Slashdot Mirror


Cassini-Huygens Reaches Orbit Around Saturn

Mick Ohrberg writes "The probe Cassini-Huygens is now officially in orbit around Saturn. Last nights' retro-burn was completed according to plan, down to the second, which in and of itself is an amazing feat, considering all data received is 1h24m old, as well as 900 million miles away. I must say, it was fairly exciting to watch the webcast, and see the signal fade behind the A-ring, and all but disappear behind the B-ring - all in (somewhat delayed) real-time. The SOI (Saturn Orbit Insertion) also saw Cassini-Huygens whisk by Saturn at around 68,000 mph at an altitude of about 12,000 miles from the cloud tops - the closest to the gas giant the probe will ever be during its planned 4-year mission, for instance the much awaited Huygens mission to Titan."

251 comments

  1. Pictures. by Mz6 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not sure when the article was written but there are already raw and press images released as well as some others. The quality isn't as good as some may think and it really doens't show much detail into the rings at all.

    --
    Hmmm.
    1. Re:Pictures. by rfinnvik · · Score: 5, Funny

      http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/instruments- cassini-iss.cfm

      "Cassini's higher-resolution camera is able to see a penny, 1.5 cm (0.5 in) across, from a distance of nearly 4 km (2.5 mi)."

      Sounds like the cameras has some potential, at least :)

      Oh, and NASA, as always, rock at converting metric to imperial... :P

      1.5 cm = 0.59 in
      4 km = 2.48 miles

    2. Re:Pictures. by iomanip · · Score: 0

      The is already raw and press images released but those did not get released till 4am PST.

    3. Re:Pictures. by clarkcox3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not only did they convert incorrectly, they measured incorrectly to begin with. A penny is 19.05mm in diameter, not 15mm.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    4. Re:Pictures. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      So, what's that in arc-seconds?

    5. Re:Pictures. by deglr6328 · · Score: 1

      Does anyone who knows a thing or two about CCD's know why these preliminary unprocessed images are so badly banded (horizontally)?

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    6. Re:Pictures. by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can also find pictures at the CICLOPS site.

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

      Are there color cameras on this probe?

      I want color, true color, not black and white or "processed" color.

      I bet it would look beautiful.

    8. Re:Pictures. by boredman · · Score: 1

      arctan(19.05 / (2.5 * (10^6))) * (180 / pi) * 3 600 = 1.57173782

      given the 19.05 mm penny diameter number and the 2.5 km distance number.

      - (really) boredman

    9. Re:Pictures. by weyoun6 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Its the camera's electrical interference - they havent removed the bars and all the specks from cosmic rays.

    10. Re:Pictures. by weyoun6 · · Score: 1

      The pictures are showing hella lot of detail - you its just that its really really close up. 1 pixel is about 2 football fields which means that these are the most detailed pictures ever taken of saturn's rings.

    11. Re:Pictures. by Xilman · · Score: 2, Informative
      A penny is 19.05mm in diameter, not 15mm.

      Not here it isn't. It's 20.03mm in diameter.

      Unless, of course, it's been worn down in circulation.

      Paul

      --
      Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
    12. Re:Pictures. by merlin_jim · · Score: 1

      CCDs read out a row of pixels at a time; any interference upstage from the sampling elements shows up as horizontal banding...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    13. Re:Pictures. by FlopEJoe · · Score: 1
      "Cassini's higher-resolution camera is able to see a penny, 1.5 cm (0.5 in) across, from a distance of nearly 4 km (2.5 mi)."

      What I want to know is why they're looking for pennies on Saturn.

    14. Re:Pictures. by zrk · · Score: 1

      Maybe they're looking for a place to dump these!

  2. Amazing. by justkarl · · Score: 0

    I can't believe that the data transfers over several billion miles in less than 2 hrs. I was wondering how long it might take, I was thinking more like a couple days.

    1. Re:Amazing. by BinLadenMyHero · · Score: 1, Funny

      Looks like it will be bad to play quake with a ping like that. Better look for another place to move.

    2. Re:Amazing. by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1, Informative

      Er... The speed of light's pretty quick.

      Roughly a billion (10^9) miles per hour, in fact.

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    3. Re:Amazing. by Apocalypse111 · · Score: 1

      Sure, the ping times aren't bad, but what about the bandwidth? If it can't get at least 50k/s, I don't want to hear about it.

      --
      There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
    4. Re:Amazing. by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bandwidth it supposed to be roughly 1900 kbps. And that's b, not B.

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    5. Re:Amazing. by sirdude · · Score: 3, Informative

      Voyager-I took only 9 hours to transmit it's signal from Neptune to Earth in 1998, and that is with 70's technology. So for a probe launched in 97 using superior compression algorithms, it kinda makes sense..

    6. Re:Amazing. by Apocalypse111 · · Score: 1

      I find myself curious what compression algorithms they are using... is it lossless? Are we using anything similar for current network or archiving purposes? Could either NASA or the private sector benefit from using the other's algorithm(s) of choice?

      I mean, hell, they gave us Tang, so if we can help them out in some way, I'd love to give back.

      --
      There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
    7. Re:Amazing. by Bob+4knee · · Score: 1
      Er... The speed of light's pretty quick.
      But when you're sending data over a noisy channel, you use redundancy (error correcting codes). To send a lot of data (a picture) might requre time on the front end for processing, more transit time before the entire file arrives (determined by bandwidth and the overhead of this redundancy), then maybe some processing time on this end.
    8. Re:Amazing. by forii · · Score: 1

      Bandwidth it supposed to be roughly 1900 kbps. And that's b, not B.

      Ahh... I remember downloading pr0n at speeds slower than that. Good old 1200 baud days!

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

      You mean they're not running a firewall on that thing? Better hope nobody sneaked a rootkit install just before the launch

    10. Re:Amazing. by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 4, Informative

      I find myself curious what compression algorithms they are using... is it lossless?

      I was reading an interesting page on how the cameras process the data and on some of the technical aspects regarding the images - the FAQ on the raw images available for downloading.

      Apparently, there are both lossless and lossy compression schemes, and it sounds like the compression is done within the cameras themselves - it's not like, say, the Mars Rovers which have a fairly big processor in the middle doing all the work. I don't think it mentions the specific compression algorithms themselves; I wouldn't be surprised if the lossy one is a form of JPEG. I know that was used on Mars Pathfinder, also launched in 1997...

      The raw images I have seen are pretty messy, and for trulyspectacular views of Saturn, its rings and its moons it's probably best to wait for them to be processed properly. The FAQ details some of the ways in which they're processed on the ground, too - anyone want a go themselves? :-)

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    11. Re:Amazing. by marnargulus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, the speed of light in vacuum is exactly 299,792,458 m/s (metres per second)[side note: the meter is defined by the speed of light, the space light travels in 1/299792458 of a second], or 186 000 miles per second. Which is 1116000 miles per minute, or 669600000 miles per hour.

    12. Re:Amazing. by Whispers_in_the_dark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1900kbps (kilobits per second) = 1.9 Mbps (megabits per second). That comes to roughly 237kBps (kilebytes per second). My cable modem at home downloads (normally) at around 350kBps, so that still sounds pretty snappy to me.

    13. Re:Amazing. by bobcave · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unless I'm missing something, you can take the data and compress it until it's the size of Jessica Simpson's brain but it won't make any difference in the transmission time - 'c' is pretty much constant in this context.

      --
      There is no such thing as 'chocohol' or 'workahol'.
    14. Re:Amazing. by mikael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I found the FAQ interesting too, and am truly amazed by the beauty of the images (I definitely want a 6-foot wall poster of Jupiter and the moons).

      Given the problems with bits being cut off from images due to time/memory constraints, I wonder if it would be possible to design camera sensors so that the returned pixels are ordered so that you could get increasing resolutions through time ie. First the (even,even) pixel coordinates first, then (odd,odd), finally followed by (even,odd)/(odd,even) so that you'd always get a full image if at a lower resolution.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    15. Re:Amazing. by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

      Well, roughly a billion kilometres an hour then.

      At least I was in the right order of magnitude; that's pretty good going for astronomy! :-)

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    16. Re:Amazing. by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 2, Informative
      ...sounds pretty snappy to me.

      Indeed. But who knows what kind of monstrous compression algorithms they're using. I read that we're still receiving data from Voyager 1. I couldn't find any data on the transmission speed, but considering it's 8.4 billion miles out, signals taking 10 hours to reach it, and this time increasing by 30 minutes each year. It's estimated that the fule supply will run out around the year 2020.

