    Space travel is still dangerous business any way you see it....

    Apollo I
    Apollo XIII
    Challenger
    Columbia

  116. what a scientific discovery by black_hunter · · Score: 1

    this is great news.....hence the inventor of the ball pen rests happily in his grave....

  117. Re:Who's REALLY Smart? by c4ffeine · · Score: 2

    Don't you love how the amount of money we spent on this keeps increasing? I mean, at this rate, we'll have gone bankrupt several times over for a single pen!

    --
    "73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
  118. Re:Amazing Technology by Mrs.+Neutron · · Score: 1

    No, let me clarify. Pb was at one time used in pencils. These days, they use graphite. I wasn't sure when the switch was made (now I know that it was before the space programs), but there was a time in history when people wrote with the metal. Hence, the term "pencil lead" which we still use today to describe the graphite.

    --

    ~~~~~

    Pet Peeve: Perscription drug advertising to the general public.

  119. Re:Amazing Technology by Random832 · · Score: 1

    that is not true... graphite pencils replaced charcoal, not "lead" lead pencils. we call it lead because like lead, it's soft enough to rub off and leave a mark on surfaces, and it's darkish grey.

    --
    We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.