Slashdot Mirror


Voyager Spacecraft Celebrate 30th Anniversary

Raver32 writes to mention that 30 years after the original launch of Voyager 2, both Voyager spacecraft are still going strong. Flying away from us some billions of miles from our solar system's edge they continue to be a wealth of information more than 25 years after their original mission concluded. Voyager 1 currently is the farthest human-made object at a distance from the sun of about 9.7 billion miles (15.6 billion kilometers). Voyager 2 is about 7.8 billion miles (12.6 billion kilometers).

222 comments

  1. hmmmm... by pwizard2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just wait until the Klingons find them.

    --
    "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
    1. Re:hmmmm... by Spudtrooper · · Score: 5, Funny

      The first post is a Star Trek reference, but NOT one about V'Ger? Your nerd license is hereby revoked, pwizard2, and may the gods have mercy on your soul.

    2. Re:hmmmm... by eln · · Score: 5, Informative

      V'ger was the (fictional) Voyager 6, not Voyager 1 or 2. Of course, the probe the Klingons used for target practice in Star Trek V was Pioneer 10, so the OP isn't really accurate either unless I'm missing a Voyager reference in some other Star Trek.

    3. Re:hmmmm... by Zwerker · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Fare thee well V'Ger. May you find and join with the creator.

    4. Re:hmmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May the force be with you.

    5. Re:hmmmm... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Klingons, schlmingons. You'd just better hope that the Psychlos don't pick one of them up, backtrack its trajectory to figure out where we are, and send an invulnerable gas drone around the planet to kill us all!

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:hmmmm... by chibiace · · Score: 1

      let us build all new deep space probes with radioactive hulls

      --
      he who controls the spice controls the universe
    7. Re:hmmmm... by Zerbey · · Score: 0, Redundant

      (Showing how much of a Geek I am). The Klingons blew up a Pioneer spacecraft in ST:V, not Voyager. Unless I'm forgetting something from the Motion Picture.

  2. Only 268 years left ... by dougmc · · Score: 1, Funny

    Only 268 or so years left until Voyager comes back. Well, I'm not sure which one it is, but one of them is coming back. But we've got some time to deal with the carbon lifeform infestation ...

    1. Re:Only 268 years left ... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Only 268 or so years left until Voyager comes back. Well, I'm not sure which one it is, but one of them is coming back.

      I think they all (Voyagers and Pioneer 10 & 11) have a solar escape velocity, so we can pretty much kiss them goodbye (barring some speed tech breakthru or expensive nuke rocket that allows us to catch up.)

    2. Re:Only 268 years left ... by Knara · · Score: 1

      V'ger was a fictional Voyager probe #, if I remember right.

    3. Re:Only 268 years left ... by brouski · · Score: 1

      Oh, you're no fun anymore!

      --
      Proud member of the American Non Sequitur Society. We might not make much sense, but boy do we love pizza!
    4. Re:Only 268 years left ... by ArcherB · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Only 268 or so years left until Voyager comes back. Well, I'm not sure which one it is, but one of them is coming back. But we've got some time to deal with the carbon lifeform infestation .

      Well, I for one will welcome our misspelled, silicon based overlord!

      (sorry, but he beat me to the ST The Motion Picture reference!)

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    5. Re:Only 268 years left ... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Oh, you're no fun anymore!

      Welcome to slashdot, home of anal nerds :-)

    6. Re:Only 268 years left ... by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Ouch! Not only NCC-74656 was not designed to last 300 years without any starbase service, but the only occupants alive from the original generation of the crew are going to be a hologram and possibly a vulcan! Let's hope they find that Borg transwarp conduits before the later take care of our carbon liveform infestation.

    7. Re:Only 268 years left ... by Tamugin · · Score: 1

      Cannot resist.... I believe V'ger was depicted in the movie as Voyager 6. I'll crawl back under my rock now.

      --
      Chris
    8. Re:Only 268 years left ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you do on your own time is your business...

    9. Re:Only 268 years left ... by somersault · · Score: 1

      isn't that 'iAnal' nerds? :P

      --
      which is totally what she said
  3. Too bad... by Kagura · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A little off-topic and out of left field, but it's too bad these probes are three-axis stabilized, which means they cannot help us figure out exactly what is going on with the Pioneer anomaly. The anomaly even featured as an Unsolved Problem of Physics on Wikipedia.

    1. Re:Too bad... by nutshell42 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I kinda hope there's not a trivial explanation (i.e. not a measurement error, non-uniform radiation pressure etc.)

      Our current model for how the universe works is way off ( >90% of the universe are dark matter and dark energy) and any clues on when and how reality deviates from theory should be quite interesting.

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    2. Re:Too bad... by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      It's ridiculous to think we could possibly know exactly every force being applied to the craft. The effect is extremely small and is probably a combination of computational accuracy, instrument accuracy, and external modifiers that we can't calculate.

      External modifiers would be things like storms on the Sun and other stars (temperature differences, particle emissions), the various particles in space, tiny gravitational forces that are too small to be measured (eg. even the galaxy on the other side of the universe is exerting force on us), etc. Space is not empty, there is dust, electromagnetic energy, black holes, etc.

      Again, our science could be 100% accurate but I don't see how we would even begin to think our technology is capable of measuring and calculating every force in the universe(s) exactly.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    3. Re:Too bad... by x2A · · Score: 1

      "( >90% of the universe are dark matter and dark energy)"

      "Could be", it's a bit early to say with that kind of certainty (as you know by your previous sentence). There could [likely?] also be some unknown force at play, something that changes the way time's perceived (thus things look to be moving faster/slower than they are, throwing off mass estimations), a property of matter that changes how much it interacts with/produces gravity. How many constants in the equations we use are really constants, and how many are maybe functions of the length of time since the big bang, that we're not yet aware are changing?

      Our current model I wouldn't say it "way off", just only a [small] part of the overall picture.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    4. Re:Too bad... by nutshell42 · · Score: 1

      "Could be", it's a bit early to say with that kind of certainty (as you know by your previous sentence). There could [likely?] also be some unknown force at play, something that changes the way time's perceived (thus things look to be moving faster/slower than they are, throwing off mass estimations), a property of matter that changes how much it interacts with/produces gravity. How many constants in the equations we use are really constants, and how many are maybe functions of the length of time since the big bang, that we're not yet aware are changing? "Dark matter" and "dark energy" are just words, placeholders for an attracting and a repelling something, that are needed to fit the world as we see it into our current models. It doesn't mean they have to be matter and energy, therefore the >90% *is* true by the very definition of the terms (perhaps you use a more literal definition so ymmv. But we certainly mean the same thing)

      Our current model I wouldn't say it "way off", just only a [small] part of the overall picture. If you construct a car that lacks brakes it's a disaster. It doesn't mean that the vast majority of the car isn't well designed, it also doesn't mean that it isn't relatively easy to fix. It just means that the car is completely unusable for its design purpose. The fix for our understanding of gravity etc. might be minor -certainly on the scale affecting us directly- but if, for every bit of stuff you can detect, you need to invent 20 times the amount just to explain how it works, something's way off.
      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    5. Re:Too bad... by x2A · · Score: 1

      "If you construct a car that lacks brakes it's a disaster"

      That's not really what we're talking about here though is it. If there's some force that we haven't spotted here in earth, but comes into play when large galaxies are observed, then until we start trying to build large galaxies, it's not exactly a huge worry. It doesn't affect our cars, our planes, our coal stations; our inventions do work. At some point our technology may progress to the point where we need more accurate information about what's going on our there, eg when it comes to intersteller travel, but that doesn't invalidate anything we've done so far or are doing so far, just as newtonian physics is enough for most current inventions as figures only start going off when relativistic speeds are reached, which isn't a common day occurance.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  4. Well Congrats! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Invite Fats Domino, the Mars rovers, and the Energizer Bunny to the Party!

    1. Re:Well Congrats! by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      Invite Keith Richards, the Mars rovers, and the Energizer Bunny to the Party!

