Slashdot Mirror


It's Official: Voyager 1 Is an Interstellar Probe

astroengine writes "After a 35-year, 11-billion mile journey, NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft left the solar system to become the first human-made object to reach interstellar space, new evidence from a team of scientists shows. 'It's kind of like landing on the moon. It's a milestone in history. Like all science, it's exploration. It's new knowledge,' long-time Voyager scientist Donald Gurnett, with the University of Iowa, told Discovery News. The first signs that the spacecraft had left the solar system's heliopause was a sudden drop in solar particles and a corresponding increase in cosmic rays in 2012, but this evidence alone wasn't conclusive. Through indirect means, scientist analyzing oscillations along the probe's 10-meter (33-foot) antennas were able to deduce that Voyager was traveling through a less dense medium — i.e. interstellar space." You can watch NASA's briefing on the probe's progress here.

218 comments

  1. Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://xkcd.com/1189/

    1. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Voyager program has helped us define what the "solar system" actually is.

    2. Re:Obligatory XKCD by LifesABeach · · Score: 0

      What is very curious is the quote, "...10-meter (33-foot) antennas were able to deduce that Voyager was traveling through a less dense medium..." That instellar space may not have much in the way of matter, but is filled with energies; that are measuareable.

    3. Re:Obligatory XKCD by dywolf · · Score: 4, Funny

      "No, we really mean it this time!"

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    4. Re:Obligatory XKCD by aix+tom · · Score: 2

      The next big step will probably be when it gets a ticket for "flying outside our private property without a license plate"

    5. Re:Obligatory XKCD by ArsonSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

      In mothers voice, "Damn it Voyager, In or out make up your mind and close the damn door."

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    6. Re:Obligatory XKCD by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      "No, we really mean it this time!"

      Maybe!

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    7. Re:Obligatory XKCD by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a function from PHP.

      Astronomy_Is_In_Solar_System(X,Y,Z)

      Is deprecated, please call

      Astronomy_Real_Is_In_Solar_System(X,Y,Z)

      Prepared statements can't help you this time.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Kinda like getting AL Keida's #2 man

    9. Re:Obligatory XKCD by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      Astronomy_Real_Escaped_Solar_System(X,Y,Z)

      FTFY

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    10. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      less dense? It took it 35 years to get out of the Congress...?

    11. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In or out make up your mind

      Could have been my first girlfriend. Heh....

    12. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 3, Funny

      Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    13. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an old Tennessee saying, isn't it? I know they say that in Texas, maybe in Tennessee too.

    14. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our Solar System is expanding!

  2. In vain does the God of War growl by jomama717 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With everything going on in the world I'm reminded of a hopeful quote:

    "In vain does the God of War growl, snarl, roar, and try to interrupt with bombards, trumpets, and his whole tarantantaran ... let us despise the barbaric neighings which echo through these noble lands, and awaken our understanding and longing for the harmonies."

    - Johannes Kepler

    --
    while [ 1 ]; do echo -n -e "\xe2\x95\xb$((($RANDOM&1)+1))"; done
    1. Re:In vain does the God of War growl by tyrione · · Score: 1

      With everything going on in the world I'm reminded of a hopeful quote: "In vain does the God of War growl, snarl, roar, and try to interrupt with bombards, trumpets, and his whole tarantantaran ... let us despise the barbaric neighings which echo through these noble lands, and awaken our understanding and longing for the harmonies." - Johannes Kepler

      Ironically, Kepler was a Monotheist so his own thoughts speak with equal measure to the paganism of the past.

  3. Congrats! by Metabolife · · Score: 3, Funny

    In a few billion years, some distant alien's house is going to have this thing pummeling through the roof.

    1. Re:Congrats! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      "What's dropping out of the airplanes these days?!?!

      Thordammit, look at my TV!"

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  4. Until.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until next year we find out it isn't.

    1. Re:Until.. by XaXXon · · Score: 1

      "but it is, now"

  5. voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again.

    1. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Funny

      They use the same math behind the Vista file copying progress bar to judge its distance.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      They use the same math behind the Vista file copying progress bar to judge its distance.

      Well, in fairness, any "x minutes to completion" is based on a projection -- you'd need to invent time travel to actually get it 100% right. This is true on any platform with a progress bar with a completion time in it.

      So, at any given time you can make an estimate, but that's about it. If other things are happening which affect the estimate, it will change.

      Mostly they're there to give you something to look at and let you know it hasn't died.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      in fairness

      Well, in fairness, there are good estimations, and there are bad estimations.

      And then there's Vista.

    4. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the UI needs to show BOTH:

      ABSOLUTE bytes copied SO FAR (as in the "past)

      RELATIVE time left (as in the "future")

      Showing one (or the other) is not giving the user all the information they may need / want.

    5. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are good estimations, there are bad ones, worse ones, horrible ones, catastrophic ones, and vista ones.

    6. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither is particularly useful by itself.

      Copying 1073741824 files, each 1 byte, takes a lot longer than copy a single one gigabyte file.

      This is why estimates are so bad.

    7. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's "then there's Gnome".

      With Gnome during a file copy, the progress bar leaps up to 99.999% completed as the bytes rapidly flow into memory. Then it stalls there for 1-2 minutes as the bytes are s-l-o-w-l-y copied out of memory to the USB stick. Absolutely the most useless progress bar I have ever seen.

      That's with my version of Gnome (whatever on CentOS6.x). Fixed in later versions? I dunno. The real question is how such a bug managed to make it through testing. TESTING, you Gnome mutherf*ckers. Do you know what it is?

    8. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      The windows 8 file copy is actually pretty good. Look up a picture if you haven't seen it. So is.......well, I like the new task manager I guess.

    9. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by jalvarez13 · · Score: 1

      They use the same math behind the Vista file copying progress bar to judge its distance.