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    17. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Science data from the Voyagers is returned to Earth in real-time to NASA's 34-meter Deep Space Network antennas in California, Australia and Spain. Both spacecraft have enough electricity and attitude control propellant to continue operating until about the year 2020. It is estimated that electrical power produced by the RTGs then will no longer support science instrument operation. At that time, Voyager 1 will be 150 times farther from the Sun than the Earth is -- almost 14 billion miles away. "

    18. Re:Amazing. by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 2, Funny
      and that is with 70's technology

      Are you saying that the speed of light has increased with technological improvements?/p?

    19. Re:Amazing. by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      Actually, Godiva makes a wonderful chocolate liqueur

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    20. Re:Amazing. by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't know where you got that....but it's too high. From JPL: "3-axis stabilized; power supplied by 3 RTG (628W at EOM); 4 meter HGA supporting S-, X-,Ku-, Ka-band signals, X-band telemetry at 249 kbps, 2 backup LGAs for emergency commanding..."

      So ~250kbps max but I doubt they get that at saturn orbit, it's probably more like ~120-140kbps. Compare to mars rovers direct to earth 11kbps and 256kbps for the through-orbiter relay.

      --
      - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
    21. Re:Amazing. by merlin_jim · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bandwidth it supposed to be roughly 1900 kbps. And that's b, not B.

      That's actually quite a lot... that's 1.9 Mbps.

      Some examples of bandwidth needs:

      MPEG2 encoded for standard play on DVD - 2Mbps
      Typical DivX encoding - 1Mbps
      High res MP3 - 300 Kbps

      Compare it to ADSL, which in my area tops out at 1.5 Mbps on the downlink, and Road Runner, which until May was only guaranteeing 2Mbps on the downlink. And those companies have a copper wire that goes into my home; that 1.9Mbps is being broadcast over huge distances with two puny little radio dishes on each end...

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    22. Re:Amazing. by pediddle · · Score: 1

      So even in the worst case, it's still faster than my DSL line. That is pretty freakin' amazing.

    23. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cassini uses a Reed-Solomon code concatenated with a Viterbi-decoded convolution code. The encoding and decoding can be done in real time. (CD players, for example, use RS codes; geosync sats often use convolutional codes.) The processing time for the FEC would be trivial compared to the transit time or image processing time.

    24. Re:Amazing. by bob_jenkins · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's also the error correction code they're using (Viterbi-encoded convolution codes) which multiplies the amount of data the probe has to send by a factor of 6.

      A probe sent today would use Turbo codes or LDPC (Low Density Parity Check) codes, which nearly reach the Shannon limit for channel capacity. The Shannon limit is a theoretical limit -- we could get faster encoders and decoders than LDPC codes (encoders particularly need work), but they're about at the end of the road for channel capacity. (These codes will work on 1s and 0s, but they can also take into account the analog strength of each bit measured to improve their performance. Decoding them involves iteratively forming and testing beliefs about what an encoded codeword should decode to.)

      I wasn't able to locate what error rate can be corrected by the Viterbi code they're using now, or how much lower their bitrate could be with the same amount of correction if they were using a code that met the Shannon limit. Help?

    25. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One possibility for a lossy compression algorithm could be something similar to Progressive JPEG.

    26. Re:Amazing. by sirdude · · Score: 1

      heh.. well spotted.. I was talking about data transfers and got a touch mixed up (I blame the late hour :S) Anyways.. My error might have had a minute grain of truth in it :P

  3. wiki by Nspace13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    wikipedia has a great bit of information on the history of this project including a section called "Plutonium power source and controversy".

    --
    steal this sig
    1. Re:wiki by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      I read an article that called for "No Plutonium in Space!". I hate to rain on their parade, but there's plenty of it out there already... Cue tinfoil hats.

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    2. Re:wiki by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Plutonium power source and controversy".

      Yeah, it's horrible how many Saturnians it might kill while in duty. :-P

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    3. Re:wiki by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      I hate to rain on their parade, but there's plenty of it out there already...

      Other than in man-made devices, probably the only place that you're going to find a macroscopic amount of plutonium in this universe is in the vicinity of a recent supernova explosion. It does not generally occur in nature.

    4. Re:wiki by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the plutonium canisters survive re-entry? I remember watching something on Mr. Wizard years ago showing plutonium casings subjected to severe abuse and coming out without a scratch.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    5. Re:wiki by KjetilK · · Score: 1

      They probably would, but even in a worst-case scenario I doubt there would have been any deaths at all. I really have no idea where Kaku got his numbers from, but it is certainly not from anything that's been through IAEA... The 120 deaths quoted by NASA is pretty easy to see how they came up with. Besides, many studies today suggest that there isn't a very harmful effect of exposure to just a little radiation. I was really surprised it was an issue at all.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    6. Re:wiki by jtev · · Score: 1

      With Plutonium it's not the radiation that kills you, it's the heavy metal poisoning. Think lead, only WAY nastier. It's chemical properties are far more deadly than it's radioactive properties. Well, unless you turn it into a bomb anyway. OTOH, once it's in space, no big fucking deal.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
    7. Re:wiki by jtev · · Score: 1

      It's a big fucking galaxy, and a big fucking solar system and saturn is a big fucking planet. The concentration in the probe may be fairly high, but there is LOTS of saturn. I'm sure the aggregate amount of plutonium on Saturn is more than in the probe already. Even if not, it decays fairly quickly, espeicaly when it's used in a nuclear reactor.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
    8. Re:wiki by Zerbey · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know it's meant in humour, but if we do find life on Titan (a slim, but definite possibility) whose to say we aren't harming them?

    9. Re:wiki by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wasn't claiming that there was any problem with sending plutonium to Saturn. I was just pointing out that there isn't "plenty of plutonium" out there.

    10. Re:wiki by KjetilK · · Score: 1
      Actually, no. Plutonium isn't very poisonous according to modern research. At least not in the form you can reasonably expect: Like blocks of metal or even dust. It is only very poisonous in the form of vapors, AFAIK.

      Hm, I tried to find some good links, but all I could find on the web in a hurry was to right-wing nutcases who did get the point of toxicity right but lost so many other points about Pu, I didn't feel like linking to them...

      I think the worry was that you might have Pu dust that ignites, it can do that. That would be pretty nasty. But the chances of that happening would be extremely slim, and considering the scientific advancement made from a trip to Saturn and Titan, it is not unlikely that it saves many lives in the long run.

      Or just that dust could get into people's lungs. But the point is that Pu dust has a stable size about 5 m AFAIK, and non-smokers have very effective defence against dust that size. Smokers pretty much signed their own "I want lung cancer" order anyway....

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    11. Re:wiki by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      Is it time we seriously start to ponder The Prime Directive?

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    12. Re:wiki by beta21 · · Score: 1

      "Plutonium power source and controversy".

      I think people were more worried about the flyby with earth

    13. Re:wiki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the worry was that you might have Pu dust that ignites, it can do that.

      Not when it starts in the form of plutonium dioxide, as it exists in an RTG. It's already "burned" to "ash".

      The worry was that OH MY GOD ITS RADIOACTIVE IT COULD EXPLODE AND WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!!

      This may not be a particularly well-founded or rational worry, but it certainly got a lot of press at the time.

  4. Dirty mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Cassini-Hugens gives Saturn a Reach-Around

    1. Re:Dirty mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Could've been worse. This could have been a Uranus mission.

    2. Re:Dirty mind by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to say that Earth Goosed Saturn?

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  5. typo title by bluethundr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The NAME, I say I say the NAME, son is Christiaan Huygens. Associate of the Protestant Defender and natural philosopher.

    --
    Quod scripsi, scripsi.
    1. Re:typo title by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      I HATE it that the SUBMIT and PREVIEW buttons are so darn close - especially that early in the morning, with no more coffee in the bloodstream than you get from a pot of double-barrel. Acknowledged, and apologies for that mistake...

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    2. Re:typo title by BigHungryJoe · · Score: 1

      How do you pronounce "Huygens"? I've been reading Stephenson's Baroque series, and I've been pronouncing it "hoy-gens" in my head.

      bhj

    3. Re:typo title by onion2k · · Score: 2, Informative

      The "Cassini" bit is named after Giovanni Domenico Cassini, a famous maths bloke.

      http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathema ti cians/Cassini.html

    4. Re:typo title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been reading Stephenson's Baroque series, and I've been pronouncing it "hoy-gens" in my head.

      that's how I've been pronouncing it as well. any objections from the Dutch?