      Fixed it for you.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
  5. Matrix by garlicbready · · Score: 1

    I take it they haven't reached the edge of the Matrix yet?
    I remember there was supposed to be some unknown force slowing one of them down near the edge at least
    but I always figured it was just a floating point error, the same sort of thing you get in secondlife when going too high

  6. You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1, Informative

    Spock: Mentally, V'ger is a child...

    'Bones': Spock, this "child" is about to wipe out every living thing on Earth. Now, what do you suggest we do? Spank it?

    Spock: It knows only that it needs, Commander. But, like so many of us... it does not know what.

    "SEND MORE CHUCK BERRY"

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by BUL2294 · · Score: 1

      God, that was a stupid movie! The background "music" sounds like some bad TurboGrafx-16-inspired acid trip.

      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
    2. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      "Sproinnnng, Sproin-Oinnnng!"

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      I liked the Klingon theme, when they attacked. Nice drum work.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    4. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by LordSnooty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wish Slashdot had a filter, like "remove all Star Trek posts"

    5. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

      Spock: It knows only that it needs, Commander. But, like so many of us... it does not know what.

      Ilia: Vger requires more cowbell.

    6. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, this would be like all Star Trek fans crying out and suddenly being silenced.

      No. Wait. Wrong Star opera.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by x2A · · Score: 1

      But that would remove your post too!

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    8. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      I wish Slashdot had a filter, like "remove all Star Trek posts"


      Then you can take what's left and fit it comfortably in the original Voyager's computer memory.

    9. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and a meta-filter: remove all people that remove all star trek posts

    10. Re:You are the Kirk Unit? You will assist me. by Cervantes · · Score: 1

      I wish Slashdot had a filter, like "remove all Star Trek posts" It does, actually. Just go up to your location bar and type "About:blank"
      Voila. Slashdot without the Star Trek posts.
      --
      If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  7. From a time when NASA actually "worked" by newgalactic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We need Probes!!! Thousands of Probes, streaking across the cosmos, searching, observing, huge "shelf life". Manned space flight is nothing but an election day promise. Our standard mode of operation should be automated probes. It's cheaper, easier, and doesn't bring the whole process to a screeching halt when something blows up.

    1. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by SomeJoel · · Score: 3, Funny

      But probes can't give inspirational speeches to auditoriums packed with High School students.

      --
      <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
    2. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Yeah and then some idiot will make them self-replicating and set the self-replication priority to 999 to maximize their return on the investment.

    3. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we come in peace

      this is probe 2418-b. we are on a peaceful mission of exploration

      priority over-ride. new behavior dictated

      must break target into component materials

    4. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by newgalactic · · Score: 1

      Self-replication??? I'd be happy if we kept them from slamming into Mars, not releasing their parachute, burning up, blowing up, ...etc.

    5. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by jdigriz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agreed, automated probes are where it's at for long-range exploration. But imagine how much cheaper it would be to produce and send those thousands of probes if they already had orbital velocity at construction time as opposed to being launched from the Earth. We need space-based industry and infrastructure!

    6. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Diablo1399 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Unmanned probes are where it's at. We can colonise the Solar System later.

    7. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "But probes can't give inspirational speeches to auditoriums packed with High School students."

      Or delay the program by scattering in meaty gobbets over the countryside when their delivery vehicle manfunctions...

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    8. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Probes don't offer the fapworthy drama of sending humans up in primitive systems.
      Sending people up not is like exploring the ocean using the equipment and methods of 1492. We can evolve systems much more quickly if we wait to put meat in space and evolve proper machines instead.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    9. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but the engineer who builds it can.

      Do we really need figureheads that direly? Everyone knows Gagarin, but who knows Korolyov? Everyone knows Armstrong, but who knows Webb or Paine? They could give far more interesting and insightful speeches about space programs.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      How much of it could be automatized by the time when this actually becomes an issue?

      I do agree that sooner or later we will need manned space travel. But shouldn't we first of all ensure that we can do it reliably and safely? We currently do have the technology to make almost every routine task in space something that can be done by machinery and computers. Currently I do not see the need to hope and pray every time that old crate takes off, whether those 7 people on board will make it. Currently, the point is reached where we can either pump FAR more money into space and create a new shuttle, or rely on automated exploration. And, bluntly, we know little enough that probes is actually enough for now.

      Craft probes, use them to learn. Not only about space, but also about the technology to explore space. Then it's time to shift towards manned space exploration again.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by bckrispi · · Score: 1

      +1 Star Control reference.

      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
    12. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by x2A · · Score: 1

      So... what you're saying is we need to invest the required huge amounts of money and effort into an inspiration-speech AI? Then we'll be able to justify to the people the money and effort required to send out loads of probes?

      It's so crazy it might just work...

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    13. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by x2A · · Score: 1

      "Currently I do not see the need to hope and pray every time that old crate takes off, whether those 7 people on board will make it"

      Neither do I, there's plenty more astronauts where they come from ;-)

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    14. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by zaffir · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The raw materials for those probes need to be placed in orbit in the first place. I don't see how building them out there helps.

      --
      "Upon attaching the waterblock to my penis, I began to notice that I know nothing about computers." -- JRockway
    15. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Everyone knows Gagarin, but who knows Korolyov?
      In the USSR, every kid knew about both. Times are different now, of course...
    16. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Claws+Of+Doom · · Score: 1

      Spot on. For things to attain extra-planetary trajectories, it's always the same energy calculations: there's no free ride for things built in space.

    17. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Gagarin is known way beyond the borders of the former USSR. It's part of common knowledge who was the first man in space. Unfortunately it's not to know who got him there.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    18. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, yeah, and NASA is the acronym for "need another seven astronauts". That joke was already stale after Challenger. :(

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by nwbvt · · Score: 1

      Well, cheap is a relative term. The Voyager program has already cost hundreds of millions of dollars and to this day still costs millions each year to maintain. And Cassini-Huygens cost several billion.

      And probes really can't be shot out willy-nilly, at least not if you want them to visit things we might consider interesting. The planets have to be aligned (literally) in order for it to be economical for them to visit specific targets in a timely fashion. For instance the Planetary Grand Tour that Voyager 2 took won't be available again until the middle of the 22nd century. And most of space is empty and boring, so if you don't have those targets you might as well be loading the rocket full of hundreds of millions of dollars in cash and sending that directly into space.

      Manned space exploration has the advantage in that you are giving the space program a goal for it to work towards. The Apollo program motivated many advancements, not to mention engineers, because it had an achievable but difficult high profile goal for NASA to reach for.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    20. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need Probes!!! Thousands of Probes

      We need a Probe for Uranus.

      --
      SOMEBODY had to say it...

    21. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by x2A · · Score: 1

      hehe, i like the way you get to tell a joke and seem disapproving of it at the same time.

      Cuz I'm a little bit country... ...and I'm a little bit rock 'n roll ya!

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    22. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Gagarin is known way beyond the borders of the former USSR. It's part of common knowledge who was the first man in space. Unfortunately it's not to know who got him there.

      I'd say that Wernher von Braun is fairly well known in the US, if not the rest of the World. The engineers do get their fair share of the credit it would seem...

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    23. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, cosmonauts knew about YOU!

    24. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Von Braun is known because he was controversal. He was the chief engineer for the V2 rockets, should a Nazi engineer build the moon rocket?

      If he'd have been a plain ol' US engineer, nobody would know his name.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:From a time when NASA actually "worked" by jdigriz · · Score: 1

      This article explains how nicely http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=427

  8. I guess we owe a beer... by SomeJoel · · Score: 1

    To the guy that said, "No, it wouldn't be cool to send the probes hurtling into the sun after their mission is complete." Sometimes, the party-poopers are the wisest of us all.

    --
    <Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
  9. But... by niceone · · Score: 2, Funny

    will Janeway give the crew the day off?

    1. Re:But... by ookabooka · · Score: 1

      will Janeway give the crew the day off?