      Related obligatory XKCD: http://xkcd.com/612/

    10. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody tests that shit, are you retarded?

    11. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the process, they invented anti-gravity drive! Let's party like it's 1999!

    12. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the estimation is so wrong even when doing nothing else on the system.

      Its one thing to get the estimation wrong when the user is doing things that cause random bits of disk access.

      There is absolutely NO reason to get it even marginally wrong when the machine is otherwise idle. Disk IO is fairly consistent when copying one file.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    13. Re:voyager has left the solar system. by kimvette · · Score: 1

      And yet, XP, Win2K3, Win2K8, and Win7 are all far more accurate. . .

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  6. LOL ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    Well, this is, what, the 3rd time it's been 'official'?

    I think I'll wait a few months before I believe it's officially official.

    That's not to say this isn't highly cool -- I just am quite certain I've seen several variations on this over the last few years.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:LOL ... by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      Most definitely. There were different times when it seemed like it had, and perhaps had, but I think at each phase, scientists were in disagreement upon what actually constitutes the edge of the solar system. I believe now, they're (at least mostly) completely in agreement.

      Very cool, though!

    2. Re:LOL ... by Kittenman · · Score: 0

      Well, this is, what, the 3rd time it's been 'official'?

      I think I'll wait a few months before I believe it's officially official.

      That's not to say this isn't highly cool -- I just am quite certain I've seen several variations on this over the last few years.

      In a few months, we'll have another 'leaving'.

      Rinse and repeat.

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    3. Re:LOL ... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Even so, it's astounding that Voyager is still operational after all these years, going strong, and sending useful data back to us.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:LOL ... by PRMan · · Score: 1

      10th at least. It's happened every month this year.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    5. Re:LOL ... by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Imagine the world we'd live in if the "Voyager" kind of engineer had more say in how society worked?

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    6. Re:LOL ... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Informative

      What they are actually announcing is that the data shows that it left the solar system in August of 2012. The news over the last year was that they weren't sure if it had left yet. The news now is that it did leave, a little over a year ago.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    7. Re:LOL ... by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      Well, this is, what, the 3rd time it's been 'official'?

      So now we have a Probe that's going in and out and in and out . . .

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    8. Re:LOL ... by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      We'd have been overrun by idiots wielding clubs long ago.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    9. Re:LOL ... by Excelcia · · Score: 1

      Imagine the world we'd live in if the "Voyager" kind of engineer had more say in how society worked?

      Indeterminate in the extreme?

    10. Re:LOL ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pencils would be able to last decades sitting outside in any climate, have paint that never chips or never shows bite marks, but would cost $100 each and the consumable lead would still last the same as pencils we have today?

    11. Re:LOL ... by Leafheart · · Score: 1

      Yes and no. Voyager now is at interstellar space, but it is still on the Solar System. Check the AMA made by the guys at NASA on reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1m9wke/were_scientists_and_engineers_on_nasas_voyager/ . And mind you, in no official communication NASA said that V1 "left the solar system", those moments were always created by the press not understanding the science.

      --
      --- "When you gotta do something wrong. You gotta do it right. (Fighter)"
    12. Re:LOL ... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I think most of the confusion is what defines the solar system. They've been wondering for a while whether it did or did not cross into interstellar space, but most of the confusion seems to stem around the definition of where the solar system ends. If the Oort cloud is included, then it still has a long way to go.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  7. For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    V'Ger is that which seeks the creator.

    1. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well, it didn't fall threw a black hole.

      Besides Star Trek is only a few hundred years in the future. If trek was real life (it isn't), that would mean right out of our solar system is black hole, which I would say would be kinda scary.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by OlRickDawson · · Score: 1

      Wasn't that Voyager 6?

      --
      Ol' Rick Dawson had a farm EIEIO
    3. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2

      If trek was real life (it isn't),

      Dude! Add a Spoiler alert before you let out a secret like that!!!

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    4. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Through

    5. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      > If trek was real life (it isn't),

      Thank you for clarifying that. ;)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    6. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I have met too many people, who couldn't fully grasp that concept.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:For the uninitiated: What is Vogager 1? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I believe you. o.O

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  8. NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    NASA appears to have a nice visualization of the spacecraft's position and the particle flux...

    http://eyes.nasa.gov/launch2.html?document=$SERVERURL/content/documents/voyager/voyager_exit.html

    1. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This visualization is currently only supported on Mac OS and Windows machines. :(

    2. Re:NASA Visualization by laitcg · · Score: 1

      And yet, if I change what my browser reports, it will work fine. Go figure.

      --
      When you want a computer system that works, just choose Linux. When you want a computer system that works, just, choose
    3. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it just me or are other people reading that as NAS's Eyes.exe?

    4. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dyslexia much? Maybe NSA's Eyes.exe

      ftfy

    5. Re:NASA Visualization by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      $SERVERURL ... really? I wonder what sort of neat sploits I could pull off with that web server, that just screams incompetent developer who left doors wide open.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    6. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw come on Nasa: Nasa's Eyes.exe

      way to screw up a filename

    7. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you.

    8. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This visualization is currently only supported on Mac OS and Windows machines."

    9. Re:NASA Visualization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      requires windows or mac :(

    10. Re:NASA Visualization by higuita · · Score: 1

      This visualization is currently only supported on Mac OS and Windows machines.

      WTF!!
      don't NASA know how to use HTML5 and javascript?

      --
      Higuita
    11. Re:NASA Visualization by davewoods · · Score: 1

      The downloadable program linked above has information for seemingly every spacecraft currently in space, a very informative tool.

  9. Thanks Obama! by realmolo · · Score: 4, Funny

    We have plenty of our own problems here on Earth! Why is a government-built probe going into interstellar space? Is Obama trying to make health-care truly "universal"? I suppose if our own "illegal aliens" get free health care, why shouldn't Andromedans?

