Slashdot Mirror


NASA's Deep Impact

NivenMK1 writes "The Seattle Times has an interesting article on NASA's plan to nail the comet Tempel 1 with a chunk of copper the size of a bathtub on July 4 this year. This copper 'bullet' is intended to strike the comet at approximately 23,000 mph and hit with a force equivalent to 4.7 tons of TNT. Scientists hope to discover what exactly the comet is made of and what changes have occurred to the outer layers with reference to the core."

314 comments

  1. Don't have to RTFA to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that there's someting dodgy there: 4th of July this year? The article is either strangely premature, or outdated.

    1. Re:Don't have to RTFA to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The probe may have gone at warp speed slingshot around the sun and gone back in time...

    2. Re:Don't have to RTFA to see... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      This won't make the Cometpeople very happy!

  2. Hit when? by ceeam · · Score: 4, Funny

    July 4 this year?! What a coincidence - it's the date the project I'm working on now should be finished to.

    1. Re:Hit when? by Gopal.V · · Score: 1

      Will it coincide with an Alien attack and the president flying into it to plant a virus ?.

    2. Re:Hit when? by daniil · · Score: 1

      They must be using a different calendar.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    3. Re:Hit when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the president draws on his Air Force experience to organize Earth's defenses. Of course, in our case, that probably means the president will just disappear to Alabama for a while.

    4. Re:Hit when? by uncoveror · · Score: 1

      Funny you should mention an alien attack. One destroyed the last comet probe, CONTOUR.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  3. Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by Linker3000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...where the bullet misses its target and curves back round to origin.

    Don't miss guys - and watch out for Hubble!

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
    1. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by Mod+Me+God+Five · · Score: 1, Funny

      No dude, its not a cartoon, its pr0n, I can see the popups now:

      NASA's Deep Impact, Starring [pun] Seymour Butts and Jade Hsu; can his bronze bullet penetrate deep enough or will she blow him to kingdom cum?

    2. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      ObFuturama quote:

      Zapp: Then what did we just blow up?
      [Kif checks the screen beside him.]
      Kif: The Hubble Telescope.

    3. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by RKBA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ... or where the bullet nudges the comet just enough to perturb its orbit in such a way that it hits earth 15 years from now. I for one would very much like to know more about why this won't happen. It seems to me that the comet's unknown composition would render any predictions of the effect on its orbit meaningless.

    4. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      If your prediction/concern were to be correct, then think of the bonus to NASA - 15 years of big budget increases and lots more copper bullets with which to hit it. (You could be on to something.)

    5. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by ferd_farkle · · Score: 1

      uh, not to be pedantic, but that's not a cartoon, it's an orbit - nevertheless, the MPAA would no doubt send a cease-and-desist.

    6. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by xanderwilson · · Score: 1

      Or what if it hits another planet where life exists, and it's got our return address on it?

      Alex.

    7. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      F=MV isn't very mutable. Small copper bullet @ 23,000 mph != multi-million ton object travelling at > 20,000 mph.

      While there is uncertainty of where that object will end up in 20 years due to the effect of such a simple change, it's not uncertain enough that we should worry about it any more than random interplanetary objects already striking it.

    8. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by RKBA · · Score: 1

      The problem is that most of the comets in our solar system have pretty much settled down into an equilibrium in the sense that any of them that were going to hit earth have already done so long ago (barring perturbations from outside our solar system). Introducing a new variable, even if very small, into that equilibrium would have an unknown future effect - like the proverbial butterfly wings precipitating a hurricane elsewhere.

    9. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Even something as simple as reducing Earth's mass by sending satellites throughout the solar system would have the same effect you describe. There are things to worry about in the world. This is not one of them.

    10. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by RKBA · · Score: 1
      Hardly. Tempel 1 has an approximate radius of only 3 kilometers. Earth has a radius of 6,378 kilometers. Even NASA says that "the impact will cause a slight change in the comet's orbit..."

    11. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      While I don't think I'm denying such a fact, the simple act of of sending the satellite to the comet "caused a slight change in the comet's orbit". The fact that it's miniscule and probably immeasurable with our current technology doesn't negate that fact.

      I'll worry about 747's falling out of the sky before getting bothered about an 820# copper bathtub slamming into a multi-million ton comet.

    12. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by RKBA · · Score: 1
      Oh I agree that the chances of Deep Impact causing a future collision of the comet with earth are minuscule, it's just that the penalty for being wrong is so immense that gives me pause. When a 747 falls out of the sky it only impacts a small area and can decimate a small village or town, but if Tempel 1 were to impact earth (and if it contains a rocky core rather than being all ice - no one yet knows its mass or composition) it would probably decimate an area the size of a small state and create serious problems worldwide for many years to come.

      I did a quick "back of the envelope" worst-case calculation based on conservation of momentum with the assumption that the density of Tempel 1 is the same as earth's (probably an erroneous assumption, but I have to assume something for its density) and that it's radius is 3 Km. Furthermore I assumed that Temple1 was stationary instead of worrying about vectors and orbital trajectories, and that the entire force of the impact is transferred to Tempel 1 (rather than being a glancing blow, or for the "bullet" to completely pierce the comet and exit from the other side). I also used 23,000 mph (37,015 km/hour) as the impact velocity, although I seem to recall reading somewhere that the actual relative impact velocity is more like 10,000 mph.

      Under these very simple conditions I found that the Deep Impact "bullet" would impart an incredibly speedy velocity of 0.5304 millimeter/day to Tempel 1! ;-) At that rate, it would require roughly 438 billion years to change Tempel's orbit by 0.568 AU (the closest the comet has ever approached the earth in the past), so I guess I don't have to worry about it happening in my lifetime! ;-) In fact, IIRC, in a couple of billion years Sol is supposed to become a red giant and engulf the entire solar system.

      What is more worrisome to me is what happens in it's next few encounters with Jupiter. According to the JPL Deep Impact web page, Tempel 1 is in a relatively stable but complex orbit which is in "1:2 resonance with Jupiter" (which I assume means that it rendezvous with Jupiter every two Jovian years). I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of "gravity assist." In two years the copper "bullet" would have displaced Tempel's orbit by roughly 39 cm (15 inches), and 78 cm the next visit, etc. Gravity assist can greatly accelerate or decelerate a spacecraft (or comet) depending upon the geometry of the encounter while also changing it's trajectory. If Tempel makes very close passes to Jupiter, might it be possible that this small difference in approach trajectory to Jupiter might be amplified by Jupiter's gravity and orbital motion to the point that Temple's trajectory is radically altered? I don't know the answer to that since I'm not an astrophysicist, but I certainly hope that the project scientists do know the answer, because they are gambling not only their own lives on the outcome, but all of humanities lives as well.

      I am all for space exploration, and have in fact written software for several space missions (including Cassini), so I know very well that things can and do go wrong - routinely. Because of that I would prefer a less intrusive method of determining Tempel's internal composition.

    13. Re:Cue Warner Bros cartoon... by benhaha · · Score: 1

      What is more worrisome to me is what happens in it's next few encounters with Jupiter. According to the JPL Deep Impact web page, Tempel 1 is in a relatively stable but complex orbit which is in "1:2 resonance with Jupiter" (which I assume means that it rendezvous with Jupiter every two Jovian years). I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of "gravity assist."

      The answer is that "Gravity Assist" is what keeps it in the resonance with Jupiter. If it gets ahead, jupiter slows it down, and if it gets behind jupiter gives it a kick. So in the long term this will have no effect on it's orbital trajectory whatsoever, and it will continue to plough the same furrow until it is vapourised by the sun.

      Interestingly, most large bodies in the solar system are in a resonant orbit with something or other, generally manifesting itself as orbital periods with ratios to each other which are small-integer fractions of each other.

      --
      NO ID: BEING FREE MEANS NOT HAVING TO PROVE IT
  4. This year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This year, July ...
    I'm looking forward ...

    1. Re:This year by novakyu · · Score: 2, Informative
      From TFA: Unfortunately, comet watchers will have to plant themselves somewhere between New Zealand and the southwestern United States to see it.

      'Got a nice yacht, perchance?

    2. Re:This year by Shag · · Score: 1

      No yacht, but unless their definition of "the southwestern United States" includes Hawaii (which would make it far more technically correct than most), the top of Mauna Kea might suffice as a place to watch it.

      --
      Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  5. Expensive launch mass? by FireFury03 · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Would it not be cheaper/better to drop a lump of high explosive on it rather than a heavy lump of copper?

    1. Re:Expensive launch mass? by imsabbel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You want to analyse the comet, which you can do by looking at the emission lines of the cloud forming after the impact, ect.
      An explosive is normally composed of chemically very reactive components, that can react with each other and the material of the comet, making it very hard to discern what WAS there and what was created by the blast.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    2. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Squapper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Explosive will heat up the comet, leave pollution, and make analysis of the dust very hard....

    3. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Cougem · · Score: 1

      Yeh, or something the world can spare, like, ooo, I don't know.....a melted down blob of AOL demo CDs? Or George Bush, pre-frozen in carbonite? Or Paris?

    4. Re:Expensive launch mass? by HeghmoH · · Score: 5, Informative

      The lump of copper is 820 pounds, and will be equivalent to 5 tons of TNT. If you sent an 820-pound lump of TNT, you would get an explosion of about 5.4 tons of TNT. An extra .4 tons-TNT increase, in exchange for a vastly more dangerous mission and chemical contamination is not a good trade.

      At these speeds, the kinetic energy is so great that chemical explosives are nearly pointless.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    5. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Mod+Me+God+Five · · Score: 5, Funny

      And millions of years from now the aliens invezstigating the comet will scratch their heads thinking 'why is there a piece of copper the size of a bathtub on this comet'. Far greater amusement factor.

    6. Re:Expensive launch mass? by f4llenang3l · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think the emission lines would actually provide much of a problem, it would be pretty easy to filter out the gaseous emissions of the explosives... I think the greater problem would be the unpredictability of the momentum problem if you added a chemical explosion. With a solid projectile, you can expect to learn a lot about the comet simply by what happens to the path of the intercepting projectile- ie shooting the snowball example. But, if you shoot a snowball with an RPG, or an iceball with an RPG, it's a lot harder to look at the resulting dispersion and tell what the target was made of after the fact.

      --

      ---
      she won't let you fly, but she might let you sing
    7. Re:Expensive launch mass? by DoctorPepper · · Score: 1

      Or Paris?

      France or Hilton?

      --

      No matter where you go... there you are.
    8. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      ummm...

      how are you planning to get the explosive equivalent of 5.4 tons of TNT from only 820 lbs of TNT?

      I think the thermodynamic police will be after you.

      rho

    9. Re:Expensive launch mass? by DoraLives · · Score: 4, Funny
      France or Hilton?

      Yes.

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    10. Re:Expensive launch mass? by HeghmoH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The other 5 tons of TNT of explosion comes from the kinetic energy.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    11. Re:Expensive launch mass? by batemanm · · Score: 1

      How do we know that this hasn't already happened and that there isn't already a bathtub sized chunk of copper on it. That would probably screw up the results somewhat.

    12. Re:Expensive launch mass? by nmk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not sure if it would be amusing. In all likelihood, it would be a startling discovery. Can you imagine what would happen if we were to find large metallic unnatural object stuck in a commit. It would be the first potential evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

    13. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 5, Funny
      Would it not be cheaper/better to drop a lump of high explosive on it rather than a heavy lump of copper?

      Given NASA's budget, copper made more sense. Finding themselves unable to afford chemical or nuclear explosives, NASA employees have spent the last four years collecting stray pennies - checking under seat cushions in taxis, keeping a watchful eye on the sidewalks and streets near their offices, and so on and so forth. Also, twice a year they held bake sales in the Vistor's Center where purchases had to be paid for entirely in pennies. Since they also lacked the budget to purchase a safe, or even a large piggy bank, one enterprising employee scrounged an old bathtub from a nearby dump, and placed it in the hall outside the Deep Impact lab for people to toss the pennies into. (Which is why the project is using the new "size of a bathtub" metric instead of the international "Volkswagon" unit of measurement.)