      Yes. As soon as they get home.
      --
      If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  10. Remarkable Spacecraft by decipher_saint · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Both Voyager I & II are amazing pieces of technology. Still giving us valuable information about the universe in which we live. So, kudos NASA but particularly to the development and current project teams at JPL.

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
    1. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by Iskender · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Let's not forget what makes these probes possible: nuclear power, more specifically RTGs. No, I'm not trying to glorify nuclear, but we simply don't have the technology to make something equally robust at anything approaching a reasonable price and launch weight. So for the moment, RTGs it is for outer solar system probes, and nuclear reactors should be given consideration if they make more valuable science possible (remember, the Russians already used some of those in space AND had them fail, so they won't be the end of us).

    2. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by skoaldipper · · Score: 1

      IANAAstronomer, well, an amateur at best. But how does VI&II plan on getting past that pile of space crap called the Oort cloud? Were there ever any projections made past it?

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    3. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by x2A · · Score: 1

      "But how does VI&II plan on getting past that pile of space crap called the Oort cloud?"

      That very question was asked in a recent interiew. After a long delay, the V1 probe responded: 10.4082.... 10.4083.... 10.4084...

      Doesn't sound like much, but is the best plan it could come up with. V2, however, is equipped with a pole vault.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    4. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by niktemadur · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The two Voyagers, as well the two Pioneer probes, are barely on the edge of the heliopause (around 85 AUs from the Sun). It is speculated that the Oort Cloud begins around 750 AUs from the Sun. As it's taken 30 years to travel 85 AUs, it'll be approximately 250 years before the probes enter the proposed inner boundary of the Oort Cloud.
      A quick footnote: Voyager 1, thanks to the particular trajectory chosen for it, is a bit further away than the other three probes, around 100 AUs away from the Sun.

      Now here's the clincher: Voyagers' batteries are supposed to last another 15-20 years at most. As for the Pioneers, the last signal from Pioneer 10 was registered in 2003, from Pioneer 11 in 2005. On blueprint, they still have a bit of juice left, but their distances from Earth are so great that there's no current instrument that can pick up their incredibly weak signal.

      Anyhow, by the time the Voyagers and Pioneers reach the Oort Cloud, they'll have been stone cold dead for centuries.

      These spacecraft fascinate me more today than back in their prime-time heyday. Most people think that when Voyager 2 flew by Neptune, the planetary team moved out of JPL and that was that. Yet the current team moved in and the really hardcore adventure really kicked into gear. These things just kept going and sailed right off the edge!

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    5. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by StarfishOne · · Score: 2, Interesting


      I once read that the strength of this incredibly weak signal was not the problem. After doing a search, I discovered that it is indeed the decaying (pun intended) power supply and not the communication signal that will become the problem when it comes to communicating with those probes in decades/centuries to come:

      "* Barring any serious spacecraft subsystem failures, the Voyagers may survive until the early twenty-first century (~ 2020), when diminishing power and hydrazine levels will prevent further operation. Were it not for these dwindling consumables and the possibility of losing lock on the faint Sun, our tracking antennas could continue to "talk" with the Voyagers for another century or two!"

      http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/didyouknow.htm l

    6. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by niktemadur · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems that you're absolutely right. I did some further reading since I posted, and here's what I came up with:

      Pioneer 11, for example, had a constant power supply of 144W upon arrival to Jupiter, but by the time it got to Saturn, that figure had decreased to 100W. By the time they lost contact with it, the figure must have been much lower, and still they lost the signal only because its' antenna's alignment with Earth had been lost. BTW, there's a typo in my original post, as last contact with Pioneer 11 was not in 2005, but in 1995.
      Pioneer 10, however, with the same specs as Pioneer 11, never lost telemetry, so the final verdict is that its' batteries simply petered out. Which is to say, signal strength did finally cross the threshold, due to the dying juice supply.

      Compare this with the Voyagers, which upon launch generated 420W of power, and I think your point becomes apparent.

      Then of course, in all four craft, some instruments were switched off after the planetary tours, to divert crucial power supply to the absolutely essential components of the following phase of the mission.

      One final thought: how low does transmitter strength have to go before it fades away, from that distance? Something like one of those gizmos you hook up to an iPod so you can listen to it in your car radio?

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    7. Re:Remarkable Spacecraft by StarfishOne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not a specialist when it comes to transmitters and receivers, but I found a few more bits of information that you might find interesting:

      "After launch, Pioneer 10 was capable of transmitting data at a maximum data rate of 2408 bits per second. Now the data rate is 16 bits per second. Reducing the bit rate compensates for the reduced signal strength; it is like speaking more slowly to enunciate more clearly. The signal strength from the craft's main transmitter is now about 7.8 watts; by the time it reaches the DSN antennas, the signal has diminished to less than a billionth of a trillionth (10-21) of a watt."

      http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13318105.500 -pioneer-the-persistent-probe-pioneer-10-the-first spacecraft-to-head-for-jupiter-proved-that-probes- could-reach-the-outerplanets-of-our-solar-system-t wenty-years-on-it-is-sending-us-messagesfrominters tellar-space.html

      Deep space tracking station - http://personal.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/D.Jefferi es/tidbin.html

      "Successfully sending a DSN signal into Voyager-2's receiver is like throwing a baseball across thousands of miles of ocean into a porthole of a moving cruise ship."

      http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/DeepSpaceNetwork/ DeepSpaceNetwork.html

      I just cannot praise the people who made and make this project possible enough. The facts are jaw dropping!

  11. Ping? by Arceliar · · Score: 1

    ...(about 2 hours and 53 minutes later) PONG! To put that into perspective, that's about how long it would take to ping Voyager 1 wirelessly. Before you factor in the slashdot effect.

    1. Re:Ping? by Arceliar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, my math was way off on that, it'd be like 28 hours to ping it, but you get the point. It'd take a while.

    2. Re:Ping? by eln · · Score: 2, Funny

      So what you're saying is if I see Voyager logging in to a Counterstrike server, I shouldn't be too worried?

    3. Re:Ping? by kayditty · · Score: 1
      It'd be more like 29 hours RTT (28.908888 -- 1.20453701 days).

      1.56*10^13/299792458/3600 = 14.454444 (mIRC $calc)

      or perl:

      $ perl -e 'print 1.56*10**13/299792458/3600 . "\n"'
      14.4544441252532555


      or google:

      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=15.6+billion+ km+divided+by+c
    4. Re:Ping? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Please DO NOT do that! You could slashdot Voyager alone, now imagine what happens when all /.ers suddenly try that! We won't get any meaningful replies from Voyagers for the next century.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Ping? by x2A · · Score: 1

      cool! Anyone who wants to try it, it's IPv1 address is 12. You can download an IPv1-in-IPv4 tunnel from sourceforge. Please note, it doesn't support ICMP-echo-request (not having enough memory to receive an ICMP packet), it only supports 12.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  12. Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by plopez · · Score: 1

    we had pretty good good German rocket scientists in those days. but once they all died or retired, it was down hill for NASA.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      we had pretty good good German rocket scientists in those days. but once they all died or retired, it was down hill for NASA.

      The launch vehicle has very little to do with probe longevity. (Unless you can argue that newer rocket brands have a bumpier ride up.)

      (Insert Made-in-China joke)

    2. Re:Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your screen door have one rusty hinge or two?

    3. Re:Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      maybe we can smuggle all the insurgent IED scientists out of Iraq and pump some fresh blood into NASA. On second thought, maybe that's not a good idea.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by ross.w · · Score: 1


      When the rockets go up
      who cares where they come down?
      "That's not my department"
      says Werner Von Braun.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    5. Re:Why they are going to last a llloonnnngg time by VagaStorm · · Score: 1

      NASA scientist: You want to take the worlds largest space nuclear reactor into a low orbit?
      "Ex" Al Quida scientist: Yes, yes, I will fly it manually. I have learned it from the latest flight simulator. Now go away!

  13. I think... by slapout · · Score: 1

    ...it's time we send out some more.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
    1. Re:I think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A reboot a day helps keep the Blue Screen of Death away!