    Keep alien overlords out of my health care!

    1. Re:Thanks Obama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's a way for the NSA to share Americans personal information with Space Israel.

    2. Re:Thanks Obama! by canadiannomad · · Score: 0

      Launched in 1977... Yeah, Obama's fault!

      --
      Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
    3. Re:Thanks Obama! by Nimey · · Score: 1

      You got Poe'd.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:Thanks Obama! by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 5, Funny

      Woosh...

      The sound of Voyager leaving the solar system..... over your head. :-)

    5. Re:Thanks Obama! by SirGarlon · · Score: 2

      Some would say, this is just another instance of Obama blaming his failures on his predecessor(s). ;-)

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    6. Re:Thanks Obama! by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot. I see you are new to Slashdot as your sarcasm filters are apparently off. Please go to your internal settings and turn them on to continue to participate.

      --
      I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    7. Re:Thanks Obama! by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      I think you may need to adjust the subtlety of for your sarcasm detector.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    8. Re:Thanks Obama! by Antipater · · Score: 1

      Sorry, all subtlety controls were destroyed during the Dice acquisition.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    9. Re:Thanks Obama! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      [Voyager] Launched in 1977... Yeah, Obama's fault!

      Well, he does have the time machine he used to announce his birth in old HI newspapers so he could run for prez. Fox believes the machine's buried next to Hoffa.

    10. Re:Thanks Obama! by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      ...sound of Voyager leaving the solar system..... over your head.

      But there's no "woosh" in interstellar space; thinner medium.

    11. Re:Thanks Obama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He heard (and JK has proof) that somewhere out there someone might be using WMD so he is obliged to bomb them! (I know it was launched in '77, don't you get the sarcasm?)

    12. Re:Thanks Obama! by SecurityTheatre · · Score: 1

      part of the joke. :-)

      It's a meta-joke.

      oooooohhhhh

    13. Re:Thanks Obama! by nherm · · Score: 1

      ...sound of Voyager leaving the solar system..... over your head.

      But there's no "woosh" in interstellar space; thinner medium.

      I propose "The sound of interstellar ion-acoustic waves detected by Voyager... over your head"

    14. Re:Thanks Obama! by lightBearer · · Score: 1

      Powered Over Ethernet? I don't see how that is relevant.

      --
      - No Bounce, No Play -
  10. Really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What about the Oort cloud?

    I thought you didn't get to interstellar space until you got through that... and that's like 1000 years more.

    1. Re:Really by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      It sounds like a definition of the edge of the solar system is where the interstellar wind overtakes the solar wind. There is a line there, on one side of the line the solar wind is blowing away from the sun, and on the other side of the line the interstellar wind is blowing towards the sun. The line is where the force of the two is the same.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Really by CreatureComfort · · Score: 1

      And very quietly, a dark probe floating in the Oort cloud ends it thousands of years long waiting and beams a tight, powerful signal back to its home world informing its creators that the beings of this system have broken out of their bubble.

      // I for one welcome....

      --
      "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
      Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
    3. Re:Really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is like trying to define exactly when you've left land when at a beach. You can look at the sand and notice when you get to wet sand, when you get to sand with water that is just from a wave (or some kid with a bucket), when you get to sand that currently is underwater until the tide changes, to a place where it looks like the bottom is almost always underwater. You can define some particular boundary point (e.g. average high tide point), which might be sharp, although other things might change gradually even if you define that point. You can be a ways out in the water, but still essentially be "at the beach." You can still go quite a ways into the water, and be a ways away from the beach, but the local conditions are influenced or determined by the fact there is a beach not far away.

      In the end though, there is no need to worry about some general precise definition, as the boundary will depend on what context you are discussing and what is relevant to that. If you are interested in plasma physics, then mostly you care about where the solar wind stops, and any other near by features that are defined by the solar wind. If you are interested in dynamics of small bodies, you would probably be more interested in the Oort cloud, and the Hill sphere of the Sun.

    4. Re:Really by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      ..beams a tight, powerful signal back to its home world informing its creators that the beings of this system have broken out of their bubble.

      Ah, fantastic. We'll be under an Ur-Quan slave shield before we know it!

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    5. Re:Really by torsmo · · Score: 1

      Damn, I installed UQM yesterday and was about to give it a try. Signed the petition, too.

  11. Except. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    According to the story, it is actually Voyager 2 and it wen 13 Billion miles, not 11 Billion

    1. Re:Except. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PASADENA, Calif. -- NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft officially is the first human-made object to venture into interstellar space. The 36-year-old probe is about 12 billion miles (19 billion kilometers) from our sun.

  12. Well, maybe by djupedal · · Score: 0

    The last time this popped up, there was a near immediate retraction. Only NASA knows the definition of interstellar they are using using to quantify their claim, so we're obligated to take their word for it.

    I suspect they were simply waiting for a slow news day so they could slot some publicity in. That's right..I went there.

    1. Re:Well, maybe by ledow · · Score: 1

      I'd rather hear something about NASA work every day than the shit that graces my news channels.

  13. Very cool, but we are so primitve.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine it taking 35 years to go from Chicago to Joliet.

    1. Re:Very cool, but we are so primitve.. by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 1

      That would still be too fast.

      I would be fine if I never had to return to Joliet, the place modernity forgot.

  14. What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am assuming that the primary means of power is electricity from solar photons. Are there enough photons in interstellar space to power Voyager (sensors, communication, navigation, etc)?

    1. Re:What's powering Voyager? by ledow · · Score: 4, Informative

      Voyager is nuclear.

      It has about 10 years of power left.

    2. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Nimey · · Score: 2

      You'd be wrong. Voyager's power source is radiothermal. Past... not sure, Jupiter's orbit? there's not enough sunlight for photovoltaics to work effectively.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Voyager is nuclear.