    5. Re:typo title by jobbegea · · Score: 1

      Huygens sounds the same as Huigens. The UI is one of the few Dutch diphthongs and fairly difficult to pronounce (for non-native speakers that is).

      See here for more double vowels, diphthongs,single open vowels and triphthongs

      --

      Net sa best, mar it koe minder
    6. Re:typo title by Trix606 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can listen to it pronounced in Dutch here.

      --
      "Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology" -- Search and Destroy -- Iggy Pop
  6. They must have been nervous by underpar · · Score: 1

    It had to do a lot to slow down and protect itself from the various particles and such. The rings of Saturn don't seem to be the most hospitble environment, ya know? I'm glad they pulled it off.

    1. Re:They must have been nervous by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 4, Informative

      There wasn't much danger of a serious collision. They passed through a gap in the rings and the probe was checking the region out several weeks ago for possible threats. Besides, Cassini will be using the high-gain antenna dish as a shield when passing through the rings, so the spacecraft itself isn't in a lot of danger.

    2. Re:They must have been nervous by underpar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The antenna had to be moved into position to be a shield. You never know what lame part may mess up and ruin the whole show. I think what concerned me (as someone who knows nothing) was that it had to do a few things just right in order to make it and it's really hard to account for all of the variables.

    3. Re:They must have been nervous by pragma_x · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was at the small (public) meeting held at Goddard Space Flight Center just last night, regarding Cassini's SOI.

      Basically they did a few basic things to mitigate risk when attempting this.

      - Massive retro burn to decrease velocity: Saturn's gravity was speeding the probe up.
      - Aimed at the space between rings so it go through *mostly* empty space... twice, since it had to come back through the rings on its way back out.
      - Flipped the craft around 180-degress so the high-gain antenna dish would act as a shield for the rest of the probe. (pretty clever if you ask me).

      I'm just happy to see that it worked. Although I wonder what condition the dish is in now.

    4. Re:They must have been nervous by underpar · · Score: 2, Funny

      See, you could have listed all of that stuff under 'a lot' like I did in my post. I don't understand you guys and your need to sound smart. :) You didn't have to go to the meeting either. You could have waited and read the CNN.com article like I did. (giggle.. sorry too much coffee) Then you wouldn't have had to leave your house.

    5. Re:They must have been nervous by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      If they can't manuver the spacecraft around to position the antenna, they can't manuver it around to make burns or to take data, so it's not a serious concern. (The antenna doesn't move, the whole spacecraft does.)

      Overall, they wouldn't be in a lot of danger anyway. Some, but not a lot. Not scientific spacecraft has been lost from meteroid collision and the only case that I know of where one was even messed with by collisions are in comet flybies. (Gitto lost control flying by Halley, which is the case that springs to mind.)

    6. Re:They must have been nervous by pragma_x · · Score: 1

      All true. But it was worth it, IMO, just to talk to some of the people who *built* the thing. ;)

    7. Re:They must have been nervous by underpar · · Score: 1

      You'll give me the variables thing, though. Murphy's law comes into play SOMEWHERE, right? Even when you're pretty sure everything will go okay the variables are what really kill you. I don't know.. maybe it the whole being a girl thing, but I would have been nervous.

    8. Re:They must have been nervous by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      What do you mean, variables are what really kill you? You mean unknowns? Things you can't control?

      Something can always go wrong with *any* spacecraft. That's not at all unique to being around Saturn. So to be especially nervous about the ring passage would be silly. If anything, I think NASA was more worried about the engine burn going off alright.

    9. Re:They must have been nervous by stevelinton · · Score: 2, Informative

      The retro burn wasn't to mitigate collision danger in the rings, it was to get inbto orbit around Saturn (instead of flying off out of the solar system). The dynamics mean that you get the most benefit from the least fuel by burning it as close to Saturn as possible. Given the difficulty of getting fuel that far, this must be the dominant consideration in the planning of the manouver. Having decided how long they needed to burn and where, then they could consider other issues.

    10. Re:They must have been nervous by jtev · · Score: 1

      Big space theory. Space is realy big. Everything is spread far apart. There's plenty of room for one little probe in all that space especialy if the probe doesn't go somewhere where there is a high probability of matter being. Such as actualy IN saturn's rings. Now because space is relitivly predictable we can also hit something if we realy realy want to, such as sending a kamakaze probe into jupiter to gather data until atmospheric pressure crushes it. on the time scale we're dealing with a random collission is improbable.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
    11. Re:They must have been nervous by Penguinshit · · Score: 1


      I'm sort of wondering whether there was any incentive to photograph while actually IN the ring structure. All the photos I saw at the NASA site seemed to be pretty far away again. There seem to be interesting "weave" patterns in some of the single rings, but the rest just looked like a flat white smooth line with no detail as to the particles making the ring.

      I wonder how close the probe got to any of the ring structure (excepting, of course, the few dust particles which may have been in the gap traversed).

    12. Re:They must have been nervous by tigersha · · Score: 1

      No spacecraft has ever flown through the rings of a planet either

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    13. Re:They must have been nervous by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      Not true. Galileo flew through Jupiter's ring and Voyager 2 and Pioneer 11 flew through a gap in Saturn's ring. (Which is what Cassini just did, albeit a different gap and with full knowledge of what they were doing this time.)

    14. Re:They must have been nervous by stuktongue · · Score: 1

      You go, girl. :-)

  7. Whoa! Now that's some lag! by rastakid · · Score: 3, Funny

    considering all data received is 1h24m old

    And we bitch when our CounterStrike match lags 300ms?!

    1. Re:Whoa! Now that's some lag! by Apocalypse111 · · Score: 1

      And we bitch when our CounterStrike match lags 300ms?!

      That's because the probe doesn't have to worry about trying to get a headshot on a moving target at 100 yards using a P90 while avoiding the wall-hacking n00bs trying to AWP you from across the map.

      --
      There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
    2. Re:Whoa! Now that's some lag! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People still play CounterSuck?! Egads!

  8. Great news! by cHALiTO · · Score: 1, Informative

    I submitted a story about this at 7 am, but it got rejected.. go figure.

    Anyway, there's already some interesting photos, and more will be arriving during the day. check NASA TV for live video from mission control.

    --
    "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    1. Re:Great news! by underpar · · Score: 1

      Get your own website and post your own news stories. I posted this story on my site around 7am. :) There are some awesome pictures. I know the quality isn't always that great, but it's really cool that it came from where it did.

    2. Re:Great news! by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      Absolutely! i can't wait to get hires pics ;)

      I'd get my own site, but it'd take away the fun of whining in /. =P

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    3. Re:Great news! by gargleblast · · Score: 5, Funny
      I submitted a story about this at 7 am, but it got rejected.. go figure.

      STANDARDISED SLASHDOT SUBMISSION ANALYSIS FORM

      CONTENT: Does the submission contain:

      Blatant anti-Microsoft bias? No
      Blatant anti-MPAA/RIAA bias? No
      Use of the word 'virii'? No

      Score: 0

      NEWSWORTHINESS: Is the story:

      Topical? Yes
      Timely? Yes

      Score (must be 3 or more): 2

      FINAL CHANCE: Is it a dupe? No

      Status: *REJECTED*

      (plonk!)

    4. Re:Great news! by underpar · · Score: 1

      It's cute that the one that was excepted had bad spelling in the title.

      MICROSOFT SUCKS!

      However the story came out its still really cool. I wish it had been posted sooner. It's a little annoying that they waited for a different format rather than a timely article. The news was everywhere for hours before anything showed up here. Even my lame site had the story.

    5. Re:Great news! by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      I submitted a story about this at 7 am, but it got rejected.. go figure.

      That's because of the 83 minutes it takes for the folks at JPL to receive and process your message.

    6. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the extra bonus points for being Anti-American, Pro homosexual marriage or Anti-Bush.

      Yea /. :rolleyes:

  9. Closest? by Grayswan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Won't it be closer when its orbit finally decays to 0?

    --
    If you open your mind too wide, people will throw trash in it.
    1. Re:Closest? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1
      Won't it be closer when its orbit finally decays to 0?