      It also keeps skype away. VOIP scares me, it sounds like an evil ghost from a scooby doo episode.
    2. Re:I think... by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      ...it's time we send out some more.

      New Horizons just passed Jupiter, and is on its way to study the dwarf planets of the Kuiper Belt; it will zip past them at a ridiculously high speed and then head out to deep space just as the Voyager and Pioneer probes did..

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  14. It just goes to show... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wwe have a very long way go to even send a probe to another star. After three decades, the farthest man made object from our little hunk of rock is less that 2 tenths of a percent of a light year away.

    1. Re:It just goes to show... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to my google calculator
      15.6 billion kilometers = 0.602268505 light days
      OR about 0.17% of a light year. So yeah, like you said.

  15. IMHO by StarfishOne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The Voyagers belong somewhere in the top of the list with the most amazing machines ever developed by humans.

    Every time I see the "Interesting Facts about the Voyager Mission" page [1] and "Fast Facts" page [2] at NASA's JPL, I am just amazed that this was achieved with technology from the early '70s!

    I often find myself wishing that I was born earlier and that I was part of the team of man and women who pushed so many of our frontiers so much further then ever before.

    *raises glass*

    To the Voyagers! [3]

    [1] http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/didyouknow.htm l
    [2] http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/fastfacts.html
    [3] Voyager 1 will celebrate it's 30th anniversary on september 5th, so let's celebrate both achievements ;)

    1. Re:IMHO by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Every time I see the "Interesting Facts about the Voyager Mission" page [1] and "Fast Facts" page [2] at NASA's JPL, I am just amazed that this was achieved with technology from the early '70s!

      I think mid-70's would be more like it. Anyhow, the Voyager pair is one of the most productive set of scientific instruments every created. They were the first to give us a close-up view of the major moons of all the gas giants, and discovered active volcanos on Io and Triton. The best images of the moons before Vogager were fuzzy blobs (Pioneer 10 got radiation confusion when trying to image Io). Plus, gave us our first probe views of Uranus and Neptune.

      I'll never forget walking by the newstand while worrying about everyday problems and suddenly spotting a marvelous full-front-page photo of a hazy blue orb with a big dark swirly spot in the middle. Voyager had visited Neptune. WOW moments like these are a rare treat. Thanks for the memories!

    2. Re:IMHO by Scaba · · Score: 1

      Plus, gave us our first probe views of Uranus...

      I don't think that joke ever gets old.

    3. Re:IMHO by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And the amazing thing was that Voyager was not initially supposed to go to Uranus or Neptune, or that the NASA boffins managed to re-engineer the thing from over a billion miles away to take better pictures.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    4. Re:IMHO by pokerdad · · Score: 1

      I don't think that joke ever gets old.

      Then clearly you are not a fan of Futurama. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ure ctum

    5. Re:IMHO by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure that it was the plan from the start to go to Uranus, the NASA guys just wanted to save themselves from the jokes akin to "So, I heard you're gonna shoot a probe to Uranus?"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:IMHO by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      Of course, not that much has changed in rocketry and space exploration since the 70's. Faster computers, yes, but that doesn't really change the basic design.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
  16. Fuel economy by stox · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many million miles per gallon of propellant these machines have gotten? Damn impressive engineering.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    1. Re:Fuel economy by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah. A frictionless environment will do wonders for your MPG...

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Fuel economy by StarfishOne · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not millions of miles per gallons. Launching costs quite a bit of fuel:

      "Voyager's fuel efficiency (in terms of mpg) is quite impressive. Even though most of the launch vehicle's 700 ton weight is due to rocket fuel, Voyager 2's great travel distance of 7.1 billion km (4.4 billion mi) from launch to Neptune results in a fuel economy of about 13,000 km per liter (30,000 mi per gallon). As Voyager 2 streaks by Neptune and coasts out of the solar system, this economy will get better and better!"

      From the page I also mentioned in an earlier reply to this news item:
      http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/didyouknow.htm l :)

    3. Re:Fuel economy by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      You can have great fuel economy right here on earth too, if you're willing to wait 30 years to get to your destination!

    4. Re:Fuel economy by feepness · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many million miles per gallon of propellant these machines have gotten? Damn impressive engineering. Meh. I'm sure even Detroit could get great fuel economy is there was zero friction after you reached cruising speed.
    5. Re:Fuel economy by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Meh. I'm sure even Detroit could get great fuel economy is there was zero friction after you reached cruising speed.

      Easy. Just make sure your girlfriend's previous relationships involved men who are better endowed than you are.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Fuel economy by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Yeah. A frictionless environment will do wonders for your MPG...

      That and the gravity boosts these probes got from our sun and the gas giants.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    7. Re:Fuel economy by VultureMN · · Score: 3, Funny

      I travel the old-fashioned way.

      Continental drift!

      (stolen from The Onion)

    8. Re:Fuel economy by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Classic.

    9. Re:Fuel economy by Pearson · · Score: 1

      Which is great since it's a long way to the next gas station.

      --
      I...I'm attacking the darkness!
    10. Re:Fuel economy by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's a bit like driving one of those electric cars. It's just not the same ride experience.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Fuel economy by skeeto · · Score: 1

      If you are having trouble imagining 9.7 billion miles, here is the same distance in a more useful unit,

      9.7 billion miles = 140 billion football fields

      Ah! That is much easier for me to picture in my head.

  17. Jsut shows you teh further away from by Farakin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    our government, the better everything works...robots...farmers....technology...

  18. billions of miles/km by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sigh. Generally, if you have to use a really big number to describe something, you're not using the right units. In this case, Voyager I is approximately 104.28 astronomical units from the Sun. In comparison, Pluto is about 39.5 to 49.3 AU from the Sun. Light takes about 14 days to get from Earth to the spacecraft. One day we might go out to the Solar Foci (around 550 AU) to use the Sun as a gravitational lens to image distant galaxies or the surface of exo-solar planets.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:billions of miles/km by StarfishOne · · Score: 4, Informative

      (Still a great distance to travel, but should that not be 14 hours instead of 14 days?)

    2. Re:billions of miles/km by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Yes, indeed, sorry!

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:billions of miles/km by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Light takes about 14 hours to get from Earth to the spacecraft.

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    4. Re:billions of miles/km by dameron · · Score: 1

      >One day we might go out to the Solar Foci (around 550 AU) to use the Sun as a gravitational lens to image distant galaxies or the surface of exo-solar planets.

      Or we could do it in 10 years, if we had the balls.

    5. Re:billions of miles/km by DocFloyd · · Score: 1
      Ok, this is a sign that I have been up too long. I HAVE to nitpick this one.

      Sigh. Generally, if you have to use a really big number to describe something, you're not using the right units. In this case, Voyager I is approximately 104.28 astronomical units from the Sun. In comparison, Pluto is about 39.5 to 49.3 AU from the Sun. Light takes about 14 days to get from Earth to the spacecraft
      Mixed your units, did you? It's not quite 14 HOURS to Voyager 1. Thirteen point 9 something, without getting out a calculator.
    6. Re:billions of miles/km by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Sigh. Generally, if you have to use a really big number to describe something, you're not using the right units. In this case, Voyager I is approximately 104.28 astronomical units from the Sun.

      Yes, but Carl Sagan saying, "lots and lots of astronomical units" doesn't quite have the same ring.

  19. Factual misrepresentation. by ushering05401 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The furthest probe is about 1 billion miles from the 'edge' of the solar system (the heliosheath 8.7 billion miles from the sun). The second probe is still well short of that.

    Not quite the "billions of miles from our solar system's edge" that the summary states.

    Just nitpicking.

    1. Re:Factual misrepresentation. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      There are a number of possible definitions of the edge of the solar system. The heliosheath is quite an obscure one; I would imagine that most people would use the orbit of Pluto, which both Voyager probes have passed by several tens of AUs. You could also use the edge of the Oort cloud as a definition of the edge of the solar system, if you so chose. The heliosheath is the edge of the heliosphere, which is a lot more precisely defined in terms of extent than the solar system.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  20. Floating point error? by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ah, the good old misplaced decimal point. We've lost some of our best space probes that way....