      No, it's American, which makes it nucular.

      Say 'chowduh', Frenchy.

    4. Re:What's powering Voyager? by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 2

      By now its definitely running on Unicorn farts.

      --
      I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    5. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nucular. It's pronounced Nucular.

    6. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are you serious? What are you doing on a site like slashdot?
      Sorry, Everyone has to learn sometime. In the beginning we pushed it up with rockets. Then it used the gravity of several planets to pick up speed. Since then it has been coasting on inertia. In space, there is nothing to slow you down. Things that move keep on moving. That's why earth orbits the sun instead of falling into it.

    7. Re:What's powering Voyager? by ledow · · Score: 1

      You are confusing propulsion with power (i.e. we can talk to it).

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24026153

      Plutonium power on board, expected to last a few years at best.

      Otherwise, yes, it's an object in space moving and will continue to move until something stops it. Not much use when it stops talking back, though.

    8. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no no no no! This sucker's electrical. But we need a nuclear reaction to generate the 1.21 gigawatts necessary.

    9. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the earth is actually falling into the sun. Just very slowly.

    10. Re:What's powering Voyager? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's why earth orbits the sun instead of falling into it"

      Well actually the gravitational force between the Sun and the Earth has a lot to do with that, and centripetal acceleration...

  15. Have they broken through the Crystal Sphere? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a bit worried that they will break through the Crystal Sphere surrounding the solar system. I don't think we're ready to face the other civilizations just yet.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crystal_Spheres

    1. Re:Have they broken through the Crystal Sphere? by Antipater · · Score: 1

      You could at least post the non-mobile version of the link.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
  16. How many times has it left? by asmkm22 · · Score: 2

    Seems like every few months, for the last 5 years, there's been a new claim that it has left the solar system.

    1. Re:How many times has it left? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Informative

      Probably confirms the heliosphere isn't static and distorts; the edge has probably legitimately washed over Voyager that many times.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:How many times has it left? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, like the Year of the Linux Desktop.

    3. Re:How many times has it left? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's like a crab walking out of the ocean.

    4. Re:How many times has it left? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also I imagine it's much like Earth's atmosphere in that there's not a definite boundary. Depending on what criteria you use, you can be in or out.

  17. I'm telling you... by Jawnn · · Score: 1

    Persis Kambatta is not dead. She's going to return some day...

  18. Bark at the moon by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Putin to America: You're Not Special

    I'm sorry, Mr. Putin. I can't hear you over the sound of our own awesome.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Bark at the moon by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah so awesome. Now try to get your astronauts off the international space station without using a Soyuz capsule. Awesome.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Bark at the moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, for mod points... truly funny

    3. Re:Bark at the moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Codex Astartes names this maneuver Steel Rain"

    4. Re:Bark at the moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beam me up scotty ...

  19. Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by wcrowe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seventy four year old Harold Lippschitz, chief proponent and designer of Voyager's antenna oscillation meters, was quoted as saying, "Ha ha! They laughed at me years ago at NASA! I told them, 'You're gonna want those damn oscillation meters, they're important!', but the other guys just rolled their eyes and shook their heads. 'There goes Harold again,' they said. 'Jabbering about his damn little meters.' Well, who's laughing now, motherf***ers? Ha HA!"

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

      then I'm just glad they didn't laugh at his death ray

    2. Re:Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a name like 'lip-shits' you gotta enjoy things when you can.

    3. Re:Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seventy four year old Harold Lippschitz, chief proponent and designer of Voyager's antenna oscillation meters, was quoted as saying, "Ha ha! They laughed at me years ago at NASA! I told them, 'You're gonna want those damn oscillation meters, they're important!', but the other guys just rolled their eyes and shook their heads. 'There goes Harold again,' they said. 'Jabbering about his damn little meters.' Well, who's laughing now, motherf***ers? Ha HA!"

      Who modded this shit up? It's either a lame attempt at a joke, or complete BS.

      Moderators: there's this new invention on the internet called "Google". Use it.

    4. Re:Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      I am stunned that my comment has been modded "Interesting". But perhaps that is the moderators' own post-modernist joke in response to my attempt at humor. I'm sorry you thought the joke was lame. It's just that the summary described the scientists using antenna oscillation as evidence that the probe exited the heliosphere, and I thought, "Wow. That means that, forty years ago, when they were designing Viking, somebody said, 'Hey, we need to monitor the antenna oscillation. That's important.'"

         

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    5. Re:Kudos to Harold Lippschitz by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

      Perhaps your comment would have been understood and modded funny if you had used the name Harold Wolowitz. As exceptionally nerdy and admirable as it seems that some near-genius guy was smart and subtle enough to think of monitoring the antenna oscillation without provocation, the reality of space exploration is that an earlier satellite or probe that cost many millions of 1960's-1970's dollars was sent WITHOUT antenna oscillation measurement instruments which caused certain data to be returned that was less than accurate. Then a group of physicists analyzing the data had to then determine the inaccuracies were caused due to antenna oscillation at which point antenna oscillation sensors were developed so the next costly project could be deployed without this weakness. What IS admirable and whelming is how scientists were able to create a "problem" like antennae oscillations and hack it in to a value-add instrument that could decades later be used to confirm the first entrance of a man-made object in to interstellar space.

  20. Faster way of reaching interstellar space by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

    If reaching interstellar space and was the original goal, they could have flown in a direction perpendicular to the principal orbital plane of the solar system. We would have achieved the goal almost immediately.