      Yes, but that isn't (as the article says) - "the closest to the gas giant the probe will ever be during its planned 4-year mission".

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  10. nice image showing gravitonal waves in the rings by kyknos.org · · Score: 4, Informative

    nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ringshttp://spaceflightnow.com/cassini/images/0407 01rings1.jpg

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
  11. nice example of USA-EU-world cooperation:) by kyknos.org · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It feels awfully good to be in orbit around the lord of the rings," said Charles Elachi, director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. "It's going to be a huge leap in our understanding of the Saturnian system.""This has just been an incredible ride," he said. "This wasn't NASA going into orbit around Saturn, it's the Earth going into orbit around Saturn because 17 countries made this happen. This is the way exploration should be done: by the Earth."

    if only we could do more things like this

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
    1. Re:nice example of USA-EU-world cooperation:) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you interested in marrying a Greek-speaking Czech ? I guess only a Polish speaking Basque would be worse.

      European:yes. Understandable:no.

    2. Re:nice example of USA-EU-world cooperation:) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i dunno, i'm into new things...

    3. Re:nice example of USA-EU-world cooperation:) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but i cannot speak greek and i am not czech :)

  12. Get some PRIORITIES!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The worst terrorist attack in recorded history occurred just over two years ago, and you people are discussing a probe entering orbit around saturn? My *god*, people, GET SOME PRIORITIES!!!

    1. Re:Get some PRIORITIES!!! by jtev · · Score: 0, Troll

      So fucking what? This probe has been in space for over 2 years. Life goes on, and there realy is no reason why we can't be interested in scientific progress and in kicking the shit out of the ragheads who planed gullible stupid zelots flying into buildings.

      --
      That which is done from love exists beyond good and evil
  13. delays by Admael · · Score: 1

    I'm still amazed at the ability to work on delays like that. I get a little frusterated when remote controlled cars don't turn quite as fast as I expect them to. Think of all the planning involved... and be thankful that we haven't found any life on other planets/moons, cause that would really screw things up. Would the probe just smack into anything it came across? I certainly hope not. If so, I think some sort of technology that allowed some independent operation on the part of the probe might be a valuable investment for the next go-round.

    1. Re:delays by Bob+4knee · · Score: 4, Interesting
      ...some sort of technology that allowed some independent operation on the part of the probe might be a valuable investment for the next go-round.

      It's in there this time. See:

      http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/07/01/cassini.o rbit/index.html

      NASA also designed Cassini to be independent because the time lag of one hour and 24 minutes -- the time for light to travel 930 million miles from Saturn to Earth -- means controllers on Earth cannot immediately react to unexpected problems.

      Instead, Cassini operates on its own.

      "The spacecraft has been programmed to continue even in the event of an emergency," said Mitchell in a statement. "We don't want Cassini to call home if a problem arises, we want it to keep going."

    2. Re:delays by stuktongue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My sibling poster handled the comment about independent action; I'll just add a thought on the delay factor, in general. I'm not familiar with Cassini's design, but I work on geosynchronous satellites, including their ascents to orbit. Most designs are capable of stored commands, which allow the ground to program a maneuver in advance. These programmed maneuvers can be time-tagged to specific epochs. So, as long as you have a solid, synchronized timing source on the satellite/probe, you're able to get the maneuvers to come off at any time you want with relative ease. Of course, the trick is knowing the correct time for a particular maneuver. For this, orbital analysts have fairly sophisticated tools and the smarts to use them. Yes, it is all in the planning.

  14. Try and imagine... by cOdEgUru · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Try and imagine this small piece of machine, an artificial eye, open to the wonders of our solar system, falling through the infinite depths of space, so that we can forget for a moment, all the troubles and tribulations around us, the cold steel and the raging fire and look beyond the physical confines of what makes us human and gaze in awe at this small contraption carrying a message of hope, of peace, of our thirst for knowledge in a never ending journey towards everything that is unknown.

    1. Re:Try and imagine... by bobcave · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yikes - how many bonghits before *that* post??

      --
      There is no such thing as 'chocohol' or 'workahol'.
    2. Re:Try and imagine... by Ignignot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Try and imagine, a sentence, with lots of commas, some in places they shouldn't be, going on and on, far past the boundaries of normal sentences, standing tall like a great dark god of sentences, like a toilet full melodramatic examples, and then when you think it might end and the commas stop and you yearn for a period, more come like a never ending journey towards a final ending.

      --
      I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
    3. Re:Try and imagine... by cOdEgUru · · Score: 2, Funny

      You sonofabitch, you made me laugh! :)

      Actually it is a slow day and I had nothing better to do.

    4. Re:Try and imagine... by Branch_Dravidian · · Score: 1

      ...the obligatory Beowulf cluster of Cassini probes...

    5. Re:Try and imagine... by ballpoint · · Score: 1

      lol. Funniest reply in weeks !

      --
      Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
  15. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by strictnein · · Score: 3, Informative

    it's called a f'en link - try this next time:

    Pretty pictures

  16. Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It would be interesting to see how it looked like meanwhile it was in the ring system?

    Or when it was nearby enough to see the massive amounts of rocks inside.

    Or didn't it pass through the actual rings?

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    1. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      It didn't actually pass THROUGH the rings, but more behind them. Still, while going through the ring plane, they had to orient the craft in a way that would minimize any potential damage from possible collisions with particles. Also, it was said that the cameras couldn't be used while the engine was firing.

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

    2. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by confused+one · · Score: 5, Informative
      they did; but, the scientists mentioned something about how fast they were traveling: (I'll quote some from the spaceflightnow article)

      "The photo sequence began around 12:30 a.m., 18 minutes or so after Cassini finished a 96-minute rocket firing to brake into orbit around Saturn. Streaking just above the rings at speeds greater than 50,000 mph, Cassini's narrow-angle camera took a series of snapshots, opening its shutter for just five milliseconds per picture to avoid blurring. Each picture was separated from those on either side by about 600 miles because of Cassini's extreme velocity."

      "It takes us about a minute to take a picture and so in the time we shutter the exposure, read out the camera and get ready to take a picture again, we have crossed a thousand kilometers."

      They never had a chance to get a close up of the debris in the rings. In fact, it would take a significant effort, timing it just right, to do so; and, they would risking damage by exposing the camera lens to any dust in the path. If you remember, they were turning Cassini so the big dish pointed in the direction of travel to act as a shield against any small objects in their path, as they crossed the rings.

    3. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Do you realize how hard it is to fake a picture like that? I think our tax dollars are better spent elsewhere. :)

    4. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by cHALiTO · · Score: 1

      50.000 mph !

      imagine taking a pic of the rings at that speed.. If taking it from above would be difficult, imagine taking it from the side... the rings are about 100m thick!

      --
      "Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
    5. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by kevlar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Passing through rings is not a dangerous thing. The reason being is that the dust that makes up the rings literally has kilometers of empty space between chunks. So much so that the chances of passing through the rings and hitting something are miniscule.

    6. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by linuxbikr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Cassini passed through the gap between the F and G rings. So it did, technically, pass through the rings. Just through an empty space between them but still part of the ring system. And as the engine burn slowed Cassini down, it swung down and passed through the rings on the other side of the planet.

    7. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by KoshClassic · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiousity, wasn't turning Casini's antenna dish towards the direction of travel as a shield against hitting anything pretty futile? At 60,000+ KPH, isn't the energy involved in hitting anything much bigger than a spec of dust (and even that) going to pretty much be disasterous? We saw that foam at 500 mph can pucnch holes in reinforced carbon-carbon. A pebble (much less mass, but much, much more speed) at 60,000 kph seems like it would ruin Cassini.

      --
      Understanding is a three edged sword. - Ambassador Kosh Naranek, Babylon 5
    8. Re:Pictures of the actual ring pass through? by Mick+Ohrberg · · Score: 1

      Oh that was G ring. No wonder, I thought you said string first...

      --

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  17. I'm not obsessed by size or anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...but Jupiter is a more interesting planet.

    Still, congrats to NASA -- anything that increases our knowledge of the universe while sending back beautiful pictures is worthwhile in my book.

    1. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow - since there like hasn't been a probe or anything to Jupiter.

    2. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by Iron+Sun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Trollish , if partially true. Saturn sans rings is probably, though debatably, marginally less interesting than Jupiter. Stuff like the uncertainty over the length of its day shows that it has some surprises in store, though.