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
    14. Re:Expensive launch mass? by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 0


      Not at all. First off, there's the matter of chemical contamination of the "sample" we're trying to dislodge from the comet. Secondly, it would deprive us of the following conversation.

      NASA tech #1: So what are we launching at that comet?
      NASA tech #2: Golden bathtub.
      NASA tech #1: THEY BOUGHT IT?
      NASA tech #2: Totally.
      NASA tech #1: So what do we try next?
      NASA tech #2: Golden bust of Paris Hilton having sex with Wilt Chamberlain.
      NASA tech #1: Awesome...

    15. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Trailwalker · · Score: 1

      And in further news, a back up is being prepared, using a Kitchen Sink.....

    16. Re:Expensive launch mass? by khrtt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I know: let's send Bush to Paris, in a blob of melted down AOL demo CDs.

    17. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Charcharodon · · Score: 1

      Hmmm let's see a bathtube sized piece of copper or 4.7 million tons of TNT as in 4.7 mega tons. A "lumb" of high explosive at that weight equivalence is called a nuke, and the odds of that happening are about zero.

    18. Re:Expensive launch mass? by djmurdoch · · Score: 5, Funny

      How do we know that this hasn't already happened and that there isn't already a bathtub sized chunk of copper on it.

      It'll be easy to tell them apart. Aliens are generally either tall and thin or short and squat, so their bathtubs would be quite a different shape.

    19. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Informative
      Finding themselves unable to afford chemical or nuclear explosives, NASA employees have spent the last four years collecting stray pennies

      Hmmm... their experimental data is going to be skewed when they find out that today's pennies are actually 98% zinc.

    20. Re:Expensive launch mass? by mikael · · Score: 1

      All your base metals are belong to us...

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    21. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Have+Blue · · Score: 3, Funny

      The Volkswagen standard is only for measuring large meteoroids. Please use it correctly in the future.

    22. Re:Expensive launch mass? by JeremyALogan · · Score: 1

      ha ha... joke's on them. pennies barely have any copper in them at all.

    23. Re:Expensive launch mass? by slashname3 · · Score: 1

      You do realize that today's pennies are mostly zinc?

    24. Re:Expensive launch mass? by luna69 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ok, sorry in advance for being nitpicky but I enjoy this sort of thing. Mea culpa.

      A quick calculation shows that the OP figure of 4.7 tons of TNT is high by about 0.12 ton TNT equiv.:

      KE = 0.5 * 370kg * (23000mph)^2 = 1.956E17 ergs

      1 ton TNT = 4.26E16 ergs (rough, but fairly good approx.)

      1.95E17 ergs / (4.26E16 ergs) = 4.58 ton TNT equiv.

      --
      No gods, no demons, and no masters. Secular Humanism!
    25. Re:Expensive launch mass? by dargaud · · Score: 1
      At these speeds, the kinetic energy is so great that chemical explosives are nearly pointless
      Which is why, if alien wanted to destroy civilisation on Earth, they wouldn't come firing with laser guns like in most sci-fi flicks, but just slowly accelerate a bunch of moderate size asteroids over the course of some decades/centuries.
      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    26. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Whoa slow down. So let me get this straight 820 pds TNT = 5.4 tonnes of TNT?

      Dude you need the metric system SO BAD!

      However 820 pounds is quite a bit of weight to throw up there and accelerate around, isn't a satellite like 1kg these days?

      They must be really looking for something, fossil fuels? But they won't have any Arab's to bomb, I don't think the U.S. government will go for it.

    27. Re:Expensive launch mass? by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      Wake up, engage brain.

      820 pounds of TNT at 23,000 miles per hour produces an explosion equivalent to 5.4 tonnes of TNT. Most of this energy comes from the kinetic energy of the projectile, which is the same whether you use an explosive or a lump of metal, which was my entire point.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    28. Re:Expensive launch mass? by krbvroc1 · · Score: 1

      And millions of years from now the aliens invezstigating the comet will scratch their heads thinking 'why is there a piece of copper the size of a bathtub on this comet'. Far greater amusement factor.

      More than likely some other civilization will send a 'rover' to investigate the comet. Upon finding the bathtub sized piece of copper--there will be widespread debate on the origins of the comet and if there was life on the comet. Employment oppurtunities will be generated for thousands for many years. The final conclusion will be that life must have existed on the comet which must have been a planet. The inhabitants became extinct when their copper ran out. Warring factions battle over the last chunk of copper causing their ultimate destruction.

    29. Re:Expensive launch mass? by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      Thats not bathtub its soup plate, and if you come at right time, it has some meat in it with some funny tasting spice in it.

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    30. Re:Expensive launch mass? by 0WaitState · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine what would happen if we were to find large metallic unnatural object stuck in a commit.

      Oh, I don't know. Ask any experienced DBA what he thinks of BLOBs.

      --

      Remain calm! All is well!
    31. Re:Expensive launch mass? by forkazoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just in case anybody wants to know, the international measure for a bathtub is:

      1 bathtub = 3.4 decivolkwagons

    32. Re:Expensive launch mass? by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

      Or alternatively, they were launching the mass at 23 271.3448 mph, which provides almost exactly 4.7 tons, and they just decided to round a little.

      --
      Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
    33. Re:Expensive launch mass? by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Yes, but certain chemicals will react with other chemicals, producing compounds that were not present in either original source. In some respects you have the same issue with copper, but less so than a complicated chemical and electronic mixture that you'd have with a chemical bomb and detonator mix.

      Plus, a copper bullet travelling at 23000 mph cannot fail, as long as it's on the proper course.

      K.I.S.S.

    34. Re:Expensive launch mass? by itzac · · Score: 1
      Chemical explosives work by producing very large amounts of gas very quickly. In an atmosphere this creates a large and steep pressure gradient which flows outwards as a shockwave. Without an atmosphere you have a lot of gas that, tho it would disperse at a good rate, would not have nearly the same effect. Most of the explosive energy would be trapped by the gas, causing it to heat up.

      It's for this same reason that the lunar landers created suspiciously small dust craters on the moon's surface. Dust was only moved if it came into direct contact with the gas expelled by the lander.

      Would make for a pretty light show, tho.

      <sig/>

    35. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just make sure the guys at Martin Marietta have the conversion right. American vs european maesure and all that.

    36. Re:Expensive launch mass? by smithmc · · Score: 1


      They should make the copper slug in the shape of a monolith, with proportions 1 by 4 by 9...

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
    37. Re:Expensive launch mass? by phizzits · · Score: 1

      Explosives generally require oxygen to explode. That's why sci fi movies are generally bullshit.

    38. Re:Expensive launch mass? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be the first potential evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

      Or maybe morons with excess copper and rocket propellant!!

    39. Re:Expensive launch mass? by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

      Paris Hilton and me at the Hilton in Paris in France?

    40. Re:Expensive launch mass? by jeephistorian · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. It is also recognized as the standard by which large naval guns are measured.

      --
      Huh?
    41. Re:Expensive launch mass? by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah, I meant *metric* decivolkswagons, if anybody didn't understand!

  6. I don't know about you... by Ramsey-07 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ....But hitting a rock on Independance day sounds like a bad idea, what if it's an Alien's rock?

    We can't just keep going around the Solar system bashing things up that's not ours!

    1. Re:I don't know about you... by lxt · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be honest, I think I many more people wouldn't mind the White House being destroyed by aliens this time around... :)

    2. Re:I don't know about you... by Councilor+Hart · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      You are an american, aren't you?
      Destroying an entire building filled with a few hundred people in it, while actually you only want to take out one guy.

      Oh, and stop asking us to do your dirty work.

    3. Re:I don't know about you... by BeatlesForum.com · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's not a majority of people.

      2004 Election Results

      --
      When millions disappear from earth, it's not aliens, it's the rapture.
    4. Re:I don't know about you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know there are people who don't live in the US, right?

    5. Re:I don't know about you... by mordors9 · · Score: 1

      Personally I was hoping for your house.

    6. Re:I don't know about you... by zpok · · Score: 1

      "It's not a majority of people."

      Depending on your definition of "People". I'd say if your definition is all inclusive (US Americans), then we can debate till we're blue in the face.
      If however you want to count in all the riff-raff, you can safely assume it's a vast majority. ;)

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    7. Re:I don't know about you... by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      Hey, if it is stupid enough to come close enough to the little blue planet with the angry monkeys with rockets, it's its* own fault!

      If the aliens want to keep their comet from getting a bathtub-sized copper suppository, keep it the hell away from us!

      * wow, I hope I used the correct forms of possesive and contractions so the grammar nazis leave me alone!

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    8. Re:I don't know about you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to the children of this post...

      get a fucking sense of humour. maybe that's why there's so much damn tension between the parties; niether can take a simple joke.

    9. Re:I don't know about you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Destroying an entire building filled with a few hundred people in it, while actually you only want to take out one guy."

      Afghanistan: Take out Osama bin Laden. Many civilians die. Osama not taken out.

      Iraq: Take out Saddam. Many civilians die.

      Blow up the White House: Take out Bush. Many civilians die.

      So, what's the difference? I'm sure many people sympthasise with Osama, and would take offence at a joke about killing him, in the same way you take offence to a joke about killing Bush. A joke like that is always going to offend some people - but just remember, there's always the other side of the argument.

    10. Re:I don't know about you... by Tuna_Shooter · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What a retarded thing to say. Can you say sore loser. ?

      --
      *--- Sometimes a majority only means that all the fools are on the same side. ---*
    11. Re:I don't know about you... by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      all the riff-raff,
      Please do not talk about the French this way. :-)
      (Did you mean the people of the world or just the citizens (voting or nonvoting) of the U.S.?)

    12. Re:I don't know about you... by militiaMan · · Score: 0

      Well I would say the same thing for Kerry and Bush.

      Although if the libertarians had won then I would send it to the Democrat or Republican National committees. Oh well..

    13. Re:I don't know about you... by zpok · · Score: 1

      I did indeed mean the rest of the world.

      And, actually, I live in France at the moment. I don't think most'd consider this post an insult, given the context. They have a wonderful appreciation of the cynical...

      Needless to say I love it here, although I don't think much of their "freedom fries". Belgian fries, there is no substitute!

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    14. Re:I don't know about you... by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      I have spent only a very limited amount of time in France, mostly in the Paris Nord train station. It was not much fun. However, I love Scotland, London, Leipzig, Pisa and Rome; Leipzig and Pisa (and Edinburgh) are my favorites. (You can have Frankfort and Milan.)

    15. Re:I don't know about you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Beatles were extremely liberal...

      I would go as far to say as they encompass a good deal of liberal values.

      I just find it funny when staunch republicans are also staunch Beatles fans.

    16. Re:I don't know about you... by zpok · · Score: 1

      Well, if Paris is your only reference, you could have a very negative image of the French... Beautiful city, but you have to be lucky to meet the nice people. A bit like NY before 9/11. Absolutely no irony intended, have been there before and (just) after, and it was incredible how nice everyone was. BTW, imo NY is incredible (literally, I didn't believe half of what I saw ;-)

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    17. Re:I don't know about you... by Phragmen-Lindelof · · Score: 1

      I know several French people and they are very nice. I was told that people in Paris leave (or wish they could leave) in the summer.

    18. Re:I don't know about you... by Boronx · · Score: 1
      Or when staunch Republicans are Jesus fans (the ultimate liberal) or pot heads or swingers.

      Don't you know that half your party would gladly throw you in the clink for your deviant sex acts?

    19. Re:I don't know about you... by RobinH · · Score: 1

      What a retarded thing to say. Can you say sore loser. ?