    1. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

      Why? Do you/"we" know the helipause isn't spherical, or did you just assume it isn't? Or are you using another definition of "interstellar space"?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2

      It wasn't. The real work was done as it past the gas giants.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    3. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We pretty much know it isn't. We receive helium atoms here on earth from outside the solar system, and their general direction of travel has been used to posit an interstellar wind. Knowing it is unlikely that only helium atoms are traveling, we can infer that the remaining particles/energy distort the heliosphere, compressing it as it faces the incoming wind and elongating it in the other direction. And before you say so, since the earth goes the whole way around the sun (and we have probes in polar solar orbit), we're pretty sure that the energy coming out of the sun is essentially the same in any direction.

    4. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The heliosphere does not necessarily bulge out in the plane of the planets orbits, and so far evidence suggest it is not perfectly round, but bulging out in the north direction and closer to the sun in the south direction perpendicular to the orbital plane. But the distance would have still been pretty far, and need some gravity assists to do it on a cheap budget.

    5. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we're pretty sure that the energy coming out of the sun is essentially the same in any direction.

      As you said, we have had a probe in polar orbit around the Sun, but it found the opposite of what you describe. The outflow from the sun is not the same everywhere, but there are gaps and holes. These holes will tend to be in the polar region of the sun during solar minima, although during maxima others will appear in other parts of the sun.

    6. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If reaching interstellar space and was the original goal, they could have flown in a direction perpendicular to the principal orbital plane of the solar system. We would have achieved the goal almost immediately.

      If they flew in a direction perpendicular to our 3 dimensions, it would have been even faster.

    7. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "as it passed". Jesus, no one knows basic english verb conjugation anymore, what with the "needs somethingd", "should of" and similar atrocities I see peppered around the net...

      (btw, before you complain, english is my third language)

    8. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Informative

      If Voyager was sent far outside the orbital plane it couldn't have used gravity boost from the planets. Substantial speed disadvantage.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    9. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't played KSP I guess? You can, by making the last slingshot a polar one. In fact, that's what ESA did with Ulysses, to get it into a polar sun orbit. They did so because a gravity boost is by far the most efficient way to achieve a plane transfer.

    10. Re:Faster way of reaching interstellar space by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

      Reaching interstellar space wasn't the original goal. As revealed in Robotic Exploration of the Solar System: Part I: The Golden Age 1957-1982, there were numerous primary scientific objectives focused mainly on the Jupiter and Saturn's systems (not even the unprecedented Neptune and Uranus discoveries we take for granted today) that were the only reason why the Voyager projects managed to receive the significantly reduced congressional funding it did. Everything beyond that had been a balancing act and genius of project management who painfully understood the extremely unique and rare window of opportunity as well as the scientific team dedication and collaboration to squeeze as much scientific value out of the proverbial stone amidst an ever year-over-year declining operational budget.

  21. Correction by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    It's Arbitrary: Voyager 1 Is An Interstellar Probe, Probably

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  22. Welcome to our new Vulcan overlords! by lp_bugman · · Score: 1

    Sending a space ship past the solar system was the only thing holding alien razes from making themselves evident to us.

    --
    BSD licensed software can't be stolen....
  23. It's not enough... by casca69 · · Score: 1

    It's not enough we trash Earth's environment, the Moon, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Jupiter, Saturns moons, and various junk trash all over the planetary disk.. Now, we're dropping trash outta the SOLAR SYSTEM??? Man, wouldn't you hate to be the garbage crew on that clean up?

  24. Ouch! by fredrated · · Score: 1

    Alright, who is probing my intersteller?

    1. Re:Ouch! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stella.... STEEELLLAAA!!

  25. Really? by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    I think they just gave up trying to quantify if it has actually left the solar system after years of false positives and debate, so they just made it official. 99.999999999% of us are not going to check, so its safe bet.

    Slightly off topic, but now that Voyager has officially left the solar system, I hope that NASA could spend some time and explain to JJ Abrams that the Enterprise would not actually leave vapor trails that flutter and make a tinkling sound when it goes to warp since light does not crystallize into particles and space has no fucking "downward gravity" or wind or sound.

    Seriously would Joss Whedon just beat the shit out of JJ and end it.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:Really? by jason.sweet · · Score: 1

      In space...
      No one hears your nerd rage.

    2. Re:Really? by RussR42 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. There won't be any more ships in the next movie. We learned in the last one that they can simply teleport from planet to planet.

  26. V'Ger is next by tedgyz · · Score: 1

    Beware all carbon-based life forms infecting planet Earth: ST:TMP

    [after Spock comments that, mentally, V'ger is a child]
    Commander Leonard 'Bones' McCoy, M.D.: Spock, this "child" is about to wipe out every living thing on Earth. Now, what do you suggest we do? Spank it?
    Commander Spock: It knows only that it needs, Commander. But, like so many of us... it does not know what.

    --
    "No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
  27. Name change by SnarfQuest · · Score: 0

    If we start calling it V'ger right now, will we be able to avoid several time-travel movies?

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  28. And in a few hundred years... by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    Voyager shall return to Earth from the Delta Quadrant with a non-plussed Captain, an uptight Hologram, a pointy eared Brother and a Cyborg.

    Or was that Red Dwarf?

  29. Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerker? by DRMShill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nasa launches this probe, about the same year that I was born, to study Saturn and Jupiter. Everything goes beautifully so it just keeps on flying. On Valentine's day 1990 just as it's about to leave the solar system they spin the camera around to take the "family portrait". Today it exits the solar system(I know for the 12th time or whatever). Now it just wanders off into the darkness while it's reactor runs down and it's systems shut off one at a time. Who knows, in a few billion years when the sun bakes this planet the golden record might be all that's left of us. Kind of like "The Inner Light" episode of Star Trek, but with less flute.

  30. Jupiter Juno Probe is solar by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Huge 60-foot panels. I think there was concern about the cost and shortage of plutonium. Just enough for 4-5 more generators in the civiilian stocks.