      But Titan sure has to be the most interesting object in the Solar System at the moment, if only because it's the biggest bit of unexplored surface left. The good probability of extraterrestrial oceans is also pretty damn cool. Go, Huygens!

    3. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by amightywind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Next to the earth, Titan may be the most chemically complex body in the solar system. It remains to be seen if it geologically complex. I have a feeling the real show will start tomorrow with the first Titan flyby. Cassini should be able to see/detect liquid hydrocarbons if they are there with IR imaging, IR spectrascopy and radar. A major world is about to be revealed with some of the best instruments ever flown.

      --
      an ill wind that blows no good
    4. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by tjmcgee · · Score: 1

      I've been looking in vain for information about the flyby of Titan that you say happens today, do you have a link?

    5. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by weyoun6 · · Score: 1

      sorry about that - had someone behind me, and forced me to submit before ready - anyways - the link is for the 4 year mission plan

    6. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by tjmcgee · · Score: 1

      great link!, thanks

    7. Re:I'm not obsessed by size or anything by amightywind · · Score: 1
      --
      an ill wind that blows no good
  18. Christiaan Huygens by rastakid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just like Huygens I'm Dutch, and thus I was taught a lot about him in school during the physics hours.
    The biggest thing Huygens brought the physica is the 'Huygens source'. A simplified explanation: A Huygens source starts sending out sound (air vibration) because the source itself got vibrated by another source. So, a Huygens source doesn't 'create' sound, but simply relays it.

    Of course this is really simplified and in reality it's fairly more complex.

  19. Launch by mfh · · Score: 0

    The Cassini-Huygens spacecraft was launched from Cape Canaveral Air Station in Florida at 4:43 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on October 15, 1997

    I think they made pretty good time! Good thing I wasn't in the ship, cuz I'd be asking "Are we there yet?" every five minutes!!

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  20. Don't hold your breath... by CaptainAlbert · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...I understand that the ESA-developed component of the mission -- the lander -- is due to touch down on Titan on Christmas day this year. Hmmm, sounds familiar. Wonder how that'll go.

    Will they never learn?

    OK so I guess they'd've had to be quite foresighted to guess the events of Dec 25th 2003 seven years ago when they launched the thing. :)

    --
    These sigs are more interesting tha
    1. Re:Don't hold your breath... by hyperstation · · Score: 2, Informative

      i believe it seperates from Cassini on the 25th, and lands on Titan 22 or so days later in January

    2. Re:Don't hold your breath... by kyknos.org · · Score: 2, Informative

      yes. it is little strange date. BUT - Beagle was not ESA developed - it was private briutish project, his mothership Mars Express was ESA project. Ant she is succesful. And not only lander is ESA developed. Also Cassini itself, the mothership, contains lots of European work.

      --

      SHE does throw dice.
    3. Re:Don't hold your breath... by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 3, Funny

      BUT - Beagle was not ESA developed - it was private briutish project ...

      So you could say that its life was nasty, briutish and short?

      (Badum-TISH!)

      I'm sorry.

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  21. Re:Hey..? by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 3, Informative

    They appearantly sling-shot it by using several planets.
    Check the Spacecraft Trajectory
    Appearantly they used nuclear power too.

    It's all I could find though :-\

    --
    I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
  22. Re:Hey..? by virid · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    They basically used a "slingshot" manuever to rocket this thing around the sun twice and use the sun's gravitational pull to fling Cassini toward Saturn. Very dangerous thing to do with a rocket full of plutonium. Thank god it didn't blow up like the Columbia or Challenger shuttles.

    --
    "The world only exists in your eyes. You can make it as big or as small as you want." - F Scott Fitzgerald
  23. Receiving data that is over there is very hard... by techmuse · · Score: 2, Interesting

    considering all data received is 1h24m old, as well as 900 million miles away Recieving old data is easy. Receiving data that is 900 million miles away is very hard. The spacecraft is 900 million miles away. The data must be here, or we could not have received it. ;)

  24. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could anyone buy these guys a FLAT projection screen ?

  25. Note to NASA by PrvtBurrito · · Score: 1

    The interface for finding pictures is so difficult to use it has almost zero functionality. The interface looks intuitive, but when I do searches, I never get back what I asked for, especially when it involves dates. Those pictures are a big part of the mission for the general public, so I would think NASA would want to make it work seemlessly.

    --
    Laboratree - Scientific collaboration based on OpenSocial.
    1. Re:Note to NASA by weyoun6 · · Score: 1

      That would be because they havent uploaded the pictures yet. You have to be patient since they want to process the pictures first to remove those nasty lines.

  26. Are we space faring? by carn1fex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know its really easy to take for granted the fact that in the last 50 years we have gone from a confined world to launching interplanetary probes billions of miles away. I think we are all a little desensitized from watching too much star trek/star wars and setting our expectations way too high. It really struck me this weekend when i was sitting on the beach with my girlfriend, relaxing and said "the cassini probe is going into orbit around saturn this week." She just smiled, because shes not that geeky, but really, never have humans ever been able to say something like that in matter-of-fact conversation. Now its the norm. Hooray for us:)

    --

    ---------

    No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    1. Re:Are we space faring? by glam0006 · · Score: 1
      ...sitting on the beach with my girlfriend...


      Come on, tell the truth. What were you really doing out there?

    2. Re:Are we space faring? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Sending out probes doesn't make you space-faring any more than throwing a message in a bottle into the ocean makes you seafaring. It is, however, an important intermediate step, and one that does (and should) fill us with awe as we consider the scale of what we are hoping to do.

      Then, we should get up off our collective asses, and do it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Are we space faring? by carn1fex · · Score: 1

      I disagree. If a UFO landed on your lawn, and an android/robot of some sort built by some alien race walked out and shook your hand would you dismiss them similarly as non-space fairing?

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    4. Re:Are we space faring? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Get back to me when we can send an android/robot that will get out on their lawn, and shake their tentacle. Until then, we're not spacefaring, we're driving radio controlled vehicles around our solar system.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Are we space faring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, the girlfriend and conversation part I just made up. I was just sitting on the beach alone.

      And it wasn't the beach, it was my parents' basement.

      Now do you believe me?

    6. Re:Are we space faring? by hicksw · · Score: 1

      It has been thirty years since people did anything more than going around in circles in near space. Since 14 December 1972, IIRC.

  27. Errata :) by kyknos.org · · Score: 1

    I have little confused it , the second part, starting "This has just been..." was said by Ed Weiler, NASA's associate administrator for space science.

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
  28. It's not the size that counts? by underpar · · Score: 1

    Show a kid a picture of the solar system and ask them which planet is their fav. It's Saturn. My 3 year old has already staked a claim to it. Then.. he's not trying to compensate for anything. :)

  29. Re:Hey..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not too worried about plutonium flating around in space.

  30. Needs to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    NASA and JPL did their job.

    ESA better not screw up. This is the big one. Its the superbowl. You either put up or shut up. If you don't perform this time, better outsource space exploration to the russians or chinese.

  31. Good for us by scoser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a great day for science and I'm glad that we didn't give into the protesters back in 1997 (to prevent the mission) and 1999 (to stop Cassini from flying past Earth on its way back to Saturn after a gravity slingshot around Venus).

    1. Re:Good for us by applemasker · · Score: 1
      Speaking of protesters, these people wanted NASA to "stop Cassini" after it developed some reaction wheel glitch at Jupiter by crashing it into the giant planet.

      Does anyone have an info as to whether this issue (the reaction wheel, not the asshat suggestion) was resolved?

      --
      Bush Lies On the Record.
    2. Re:Good for us by joggle · · Score: 1

      The scary thing is those guys specialize in educational software. Yikes.

    3. Re:Good for us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. He seems to be a flat earther nut but HE TALKS LIKE A 419ER

  32. My thought exactly by RetiredMidn · · Score: 2, Informative

    Although somebody has pointed out that they did qualify it as the closest approach during the 4-year planned mission, note that Galileo survived 6 years beyond its 2-year planned orbital mission, and sent back data even as they intentionally crashed it into Jupiter to keep if from possibly contaminating one of Jupiter's moons in the future. I wouldn't be surprised if a similar fate is in store for Cassini-Huygens: both a significantly extended mission, followed by a controlled "disposal" when its usefulness has been wrung dry.

    1. Re:My thought exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Do you think that disposal of Cassini would involve crashing it into the rings instead of into the planet.