      Not to be too nitpicky, but the original post was talking about "people", not Americans. Pretty certain the majority of all people on Earth might not mind seeing the whitehouse getting blown up in ID4. Actually, it got quite a good cheer the first time around in the theatre I was in, and that was back in Clinton's time. Then again, I was watching it in Canada, not the U.S.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    20. Re:I don't know about you... by flyingsquid · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In my opinion, Parisians are assholes. Maybe towards Americans in particular, but I was talking to a Spaniard who'd lived there for years and I got the impression from him that people there weren't particularly friendly towards anybody. However I've also been told that outside Paris, we're still remembered as those guys who got rid of the Germans. And from my very limited experience, they do seem to be much more welcoming towards Americans (or again, perhaps just towards anybody) outside Paris.

      A couple years ago, right during the push for the Iraq invasion, I dislocated my shoulder on a train in Northern France(slept on it wrong) and ended up in the E.R. in Nancy-Ville or however the heck it's called. They were sort of amused by my hollering loudly in English ("Americain" one of the guys remarked to his buddy with a chuckle) but my brief stay there dealing with the E.R. doctors and nurses and people around town the next day, they didn't have a huge problem with me being an American who spoke three words of French, and impressed me as being pretty hospitable. Plus, I got a ride to the E.R. in an ambulance, an X-ray, some morphine(weird stuff... you still notice the pain sensations but it doesn't hurt), a relocated shoulder, and a few hours of sleep on a stretcher for, I shit you not, like 100 euros... this would cost easily a couple thousand in the states, without the ambulance ride (I know 'cause I've done this a lot). Socialized medicine, don't knock it till you've tried it.

    21. Re:I don't know about you... by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      Belgium...

      Any country that is known for it's chocolate, beer and chips seems to have it's priorities right.

    22. Re:I don't know about you... by BeatlesForum.com · · Score: 1

      Jesus fans (the ultimate liberal)

      Hardly the ultimate liberal.

      But to give you some credit, when He returns to this earth I'm sure He won't be a Democrat or a Republican.

      I can't blame you for buying into the "Jesus was a liberal" lie. It's typical spin from a group of individuals (no matter what political, ethnic or race-based background) who refuse to accept the absolute truths of Jesus and the Bible.

      If Jesus were a liberal, would he allow abortion? The Bible says that God knew you before you were born and in your mother's womb. Some liberals in this country would have you believe you're a sack of replaceable cells up until the time you are born. Until that time, however, it's alright to give women the "choice" to abort you. It's all about women's rights, right? The unborn child has no say.

      If Jesus were a liberal, would he condone (or at least turn a blind eye) to unrepentant adultery? Nope - Clinton was a self-professed church-going Christian, but Jesus says that even lusting after another woman is adultery in your heart. I'm willing to bet that Clinton had a little more than his heart invested during his presidency, but so do countless others who somehow justify their thoughts and behavior.

      If Jesus were a liberal, would he condone capital punishment? Yes. The Book of Numbers clearly defines when capital punishment is acceptable.

      Now I can't help if some staunch Republicans are pot heads or swingers. I don't know of their moral convictions. But I do know that Jesus gave a speech called the Sermon on the Mount that taught people how to live their lives morally and ethically. Too many people claim to be a member of this religion we call Christianity but too few have a personal relationship with Christ and it shows in their fruits.

      --
      When millions disappear from earth, it's not aliens, it's the rapture.
    23. Re:I don't know about you... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      I agree about the thoughts on morphine, although I would describe my experience with it as not really doing anything for the pain, but putting me in a state where I really didn't care about it. :-) The overwhelming nausea that came later made me wonder how anyone could find taking it pleasurable to the point of voluntarily taking enough of it to become addicted.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    24. Re:I don't know about you... by Peaceful_Patriot · · Score: 1

      We can't just keep going around the Solar system bashing things up that's not ours!

      It has been suspected for some time, and recently proven, that this comet is harboring WMDs and needs to be dealt with before it becomes a threat. Pictures and documents have been leaked to the press that proves this to be true. The comet also tried to purchase uranium from some shady African arms dealers.

      We have given this comet every chance to comply and now we have no choice but to take decisive action.

      --
      There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.
    25. Re:I don't know about you... by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      I would describe my experience with it as not really doing anything for the pain, but putting me in a state where I really didn't care about it

      Yeah, that's probably a slightly more accurate description of how I felt. A shot of valium though... woo! That's the shit. You instantly go off to the Land Where Everything is Groovy, and your muscles sort of turn to jelly.

    26. Re:I don't know about you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eddie Izzard: "Do you know there are other countries?"

    27. Re:I don't know about you... by Councilor+Hart · · Score: 1

      Damn
      I knew it was a joke, I found it funny.
      Guess my joke was not funny.

    28. Re:I don't know about you... by Boronx · · Score: 1
      If Jesus were a liberal, would he allow abortion?

      Jesus never talked about abortion that we know of. "Pro-Choice", while a bullwark plank of the Democratic party, is not a particularly liberal position. There are hordes of "Pro-life" liberals, and liberals everywhere would agree that reducing abortions is an important goal.

      Meanwhile, "Pro-life", though a bullwark of the Republican party, is a position not shared by legions of conservatives.

      but Jesus says that even lusting after another woman is adultery in your heart.

      Do you have any idea why he says this? Let me ask you a couple of questions: Did Jesus ever lust after a woman in his heart? Have you? Don't you recall that famous bit where he puts a stop to a stoning?

      If Jesus were a liberal, would he condone capital punishment? Yes. The Book of Numbers clearly defines when capital punishment is acceptable.

      You might have a point, if Jesus didn't directly contradict Numbers by interceding to save people who were being executed under its law, admonishing those who would carry it out! Do you even know this righteous long haired hippy whom you claim to worship?

      But I do know that Jesus gave a speech called the Sermon on the Mount that taught people how to live their lives morally and ethically.

      To see what sort of political leader Jesus is, you ought to read more Sermon on the Mount. Republicans who are Jesus fans love citing the old testement, but when it comes to the gospels, the actual words of their hero, they don't seem to have much to say.

    29. Re:I don't know about you... by tod_miller · · Score: 1

      You should really buy a travel cushion.

      It costs like a few euros, and will save you a lot of money judging by your need to sleep awkwardly on public transport!

      Or get those with suction cups, stick it to a window/convienient forehead, and rest away.

      --
      #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  7. Silly question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why copper?

    Is it because Tempel 1 is known to not contain any copper itself, so it makes the spectral signature easier to read?

    1. Re:Silly question... by MoonFog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nobody's sure what will happen next. There's a small chance the impactor will blow the 2-½-mile-long comet to smithereens, or simply bore through it like a bullet through a snowball. More likely, scientists say, it will blast open a crater the size of a football stadium. It all depends on what Tempel 1 is made of, and how sturdily it is composed. Which is exactly what scientists hope to learn.

      In essence it appears they don't know jack shit what it really contains.

    2. Re:Silly question... by XenonDif · · Score: 5, Informative
      to quote NASA:

      "The impactor is made primarily of copper (49%) as opposed to aluminum (24%) because it minimizes corruption of spectral emission lines that are used to analyze the nucleus."

      http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/tech/impactor.html

  8. Consequences of destroying a comet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are there any possible issues like destruction of important "environments"(if a comet could be called an evironment) if the comet is blown to pieces by this experiment? I mean, is it possible that important microorganisms or other important/rare/valuable occurences may be destroyed if this comment is blown up? It kind of reminds me of some of the unintended consequences of mans earlier forays into new environments on earth. I just wonder if these kind of scenarios have been considered.

    1. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by Devalia · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or a young race on a planet far,far away who view the comet as a sign to reproduce.

    2. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by VocabularyNazi · · Score: 0

      someone's sig on here sums up the whole driving force behind why these types of experiments are carried out:

      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."

      --
      I will not be using Plan 9 in the creation of weapons of mass destruction to be used by nations other than the US.
    3. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by Ianoo · · Score: 1

      You forgot about the even younger race who view exploding comets as a sign to reproduce, you insensitive clod!

    4. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by r.jimenezz · · Score: 2, Informative
      I mean, is it possible that important microorganisms or other important/rare/valuable occurences may be destroyed if this comment is blown up?

      Nah... No offence intended but this is your run-of-the-mill, typical AC comment :)

      Seriously though, you've got an interesting point. Even if no life is up there I wonder how smashing a comet affects things as a whole.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised.
    5. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by lateral · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well if we find a dump-truck sized lump of copper being thrown back at the Earth in a few days we can probably conclude that we pissed *somebody* off.

      Either that or they're just trying to talk to us...

      L.

    6. Re:Consequences of destroying a comet by Saint+Aardvark · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Ha! Check out the Engines of Light from Ken MacLeod, who is one of the best goddamned SciFi authors since Heinlein or Gibson. The series is about Gods -- vastly intelligent, hugely complex colonies of bacteria that live in comets -- and what happens when they allow themselves to be discovered by humans.

      I can't possibly do justice to the series here, but I will say that he namechecks Slashdot. Check him out -- his books are absolutely incredible.

  9. RTFA by ari_j · · Score: 2, Informative

    820 pounds, from the first sentence of paragraph 3.

    1. Re:RTFA by ceeam · · Score: 1

      Nice bathtubs they have out there.

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

      "820 pounds"

      Or about the same as a VW Beetle...

  10. Morgan Freeman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was Morgan Freeman involved in it in any way?

    1. Re:Morgan Freeman by meringuoid · · Score: 1

      Morgan? No, not quite, but close. They're sending up the sample now...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  11. I'm waiting for the comethuggers... by rseuhs · · Score: 3, Funny
    ... to step up and tell us that we can't do that and we are destroying nature.

    1. Re:I'm waiting for the comethuggers... by f4llenang3l · · Score: 1

      Aw, hell, if they're that worried about it they can go chain themselves to the comet.
      I wonder if NASA would still have the balls to keep the bathtub on-target then?

      --

      ---
      she won't let you fly, but she might let you sing
    2. Re:I'm waiting for the comethuggers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the copper bathtub, you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:I'm waiting for the comethuggers... by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      Don't worry there will be a mission for them too. Next time they will be send STRAIGHT ahead to hug a comet in space suit...

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    4. Re:I'm waiting for the comethuggers... by 1600+penn+ave · · Score: 1

      comethuggers, interesting:: We already have planethuggers, according to slashdot article (Scientists Propose 'National Parks' On Mars)http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04 /11/27/1947215&tid=160&tid=1 it would stand to reason that some "group" will more than likely file a lawsuit to stop the comet smashing before it starts in ernest.....

  12. 23,000 mph by ari_j · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article doesn't state if this velocity is relative to Cape Cod or relative to the comet. It makes a big difference.

    1. Re:23,000 mph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say it's the closing speed. It seems that the mass itself will have little velocity of it's own. (ref: Deer-on-highway allusion)

    2. Re:23,000 mph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the comet. Although at those speeds, it probably doesn't much matter which one you choose. Err, incidentally, why Cape Cod? Wouldn't Cape Canaveral make more sense, seeing how the topic is NASA and space probes?

    3. Re:23,000 mph by ari_j · · Score: 1

      No, it wouldn't. :P

      I'm talking relative speeds, here. The only velocity that matters is (v.bullet - v.comet). I don't care of |v.bullet| or |v.comet| is 23,000mph; I care about how hard they actually collide.

  13. Comet's part of a national park by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smash a comet?

    Sorry, can't do it. It's part of a national park and thus must be kept in its pristine state.

  14. Oops by Savage+Conan · · Score: 1, Funny

    I wonder if there is any danger of some chunks coming to Earth that would be large enough to survive the entry into our atmosphere and cause some damage at the white house? One can always hope.

    1. Re:Oops by Ramsey-07 · · Score: 0

      Doubtful, Why do you think we tried the Pretzel first?

    2. Re:Oops by FatherOfONe · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Wow John Kerry is now posting on Slashdot!

      Sorry you lost John, but I thought it was funny you are now blaming Fox news and the OBL tape on your loss.