    1. Re:Jupiter Juno Probe is solar by Nimey · · Score: 1

      In a rare case of something getting done, Congress voted to let NASA make some more RTG-grade plutonium earlier this year.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:Jupiter Juno Probe is solar by kimvette · · Score: 1

      We could always make nice with North Korea or Iran and buy theirs. . . ;)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    3. Re:Jupiter Juno Probe is solar by Nimey · · Score: 1

      I know you're joking, but they've probably got the wrong isotope of Pu. Pu-238 is used for RTGs and Pu-239 for reactors and bombs.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
  31. From this point forward... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It demands to be called V-ger.

  32. Dupe! by Solandri · · Score: 5, Funny

    This story has already appeared on Slashdot multiple times:

    March 2013
    December 2011
    December 2010
    May 2005
    November 2003

    Is it too much to ask that the editors do their jobs and search for dupes before approving a submission?

    1. Re:Dupe! by DRMShill · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're joking or not but just in case you aren't, we don't have a completely solid understanding of where exactly the solar system ends. That's why this comes up like this. Well that and slashdot dupes.

    2. Re:Dupe! by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Nicely done, and EXACTLY what I was thinking...

      I COULD read TFA, but no. I think I'll wait until next week, when some NASA scientist announces that Voyager I is STILL in the solar system, and why the theory/sensors/calculations were wrong. Then the week after that, NASA will announce again that Voyager I is in interstellar space "for real this time..." Repeat, ad-nauseum.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:Dupe! by melikamp · · Score: 1

      They are not dupes: the story is truer every time.

  33. Screw the Obligatory XKCD by globaljustin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Voyager program has helped us define what the "solar system" actually is.

    XKCD is great but I'm with you on this...Voyager's data *literally* defined the solar system for us (i'm sure Randall Munroe is up on this and appropriately stoked)

    IMHO there is a greater point here about space exploration.

    What *is* space exploration? When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?

    The Mars rovers are another example. When you consider the scale and complexity of their task, the rovers comparatively performed on par with Voyager 1.

    You might say, "We can't plan for what it does after the mission is over, that's kind of the point of having a defined *mission plan*" and to that I say 'hogwash'

    It is my firm belief that humans should be taking vacations on Luna *now* and soon stepping foot on Mars. We could do it.

    Why aren't we?

    I see the same answer in both questions I posed. The best way I can say it is 'operational space research'...

    I'm not dogging the Hubble or satellites made to find WIMPS or w/e...I think that it is more a failure of VISION.

    Everything we do in space should be based around the notion of iterative progression. Each mission serves a primary function but also has a *secondary* function which is to provide the basis for the **NEXT STEP OUT**

    We've been chasing our tails for 20+ years with most of our NASA projects. Don't get me started on the Shuttle and ISS. I won't get into it b/c I get huge downmods every time...

    No...my criticism is systemic.

    NASA is a tool. Are we using it to its fullest?

    Voyager 1's quiet incessant pinging tells me 'no'

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Screw the Obligatory XKCD by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 1, Funny

      My dear fellow slashdotter,

      Thank you for asking these questions in exactly the right place. I would like to offer you some answers to your questions. At first I tried to answer them from bottom to top, but I found out that each question has some relation to the previous one, so I did it top to bottom. My sincere excuses for the delay coming forth from my misconception. Again, this IS the best place to ask these questions! For your convenience I have put a 'Q' in front of your question, and an 'A' in front of the Answer.

      Q> What *is* space exploration? When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?
      A> Space exploration is the exploration of the stuff on the outside of the planet earth (or Gaia as some seaweed-cracker eating nutjobs call it)

      Q> The Mars rovers are another example. [xkcd.com] When you consider the scale and complexity of their task, the rovers comparatively performed on par with Voyager 1.
      A> This is not really a way to ask something, is it?

      Q> You might say, "We can't plan for what it does after the mission is over, that's kind of the point of having a defined *mission plan*" and to that I say 'hogwash'
      A> Again, this is not really a proper way to ask something, is it? Please leave your comments on wired.com

      Q> It is my firm belief that humans should be taking vacations on Luna *now* and soon stepping foot on Mars. We could do it. Why aren't we?
      A> The main reason that we do not go on holiday on the moon, or Luna as some amateurs prefer, is usually one of the following:
      1 - no bars
      2 - no beaches with ladies in swimming attire
      3 - more importantly: no beaches with ladies in half their swimming attire.
      4 - (if you are a reader of the Guardian) no museums
      5 - you *constantly* have to remember where your towel is.
      6 - Flip-flops fit really badly on these so-called moon-boots.
      7 - any of the above

      Q> NASA is a tool. Are we using it to its fullest?
      A> NASA is an abbreviation, or more specifically it is an acronym, not a tool. A hammer is an example of a tool.

      Hopefully I answered your questions fully and may I add that the answers provided here are conclusive. If you somehow feel in need of a second opinion from another /.visitor you can request so by filing form 82BKO0E3#9320B/fsF-109 at your local Vogon station on each seventh Wednesday of the month on odd-numbered-months-even-numbered-years between 11:59 and 12:00AM or in the trash-bin whenever you feel like.

      With kind regards,
      The /.space council & climate change spindoctors.

      --
      rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
    2. Re:Screw the Obligatory XKCD by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Why aren't we?

      The same thing could be said about maintaining our natural spaceship, it's life support system is collapsing, why aren't we fixing that? If we can't build a self-sustaining biodome on Earth where there are few limits on the initial raw material, what makes anyone think we can do it on Mars?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:Screw the Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably won't be. This is just more of the same. The "It's Official" isn't actually official. Money quote from the article: "Voyager 1 spacecraft become the first human-made object to reach interstellar space, new evidence from a team of scientists shows."