    :-P

    HAL.

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  21. The really amazing thing by edwardpickman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The distance actually can be measured in light hours and I'll probably live to see it go into a light day distant and some on the forum may see it hit two light days, young teens with long lives. Puts interstellar travel into perspective.

    1. Re:The really amazing thing by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Puts interstellar travel into perspective.

      I'd say it puts our lifespans into perspective. We really don't live long enough to play in this game.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:The really amazing thing by xeno-cat · · Score: 1

      "I'd say it puts our lifespans into perspective. We really don't live long enough to play in this game."

      Depends on what you consider a "life span". Having children carry on our genes can be seen as a continuum. Maybe our egos don't live long enough to think it's worth it?

      Kind Regards

      --
      "A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us w
  22. technology from the 70s was quite good enough by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and isn't it curious how we can still find ways to play Edison cylinders, decode stone heiroglyphs, communicate at the edge of the solar wind with a handful of transistors ruggedized and wired in very conservative circuits...

    and we can't find a drive to read a 5-1/4 inch floppy in? can't play a Betamax tape?

    good enough is good enough, you don't have to spend a billion on a whole new infrastructure to get one project done.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      Just to be clear: I did not intend to say that technology from the 70's was not good enough. I meant it more as a compliment to the men and women who designed this whole thing. For example: perhaps they were still using slide rulers at times[1]. This compared to the 'fancy CAD/CAM systems' that are now available on each desktop computers because those are now powerful enough to run such software now.

      Perhaps not the best example, but it's all I can think of right now to (hopefully) help make my underlying intention clear.

      [1] "The use of slide rules continued to grow through the 1950s and 1960s even as digital computing devices were being gradually introduced; but in the early to mid 1970s the electronic scientific calculator made it largely obsolete and most suppliers exited the business." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_rule

    2. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by jd · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Well, some hieroglyphs. There are a good few hundred languages from the days of writing on stone or in clay that cannot be deciphered and quite likely never will be. I find the study of ancient languages fascinating, as they were never intended to be DRMed - uhh, unreadable, but they have become so. At the present time, nobody has successfully used computers to assist in decoding such languages except in the limited sense of counting sign combinations. This seems like a superb application, but it is also an unsolved application. Nobody, nobody at all, knows how.

      When it comes to old technologies, some things are superb and some things have proven a disaster. Floppies didn't start with the 5.25" - the 8" was older and is even less readable. Long before floppies, you had core memory. Good for 100+ years! But in less than half that time, I doubt there are many systems that could actually read the damn thing without wiping it. (Core was destructive on read, so you had to perform a write for every read into the correct address space.)

      On ancient technology, more than one archaeological site has been utterly destroyed - partially or totally unmapped and unstudied - because some country or other wanted to build a dam. Water is important, sure, but you can collect water in any number of ways, and even if the dam is imperative, it'll take years to decades to build. Allowing scientists a few months to collect irreplaceable data isn't going to kill anyone or anything. Denying them does kill our chances of understanding the past. We only have one history, once it's gone, it's gone. It is, sadly, very easy to destroy and politicians have done much to destroy it.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    3. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      if you're willing to spend 5 minutes on ebay, you can find a beta VCR and a 5.25 floppy drive. I'm mentioning this because NASA uses ebay to find parts for their outdated computers.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by morcego · · Score: 1

      Quoting (or misquoting) Frank Herbert: "Computers increased the number of things humans could do without thinking"

      That in itself explains why we get to many crappy, broken things these days.

      --
      morcego
    5. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by CharlieG · · Score: 1

      Ah, there is a 5-1/4 drive in one of the boxes right next to me

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    6. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by confusedneutrino · · Score: 1

      Off-topic, but I found a working Betamax player in my parents' basement last week. With playable copies of all 3 original Star Wars movies. Party time.

      --


      --RIAmAses! Let my MP3ople go!
    7. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      The Space Shuttles used core memory until 1990. It's an awesome technology. Solid state and persistent. (And I dig how . . . physical it is. You can see how it works!)

      -Peter

    8. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      If those tapes are original and not recorded, they could be worth some $ to a collector.

    9. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by x2A · · Score: 1

      "Computers increased the number of things humans could do without thinking"

      And of course, the number of mistakes per second that can be made :-)

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    10. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On ancient technology, more than one archaeological site has been utterly destroyed - partially or totally unmapped and unstudied - because some country or other wanted to build a dam. Water is important, sure, but you can collect water in any number of ways, and even if the dam is imperative, it'll take years to decades to build. Allowing scientists a few months to collect irreplaceable data isn't going to kill anyone or anything. Denying them does kill our chances of understanding the past.

      If the dam takes years-to-decades to build... Why in hell aren't the scientists and archeologists out there doing their digging and collecting from friggin' day one of earth moving? They keep getting denied because they wait till the last damn minute - and then complain loudly they don't have time to do in a few months what they've put off for years-to-decades.
    11. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, i have a celeron (~300mhz, i think, but maybe way off. dont remember.) machine with 32mb of ram and one gig of scsi hdd. runs windows2000, and has a 5.25 inch floppy drive. i share it on the network, and can read from those old floppys in winxp, and presumably vista too. my dad has like 7 gigs of stuff on that kind of media, so its kinda useful.

        put it all together a few weeks ago from a few old craps found on the street under signs that said 'free'.

    12. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by jd · · Score: 1

      Oh, well that one's easy to solve. Lazy and incompetent scientists and archaeologists get to provide organic supports within the concrete structures. Everything else gets sorted out by Darwinian mechanics.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    13. Re:technology from the 70s was quite good enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything else gets sorted out by Darwinian mechanics

      Yeah, because who needs those dam(n) hippie, liberal commie archeologists anyway. Everybody knows that the only science worthy of study for a God-fearing conservative scientist is Intelligent Design and Ballistics.

  23. Still going but fading from public awareness... by KokorHekkus · · Score: 5, Informative

    A couple of years ago we talked about portable electric power on the coffee-break at work and I mentioned that Voyager had some kind of nuclear powered source for electricity (corret term turned out ot be Radioisotope thermoelectric generator, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoel ectric_generator.

    A reasonably intelligent guy turns to me and says "But you know that Voyager is all fictional?". He had no clue about the Voyager program and only thought of Star Trek Voyager...

    1. Re:Still going but fading from public awareness... by Ironsides · · Score: 3, Funny

      PLEASE tell me you smacked him upside the head good for that.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:Still going but fading from public awareness... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      A reasonably intelligent guy turns to me and says "But you know that Voyager is all fictional?". He had no clue about the Voyager program and only thought of Star Trek Voyager... Just because someone is intelligent does not mean that they are not ignorant. Fortunately, ignorance is easier to cure than stupidity.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  24. Hopefully, another president has future thoughts by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    It would be nice to see a president push the idea of having a voyager III. By using a powerful rocket (spacex's BFR or ares V) combined with electric engines AND nuclear power, it might be possible to get quite a bit further in a short time. I was thinking that while we need nukes for this, an ion engine would allow for some major speed to be built up. In addition, at this time, we would probably have a new array of instruments to put on there.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  25. I need proof. by eadiek · · Score: 1

    "We have thousands of probe droids searching the galaxy. I want proof, not leads!"

  26. Billions and Billions by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Funny

    15.6 billion kilometers is so hard to conceptualize. If only we had some measure of distance to give proper context; some sort of scale relative to the distance from the earth to another significant celestial body. A unit of measure large enough for "astronomical" purposes. Then we could say the probe is, oh, I don't know.. let's just pick a number and say the probe is 104 of these units away, instead of billions of kilometers. If only...

    1. Re:Billions and Billions by dkf · · Score: 2, Informative

      A unit of measure large enough for "astronomical" purposes. You mean the parsec? "Voyager's now gone a bit over 500 microparsecs." Yeah, that works for me.
      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    2. Re:Billions and Billions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Billions and Billions by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      The other day someone asked me how far away the sun is. I told him with a straight face, "On average it is 1 away."