      Well seeing that you have a lot more time on your hands now, perhaps we will see more of your post on Slashdot :-)

      Oh yeah please give my simpathy to Dan Rather, he did everything he could to get you elected and it cost him his job.

      --
      The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
    3. Re:Oops by ezzzD55J · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Sorry you lost John, but I thought it was funny you are now blaming Fox news and the OBL tape on your loss.

      How do you think Kerry losing caused the OBL tape and Fox news?

    4. Re:Oops by medelliadegray · · Score: 1

      careful what you say--big brother may be reading this and you may get moded +1 Terrorist.

      and then my friend, a governmeny agency may just put a jihad on you.

      --
      Troll, Troll, go away and flame again some other day
    5. Re:Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's about 5 billion people hoping just like you. ;-)

    6. Re:Oops by FatherOfONe · · Score: 1

      It is the opposite. Kerry has blamed the OBL tape and Fox News on his loss.

      I believe in his mind he thinks that Fox news was not fair to him. Yet the irony is that he was asked multiple times to come on the network. Also I believe he thinks that once the tape was released it caused people to be scared again and thus those people voted for Bush.

      What I would have liked to see him do is take the blame on himself and try and understand why he carried such a small amount of the religious vote. It gets very bad for him when you consider that over 70% of his vote came from people that were voting AGAINST BUSH!

      He like most of the slashdot community seem to take methods when talking with conservatives.
      1. Call them stupid.
      2. Paint them as war mongers and evil.
      3. Blame others when they don't get their way.

      Now Kerry's image with the religious voters appeared to be that of someone who tries to say the correct things but his actions and voting record appear to be the opposite. Specifically he is a Catholic who is dicated by the pope to believe life begins at conception, yet he has voted multiple times against partial birth abortion. He never explained this to the satisfaction of those voters. At least Bush went to the black caucus. Granted after the way he was treated, I can't blame him for not going back.

      So what I would like to see is the democrates refocus their efforts and try and reach out to those other voters. They don't appear to be doing that at all. Now that they are losing their total control over the mass media, their future doesn't look too bright if they don't make some changes.

      --
      The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
    7. Re:Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sorry you lost John

      Funny, I thought it was first and foremost the American people who lost, not to mention the rest of the world.

  15. Maybe next... by Tropaios · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They'll develop a working missile defense system. All kidding aside how hard is it going to be to position this giant copper bullet in the path of a speeding comet? How acurately can they predict the comets path (whenever I here about near earth passes they are always given in wide ranges as to how near they actually came). So maybe I just naieve but the idea that we could hurl a giant block of metal into a comet traveling 23,000 miles per hour millions of miles away, I feel like a kid again at the wonderment.

  16. Time is curved. by JustOK · · Score: 1

    That's the only answer...

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
    1. Re:Time is curved. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's the only answer..."

      ummm, no. The only answer is either: "There is no spoon" or "42"

  17. Sadly by eclectro · · Score: 4, Funny


    Our comets are now under attack. Please join the Society for the Preservation of Comets, before it's too late.

    Hopefully together we can make a difference. It's time to stop these bigoted scientists from damaging comets with bathtub size copper slugs, just "to see what will happen."

    Without comets, there would be no space snowballs. This must stop.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Sadly by SnoBall · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but don't eat the yellow space-snow.

      --
      Don't eat me ... *looks at nickname* ... okay, eat me.
  18. I just know that... by zecg · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...NASA is lying. The comet is actually heading straight for Earth and the best plan they have is to launch a copper bathtub filled with Bruce Willis.

    --
    .i lu doi ringos.star. xu do puku'aroroi dunli dopecaku leni virnu li'u
    1. Re:I just know that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least we'll have fun watching his rag-tag team of misfits as prissy Nasa scientists vainly try to get them in some sort of regular shape. Also be on the lookout for Russian comic relief.

    2. Re:I just know that... by th3w4y · · Score: 1

      it is more plausible what you have written than what NASA is telling us

    3. Re:I just know that... by robotsrule · · Score: 1

      Actually knowing our luck... The comet isn't heading towards us but after the copper bullet hits it, a large Detroit sized chunk of it will split off the comet and heads towards earth. - BCOD (Blue Comet Of Death)

      --


      Robert Oschler - RobotsRule.com
  19. $311 million!! by muditgarg · · Score: 1

    "Nobody's sure what will happen next"

    Spending 311 million dollars without knowing what happens next doesnt seem a very nice idea.

    1. Re:$311 million!! by XenonDif · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Spending 311 million dollars without knowing what happens next doesnt seem a very nice idea.

      Nasa is conducting the experiment precicely BECAUSE nobody know what will happen next. If we knew with certainty what was going to happen, THEN there wouldn't be a very good reason for carrying on with the experiment.

      Last year they spent $200 billion blowing up comet Baghdad and we're all still waiting to see how that cliffhanger's going to end! This time it's cheaper and it doens't involve killing anybody.

    2. Re:$311 million!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they knew there would be no reason to do the experiment!

    3. Re:$311 million!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, spending $311 million on a scientific experiment , when you already knew what would happen would be a waste.

    4. Re:$311 million!! by zpok · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't know, doesn't that happen all the time at Congress? Isn't that what neo-conservatism is all about?

      "We don't know what'll happen, but we have faith in God, America and the Free Market - unless of course it isn't in our interest."

      Seems almost refreshing after Reagan and Thatcher's "This is not happening." style of spending...

      I'd rather they throw a few millions at a meteorite than countless billions at the army in the name of Peace and Democracy...

      On that topic, there's a nice study floating around correlating the amount of the use of the word "Peace" used in political speeches with the subsequent use of violence against other nations... Go google if interested.

      --
      I think, therefore I am...I think.
    5. Re:$311 million!! by muditgarg · · Score: 1

      What I meant is that they arent even sure whether it will drill a hole through it , blow it up , or create a crater i.e. they arent sure how deep a hole is it going to make , which is very critical as the article states

    6. Re:$311 million!! by novakyu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Spending 311 million dollars without knowing what happens next doesnt seem a very nice idea.

      And I quote:
      "If we knew what we were doing it wouldn't be research."
      - Albert Einstein

    7. Re:$311 million!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hum, isn't that what's happening in Iraq? But on a much larger scale...

    8. Re:$311 million!! by jrp2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spending 311 million dollars without knowing what happens next doesnt seem a very nice idea.

      I am sure there is military research aspect in this project too. The ability to hit a comet with a bathtub-sized hunk of metal is probably good practice for hitting an adversary's satellite with a bar of soap-sized hunk of metal.

      I highly doubt this is purely civilian science in action.

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    9. Re:$311 million!! by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

      Spending $311 million to satisfy the curiousity of humankind is a tiny price compared to the hundreds of billions we spend on the military every year, globally.

  20. STOP NASA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My guess.... It'll be a huge bomb and will blow up the universe!

    1. Re:STOP NASA! by Ramsey-07 · · Score: 0

      Let us pray that it isn't filled with Nitric Acid, and comes back on a collission course, Copper reacts quite nicely with acids. "(NO is colorless. It goes on to react in air with oxygen to form brown NO2.)" -> http://dwb.unl.edu/Chemistry/MicroScale/MScale04.h tml/

    2. Re:STOP NASA! by sadomikeyism · · Score: 1

      Ooooh! Ooooh! I saw this episode of Stargate SG-1. The core of the comet is made up of n'aquita and will cause an explosion the size of the solar system when we kick it off.... don't worry, though, we've got that trusty warp drive to warp it through the planet... uh, where's the warp drive?

      --
      "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves
  21. Mighty Joe Young by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    I cen see it now. Joe freaks out and hurls chunks of comet at earth while Fay's eye glazes over with shock. Helicopters swarm the air blaring Pennies From Heaven over huge loudspeakers. Trembling earthlings make their pleas to $deity(s) SUddenly Godzilla and Mothra appear out of nowhere. Godzilla hurls balls of magma in escort for mothra who flies toward the comet and Joe. Will mankind survive. Why did he mess with nature (again). Coming soon to a theatre near you. A NASA production.

  22. The Original Plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Was to scour the earth and gather together the meanest ex-con alcoholic drilling team humankind has to offer, and land them on the comet with a couple of nuclear warheads for this experiment.

    Unfortunately, the MPAA sent a cease and desist order to NASA informing them that this would be infringing on the IP of one of their client's copyrighted movies.

    Hence, plan B involves throwing a bathtub at the comet instead. Go NASA!

  23. NASA? Deep Impact? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... am I the only one who thought this was the name of a new NASA produced pr0n flick?

  24. Forgot one thing: by imsabbel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Look at the numbers:
    The impact power of the copper rod is 4+ tonnes of TNT. IF you wanted to double the blast, you would have to send more than 4 tonnes of explosives.
    at 30km/s+, the kinetic energy of the material is bigger than the chemical energy of explosives.
    The added energy just doesnt matter anymore because it would be difficult to time the blast, plus the softness of the explosives would reduce the impact penetration.

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  25. Dumbing it down for fun & profit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More likely, scientists say, it will blast open a crater the size of a football stadium.

    The copper hammer, equipped with a camera, guidance and maneuvering systems, will move directly into the comet's path, like a deer stepping in front of a speeding pickup truck.

    Deer in front of pickups? Ugh! Bathtub-sized bullets, (American) tons of TNT... sadly no VW cars mentioned, but I've got my fingers crossed for the follow-up article!

  26. Is this comet, by any chance, the size of Texas? by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

    We might have to send a crew of rednecks up to drill into it first.

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
  27. Weapon test? by datadriven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is this a test of a planetary defence system? Imagine if the dinosaurs could have had one of those.

    1. Re:Weapon test? by Epistax · · Score: 1

      Right. If only the dinosaurs had a copper bathtub.

      Oh well.

  28. End of the Earth? by miaDWZ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I the only one who feels this is the start to a disaster movie?

    "The year is 2004, and the scientists of the day decide to crack open a comet with a bullet the size of a bathtub. But then the unthinkable happens. The comet bullet causes the comet to change path and come right towards Earth and there is nothing we can do to stop it. Will all Earth will be destroyed? Will our hero be able to save the world? There is only one way to find out..."

    Coming to cinemas everywhere this Summer.

  29. Why do I want to break out my atari by Da+w00t · · Score: 4, Funny
    ... and play asteroids? 8-)
    > . . O
    I can just see the "bullet" hitting the asteroid, but .. we've only got one bullet, so how in the heck are we going to deal with the bits of asteroid from the big one? I mean, the entire point of firing up on the asteroid in the first place was to vaporise it. They think one shot will do it? C'mon, we all know from experience that you have to break it down to advnace to the next level.
    --

    da w00t. mtfnpy?
    1. Re:Why do I want to break out my atari by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my favorite game, but I don't think that's why NASA is doing this.

      Potential reasons:
      1. If you recall, one space problem is "space junk" including tiny particles that hit spacecraft and can disable them or satellites. This shooting of the comet will definitely create more space junk, enabling us to disable our own satellites.
      2. God didn't create spacecraft, so this is our way of destroying them.
      3. We couldn't get a good rock band to play for GWB in DC this Independence Day, so we decided to go for a good rock instead.
      4. We're really trying to get a reason to build a giant oil supertanker that can REALLY screw up our environment in one accident, so we're hoping for oil...

    2. Re:Why do I want to break out my atari by lateral · · Score: 1

      OK. If it blows up it's asteroids. But if the commet doesn't blow up but gets freakishly knocked off course and hits a big red planet that then falls into a black hole it's interplanetary snooker.

      L.

  30. Re:NASA? Deep Impact? by radio.cgt · · Score: 1

    yes.

  31. mnb Re:Maybe next... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Hitting comet vs. Missile defense:

    1.Long time to learn precise trajectory of comet vs. few minutes with missile.
    2.One comet (and big at that) vs. multiple warheads and fake warheads x10.
    3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads - where can you "wait" for warhead? - you would need constant thrust to maintain position.
    4.You miss the comet NASA looks bad for a few weeks. vs. you miss the missile - some city looks bad forever.