      The only people who are calling it official right now are these scientists. Thus, it is not official. Congrats to these scientists for getting themselves interviewed on their research. But shame on them for the hyperbole.

    4. Re:Screw the Obligatory XKCD by slashdotjunker · · Score: 2

      Every mission advances the state-of-the-art in space exploration in some way.

      For example, Pathfinder (1996) landed a 10 kg rover on Mars. Next, MER (2003) landed two 180 kg rovers. Most recently, MSL (2011) landed a 900 kg rover.

      Another example, Giotto (1986) approached a comet within 590 km. NEAR (1996) orbited an asteroid within 35 km. Finally, Deep Impact (2005) collided with a comet. There are now proposals for a rendezvous with an asteroid (i.e., land on it).

      I believe you answered your own question. Space exploration is making incremental improvements, constantly bringing humanity closer to the stars. It's happening, and "You're welcome."

  34. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by upto0013 · · Score: 1

    Actually, since there was some extra space, NASA threw on a couple Jethro Tull songs.
    It was the 70s, everyone was high.

  35. What star is it headed towards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone know what direction it's headed? Towards any particular star?

    1. Re:What star is it headed towards? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Voyager 2 is not headed toward any particular star, although in roughly 40,000 years it should pass 1.7 light-years (9.7 trillion miles) from the star Ross 248. And if left alone for 296,000 years, Voyager 2 should pass by the star Sirius at a distance of 1.32 parsecs (4.3 ly, 25 trillion miles). Voyager 2 is expected to keep transmitting weak radio messages until at least 2025, over 48 years after it was launched. (wikipedia)

      So, assuming it isn't deflected by something we're currently unfamiliar with, the star with a well-known name that it'll get relatively close to is Sirius, the Dog Star.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:What star is it headed towards? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Arrgh. That's not a very accurate estimate. Sirius is only 2.6 parsecs distant. Sorry.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    3. Re:What star is it headed towards? by crunchygranola · · Score: 2

      Does anyone know what direction it's headed? Towards any particular star?

      The relative motions of stars in our vicinity is many order of magnitudes higher than the velocity of the probes relative to the sun. They have no meaningful velocity toward any other star system. The future encounters with star systems have to be projected statistically through the theory of random processes.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  36. Not profitable by rsborg · · Score: 2

    It is my firm belief that humans should be taking vacations on Luna *now* and soon stepping foot on Mars. We could do it.

    Why aren't we?

    Fact is, it's not profitable. Don't read this as merely a critique of our current quarterly-results-focused society (that's another conversational tarpit I'm usually happy to discuss to death), but more as in, will it ever be profitable. With the discovery of H3 reserves in the Moon, you'd think we'd have all the need we could to send folks to stake claims. Realistically, the "in the black" date for such a mission looms decades or centuries in the future. Does any country or corporation have that kind of planning horizon? I challenge you. The US has abdicated any role of spending any money apparently (see sequester), and corporations are living quarter to quarter.

    Face it, traditional exploration and exploitation of the unknown world really rested on the fact that it was generally considered habitable (after the "dragons be here" and flat-earthers were proved wrong) and most importantly, profitable - many natural resources and other humans to exploit and then fight over, and finally trade with.

    What resources exist on Moon/Mars/A.belt that really get our conquistador types' blood flowing (and the purses loosened)? Will we as a society ever really mature to the point that even inter-planetary discovery and travel become feasible?

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  37. profit != we should do it by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    The US has abdicated any role of spending any money apparently (see sequester), and corporations are living quarter to quarter.

    Corporations living quarter to quarter??? You are dead wrong.

    The big 'conquistador' corporations (btw my vision is not a fucking 'conquistador' vision) that exploit resources are the ones with the BIGGEST INCREASE IN PROFITS of all companies that are profitable over the last 10-20 years.

    But fsk all that...

    'wont be profitable' is a ridiculous argument because everything about going into space causes us to create new technology that can be used in consumer goods

    one word: velcro

    just extrapolate from there...or not...from your attitude it seems you'd be the one harranging 'It's too dangerous...we shouldn't do it' no matter what the plan...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:profit != we should do it by ChrisMaple · · Score: 2

      Velcro was conceived in 1941, invented in 1948, and patented in 1955.

      Thank you for playing "Fraudulent Reasons to Praise the Space Program". Please take your place behind teflon.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:profit != we should do it by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      Velcro was made to fill a need. It didn't come from space, it came form an engineer. It went to space, sure, and it certainly came from the money budgeted for space exploration, but space wasn't needed to make it.

      The problem with space is the cost per kilo to get there. That makes it extremely uneconomical. This is not debatable.

      I'm all for the exploration, and the extra cost now will be worth it long term. Going to the moon for vacation however, is utterly unviable. There has been one man that has done it. Russia will take your money and do it, but it just costs too damn much.

      I hope that someone finds a solution so that little people like me can go to space in my life time, but its just not likely unless we make some massive leaps in energy generation and propulsion systems. Earth is just too big of a gravity well.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:profit != we should do it by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Hey, if it doesn't show a profit "going forward".... [WTF, they're going to go backwards? I hate that fucking phrase and all like it - it's ridiculous and weak-minded besides. Does no one understand future tense and such any more?]

      Besides, what has science ever done for us? Especially space science? I mean, we've got GPS for driving directions, we've got plenty of comms satellites - how many channels of "I Love Lucy" re-runs do we need? We sure as hell don't need any goddam asteroids for resources. Biggest copper mines are above ground already, in buildings. Ditto a bunch of other stuff. As for the rest, a bit of population control will fix things.

      Screw it, ya know? Man's place is on Earth. Get over it. Get over yourself. Resign yourself to Fate, the way things are meant to be. We have no business anywhere else.

      Yah, yah, Voyager. Enough already. Gorram NASA toy. Make money and screw hindmost, I say.