      Let's also hope they don't do this again.

  33. Re:Hey..? by SB9876 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While the risk of the Pu RTGs breaking open if Cassini had hit the Earth on those slingshot maneuvers was non-zero, the risk to human health was non-existant. The stupid - 'toxic enough to kill every human on Earth' line was complete BS.

    For one, it's know that at least 3 RTGs have burned up on reentry, one US and two USSR. We didn't all die.

    Second, while Plutonium is toxic, it's not that bad - caffeine has a lower fatal dose than Plutonium.

  34. NASA is the Lord of the Rings by antdude · · Score: 1

    I heard Carlos's comment on KTLA 5's morning news today. It was quite funny!

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  35. Re:Receiving data that is over there is very hard. by the+real+darkskye · · Score: 1

    The data is also 900 million miles away sitting on the solid state storage unit of the C-H probe & orbiter

    So nyeh :P

    --
    Music is everybody's possession.
    It's only publishers who think that people own it.
    Fuck Beta
    ~John Lenno
  36. Sir, your pants are on fire. by shrubya · · Score: 1

    named after Giovanni Domenico Cassini

    False. Everyone involved in the pursuit of emergency medical-care vehicles knows that NASA illegally named it after fashion designer Oleg Cassini to infringe on his intellectual property. The rings of Saturn clearly owe him royalties.

    1. Re:Sir, your pants are on fire. by Wybaar · · Score: 1

      Hmm ... celebrity naming has a bit of potential. If NASA ever did design a waste-disposal rocket (a la Futurama) do you think we could petition them to name it the McBride-Gates mission?

      --
      Y|
  37. Wrong! by Shoeler · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not several billion - it's only 900 million miles away, plus or minus 2 AUs or so. ;)

    Cassini TRAVELED several billion miles to get there - its path looks like an archimedes spiral because of the multiple slingshot maneuvers it used to gain speed. This is also why it took so long to get there.

    1. Re:Wrong! by cheekyboy · · Score: 1

      How long would it have taken if it only swingged by mars and nothing else? 6months to mars, * 5?

      --
      Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
  38. Re:Hey..? by RetiredMidn · · Score: 4, Informative
    Sigh.

    They did not use the sun's gravitational pull; they used the gravity fields of Venus (twice), Earth, and Jupiter to overcome the sun's gravitational pull.

    The "risk" of a Columbia/Challenger type accident - breaking apart from a launch vehicle failure or atmospheric stresses - had nothing to do with the slingshot trajectory, and the RTG was packaged against that contingency. The risk of the slingshot maneuver around earth leading to an accident was infinitesimal.

    As the linked article discusses at greater length, the wisdom of the plan was disputed by some, but calling it "very dangerous" is getting close to tin foil hat territory.

  39. Re:Hey..? by stevelinton · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nothing very remarkable. It was launched on a big chemical booster with various upper stages. It then did the usual gravitational dance passing by Venus, Earth (twice) and Jupiter before getting to Saturn. It has a few small rocket engines on board, a biggish one that it just fired for 96 minutes to get into orbit around Saturn, and a bunch of tiny ones for attitude control and fine steering. From here on, though it will basically use the gravity of Saturn's various moons to "bounce" around and visit them.

    It does have a nuclear electrical source on board but that is not used for propulsion.

  40. Holey Dish Antenna, Batman! by dpilot · · Score: 1

    It's full of stars...

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  41. So, I guess that makes Cassini... by Papatoast · · Score: 0

    Lord of the Rings

    --
    We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. - HST
    1. Re:So, I guess that makes Cassini... by sirdude · · Score: 1

      No. It would be Saturn who is the Lord of the Rings..[I believe the article quotes somebody saying just that].

      Cassini is just an annoying gnat buzzing around.. :D

  42. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by photonic · · Score: 1

    I don't know if those are gravitational waves you are seeing (They are building big machines to observe those, if you're the first to see one you got yourself a Nobel prize). The lines running oblique trough the image are obviously the rings of Saturn. The waves you are probably referring to run exactly horizontal. I therefore suspect it is an image artifact, caused by something in the CCD or because the image was recorded line for line. This might be a raw image, which still has to go through image processing to get the 'waves' out with some previous calibration. If it were something to do with the rings themselves than i would expect it to be either parallel or perpendicular to the rings, and not exactly parallel to the frame.

    --
    karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
  43. Don't you hate it... by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

    Probing around Saturn is fine with me.

    But don't you hate it when they start probing around Uranus? :)

    --
    "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
  44. Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyone? by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, I realize I should know this one already, but I can't seem to recall ever hearing his name actually said out loud and it aggravates me that I mentally stumble through every instance of his name in print.

    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  45. Is "Saturnian" the proper adjective? by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most of our planet names come from the Latin form. Sometimes I see the Greek name used as the adjective. In this case it would be "Chronus", even more awkward.

    1. Re:Is "Saturnian" the proper adjective? by Analise · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yep, it is, according to dictionary.com:

      Saturnian ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-tûrn-n, s-)
      adj.
      Of or relating to the planet Saturn or to its supposed astrological influence.
      Archaic. Of or relating to the god Saturn or his reign.

      --
      >insert witty sig file here
    2. Re:Is "Saturnian" the proper adjective? by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Saturnian" is correct.

      "Chronian" is never used, in my experience, although the stem does work into a few peculiar words, like "perichrone" (closest approach to Saturn in an orbit). Even then, I seldom hear those words used.

    3. Re:Is "Saturnian" the proper adjective? by qbwiz · · Score: 1

      I've heard of "Jovian," but never "Zeusian."

      --
      Ewige Blumenkraft.
    4. Re:Is "Saturnian" the proper adjective? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The adjective refering to Venus is Cytherian; I guess they wanted to avoid venereal or venal.

  46. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2, Informative

    M-W has you covered. Most astronomers I know pronounce it like "Hoi-gens" (hoi like in "a-hoy", gens with a hard g).

  47. Re:Hey..? by scaaven · · Score: 1

    make it

    --
    I know I'm going to be modded up on this
  48. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by kyknos.org · · Score: 2, Informative

    of course i wanted to write density waves :) my mistake. "Look at that structure, it's so regular!" marveled imaging team leader Carolyn Porco as a picture came in showing well-defined bands of brightness and darkness. "I'm wondering if we're looking at a density wave. This looks like it might be a density wave, but I'm not quite sure." Density waves, caused by gravitational interactions with nearby moons, are thought to be "kissing cousins" of the waves that produce the spiral structure seen in galaxies like Earth's Milky Way. "These are regions where the rings are communicating gravitationally with the moons exterior to them," Porco explained. A few moments later: "Oh my God, look at that! ... These density waves are like books, just waiting to be read." story

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
  49. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking he was talking about the interesting pattern of the rings. In the top left corner, there is one dark ring, with several "echo" rings getting weaker while they get closer to Saturn in decreasing intervals.

  50. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by LordKronos · · Score: 1

    I agree with you on the horizontal lines, but there is obviously something in there that I can't see...some type of ripple. Here is an article talking all about the gravitational ripples.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5333700/

    Now if it turns out they ARE talking about the horizontal lines, I'll die of hysterical laughter when they finally figure it out.

  51. DENSITY not gravitational by kyknos.org · · Score: 2, Informative

    thanks the other poster for the correction. the article is here i just mistaken the words :)

    --

    SHE does throw dice.
  52. Re:nice image showing gravitonal waves in the ring by SiliconEntity · · Score: 1

    nice image showing gravitonal waves in the rings (link)

    Not sure what you mean by gravitational waves let alone gravitonal waves, but there does seem to be some interesting structure in the outer ring in that picture. It reminds me of the famous braided ring spotted by the Pioneer 11 fly-by. I don't remember if Voyager saw this kind of thing.

  53. Re:Hey..? by StarWynd · · Score: 3, Informative

    The "slingshot" maneuver is a pretty common with deep space missions. The reasoning behind it is to not only speed up the spacecraft, but also conserve fuel. Conserving fuel may be more important than you think. Fuel is heavy and the more you need, the heavier your spacecraft will be. The heavier your spacecraft, the more fuel you'll need to turn since you're trying to turn a heavier object. An easy way to gain speed without using much fuel is to use the gravity of the planets. Cassini flew by Venus twice and then Earth once picking up more and more speed each time until it went by Jupiter. It picked up some final additional speed from Jupiter's gravity and now a few years later, here we are at Saturn.