    1. Re:mnb Re:Maybe next... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hitting comet vs. Missile defense:

      You left out the most important factor:

      5. Comet has no acceleration except from (reliable) gravity. Missile has onboard thrusters that can push the object in unpredictable ways, such as to specifically evade the attack.

      It's true that there are occasional comets which give of thrust, but that happens when they're close enough to a star to heat up and blast steam.

      3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads

      That's a pointless idea. In the depths of the solar system the concept of "stopping" is barely meaningful. The only way an object could "stop" would be to enter a stable orbit, which is still basically moving. Otherwise you'd still need "constant thrust" to fight gravity. It's far better to use a single-curve trajectory than to try and alter it like that.

      Besides, you get more destructive power from a faster hit.

    2. Re:mnb Re:Maybe next... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are hitting a warhead on re-entry, it has already detatched from the booster, so it is being affected by gravity and air resistance only; and putting rockets on a re-entry vehical would probably be as practical as propellers on a bullet.

    3. Re:mnb Re:Maybe next... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you are hitting a warhead on re-entry, it has already detatched from the booster, so it is being affected by gravity and air resistance only

      GPS guided bombs adjust their flight path with steerable tailfins.

      My understanding is that most newer MIRVs do this also.

      and putting rockets on a re-entry vehical would probably be as practical as propellers on a bullet.

      The army is working on steerable bullets.

  32. Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by John_Booty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've loved astronomy on a casual basis since childhood and I think it's important to mankind. I'm not one of those people who thinks we should abandon NASA spending because there are still underprivilidged marmasets living in a swamp somewhere or whatever.

    But isn't this kind of, uh... wrong? Possibily destroying a comet? It seems so destructive to possibly break apart something that's been circling our sun for millions of years.

    I understand that comets are more like "dirty snowballs" than things of infinite beauty, and I can definitely understand the scientific reasons for this mission because they're going to get all kinds of data that they couldn't get otherwise.

    This seems kind of wrong to me, though.

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    1. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by f4llenang3l · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It seems so destructive to possibly break apart something that's been circling our sun for millions of years.
      Have you looked out your window recently?

      --

      ---
      she won't let you fly, but she might let you sing
    2. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly...

      There are tens of thousands of Comets, but only one earth... That should be our main concern.

    3. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by JerkBoB · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Possibily destroying a comet? It seems so destructive to possibly break apart something that's been circling our sun for millions of years.

      Interesting set of priorities there... As for me, I can't wait until we get our act together enough to start mining all of those eons-old lumps of raw material instead of strip-mining our planet.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    4. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You could make this "hands off" argument for anything. Moon rovers/landings, mars rovers, etc.

      The question is, "Should we remain in ignorance to keep things pristine?"

      Historically the answer is no and ethically it seems to be working pretty well. Comets that pass through our system number what? In the tens of thousands? More? I don't think this is as controversial as you might think, especially considering we've dropped all sorts of detritus and other "bullet-like" techniques (crashing stuff into planets) for science.

    5. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand that comets are more like "dirty snowballs"

      Yeah, don't eat the yellow ones

    6. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by John_Booty · · Score: 1

      Interesting set of priorities there... As for me, I can't wait until we get our act together enough to start mining all of those eons-old lumps of raw material instead of strip-mining our planet.

      Where did I imply that I was in favor of strip-mining (or any other destructive process involving) the Earth?

      And how does the Deep Impact mission have anything to do with mining? If you knew anything about the makeup of comets, you'd know that they're basically dirty snowballs. Not "lumps of raw material" you'd want to mine like a moon or an asteroid. Of all the things we might possibly mine in this solar system, comets are absolutely not one of them.

      To top it off, I wouldn't even mind strip-mining an asteroid, comet, or moon once it's economically feasible. Like you say, I'd rather have barren space rocks mined than our fertile home planet. But there's a difference between "mining" and "possibly breaking apart", which is what the Deep Impact mission is aiming to do.

      --

      OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    7. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by John_Booty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You could make this "hands off" argument for anything. Moon rovers/landings, mars rovers, etc. The question is, "Should we remain in ignorance to keep things pristine?"

      Sure, you definitely have to run the risk of dirtying things up a bit in order to study them in most cases. I think that landing spacecraft on other planets is an acceptable tradeoff for the knowledge we gain.

      It's the destructive nature of the Deep Impact study that made me pause. We've never really gone out and just smashed something in our solar system to bits before. The scientific gains might definitely outweigh the cost (agree with this mission or not, I can't wait to see the results) but it's not a step to be taken lightly and I hadn't seen that aspect of the mission touched upon in the coverage I've seen.

      --

      OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    8. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by JerkBoB · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you knew anything about the makeup of comets, you'd know that they're basically dirty snowballs.

      Actually, we don't really know everything about the makeup of comets. In fact, that's the whole point of this mission: to find out more about what makes up comets. Our best guesses, based on data gathered during previous flybys and deductive reasoning, indicate that comets are mostly frozen water and some rocks mixed in, but we don't really know because we've never seen the inside of one.

      Anyhow, it's not as if we're randomly blasting apart any and every comet that comes our way. We're not nuking Halley's Comet or anything.

      As far as the mining issue is concerned, Deep Impact doesn't have anything to do with mining, directly. However, it adds to a body of research which could be used in the future. Even if comets typically don't have much more than water and some rocks, what better way to get a heck of a lot of water to Luna than to figure out a way to divert a comet into a lunar orbit? What if we need to figure out a way to divert/destroy a comet that's coming in too close for comfort? Etc. etc. It's empirical data that could be used in the future. It's not just fireworks, as you seem to be implying.

      The intent of my post was not to question your intelligence, but I had to address what seemed to me to be a somewhat short-sighted and unimaginative perspective.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    9. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by mr_snarf · · Score: 1

      The point of the experiment is (or was?) to find out what the coment is made of, and therefore get a better understanding of comets. If sometime in the future we intend to mine stuff like this, we'll need this sort of knowledge.

      --
      printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
    10. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      We've never really gone out and just smashed something in our solar system to bits before.

      Wrong. We've done that more than 87,000,000,000 times so far.

      Me, I've smashed 3 things today already.

      (Welcome to the solar system, btw)

    11. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems so destructive to possibly break apart something that's been circling our sun for millions of years.

      These short period comets are being destroyed by the Sun- that tail is material that is being blown off of the comet. While comets in the Oort Cloud or Kuiper Belt were formed billions of years ago and could last billions more, once they get kicked into orbits that pass near the Sun (and also us), they have on the order of thousands of years to live. Even if we don't destroy this comet ourselves, it is already guaranteed death relatively soon.

    12. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      There are, depending on who you ask, at least several billion comets in the solar system. *One* of them won't be missed. And they aren't like archeological sites, where every one is unique, either.

    13. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by khallow · · Score: 1
      At first glance this just seems like a poor idea with possible ramifications we can't fathom.

      In other words, you can't think of any problems. I really don't see what the problem is either. We don't understand how a comet is structured and this is a clever way to find out. It's not a mission with the purpose of "destroying" a comet and in fact probably won't destroy said comet. So it does some damage to a comet of which the solar system has many, so what?

    14. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by khallow · · Score: 1
      And how does the Deep Impact mission have anything to do with mining? If you knew anything about the makeup of comets, you'd know that they're basically dirty snowballs. Not "lumps of raw material" you'd want to mine like a moon or an asteroid. Of all the things we might possibly mine in this solar system, comets are absolutely not one of them.

      Actually, comets are lumps of raw material that you do want to mine. Basically, they're good sources of various chemicals like water, carbon dioxide, ammonia, etc that are volatile and otherwise hard to find in the inner solar system. Probably cheaper than bringing the raw material up from Earth. For example, if you want to feed people in space, the comet is one of the best sources for the raw carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc.

      We don't know the internal structure of a comet. But please recall that a comet inside the orbit of Jupiter is exposed to serious heating from the Sun. How does affect the comet's internal structure, especially comets that orbit fairly close to the Earth? Given that jets have been observed in previous comet flyby's, it would appear that there's a surface layer that is relatively resistant to heating, and a deeper layer where the more volatile compounds reside.

      This experiment appears well thought out to me. you probably won't get better penetration of the comet with drills or the like. I just don't see what the problem is.

    15. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by snake_dad · · Score: 1

      Worrying about destroying one of a billion comets (one that will likely be destroyed by the sun anyway) to me falls in the same category as worrying about contaminating open space with radashiun.

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    16. Re:Uh.... does this strike anybody else as wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think there are plenty more comets to go around. Also, we're destroying our own planet with great enthusiasm, not to mention we're trying to kill and harm as many as possible of our own species. Now that's wasteful and disrespectful - after all, we (or the comets!) wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the death of a star or two. Those stars existed for billions of years, we live for 80 years. Still, we feel it's a wonderful idea to shorten other people's lives, and to destroy our home. In my eyes, busting up a comet in the name of science is a sign of respect and admiration, if anything.

  33. So what does the comet think of this? by Grey+Ninja · · Score: 3, Funny

    What happens if the comet doesn't like being shot with the world's biggest bullet, and decides to come after us? Has NASA factored this into their plans?

    1. Re:So what does the comet think of this? by adam+mcmaster · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, they have Bruce Willis on speed dial, just incase.

    2. Re:So what does the comet think of this? by rzebram · · Score: 1

      Yup, they have Volkswagon-sized chunks of aluminum waiting on the ground, prepared for launch at the slightest sign of artificial intelligence of the comet nature.

  34. NASA Website by themo0c0w · · Score: 4, Informative

    This project has been around since 2001; probably a dup /. article somewhere... Anyway, here is the NASA website, which gives more details on the mission.

    http://deepimpact.jpl.nasa.gov/

    --
    ph34r teh p0w3r 0f th3 c0w
    1. Re:NASA Website by Leadhyena · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the link! They have an interesting Java simulation of the path of the comet that explains a lot. This comet is nowhere near Earth's orbit, it actually seems to intersect with the orbit of Mars, and July 4th of next year places the comet on the second intersection of the Martian orbit. I'm sure that makes the calculations a lot easier from NASA's standpoint, they've already thrown a lot at Mars. Another thing with the experiment has me worried though... adding 400 or so kg of mass to the comet, won't the orbit change?

      Although this might be a good thing, since by the simulation, the comet will make a scary close pass to Mars from Nov 2022 to Jan 2023.

    2. Re:NASA Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      adding 400kg of mass to a comet is an insignificant amount. according to this article's calculations, the hale-bopp is losing about 2x that mass every second. also, the article mentions that mass loss will not affect the orbit, however, velocity will. so, the comet's orbit will definitely change. fortunately the change will be practically immeasurable.

      http://www.scienceweb.org/astro/comet/halebopp/tea ch/cq15.html

  35. NOT AN asteroid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Comets are known (thought) to be less solid than asteroids, most (not sure about this one) seem to be made largely of ice. You can imagine how dangerous these iceballs might be if they were to enter the atmosphere, but I like water vapor, even with unknown additives, over pieces of rock, if it fragments. It does seem like a less invasive technique might be available, why kill a comet (with unknown ramifications)if you don't have to.

  36. Re: NASA's Deep Impact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would make a great Mythbusters episode: can you launch a copper bathtub into space and destroy a comet? Cue the narrator: "Adam and Jamie are eager to send the crash dummy Buster into space in his homemade copper spaceship, and hope that he'll live to tell the tale."

  37. Choice of metals by Gopal.V · · Score: 1

    Comets are usually ice and frozen gases (dry ice, ammonia ...etc.)

    Heavy metals are very rare in comets . Also copper over iron , because copper is much more rarer than iron . Aluminium or Iron would be too common , silver/gold would be better than copper - but who can afford that :)

    1. Re:Choice of metals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "silver/gold would be better than copper - but who can afford that :)"

      Hey, it worked for Scaramanga. Evidently NASA blew their budget making the giant gold cigar case, lighter and pen that launches it...