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    4. Re:Billions and Billions by Karellen · · Score: 1

      Nah, I can't conceptualise it unless it's in football-field lengths. Can someone figure that out for me? Google calculator won't do "15.6 billion km in football fields" so I'm stuck.

      --
      Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
    5. Re:Billions and Billions by freedom_india · · Score: 1

      Is it American football, or the Brazil futbol??? (Like the rest of the world)

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    6. Re:Billions and Billions by brer_rabbit · · Score: 1

      You've never heard of the Voyager? Voyager is the ship that made the Kessel run in less than 500 microparsecs!

    7. Re:Billions and Billions by dintech · · Score: 1

      If only we had some measure of distance to give proper context

      The Library of Congress has 850km of shelf space. So....

      15.6 billion divided by 850 equals 18,352,941.2 Libraries of Congress. At least now even politicians can track Voyager's progress...

    8. Re:Billions and Billions by wjsteele · · Score: 1

      Billions and Billions = 1 Sagan!

      Voyager is 1 Sagan away - and always will be! Coincendently, so is Voyager 2... and even the Pioneers.

      Wow... that's was easy.

      Bill

      --
      It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
    9. Re:Billions and Billions by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

      By all means, lets convert this to a more personal system of units. The spacecraft is now approximately 9.14E12 Smoots away.

      --
      -
    10. Re:Billions and Billions by slashdotjunker · · Score: 1

      Billion-km is useless but AU is meaningless too. For a unit of measurement to be meaningful you have to link it to a physical observation. No human will ever observe an AU, even if they go into space. If you ever get far enough out to have an AU in your field of view then the Earth will be too small to see.

      Light-hours is not that useful either since we're not fast enough (or sensitive enough) to see photons of light traveling at the speed of light.

      The only thing I can think of that might be useful is the speed of sound. Nearly everyone has observed the difference between lightning and thunder. So, in those terms it would take about 1400 years for you to hear the thunder.

  27. Pioneer 10 by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

    'Scuse my ignorance but I thought Pioneer 10 was farthest away. Weren't the Pioneers launched launched before the Voyagers?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:Pioneer 10 by Nimey · · Score: 1

      The Voyagers are traveling at a higher velocity.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  28. IMH-Uhhhhh!!-O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Voyagers belong somewhere in the top of the list with the most amazing machines ever developed by humans."

    Right next to the vibrator.

    "I often find myself wishing that I was born earlier and that I was part of the team of man and women who pushed so many of our frontiers so much further then ever before."

    Hope you enjoy slide-rules?

    "*raises glass*"

    Don't we have enough drunks in the space program?

  29. Farthest Man Made Object? I duno.... by Tmack · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Voyager 1 currently is the farthest human-made object at a distance from the sun of about 9.7 billion miles (15.6 billion kilometers). Voyager 2 is about 7.8 billion miles (12.6 billion kilometers).

    I think theres Another contender for that title...

    Tm

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
    1. Re:Farthest Man Made Object? I duno.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Two actually... this one has more confirmation that it actually was launched, and had a better chance of escaping earth.

      tm

    2. Re:Farthest Man Made Object? I duno.... by pjt33 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's without even raising the question of what constitutes an object. If photons or neutrinos count...

    3. Re:Farthest Man Made Object? I duno.... by Seenhere · · Score: 1

      Except probably not:

      "Leaving aside whether such an extremely hypersonic unaerodynamic object could even survive passage through the lower atmosphere, it appears impossible for it to retain much of its initial velocity while passing through the atmosphere. A ground launched hypersonic projectile has the same problem with maintaining its velocity that an incoming meteor has."

      --
      "I used to be a dilettante. Then I thought I'd try something else for a while."
    4. Re:Farthest Man Made Object? I duno.... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Now that's what I call an "atomic cannon". I guess we should be grateful the thing didn't land in Russia back then. They'd probably have thought it was an attack and launched.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  30. Are you refering to 7 of 9? by infonography · · Score: 1

    She didn't seem to be composed of that much Silicon. We'll have to ask Captain Janeway.

    The ST-Voyager cycle is now complete we can drop it.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  31. In Light Years by Thyamine · · Score: 1

    Well if I punched that correctly into Google, that's still only 1/1000 of a light year (0.00165008086 light years). Hopefully someday we find a faster method of travel.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client =firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aoff icial&hs=ZMa&q=9%2C700%2C000%2C000+mile+to+light+y ear&btnG=Search

    --
    I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
    1. Re:In Light Years by RuBLed · · Score: 1

      Then retrieve Voyager and bring it back....

  32. I liked the part.... by hasbeard · · Score: 1

    about the record containing (among other things) directions to Earth. I don't guess it reads something like..."Take a left at the Crab Nebulae, and go about 2,000 light years...."

    1. Re:I liked the part.... by Hanging+By+A+Thread · · Score: 1

      I think we need to get that changed to the Zoidberg Nebulae!

    2. Re:I liked the part.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It has so far travelled around 0.001 light years. At its current rate, it will have to travel for a at least sixty millennia before it's closer to any other start than ours (assuming one was launched in the direction of Proxima). It would have to go near another star and sling-shot off in a different direction before there could be any doubt as to which solar system launched it. Once you know that, you just need to pick the planet with all of the crap in orbit.

      If we discover some form of faster than light (or even near-C) travel in the next 120 millennia, then we will get to the nearest stars long before it does. If we don't, then either we've wiped ourselves out or such a form of travel isn't possible at all (120,000 years is a really long time for technology; it only took 4,000 to go from horse taming to mobile phones and space shuttles). If we've wiped ourselves out without developing interstellar travel, then it will probably be tens of millions of years before the probe goes anywhere near an inhabited system (if it ever does), by which time there is unlikely much evidence that we ever inhabited this planet. In this case, it's quite possible that the probes to be our last memorial. I wonder if anyone will ever see them...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:I liked the part.... by laddiebuck · · Score: 1

      It only took about 200 years, quite literally... It also depends on where you draw the line with horse taming. Horses were the major form of transport before the industrial revolution, but that isn't to say that huge advances in metallurgy, etc. had not occurred. Just pointing this out as many people underestimate the magnitude of the change the Victorian era brought.

    4. Re:I liked the part.... by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No matter whether we're still alive (well, humanity, not you and me), should this craft be caught by some alien it can have some serious impact for their culture.

      Imagine we noticed something artificial flying by. We needn't even be able to catch and examine it, just imagine the Hubble telescope picks up some item that is without a doubt artificial. Even after millenia of interstellar travel, a probe is still not an asteroid. It will be heavily damaged and probably look barely like the probe that was launched, but it will no less be clearly evident that some intelligence shaped it.

      How would we react if we found something like that? Most certainly it would be an answer to the eternal question whether we're alone in the universe. Not only statistically (with so many stars and so many planets it's near impossible that we're really alone), but we would have hard proof that there is or at least was some other civilisation that was at the very least so advanced that they could create spaceship.

      I'm fairly sure that this would increase our own interest in space. It would most certainly mean better funding for space exploration, maybe it would also mean a lot of fear of an "alien invasion", as ridiculous as it may be (when Voyager reaches any other solar system, we will either already be there or no longer alive, it is likely that the same applies for other civilisations). But the impact would be there, and I'm fairly sure that it would be large. No matter if the civilisation that created the probe still exists or not.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:I liked the part.... by Zarhan · · Score: 1

      Imagine we noticed something artificial flying by. We needn't even be able to catch and examine it, just imagine the Hubble telescope picks up some item that is without a doubt artificial. Even after millenia of interstellar travel, a probe is still not an asteroid. It will be heavily damaged and probably look barely like the probe that was launched, but it will no less be clearly evident that some intelligence shaped it

      May I recommend Pushing Ice, by Alastair Reynolds. Deals with exactly such a scenario happening in near-future. Just finished reading it a month ago and thought it was great (as are other AR's books).