    It's a common misconception that the plutonium would have caused catastrophe should the rocket have exploded. Had the rocket exploded on takeoff, the total land area infected would have been quite small. Only if you were present at the launch would you need to be concerned. If the rocket had gotten into the higher atmosphere before exploding, the plutonium would have dissapated to the point that it wouldn't have much of an effect. Even if the plutonium stayed concentrated, again it would have only affected a small area as in the case of exploding seconds after launch. In short, even if the worst had happened, it'd be localized and not something which would kill all life around us. I am much much much more concerned with the health risks of breathing in smog around JPL rather than worried about JPL's RTGs.

  54. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by Vireo · · Score: 1
  55. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can pronounce Finnish (hey, it's a long shot, but anyway...), the correct pronounciation would be like "höijens", stressing the "j".

  56. AND WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH AIRLINE FOOD, HUH? by Glytch · · Score: 1

    AM I RIGHT, FOLKS?

  57. Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

    I understand that Cassini used gravitational assists to accelerate for the journey to Saturn. Does anybody know what maximum speed is attainable through these gravity assist maneuvers within our solar system? Just how fast could we make something go by doing a long series of these things with the most massive bodies in our solar system?

    1. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by Iron+Sun · · Score: 1

      I am totally talking out of my arse here, and anyone is welcome to slap me down, but I would guess that it would be in the ballpark of the Solar System escape velocity at the distance of the planned planetary swingby, if only because of the difficulty in arranging the celestial billiards game to squeeze even more delta v out of the system before escape.

      The above phrasing probably gave conniptions to any celestial mechanics boffins in the audience.

    2. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by captainClassLoader · · Score: 1

      I don't know what the maximum speed attainable is, but in Cassini's case, what they got was a maximum speed relative to Saturn of 69,350 MPH (~111,512 KPH). This is 32 times faster than an assault rifle bullet, and 4 times faster than the shuttle, according to the spaceflight.com article on the maneuver.

      --
      "The plural of anecdote is not data" -- Bruce Schneier
    3. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by Virtual+Sabot · · Score: 1

      I am no rocket scientist, but i believe the *theoretical* limit, if one could choose to line up the planets as they wished, would be an appreciable fraction of the speed of light. The real limit here would be the materials tolerance of the object used. Imagine holding on to an old merry-go-round, while you're friends spin it. How long could you hold on? How long would your arms stay in their sockets? Now imagine trying to get the massive gravitational effect of jupiter to work for you, and hope the nearest part of your spacecraft (using the arms metaphor) can hang on while it's whipped around for more speed... It's a simplified effect of trying to accelerate using the event horizon of a black hole. The black hole can stand in for the multiple spins around the solar system trying to gain speed, if we attempt to just spin partway around the black hole. Hope that clears some of it up.

      --
      Some of my colleagues think that the chemicals we are experimenting with could potentially cause brain damage, however I
    4. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have to comment on this to say it's completely wrong. The fastest anything could go in the solar system using gravitational assists is still on the the order of 10s of km/s. This is because, from the planet's point of view, the incoming speed is the same as the outgoing speed. Only because the planet is moving is any energy gained. Therefore, the absolute maximum speed increase from going around a planet is your initial speed plus twice the planet's speed around the sun (on the order of 10 km/s). As the speed increases, the planets are less able to deflect the orbit, so less and less is gained from encounters

    5. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can (theoretically) add the planet's speed relative to the Sun to your own on each flyby. A "long series of these things" could add as much as you wanted.

      In a practical sense, though, you can't just keep zooming by Jupiter again and again at just the right angle and get up to c for free. You'd have to keep adjusting your orbit to encounter Jupiter over and over, and at some point the energy required to do that would be more than you'd gain from the effort. The gravity assist is only worth doing when the planet is "just going your way", more or less. The trick with something like Cassini is to figure out a path (however convoluted) that results in those planets "just happening" to be going your way at the time you get there.

      The technique is useful when you only have slow, pathetic chemical rockets to shove yourself around the universe.

      Explanation of gravity assist

    6. Re:Gravitational Assists Get you what speed? by mr_pins · · Score: 1

      MOD PARENT UP. GEEZ.

  58. Re:Hey..? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1

    The nuclear power is only for electrical power generation, not spacecraft propulsion. Cassini has two main engines and 16 thrusters for attitude control.

  59. A good start by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For our next project, let's murder a bunch of foreigners.

  60. Umm.... by jmichaelg · · Score: 3, Informative
    Cosmic rays create randomly oriented streaks. Noise induced specks have a random "snow-like" appearance. The bands appear to be some sort of malfunction in the imaging circuitry.

    This image shows all three imaging problems. There appears to be a short cosmic ray streak in the lower left quadrant veering about 30 degrees downward and to the right, there may be some speckle in the black band or it may be a real signal (the white dots in the black band) and there's banding throughout the entire image that spreads from the white regions to the black and back to the white.

  61. About the bands--from the FAQs: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    What is that horizontal waviness in the picture?

    There is a low level source of noise in the camera's signal as it comes out of the sensor and gets converted to numbers. This noise adds and subtracts a small amount to the signal in a cycle. When the data is put into an image, one can see it as bright and dark bands in the image. The amount of noise is very small and is not noticeable in most images. Images that are of black sky or very dark can show this noise. The camera records the baseline of the signal for each line so this noise can be removed in later processing. Both cameras are affected by this noise but the Narrow Angle Camera is worse.

  62. sheesh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's cute that the one that was excepted had bad spelling in the title.

    Nice try, but you mean ACCEPTED

    If you are going to make a comment like this, please - for the love of god - use the proper word.

  63. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 1

    I can't believe I didn't think to try M-W myself; I refer people there at least once every couple of days myself!! Duh...

    Thanks!!

    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  64. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 1

    And thank you, too!
    (hmmm, I didn't realze /. "makes you wait 20 seconds between replies" (nor did I realize it had been only 19 seconds since I replied to the other /.-er...grr...) Oh well. One, Mississippi...two, Mississippi...

    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  65. Waves in the Rings? by S_Dub · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can anyone explain the seemingly horizontal waves that are running through all of the rings? They seem to be fairly uniform and direction and size. However, the orientation does not seem to be radial from the planet itself or any other object... Any conjecture out there as to what has caused this? They almost seem like an artifact in the images themselves.

    Also, is anyone else a little disappointed that these are the best images we're going to get of the rings or are there going to be better pictures in the future? This is the closest the spacecraft is going to get to the rings, yet I really was hoping to see the individual components of the rings themselves. I've seen the intro to Voyager, and I wanted to see tumbling boulders...

    1. Re:Waves in the Rings? by Angry+Toad · · Score: 1

      This is the closest the spacecraft is going to get to the rings, yet I really was hoping to see the individual components of the rings themselves. I've seen the intro to Voyager, and I wanted to see tumbling boulders...

      Me too - all the same you can make out some structural detail in these pictures if you download the big 1024x1024-ish versions (ie, clumpiness and brightness variation). Since the pixel size is still on the order of hundreds of meters (IIRC) that's the best we'll probably get...

      All the same if they decide to do a close run by the rings four or five years from now when the mission is winding down, it would be very cool indeed to see some real detail. Here's hoping.

    2. Re:Waves in the Rings? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the JPL folks say that is just noise in the raw images they will correct later

    3. Re:Waves in the Rings? by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Fortunately, unfortunately that is going to be the extent of it. I hope that sometime before the end of THIS century some sort of probe will actually make it to Saturn, this time exclusively to study the ring systems themselves. It would be cool to intentionally do a rendevous with one of the moons within the ring system, and perhaps even try to land, or even do a little "moon hopping" around the ring system. The is much to learn about what is going on.

      From my own look of the rings, there are some strong mathmatical harmonics going on... worthy of at least a few master's degrees if not a couple of PhDs with these photos alone. Perhaps the most intriguing are the scalloped rings that were found. This is going to be a career maker for somebody when they finally figure out the celestial mechanics regarding how this could have been done. This photo also seems to have a moire pattern between the pixel resolution of the CCD camera and the rings on Ring A. That is a significant finding in itself, and can be used to determine the approximate size of the smaller ringlets that form Ring A. (I.E. rougly the same arc angle that a single pixel would have on the probe camera... that is quite tiny to be honest, and suggests some uniformity of the ringlets as well, or even suggesting mean particle size in the rings.)