    2. Re:Choice of metals by DoraLives · · Score: 1
      Heavy metals are very rare in comets

      Shame they didn't take this opportunity to rid the home world of an equal weight of plutonium.*

      *No, actually I do not wish to hear about what would happen if the rocket blew up during liftoff, and neither do I wish to hear about what would happen to somebody attempting to assemble that much plutonium into a single piece, or if the Bad Guys got hold of it prior to launch, or the terrible health effects on the poor techs who have to work with it, or ...... ah, fuckit.

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    3. Re:Choice of metals by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      actully if couldn't get that much plutonium in one mass. If you did you would get an earth shattering kaboom

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  38. Er, what if we change the trajectory JUST enough.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone care to see what happens the next time this sucker does a flyby?

    "What do you mean it's going to hit us this time?"

  39. stupid thing to be done by th3w4y · · Score: 0, Troll

    this does not sound logic at all...

    if the chemical composition of the comet it is unknown, how "safe" it is to force it in an explosion with cooper...?

    if it is known to be "safe" for the comet to interact with cooper in that explosion, then the chemical composition of the comet it is already KNOWN and that makes NO reason for the experiment.


    sounds to me that NASA is like a little 3 years child that want's to play with fire...

    1. Re:stupid thing to be done by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      Safe for who, the little green men living on it?

      Its a big rock that will be 80 million miles away from earth when they do this, what possible 'unsafe' scenario are you imagining from a big rock hitting a block of copper?

      The sun itself(a monstrously huge ongoing nuclear reaction) is only 93 million miles away, and we seem reasonably safe from it.

    2. Re:stupid thing to be done by jdunn14 · · Score: 1

      First off it's COPPER, not cooper. Cooper is a guy who makes barrels, copper is a fairly non-reactive element. Surely you see the difference. Other options for cooper are Alice Cooper, Hanging With Mr Cooper, D. B. Cooper, etc.

      Next up, lets take the line: if it is known to be "safe" for the comet to interact with cooper in that explosion, then the chemical composition of the comet it is already KNOWN and that makes NO reason for the experiment. How wrong can you be? It's pretty easy to know something will not significantly react with copper and yet not know the exact composition, unfortunately I can't come up with a clever metaphor about throwing a penny at a dirty snowbank, but based on some simple chemistry you'd get the idea.

      Next, how about the part: how "safe" it is to force it in an explosion with cooper(sic)...? Well, let's see, there is a gigantic nuclear fusion reaction that provides most of our planet's energy in one form or another, so you can guess space is not going to notice even something the size of a comet going nuclear. It's not like we're setting it off over New York city. It's a long ways away. Additionally, since the current theory (theory like evolution is a theory) is that comets are basically dirty snowballs, the odds of getting something more like an explosion and less like a splash are slim, verging on none.

      For the rest of the people talking about, "is it a good idea to destroy a comet?" Well, worst case is that it's fairly whole, and orbit its changed. Could be changed in a way that puts it in a collision course with earth. Basically that would be very bad. But, another thing to keep in mind is the sizes we're talking about here: very dense bathtub vs. 2.5 MILES long. Overall, not too worried. Also, keep in mind that if it's this easy to change the trajectory, then.... well.... it's this easy to change the trajectory.

    3. Re:stupid thing to be done by freeweed · · Score: 1

      if the chemical composition of the comet it is unknown, how "safe" it is to force it in an explosion with cooper...?

      High school chemistry. Well, that and the fact that they're not detonating this 8 feet above your head.

      if it is known to be "safe" for the comet to interact with cooper in that explosion, then the chemical composition of the comet it is already KNOWN and that makes NO reason for the experiment.

      See above. Find me something that will combine with copper to have any sort of explosion anywhere close to as bad as the one resulting kinetic energy release.

      Hint: there isn't anything.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    4. Re:stupid thing to be done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the rest of the people talking about, "is it a good idea to destroy a comet?" Well, worst case is that it's fairly whole, and orbit its changed.

      Well.. What if it pisses off the mama comet?

    5. Re:stupid thing to be done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "First off it's COPPER, not cooper. Cooper is a guy who makes barrels, copper is a fairly non-reactive element. Surely you see the difference. Other options for cooper are Alice Cooper, Hanging With Mr Cooper, D. B. Cooper, etc."

      In this case, I'd go with Cooper Hawkes...

    6. Re:stupid thing to be done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can think of one thing... how about 4.4 kt of TNT? :-)

    7. Re:stupid thing to be done by freeweed · · Score: 1

      Good point actually, although if this is the case, ANY material sent at the comet would trigger this sort of explosion. TNT explodes due to a high intensity shockwave hitting it. Now imagine a comet filled with TNT. Intelligent design indeed!

      Hmm, which causes a greater explosion - hundreds of pounds of copper, or hundreds of tons of feathers? :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  40. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Actually a large sum of that debt is to the people that live in this country.

  41. Breaking Things by Mr_Blank · · Score: 1

    The geeks at NASA never really grew up: Their jobs are all about neat toys and breaking things.

    Amazing that despite all our centuries of civilized sophistication the best way to figure out how things work is still to break them. Kids break clocks. Cooks break locks. NASA breaks giant icy rocks.

    1. Re:Breaking Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of mean-ass cooks are there where _you_ are?

    2. Re:Breaking Things by Mikail · · Score: 1

      "The Giant Icy Rocks" would be a great band name...

      --
      If life is a waste of time and time is a waste of life, let's all get wasted and have the time of our lives.
    3. Re:Breaking Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that's how you figure out how things work. You break them apart and look at the pieces. That's why they call it analysis. According to Merriam-Webster online dictionary: "New Latin, from Greek, from analyein to break up, from ana- + lyein to loosen"

  42. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And even trillions of dollars in debt, we still manage to keep our poor people fed (our homeless don't starve, they just live outside!), our crazy projects running (where's *your* country's golden comet-smashing bathtub?!), and still have the cash and free time to win a war (yeah, you heard me! It's slow and ugly, but *we're winning*!).

    So suck on that, you pompous twat. Oh, and I voted for Kerry, so even the losing side over here would like to take this opportunity to tell you to blow it out your ass!

  43. I'm just glad the Beagle team aren't doing this... by myc_lykaon · · Score: 2, Funny
    With our track record for slamming into things we should bounce off and hitting things we should miss, I'm certain that it would be one of the few missions to miss the thing we should hit...

    Captains additional: Does this mean we can add 'bath tub' to the ISO weights and measures along with VW Beetle, football field and 18 wheel truck?

  44. Screw the bathtub... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just launch Bruce Willis frozen in carbonite!!!

  45. Missing Missiles... by drjzzz · · Score: 1

    Excuses, explanations, or what?
    1.Long time to learn precise trajectory of comet vs. few minutes with missile.
    Outweighed by much shorter distance.
    2.One comet (and big at that) vs. multiple warheads and fake warheads x10.
    But many failed tests had no decoys or only easily distinguished decoys.
    3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads - where can you "wait" for warhead? - you would need constant thrust to maintain position.
    Huh? The mass bullet should "stop and wait"? Maybe this grasp of physics is why the 'scientists' at 'Defense' can't hit the mark.
    4.You miss the comet NASA looks bad for a few weeks. vs. you miss the missile - some city looks bad forever.
    And how exactly does this explain the failures?

    --
    to err is human, to forgive is divine, to forget is... umm...
  46. I call bullshit on this by ThoreauHD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Something else is going on. They can pick pieces of comet out of the moon if they wanted it. No point in blowing money on this unless it's for defense. Copper my ass.

    1. Re:I call bullshit on this by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
      Pieces of comet on the moon will be intermingled with moon materials and a variety of meteorites. Too polluted to get meaningful data. Furthermore, the heat from the collision with the moon, and the passage of time, would drive off volatile components.


      That said, there is value from the "defense" standpoint - defense against comets colliding with earth. This experiment may give some indication of how much of a shattering effect throwing things at a comet will have.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:I call bullshit on this by jd_esguerra · · Score: 1
      Something else is going on. They can pick pieces of comet out of the moon if they wanted it. No point in blowing money on this unless it's for defense. Copper my ass.

      Or it could just be cheaper than a mission to go to the moon, mine for old comet chunks, and then return them to Earth. If it was for defense (exclusively), I doubt you would be reading about it.

    3. Re:I call bullshit on this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be careful what you say. The secret service sometimes read slashdot.

  47. One more good reason... by p_trekkie · · Score: 5, Informative

    Another reason they are doing a kinetic impact is because they want to judge the structure of the comet. Right now, scientists don't really know if the comet's consistency is that of a fluffy snowball or a hard chunk of ice. If you used explosives, you would have melting of the ice, whatever its consistency, and would get less information about the construction of the comet. Once possibility is that the comet might be loosely packed enough that the impactor goes in one side and flies out the other....

    Also, I'm surprised the article submitter didn't include a link to the mission website.....

  48. You can tell... by Ramsey-07 · · Score: 0

    NASA's getting pretty bored....

  49. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    we still manage to keep our poor people fed (our homeless don't starve, they just live outside!)

    Perhaps you should read this article

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=286105

    "Unfortunately, the blessing of abundant food is not shared by all Americans," Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack said. "A recent report from our Department of Agriculture documented an increase in hunger in America, particularly among our children."

  50. Re:I'm just glad the Beagle team aren't doing this by syrinx · · Score: 1

    Does this mean we can add 'bath tub' to the ISO weights and measures along with VW Beetle, football field and 18 wheel truck?

    and "Libraries of Congress"...

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  51. Actually, you have a serious point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    This comet existed for most likely untold millions of years; its lifespan almost definitely exceeds that of the entire human race, and it could actually date back to the creation of the solar system itself. More than that, it's a beautiful astronomical phenomenon, part of the intricate web of movements and reactions that make up the universe as we know it.

    And we're gonna blow it up to find out what it's made of.

    So much for enlightened science. What practical purpose could this experiment serve, anyway?

  52. Re:Who Cares? by PeelBoy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Get fucking real.

    Have you taken a look at the rest of the world lately?

  53. What about the people living on the comet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens when they find that there were several people from the Heaven's Gate cult that were aboard the comet? Will NASA scientists be charged with murder if those people already killed themselves on Earth first? Or is this more of a wrongful explosion suit? Maybe it would be more of a moving vehicle accident - and if so, is space considered a no-fault area? I hope the comet dwellers have insurance!

    Questions, questions....

  54. On NEOs and orbital physics by freeweed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How acurately can they predict the comets path (whenever I here about near earth passes they are always given in wide ranges as to how near they actually came).

    You hear about near-Earth passes, as you call them, because they're always the first time we've noticed said object getting close to the Earth. This comet (and many others, plus asteroids, etc) has a pretty well-known orbit around the Sun. We have plenty of observations and can accurately predict where it's going to be at any given point in time (barring things like orbital changes due to outgassing, disintegration, etc).

    There's another object in the sky that we can do this with: the Moon. It's VERY close to Earth, yet we can be pretty safe in saying it ain't about to hit us. Lots of observations == confidence in a body's motion.

    The "scary" ones you hear about are new objects we've never seen before, and all of sudden they look like they're coming "close". Once we get enough observations of them, we can calculate their orbits, and you pretty much never hear about them again.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  55. mnb Re:Missing Missiles... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Excuses, explanations, or what?
    Reasons hitting a missile is hard and hitting a comet is easier.
    1.Long time to learn precise trajectory of comet vs. few minutes with missile.
    Outweighed by much shorter distance.

    It's hard to hit a missile because you don't have much time to measure and calculate all you need for an intersecting path.
    2.One comet (and big at that) vs. multiple warheads and fake warheads x10.
    But many failed tests had no decoys or only easily distinguished decoys.
    Doesn't disprove my point that missile defense is a tough nut. Most likely impossible for the near future at least.