    6. Re:I liked the part.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It describes the periods of various pulsars as multiples of the resonant period of a hydrogen molecule. It then gives the distance of each pulsar from the sun as multiples of the bond length of a hydrogen molecule. These numbers are written in binary using a morse-code-like notation.

  33. Interstellar space by Nonillion · · Score: 1

    Can anyone elaborate weather or not Voyager one on two have sufficient velocity to escape the heliopause let alone the oort cloud. I would venture to guess they don't. However, their longevity is a testament to 70's electronics. If these were made with components of today, they probably would of failed decades ago.

    --
    "I bow to no man" - Riddick
    1. Re:Interstellar space by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Yes, both Voyagers, and I think Pioneers 10 and 11 all have solar escape velocity.

      Voyager 1 has already passed the heliopause.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:Interstellar space by BUL2294 · · Score: 1

      However, their longevity is a testament to 70's electronics. If these were made with components of today, they probably would of failed decades ago.
      Honestly, I don't think that's totally true... The Mars Rovers http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/home/ are still going strong in a much more inhospitable climate, today's cars are WAY more reliable than cars were in the '70s, and so on. (And my examples don't even consider the technological advances...)

      It boils down to how well something is designed... Back then, consumer products were designed with longevity in mind. But just because few presently are doing it with consumer and other products doesn't mean that it can't be done... Entities like NASA have to do it--with surprisingly good results...
      --
      Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
    3. Re:Interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Solar escape velocity is different from a velocity merely high enough to reach some altitude from the sun. Escape velocity means, barring some other influence, it is moving fast enough that it will never come back.

    4. Re:Interstellar space by m.dillon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Its always possible to spec very reliable parts, as well as over-engineer equipment to handle degredation. It just costs a lot more for those sorts components verses the mass-produced junk you see in most consumer electronics. The market is there, its just a lot smaller.

      There's still computing equipment out in the field going strong that I designed 20 years ago. They were 68000 based computers with dynamic ram, with everything overengineered by 2x (including running the cpu at 1/2 the clock frequency in production that it was tested at during burn-in, specing resistors for far more current then they were expected to handle, refreshing the ram at 2x the required rate, specing capacitors for almost 2x the voltage they were expected to handle, and throwing a dozen zeners all over the motherboard to protect all the regulated voltage busses). Virtually unbreakable. One even operated for over two weeks completely submerged when a station got flooded before corrosion shorted it out. Some scraping and A good washing in a washing machine (no heat), and after careful drying and replacing a fuse it was ready to go again!

      -Matt

    5. Re:Interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Escape the oort cloud"? I bet you're amazed that the Voyager probes even survived the asteroid belt!

      Dumbass.

  34. Re:Barrapunto by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    I read that as barrio puta, ie, "neighborhood slut".

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  35. Richard Dawkins by Nymz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Mr Dawkins made a statement that our society is increasing belief in superstitions, even as we make progress in science and technology. I can't help be reminded of this with the Voyager aniversary as news programs focus on the Golden Record and Chuck Berry. Sure, at first I thought it was fun, but then reality sets in when I witness so many people that fully believe aliens and or angels are watching us, and just waiting for us to contact them.

    I'm sure at the time the record might of seemed harmless, except for the outcry over the naked images of a man and woman (for the sake of the children I'm sure), but today it feels like that small acquiencence was simply a foothold for drawing an ever growing shadow over... reason.

    1. Re:Richard Dawkins by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The Golden Record is a publicity stunt. Nothing more. Do you really think anyone at NASA did that because they really believed they could contact someone that way?

      But if nothing else, it made a few people think about a quite interesting problem: How do you communicate with someone who does not understand you in any way? How do you explain a length of space or time to them? How do you tell them how to use your encoding mechanisms for the information you want to relay to them? You have to give someone information, audio and video information, to someone who has no other information than what you can give him with pictograms.

      If we pondered this earlier, the life of archeologists would be a lot easier...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Richard Dawkins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i wonder how much it cost segan to license chuck berrys song? maybe, the RIAA will start suing the aliens for listening to un=licensed music? could the voyagers be -the first- long-distance p2p network?

      lets hope the RIAA does not defeat the aliens (we need to them to kill the zombies)

    3. Re:Richard Dawkins by Arimus · · Score: 1

      For gods sake - its hard enough to get two people from the same country to communicate efficiently and without confusion these days, let alone communicate with an alien... I can just imagine the first encounter:

      Man: We come in peace (which in alien = We present ourselves as the main course)
      Alien: Did you bring ketchup? (in english = we greet you)

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
    4. Re:Richard Dawkins by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      The Golden Record is a publicity stunt. Nothing more. Do you really think anyone at NASA did that because they really believed they could contact someone that way?

      If the Voyager record ever gets played, the best bet is that it's by our own descendants. Given ten thousand years it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone will go out and grab the thing and bring it home. Think of it as a really long-term time capsule.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  36. Nuclear power ROCKS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuclear Power ROCKS! Especially in space. Why are all the crazy people worried about what happens there? They work off the heat generated due to decay, not like a ground-based power plant. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950 DE0DD123CF935A1575BC0A96F948260 Imagine what we'd know if both mars rovers had nuclear power in addition to solar? How much longer could we expect data? 20 years? 30 years?

    1. Re:Nuclear power ROCKS! by m.dillon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually the rovers do have some nuclear elements in them. They have a couple of nuclear decay heaters which put out a watt or two to help keep the electronics compartment warm. Since they work off decay, they are always on.

      But not for power generation. The solar cells have been a big success, now it is just a matter of how long the wheels and outside wiring will last. And some of the electronics have radiation sources for operation which decay too (but can be compensated for).

      -Matt

  37. how do they keep it from crashing? by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    Does this thing have any navigation on it or anything to keep from splatting into stuff?

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
    1. Re:how do they keep it from crashing? by Salsaman · · Score: 1

      Splat into what ? There is pretty much nothing out there for it to hit...

    2. Re:how do they keep it from crashing? by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      It has the same thing that keeps meteors from splatting into you: the laws of probability. Nothing more.

      rj

  38. Ahhhhh! The good old days by caober · · Score: 1

    Metric and English units were much simpler then. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric. 02/

  39. Mission Planning Engineer on Voyager 2; Re:IMHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I was Mission Planning Engineer on Voyager 2, after the Saturn flyby, and in preparation for the Uranus flyby.

    I mentioned this on emails that I sent to my friends today. I also mentioned it on an email that I sent to the principal of Balir IB Magnet High School in Pasadena, where in summer school earlier this month I gave a final exam question based on my Voyager 2 experience.

    59. Uranus (19.6 AU from the sun), at 14 Earth masses,
    is the lightest of the outer planets. Uniquely among
    the planets, it orbits the Sun on its side; its axial
    tilt is over ninety degrees to the ecliptic. It has a
    much colder core than the other gas giants, and
    radiates very little heat into space. Uranus has
    twenty-seven known satellites), the largest ones being
    Titania, Oberon, Umbriel, Ariel and Miranda.
            I was the Mission Planning Engineer responsible
    for designing how many photographs the Voyager 2
    spacecraft took of Miranda, as it flew past Uranus and
    its moons.
            If we estimate the length of time it takes light
    to travel from the Sun to the Earth as 8 minutes, how
    long does it take for light to travel from the Sun to
    Uranus?

    I saw the Principal today. He's awaiting enrollment numbers from the school district, to determine if he'll have the budget to hire me full time as of Labor Day. If not, a rival high school's acting principal wants me immediately to teach Physics.

    -- Prof. Jonathan Vos Post

    1. Re:Mission Planning Engineer on Voyager 2; Re:IMHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, the high school is actually named Blair IB Magnet High School.

      Have you done the calculation yet? Okay, class. Set your pen or pencil down... now!