      That is just my casual observations as a very amature astronomer. The Pros are certainly going to have a fun couple of months ahead, particularly if they are into planetary astronomy.

  66. last of the big planetary probes? by peter303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is Cassini the last of the billion-dollar deep-space probes? I don't see much else funded. Theres and on-again, off-again flyby to Pluto next decade. The Mercury probe Messenger was axed in the current White House budget. The next four launch-cycles to Mars are being worked on. But these are relatively inexpensive, small things in the couple hundred million range. Maybe a few more lunar and comet missions in the works too.
    The previous NASA administrator Goldin promoted the faster-cheaper-smaller (and less reliable) probe model. I guess the initial Hubble troubles and the decade-long Galileo & Cassini projects spooked him out. At least Cassini will last for 4 to 10 years.

    1. Re:last of the big planetary probes? by tonekids · · Score: 1

      Messenger is not dead...

    2. Re:last of the big planetary probes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Actually, the Mercury orbiter is scheduled to launch August 2nd. Not much time left to axe it. Aside from human exploration initiative, the multi-billion-dollar missions seem at an end. Not exactly a bad thing.
      http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/news_room/stat us_repor t_06_29_04.html

    3. Re:last of the big planetary probes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watching NASA TV one of the scientists did say Cassini was the "last of the Cadillac" missions. Not that it really matters at this point since the only major mystery remaining is Europa and it's possible liquid water oceans. Other than that the Solar System has pretty much been photographed.

    4. Re:last of the big planetary probes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what about Uranus and Neptune? Are we going to leave it at one flyby?

    5. Re:last of the big planetary probes? by weyoun6 · · Score: 1

      Actually there is quite an argument to bring back the multi-billion dollar probes - since "faster-cheaper-'better'" has't exactly worked out. With the big missions you can put all the instruments you think you need, while the small fast missions make assumptions - often wrong - about what to observe. I heard a lecture at the local Astronomy Society that many scientists are saying that the current mars missions are looking at the wrong thing. Since these missions are pretty much one-trick ponies sent to answer one question, instead of exploring and finding questions, and since they are so many of them already the pipeline, it will be 10 years or so until they even have a chance to turn around and addressing science's needs. Current missions are faster, smaller, and cheaper - but they are not better than missions like Gallieo and Cassini, and even Voyager and Pioneer that were built like a rock and can take anything that a planet throws at them. Because of the budget cuts - NASA's robotic missions have become less and less effective.

  67. Klingons circling uranus... by PseudoThink · · Score: 1
    but really, never have humans ever been able to say something like that in matter-of-fact conversation
    Aside from all the "Uranus" jokes, of course...
  68. Re:Hey..? by mlyle · · Score: 3, Informative

    Second, while Plutonium is toxic, it's not that bad - caffeine has a lower fatal dose than Plutonium.

    While I agree with the gist of your point, plutonium is fairly toxic. Death from a month comes from quantities as low as 50 mg inhaled; 80 micrograms inhaled is probably sufficient to cause cancer. Ingestion LD-50 is estimated to be 500mg or so for an average sized person.

    LD50 of caffeine is 150mg/kg, give or take, or 10 grams ingested.

    It's nowhere up there with neurotoxins; and it certainly couldn't wipe out all life on earth. But an (extremely) low probability event could kill a few hundred people.

  69. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by FasterThanLight · · Score: 1

    Hi-genz... with a hard "g"

    --
    They're a little melty, but damn are they exquisite!
  70. YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  71. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by David+Gould · · Score: 1


    Isn't it great how you can ask a question on Slashdot and get two answers, both purporting to cite the same reference source, and yet completely contradicting each other?

    It reminds me of somebody's sig that I noticed a while back: "Go not unto Slashdot for advice, for ye shall be told both 'yea' and 'nay'."

    (and no, I'm not interested enough in this case to click either link, let alone do any deeper research, to find out which one is correct.)

    --
    David Gould
    main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
  72. BS! Uranus is more interesting! by gatkinso · · Score: 1


    But then again Uranus has some pretty lame moons... harharhar

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  73. Huygens pronunciation by awhoward · · Score: 1

    Here's the amusing narrative that accompanies the mp3 Huygens pronunciation.

  74. cool stuff by serenarae · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't know if this has already been mentioned, but there are 616,800 hand-written signatures from 81 countries on a disc inside Cassini. I remember when I was in 7th grade and my entire class sent in our signatures to NASA. Now it's seven years later and my name is billions of miles away in space. How cool is that?

    --
    see sig. see sig run. run sig run.
    1. Re:cool stuff by Terminal+Saint · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my boss who's a science teacher in the off-season mentioned one of his classes sent their sigs in. I also seem to remember signing my sig for one probe or another many years ago, may well be Cassini.

      --
      It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
  75. Re:Hey..? by joggle · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, the RTGs are shielded even more than the typical black box in a jet. They are specifically designed to withstand a rocket blowing up or re-entry. So the only real worry is being hit in the head as it comes down. So, at most, one person may be killed by an RTG.

  76. Tin Foil Hat by mosb1000 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I can't believe that the people on that website are real. They claim that NASA use RTG's and RHU's to cover up military plutonium launches. Where do they expect these probes to get power from?

    I mean, seriously, I've seen some pretty crazy theories in my time, but this one takes the cake. Why would the military use NASA to cover up it's activities, how would this even work. Wouldn't the military still have to cover up their activities regardless of what NASA does?

  77. MOD PARENT UP by mr_pins · · Score: 1

    this what I meant to do

  78. Offical Cassini Imaging Team Website by Koensayr · · Score: 1

    Its a shame each time Cassini is mentioned on Slashdot they ocassionaly forget to mention the link to the Cassini Imageging Teams Offical website. The link is here. Just so everyone knows... :-) Enjoy

  79. Mines of Titan! by Veramocor · · Score: 1

    Anyone ever play the CRPG game Mines of Titan. 1989 by westwood studios. A little blurb

    That game kicked ass.

    The best part was learning how to use computers so you could hack yourself free tickets, clean up your criminal record and stuff.

    Anyone else beat it besides me?

    --
    Veramocor
  80. They didn't pass through the rings... by bani · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...they passed through the ring plane, in the huge gap between the F and G rings.

    Passing through the rings themselves would likely have been disastrous.

  81. Yes, passing through the rings is dangerous indeed by bani · · Score: 1

    That's why cassini passed through the huge empty gap between the F and G rings.

    In the denser rings, baseball-sized ring particles are about a meter or so apart. Most ring particles are much smaller than that though.

    This is why the cassini radio transmissions were so strongly attenuated when it passed behind them -- the rings are dense enough to do that. If the ring particles really were km's apart, there would be virtually zero attenuation of the radio signal.

    Had cassini passed through a ring instead of a gap, the mission would have been shortened rather dramatically.

  82. Here's some of the better ring close-ups by bani · · Score: 1

    MHO, of course:

    http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA06093.j pg

    http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA06095.j pg

  83. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by aonifer · · Score: 1

    and no, I'm not interested enough in this case to click either link

    If you had, you would have seen that both "Hi-guns" and "Hoi-guns" are acceptable.

  84. Rather (in)famous challenge to environmentalists by bani · · Score: 1

    cohen offered to eat the same amount of plutonium as nader would eat caffeine.

    http://www.atomicinsights.com/may95/plutonium_ef f. html

    unsuprisingly, nader never took him up on his challenge.

  85. Re:Huygens - phonetic pronunciation, please? Anyon by David+Gould · · Score: 1


    Huh. Guess that shows me.

    And yet, I still find it amusing that the two previous replies that I referred to each chose to quote a different one of the possible answers, without mentioning that there were any others. So the "ye shall be told both 'yea' and 'nay'" thing applies, even though in this case they were both right.

    Oh well, I think I'll just stick wth my original system of pronouncing it like "Hi-guns" on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Sundays, and "Hoi-guns" on all other days.

    --
    David Gould
    main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
  86. Ha... by Phil+John · · Score: 1

    ...by "software" I take it you mean crap flash animations. I mean, looking at his website, would you buy anything from this loon?

    --
    I am NaN
  87. I have nothing to contribute to this discussion by chegosaurus · · Score: 1

    But isn't this thing just so freakin cool? Reminds me why I used to get so excited about space type stuff. (Before the astrophysics degree knocked it all out of me.)