    3.Comet is in a microgravity enviroment, bullet could stop and wait for comet vs. warheads - where can you "wait" for warhead? - you would need constant thrust to maintain position.
    Huh? The mass bullet should "stop and wait"? Maybe this grasp of physics is why the 'scientists' at 'Defense' can't hit the mark.
    You have plenty of time to calculate an intersecting path with a comet, you can simply launch the mass bullet into an intersecting orbit and let it be. Can't do that with missile defense.

    4.You miss the comet NASA looks bad for a few weeks. vs. you miss the missile - some city looks bad forever.
    And how exactly does this explain the failures?

    Explains nothing - simply another reason hitting comet is no sweat, hitting missile is hard.
  56. Insider Perspective by Performaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    I once spoke to someone who works on the Deep Impact project, and he said that, after the Mars Polar Odyssey crashed, their motto became "Deep Impact: We're Supposed to Crash."

    --

    I have gas, but my car uses petrol.
  57. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I was just trying to show that it was not as rosy, as the parent post indicated.

    I am from Northen Europe, and I just have to look out the window, to see a better place that America.

  58. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, and I wonder if you'll still be able to do that after your pathetic welfare state collapses in on itself, or after muslim extremists have become such a large portion of your country's population that you have to follow all kinds of crazy shiara laws.

  59. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that America is closer to collapse than my country is.

  60. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are just looking for a reason to complain.

    They won't be happy until they get their way.

    It's not nearly as bad here as people make it out to be.

    People like to blame it all on Bush, but the job market crashed when CLINTON was president NOT Bush.

    I should know I was right in the middle of it and I remember it like it was yesterday.

    But anyway. YOU don't even live here. The only thing you have to go on is BIAS media and these selfish nut jobs on Slashdot.

  61. Units by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, the ton of TNT is now a unit of force?

    1. Re:Units by steak · · Score: 1

      i was under the impression that it was since megatons are based on an amount of TNT.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaton

    2. Re:Units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      No, but the metric kilotonne of TNT is the standard unit for equivalent explosive energy. So when you hear people going on about how an explosive has the same energy content as X kt of TNT, they're really using the right unit. Explosions are complicated, so more fundamental measures like joules and such aren't really useful.

    3. Re:Units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the Wikipedia link you provided, a megaton of TNT is a unit of energy, not force.

    4. Re:Units by aaron_ds · · Score: 1

      one ton = 2000lbs = 8896.44323 Newtons
      Since pounds are the english unit of weight/force, the conversion works out nicely. The English unit of mass is a slug, IICR.

    5. Re:Units by dbIII · · Score: 1
      So, the ton of TNT is now a unit of force?
      Yes, it's enough force to propel a Volkswagen sized rock the length of a football feild.
  62. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was not blaming it on Bush, since I have no idea if it would be correct.
    But I do blame it on american politics, since a country that wealthy, should be able to help their own people more.

    I don't live in the US but I have been there a few times, and I must say that I saw a lot of people, in the big cities, that were homeless...

    It reminded me quite a lot of Bangkok, with all those homeless and poor people.

  63. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So fucking what? Are we having a race to see whose country is going to collapse first? I was just trying to show that things are not as rosy as you make them out to be.

  64. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't really know how to reply to this because I can only speak from my experinces. I don't really know any starving people who deserve help and aren't getting it, but I'm sure they exist.

    Most people are homeless because that's the life style they choose them selves.

    I hate to say it but one of my best childhood friends is on the path to being homeless. I've tried my hardest to help him, but its the life style he seems to want.

    Not that it's the case for everybody.

    I also have family who is poor and takes advantage of the gov. as much as they can. I don't feel sorry for them at all. They are white trash.

    I also know a guy who won 1-2 million in a settlement. He quit his job. Assumed he was rich and blew all his money on drugs and crap and now he's broke, has nothing to show for it, has no job, and will find him self on the streets soon enough.

  65. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flamebait?

    Is it not the truth?

    Help help I'm being repressed!

  66. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As far as I can tell things are starting to look up in America.

  67. Uh! by radpole · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope the aliens onboard the spaceship inside the comet don't mind.

  68. NASA will be releasing a DVD next year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But in that the comet shoots first.

  69. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh enough already, Muslims are still a minority in Europe, and many have left their previous countries to enjoy the freedoms that Europe has to offer. They're not there to impose Sharia, which wouldn't apply to non-Muslims anyway the same way kosher laws don't apply to non-jews.

  70. the real plan.. by osho_gg · · Score: 1

    is to divert the comet's trajectory just enough so that it lands on earth on bin laden's head. but of course they won't say it!

  71. The world's most expensive fire works. by twitter · · Score: 1, Interesting
    The lump of copper is 820 pounds, and will be equivalent to 5 tons of TNT. If you sent an 820-pound lump of TNT, you would get an explosion of about 5.4 tons of TNT. An extra .4 tons-TNT increase, in exchange for a vastly more dangerous mission and chemical contamination is not a good trade.

    True, but if you send up an 820lb nuclear warhead you will get a much better fire cracker. Megatons baby, that's what I'm talking about, thousands of your piddly little copper lumps have I in a few pounds of Pu and hydrogen.

    So you have to wonder when nations will start nuclear fireworks displays. People want bread, wine and circus. Science has to have it's element of circus to be funded. I hate myself for realizing that. Nations like to intimidate, and traditional fireworks displays included cannons and other military devices. Ah to be entertained by brute intimidation. When it happens, you know that the world is drifting back to feudalism.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:The world's most expensive fire works. by WildFire42 · · Score: 1

      Great, but there's a treaty that forbids nations (including the U.S.) from detonating nuclear warheads in space.

      Of course, if something like Deep Impact were to be on the horizon, and a comet were going to hit the Earth, I'm sure the other countries would probably turn their heads while we nuked the giant ice cube.

  72. Kill it!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Leave it to Americans to come up with a plan along the lines of: "Wonder what that's made of... lets blow it up!"

    1. Re:Kill it!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, don't knock it-that's what *everybody* did with the atom!

    2. Re:Kill it!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey- if it moves, shoot it!!

  73. dude this is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    space should be like an international nature park. you dont go just randomly blowing things up willy nilly.

    1. Re:dude this is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's bewildering how this was modded Insightful.

      Why the sudden compassion for comets? Is it as wrong to blow up a small part of the comet in the name of science as it is to blow up human beings in the name of god-knows-what?

  74. Smart-ass Slashdot Comment #5002 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So original...

  75. Re:Who Cares? by gadget+junkie · · Score: 1

    " I am from Northen Europe, and I just have to look out the window, to see a better place that America."

    It's not technically known as "window": it is called "television".
    Now quit looking at "CSI Miami", I want to see the evening news.

    --
    "If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
  76. Genesis II: Should be easy for NASA by mschaffer · · Score: 2, Funny

    All they have to do is get the Genesis team to try to gently land the copper bullet onto the comet.

  77. Calculate trajectories before and after. by OgGreeb · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they must be doing this, but I hadn't read of anyone speculating. This would be an excellent opportunity to direct the slug in, to change the comet's path slightly, and then measure the resultant path and check on their accuracy.

    I'm pretty sure we're going to need that capability sooner or later.

    --
    -- Gary Goldberg KA3ZYW 301/249-6501 AIM:OgGreeb Digital Marketing Inc., Bowie, MD //www.digimark.net/
  78. Re:Butterfly Effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOUR HEAD ESPLODE!!!!!!!!

  79. In other news... by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    Fragmented comet shards predicted to impact earth after scientific experiement goes awry. During an experiment to shatter the coment "Tempel" with a magic bullet, fissures in the comet created unexpected fragmentation lines. Minutes after impact with the comet scientists noticed something terribly wrong with the breakup. One team of scientists involved with the experiement were quoted as yelling "Bag ass!" as they ran from the NASA complex. Other scientists were quoted as saying "umm... uh oh" and "Oh, shit!" Bill Nye the Science Guy was on hand to give this report of what actually went wrong. Bill -

    "The scientists here at NASA were trying to use this great big huge gigantic gun of science to shatter this great-big huge gigantic comet and all of a sudden things went terribly wrong! The big comet didn't break like the scientists expected, and all of a sudden People were running around burning papers (Bill) and nametags and (Bill) forging timecards, and..(Bill)....huh?..oh.."

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  80. Are we declaring war on comet inhabitants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would they say when they see this bug chunk of copper hurtling towards them from Earth?

  81. Re:How big is your tub? by dan42 · · Score: 1

    Something isn't right with this picture - copper is very dense! From my calculations an 820 pound brick of solid copper is only 12 inches by 12 inches by 18 inches.

  82. This is an outrage! by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1
    I have been circulating a petition to make comet Temple 1 an international historic preserve - to be kept in its pristine state for all to enjoy forever!

    When you tell people the government wants to destroy this natural wonder, there is nearly universal acceptance of this proposal!

    Then I sell them lots on Mars, desireable lots, backing on nature preserves.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  83. Somebody call it! by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    Is is going to land on the comet head or tail?

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  84. Funding by NRA, Smith&Wesson by spineboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nasa should get funding from the NRA (National Rifle Assoc.) and Smith and Wesson. This will be the largest bullet ever made!

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
    1. Re:Funding by NRA, Smith&Wesson by whiskers · · Score: 1

      Actually many larger bullets exist- the projectiles for 16 inch naval guns weigh over a ton.

  85. This is a bad idea. by phantomfreeze · · Score: 0, Troll

    I wonder if they realize how bad of an idea this is and what the possible future consequences are. I mean this is the kind of stupid crap that is bankrupting our country. Wake up and smell the coffee America! We are broke, and getting more so by the minute. We are just riding the wave to destruction. We are all so preoccupied with ourselves that we don't realize what we are doing to our own country. I mean let's take a look at some facts. One Hollywood is slowly being taken over by Japan. Two Chrysler is now basically owned by Mercedes Benz. The name Daimler even appears before Chrysler which should be a big wake up call. I mean come on; the automotive industry is part of what America is famous for. You know that whole Henry Ford inventing the Automobile thing. We are all so preoccupied with what other people think about us that we don't stop and think when we go to spend our money. Also, the airlines are slowly going out of business and again this is another thing America is famous for. We did invent the airplane you know for those of you that didn't pay attention in history class. Take a good look people all of the things that made America so great are in deep trouble. Then to top it off we have all of these big companies outsourcing jobs to make a better bottom line! Let get it together before there isn't any America left to save!!!!

    1. Re:This is a bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Henry Ford was the first to mass produce automobiles, but he was far from the inventor. While it is uncertain exactly when the motorized wheeled devices could be called automobiles, Karl Benz, a German, is often credited with the invention of the first true automobile.

    2. Re:This is a bad idea. by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Hollywood is slowly being taken over by Japan
      Hollywood don't pay much tax anyway and produce as much as possible overseas, so they are effecitvely contributing very little to the economy now, so it doesn't matter.
      Chrysler is now basically owned by
      No-one outside of the US buys US cars, so once again little relief on the overseas debt.
      You know that whole Henry Ford inventing the Automobile thing
      There were a lot of cars produced in the decades before before the first Ford motor car, he just churned out cheap consistant quality cars and dominated the market. Cheap Fords were almost as good as handmade British cars at ten times the cost.

      The USA has sold the farm - innovation is what it has left and weird patent laws are trying to kill that too. Experiments such as this are an investment in the future, so if you are worried about the future of the USA you should be behind such things as this. And stop your management getting hold of hard drugs, that's the only thing that can explain a lot of decisions.

    3. Re:This is a bad idea. by smoker2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this is an example of why "America" is no longer great.

      If you (as a country) spent less time watching "info-mercials" and more time actually learning real history, you would know that Henry Ford is responsible for the introduction of the production line. He didn't invent the car, there were French, German and British inventions way before his car was built.