  40. I was 17 by p51d007 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    and beginning my senior year of high school when those were launched. For those of you too young..........we had PONG and THAT was it! No cell phone, no internet, no video games. Telephones had these things called rotary dials. You couldn't call someone in another city, sometimes, without going through the operator. There were only THREE kinds of gasoline. Leaded (for the older cars), diesel, & unleaded. We didn't have the 5-6 types of unleaded, JUST ONE. Cars costs an average of 5-8 thousand dollars BRAND NEW. Of course, they fell apart, looked like boxes, and were noisy. For music, there were a couple of FM radio stations, most cars had AM, some had FM, and if it was REALLY fancy, it had (get this) an 8 TRACK TAPE player. Oh, we walked up hill 10 miles to school in the snow every day...both ways....LOL

  41. No need to backtrack ... by trolltalk.com · · Score: 1

    FTFA:

    "The records also have directions on how to find Earth if the spacecraft is recovered by something or someone."

    I hope they don't show up any time soon - the way we're running things into the ground here on earth, it would be like getting hit by a bus without wearing clean underwear.

  42. What should it explore? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Realize that we live in a world where the first question asked is "How can we profit from it?" Back in the 60s, the reason to send probes into space was, amongst others, mostly to test the delivery technology for nukes. In fact, it often seems that the whole space programs of both sides was more or less a byproduct of that missle arms race. One could almost assume that Voyager and Pioneer just came into existance because their carrier rockets needed a test that didn't look like they're testing nuke delivery systems.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:What should it explore? by x2A · · Score: 1

      and to occupy rocket engineers who otherwise could've ended up working for (in some way or form) the enemy or an enemy-to-be.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  43. apples to oranges by qweqwe321 · · Score: 1

    If you had $4.2 million a year to find floppy drives and Betamax players, you wouldn't have any trouble at all.

  44. Perhaps, you should read as well as google by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    The title here is about the 30th anniversy of the voyager. Therefor with VERY trivial math, you will see that they launched in 77 (in fact, 2 launched today, in 1977). It flew on the Titan III which was created in 1965, and was actively being used for 12 longs years for a number of sats as well as formed the core of our nukes. IOW, this had NOTHING to do with launching nukes (other than that the titan system allowed NASA to have cheap rockets). No tests were needed. This was a pure NASA mission to find out about what is out there. Keep in mind, that the voyagers showed us our first looks of a number of planets and produced a large amount of firsts.

    If we send out a new voyager (or more), they would be designed with all new instrumentations AND propulsion. In fact, it would be useful to have the system hit a couple of planets and perhaps drop off some sub sats to explore these planets, while the new voyager uses the planets for a swing shot.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  45. And I can remember... by SIGBUS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...when one of the "upcoming events" that was in FidoNet's FidoNews was "August 24 1989: Voyager 2 passes Neptune." Scary to think it was that long ago - it seems like only yesterday.

    --
    Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
  46. From a time when figureheads actually existed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Do we really need figureheads that direly?"

    Yup.

    1. Re:From a time when figureheads actually existed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best. Post. Evar.

  47. Uranus & Neptune a bonus by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    And the amazing thing was that Voyager was not initially supposed to go to Uranus or Neptune

    IIRC, there were 2 issues that were against the outer gas giants. First, Voyager had to pass thru the inner ring gap of Saturn. Second, it would have reduced Titan photos. But Pioneer 11 tested the right path and found it safe; and second, Titan appeared to not show much photo detail for Voyager 2 (Cassinni has a special-built filter), so they decided to go ahead with the outer planet plans.

  48. Wow!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's 0.00164895652 light years

  49. Re:Uranus & Neptune a bonus (correction) by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Re: Titan appeared to not show much photo detail for Voyager 2

    Correction: Should be Voyager 1, not 2. Titan was so bland (for existing equip.) for the pass of Voyager 1, that they decided that closer photos would be of little value from Voyager 2.

  50. This reminds me of Project Orion.. by brxndxn · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclea r_propulsion)

    Supposedly, without the environmentalist wussies crying about any kind of progress, we could be travelling to other planets.. and even other stars.

    --
    --- We need more Ron Paul!
  51. Re:Hopefully, another president has future thought by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

    [...] it might be possible to get quite a bit further in a short time.

    I remember a short story from the 80s or 90s, in Asimov's Science Fiction (or Analog?), about just that.

    The first manned mission to another star featured deep sleep, and they were woken up by some flashing thing; it stopped, so they went back to sleep.

    When they arrived at the star, they were greeted by "humans" but were told that they smelled really funny, and they found that they were not "with it", couldn't keep up with the people they were talking to.

    Turns out the flashing was another craft launched from earth with a higher velocity, overtaking them, so that when they finally arrived at the star system/planet they intended, the second craft had already been there for several hundred years.

    Really neat story, showing the difference in "time travel".

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  52. This reminds me of speed of light. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And then you'd have those relativity and astrophysicists wussies getting in the way. What's a nu-clear nut suppose to do?

  53. Funny thing, but that is the issue by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    None of these will be the first of human systems to reach another star system. They are (and will) far too slow. As it is, we now have the ability to create a craft that can actually beat these sats. out of our solar systems. But these voyagers enabled a whole new generation of explorations to other planets, with a decent set of instruments to each. More importantly, these have shown us what we need to look at even as we head out of the solar system. If we continue the voyagers, it will undoubtedly have a new set of instruments and a design that perhaps allows a slow shutdown of systems. It would be nice to see a system that leaves earth and as it does it swingby of larger planets, that it drop off smaller satellites to study them again. But again, by the time that this system is slowing down on gathering infomation, a new system would no doubt come along and surpass it. At least, lets hope it would.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  54. Proxima Centauri by dusty123 · · Score: 1

    Well, 15.6 billion km are approx. 14.5 light hours.

    Hmmm, well, the next star (Proxima Centauri) is 4.24 light years away, so Voyager travelled around .04 % of the distance. Well, 76000 years more to go, Voyager!

  55. old farts thread by Zoxed · · Score: 1

    > ...when one of the "upcoming events" that was in FidoNet's FidoNews was "August 24 1989: Voyager 2 passes Neptune." Scary to think it was that long ago - it seems like only yesterday.

    I match that and raise you 12 years: I remember as a kid watching some of the TV hype *before* the launch :-)

    (I also remember watching live the launch of Apollo 11, but we were on a (TV free) holiday and missed seeing the landing :-(

  56. Re:Barrapunto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CmdrTaco getting in touch with his Latin inner child? Barrapunto is poised to become the new Soviet Rusia!

    I, for one, welcome our new Barrapunto trolling overlords!

  57. Blind Willie Johnson by photomonkey · · Score: 1

    Speaking of Voyager, anyone who hasn't heard it should check out Blind Willie Johnson's recording of "Dark was the Night", which was one of the sound recordings put on board the Voyager.

    In my estimation, it is one of the least heard and best treasures of American music.

    Imagine that a song composed a man, blinded by his own mother and completely racially unaccepted at the time, hurtles through space at tens of thousands of miles per hour. We might not have respected him while he was alive, but just maybe this is a fitting tribute.

    --
    Message contains 1 attachment: spam.gif
  58. Why no one bothers with interstellar probes by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    they take way to long to get there

    require way too much energy to go there "fast"... ...far more if you want to to slow down when it gets there

    and finally, if we did launch one, 30 years later we would come up with something faster that would actually pass the first one launched. 30 years after that the same thing would happen.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  59. Please mod parent Informative! by RoverDaddy · · Score: 1

    and Anal, Nerdy and Living in Mom's Basement.

    --
    RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
  60. Some statistics by hjo3 · · Score: 1

    Voyager 1 is now about 14.4 light hours away. (That's ~0.0016 light years.)

    At this rate, Voyager 1 will have traveled a whole 1 ly by the year 20150 AD (give or take a few decades; and, yeah, that's supposed to be five digits).

  61. What's next? by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

    Voyager is fantastic, but I wish we would put our efforts towards even better deep space probes. Something traveling 100 to 1000 times as fast, with a much more powerful radioactive power source, could provide us with amazing data and views from deep space.

    If we could invent something really fast, we could point it towards Proxima Centauri and eventually get some fly-by photos and data.

    I know this is not easy, but there are ideas on how to do this that are worth exploring, and yet I don't think much serious effort is being made.