      As for inventing the aeroplane, that is not entirely true either. The wright brothers were credited with the first powered flight, but they built on the work of others in Europe, and there is even some doubt as to whether they were the first to achieve powered flight.

      As to the Chrysler/Mercedes Benz thing, you do realise that most of the inventions that "America" is famous for were invented by European immigrants. Names such as Einstein and Werner von Braun spring to mind here.

      Add all this to the fact that "American" companies have been taking over the rest of the worlds industries with the almighty dollar for over 40 years and you might realise what the fuss over globalisation is about.

      fucking goldfish memory !

      Telephone - Alexander Graham Bell - Born in Scotland
      Wireless transmission - Guglielmo Marconi - Born in Italy
      Manhattan Project - J. Robert Oppenheimer - Born In New York to German Immigrants
      Electronic Computer - Konrad Zuse - Born in Germany
      Helicopter - SIKORSKY, Igor Ivanovich - Born in Russia
      Motorcycle - Gottlieb Daimler - Born in Germany
      Bicycle - James Starley - Born in England
      Jet airplane - Hans von Ohain - Born in Germany

      British :
      Disc Brakes - Frederick William Lanchester
      Tin Can - Peter Durand
      Cat Eyes - Percy Shaw
      Portland Cement - Joseph Aspdin
      Cordite - Sir James Dewar, Sir Frederick Abel
      Electric Motor - Michael Faraday
      Locomotive - Richard Trevithick
      Periscope - Sir Howard Grubb
      Polyester - John Rex Whinfield and James Tennant Dickson
      Viagra - Peter Dunn, Albert Wood, Dr Nicholas Terrett
      Waterproof Fabric - Charles Macintosh
      World Wide Web - Tim Berners-Lee
      .....

    4. Re:This is a bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder why all those imported "non-Americans" didn't just stay at home and invent all that cool stuff. Is it just REMOTLY possible that there was something about being in the USA that made the difference? I am not a person who automatically says that everything done in American is good, but it is just as bad (and obviously wrong) to say that nothing done here is useful.

      By the way, the person I am respoding to has "fucking goldfish intellegence".

    5. Re:This is a bad idea. by fourlugas · · Score: 1

      I don't agree with alot of what goes on in this country, but bashing America because Americans didn't invent all these things or for whatever reason is kinda silly. All non-Americans jump on the bandwagon and point out all these silly, worthless bits of information. They love to bash our politicians, like every country in the world hasn't had it's share of f-tard leaders. Your comments are so old and played out. As far as countries coming in and owning companies or whatever, that's what America does. That's what it has always done, and that's what it will always do. People act like this is a new thing. The fact of the matter is...despite all these things you bash America for, is is still the big boy on the block. Should it be? I don't know. Perhaps not. But it is. Try to argue that point. Have facts, don't just spout off gibberish. If you can, I salute you and bow to your wisdom. They say that a chain is as strong as it's weakest link, so I guess America's weakest inbread link is still stronger than the rest of the world? I don't believe this but am simply illustrating a point to your comments above. I'm not WOOHOO AMERICA, or bash the rest of the world. I just think it's silly for people from other countries to sit and bash bash bash when their own history is full of f-tardism.

  86. Ah, yes. by Viking+Coder · · Score: 1
    ...hit with a force equivalent to 4.7 tons of TNT.

    ...thus, starting the first Solar System War.

    I, for one, welcome our new Comet Temple Overlords.

    --
    Education is the silver bullet.
  87. On the planet Kazalwook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The residents of Kazalwook were surprised... Comet "Muncho Muncho Nachos" was back a year earlier. They just had time to calculate the trajectory, and make plans for a few thousad Kazalwookians to escape their doomed planet. The mystery remained: why did the comet change its direction? Determined to find out the cause and *finish* off any alien races which might have caused this mischeif, the chosen Kazalwookians set off from their planet...

  88. Right... by Ciel · · Score: 1

    So I take it that you've never, say, broken a rock in half?

    The comet is an inanimate object meandering through space - it has no more of an ethical status than any of the ancient, storied rocks used in the creation of your house. The information gleaned from this test, however, is of potentially great consequence to our understanding of the universe.

    I might also add that there are PLENTY more comets where that one came from in the Ort Cloud.

  89. Might be worth seing by ClemensW · · Score: 1

    $311 million. 4.8 tone of TNT. On July 4th. ONE BIG BANG. Sheesh, that has to be the biggest fireworks ever.

  90. hits the comet off course and goodbye earth.... by kiwi_damo · · Score: 1

    Still it must vastly help mankind to know that an icy comet is made up of ice.

  91. Re:Boron as a fuel, What the heck? by Ralconte · · Score: 1

    Oh, what's the worst that could happen? Try: http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ Just punch in the numbers, it's fun.

  92. Re:Oh... by Ralconte · · Score: 1

    ...so that's what happens when you don't edit the Subject: when you write a comment. /. uses the subject from your last post. Fascinating.

  93. I wonder why they didn't use a DU bullet? by multiplexo · · Score: 1
    DU is denser than copper, so the bullet could be smaller and thus easier to launch. It would be more difficult to machine a DU bullet because of the material's pyrophoric properties, but on the other hand it would be easy to filter the uranium lines out of the spectrograph from the resulting explosion on impact.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
    1. Re:I wonder why they didn't use a DU bullet? by eobanb · · Score: 1

      Absolutely not. How easy something is to launch into orbit has virtually nothing to do with how big it is, only its mass. I suppose I could envision something very large not really fitting into a particularly aerodynamic launch vehicle, but still, mass has much more to do with it than volume.

      --

      Take off every sig. For great justice.

  94. Re:How big is your tub? by Anders+Andersson · · Score: 1
    From my calculations an 820 pound brick of solid copper is only 12 inches by 12 inches by 18 inches.

    That's 2,592 (or 36 * 72) cubic inches, but the edges may just as well be something like 0.1 m by 0.4 m by 0.9 m. Shouldn't every comet have one of those?

  95. End Result Of Experiment by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


    Nanotech civilization living on comet gets pissed, launches nanotech weapon the size of a marble to Earth, where it proceeds to turn the entire planet into grey goo.

    Oh, wait, it already was grey goo...

    Never mind.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  96. Re:Who Cares? by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    You live in Washington, D.C., right?

    In a wealthy neighborhood full of politicians, right?

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  97. Explosives In Space by spdt · · Score: 1
    Would it not be cheaper/better to drop a lump of high explosive on it rather than a heavy lump of copper?
    A chemical explosion such as this is nothing more than a rapid oxidation reaction. So, in order to have such an explosion in space, there would have to be a large presence of oxygen.
    1. Re:Explosives In Space by m.koch · · Score: 1
      A chemical explosion such as this is nothing more than a rapid oxidation reaction.

      Yes.

      So, in order to have such an explosion in space, there would have to be a large presence of oxygen.

      No. A chemical explosive contains fuel and oxidant. It does not need athmospheric oxygen.

  98. They're going to hit a comet? by Pedrito · · Score: 1

    NASA has trouble hitting Mars, and it's a planet. They're going to hit a comet? Anyone taking odds on this?

    1. Re:They're going to hit a comet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how many times has your country hit mars? exactly, now stfu.

    2. Re:They're going to hit a comet? by Elder+Entropist · · Score: 1

      I don't think they've had much problem with hitting Mars, but in hitting Mars the EXACT right way. Part of that is because it has an atmosphere - too steep and angle, you burn, too shallow an angle, you skip. Part is that you want to touch down VERY softly in interplanetary terms or speed and force. With the comet, you just want to hit it however it hits. Plus, Mars is MUCH farther away.

  99. Not force by hardcode57 · · Score: 1

    Come on, we're all geeks here, lets be geeky. It doesn't hit with the force of anything. When it impacts, it releases energy equivalent to x tons of explosive detonating.

    1. Re:Not force by hardcode57 · · Score: 1

      also, it's a damn sight more than 4.7 tons of TNT. Assuming a bathtub size chunk of Cu is 2m^2, the release of energy is about 40kilotons, based on 1kg of TNT releasing 4Gjoule (http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/mar97/859204 043.Ph.r.html). Come on guys and gals, lets get pedantic here!

  100. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you know a lot of losers. maybe you are a loser?

  101. wrong verb tense by mapmaker · · Score: 1
    Scientists hope to discover what exactly the comet is made of...

    Since their "copper bullet is intended to strike the comet....with a force equivalent to 4.7 tons of TNT", I think the above sentence should have been:

    Scientists hope to discover what exactly the comet was made of...

  102. In Other News, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NXWYQc4, the galactic space agency for the Federated Gleepthiz Empire, is planning on piercing one of the rare blue planets with a 5-mile diameter ball of molten titanium shot through its core for scientific research purposes.

    Having recently decoded four of the major languages used by that planet's inhabitants by careful analysis of its radio frequency emissions, additional entertainment value is expected to be had by listening in on the primitive's intraplanetary communications in the 7 Earth days prior to impact.

  103. NASA's luck. by Hobadee · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    With NASA's luck, 1 of 2 things will happen:
    1. It will hit the comet but they will have done the calculations wrong (because they forgot to convert centimeters to inches) and it will re-direct the comet on a collision course with the Earth.

    2. They will hit the comet, but at the moment it hits and they are supposed to be observing it, they will see a hot girl changing in the house next to the observatory and aim thier telescopes there.

    Alright mods, do your worst!

    --
    ...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
  104. I actually work in support of this mission... by Shag · · Score: 2, Informative
    One of the 13 co-investigators on the Deep Impact science team is Karen Meech of the Institute for Astronomy at University of Hawaii.

    A lot of observing and imaging of comets and their dust comas, and analysis of the resulting images, is being carried out by Jana Pittichova, a postdoctoral fellow (and triathlete!) on Karen's research team, primarily using the University's 88-inch telescope atop Mauna Kea.

    Being one of the operators on that telescope, I've worked with Jana on several nights - probably one-third to one-half of the Meech team's total observing this semester.

    Although I understand how the observations are carried out from a purely operational and practical standpoint, I haven't seen what the actual analysis looks like... and even if I did, the odds are good that I'd need a lot of explaining, since I'm not a Ph.D. myself!

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  105. NASA, you think you're better than me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Given NASA's budget, copper made more sense. Finding themselves unable to afford chemical or nuclear explosives, NASA employees have spent the last four years collecting stray pennies

    You think you're better than me? Oh, you're not better than me. You handle my ass pennies everyday. You pick up my ass pennies for good luck. You throw my ass pennies in fountains and make wishes on them. You give my ass pennies to your little daughter to buy gumballs with. And now, you're shooting comets in deep space with my ass pennies!

    <It's a joke, laugh>

  106. Re:Who Cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let him whine. With hate-the-USA cocksuckers like that, I don't have to look far to find a spot to use modpoints.

  107. misleading size description by sribe · · Score: 1

    A chunk of copper the size of a bathtub would weight far more than 820 pounds. I suspect it's a bathtub-sized probe, with an 820 pound chunk of copper on its front end.

  108. Great, just great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh sure, blow it up, learn something and move on. Next thing we know some ancient alien civilization takes the absence of their god's comet as though they have wronged him, commited mass suicide in repentence, and when we show up 2000 years from now, we wonder what the hell happened to them that they up and all die like that....

    Rivendahl

  109. not too much to loose anyway by Striker770S · · Score: 1

    its just a giant penny for the most part. Getting it into space will cost a bit (dare i say a pretty penny). If anything goes wrong such as a small knock off course, then that tub is gonna miss. But if it hits, we can possibly see the cult members from that heavens gate mass cult suicide thing back in the 90's. wouldnt you be damned if they were really right and the passing comet did hide a ufo behind it?

    --
    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes. - Catcher in the Rye
  110. That would depend, wouldn't it? by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

    a 5-ton bomb might be enough to blow up a building, but if the comet is solid rock (or ice) I doubt it would make a big dent. OTOH - if, as some suspect, comets and asteroids are really just blobs of gravel the probe might pass through it without even changing the comet's path!