    4. Re:profit != we should do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to the moon for vacation however, is utterly unviable. There has been one man that has done it.

      No there hasn't. Not one person has taken a vacation on the moon.

  38. record corporate profits evidence by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    sorry, meant to link to this article but i didn't tag link:

    "Corporate profits hit record as wages get squeezed"

    http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/03/news/economy/record-corporate-profits/index.html

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:record corporate profits evidence by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      Profit is not the issue. How that profit is re-invested, is. Profit is not evil.

      What's happening is because of the ongoing uncertainty about WTF are the Obamanistas going to to NEXT, what legislation are they going to SELECTIVELY ENFORCE, what imperial mandates are they going to issue as a result of some MANUFACTURED CRISIS... There's zero incentive to invest.

      Investment will get us back to the moon, create jobs, build factories, all of it.

      Just look at the financial statements of these evil corporations. They are sitting on their cash, waiting for an administration that doesn't openly advocate how evil business is, and threaten to take all kinds of drastic action...

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
  39. Depends on definition of interstellar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the Oort cloud lies beyond the heliopause, and is bound to our sun by gravity, how can we say that Voyager has "really" entered interstellar space? Shouldn't true interstellar space be a distance from the sun where nothing is bound directly to Sol by gravity? Where another star has equal pull on an object? Voyager I is currently far from that point in space.

    1. Re:Depends on definition of interstellar by crunchygranola · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Since the Oort cloud lies beyond the heliopause, and is bound to our sun by gravity, how can we say that Voyager has "really" entered interstellar space? Shouldn't true interstellar space be a distance from the sun where nothing is bound directly to Sol by gravity? Where another star has equal pull on an object? Voyager I is currently far from that point in space.

      The claim is that it is in interstellar space: i.e. the interstellar medium that pervades the space between star systems. This has nothing to do with gravitational binding of other distant objects. The Oort Cloud is without question in interstellar space, despite very weak gravitational binding to the sun (solar escape velocity there about 100 mph).

      Going by the gravitational binding argument you could claim that all five probes "left the solar system" the instant they achieved solar escape velocity and was no longer bound to the sun.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    2. Re:Depends on definition of interstellar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The Oort Cloud is without question in interstellar space, despite very weak gravitational binding to the sun (solar escape velocity there about 100 mph).

      Cool... so if I was stood on an Oort object playing tennis / baseball / cricket / golf, I could conceivably hit a ball out of the goddamned solar system..?
      For me, that is reason enough to go out and put boots on other worlds.

    3. Re:Depends on definition of interstellar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if you were your train of logic all the way through... there is in fact NO interstellar space since something's gravity will always be pulling you in one direct or another. You'd simply be hoping from solar system to solar system (or black hole or brown dwarf or whatever)

  40. A this Q 4 me homeboy by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    Could you answer this part of my origninal post? It's a question I posed...since you seem so intent on pedantically and patronizingly answering all my questions, I'm fairly surprised you missed it:

    When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?

    I guess you could say my Curiosity is piqued...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:A this Q 4 me homeboy by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Voyager(s) were ridiculously overbuilt for the time as we had no real idea what was going to happen. They have redundancies for their redundancies of which are redundant.

      Most of their equipment hasn't worked in years.

      Our end has been upgraded. There is no way we could communicate with them using technology available when they were launched.

      The nuclear generators in them now cause half the nut job anti-nuke protesters to shit bricks now days and would never get off the launchpad if the public found out. Most of the time, they manage to get RTGs into space before anyone knows they are the power source now, otherwise protestors would be strapping themselves to the rockets.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:A this Q 4 me homeboy by slew · · Score: 1

      When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?

      FYI, the Voyager program was a happy accident. It was designed as part of the Grand-tour of the outer planets that could only happen because of rare alignment of the outer planet that apparently only occurs every 176 years. W/o this alignment and the mutiple gravity assist trajectories available, there would be no Voyager program because the budget to keep the ground support going for the duration of such a long journey was not in the cards (even the actual Voyager mission was a scaled down version of the original Grand-tour plan because of budget cuts).

      Contrary to popular belief, the Voyager spacecraft were actually designed for the mission that it is currently on (that's why it launched with an RTG that could last this long). Although not officially part of the main mission, the interstellar phase was always part of the "extended" mission component that is part of most Nasa projects (funding has to be separatly approved for the support-costs required for the extended mission).

      Also Voyager wasn't so "humble". Launching a 815kg spacecraft about the size of a car in 1977 wasn't really just a faster/cheaper project. According to the JPL website,

      A total of 11,000 workyears was devoted to the Voyager project through the Neptune encounter. This is equivalent to one-third the amount of effort estimated to complete the great pyramid at Giza to King Cheops.

      Also, other extended missions for Nasa project have been reasonably successful. For example, most recently, Fermi just entered it's extended mission phase, and of course there are the more pop-culture Sojourner and Spirit and Opportunity...

    3. Re:A this Q 4 me homeboy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      otherwise protestors would be strapping themselves to the rockets.

      You say that like its a bad thing.

  41. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Who knows, in a few billion years when the sun bakes this planet the golden record might be all that's left of us. Kind of like "The Inner Light" episode of Star Trek, but with less flute.

    Should be pointed out that this is the first, not the only, man made object on a straight course for interstellar space. It will be joined not only by it's sister Voyager probe, but also the Pioneer 10 & 11 probes with their golden plaques, and the New Horizons mission with its CD. All in all, we're getting pretty good at littering the cosmos with our civilization's mementos.

  42. No, it's not by J'raxis · · Score: 1, Interesting

    No, it's not. It's kind of like landing on the moon only if they claimed they "landed" on the moon 1000km from the surface, and kept reporting that once again they've "landed" on the moon (officially now!) every 5km thereafter.

  43. Re:Obligatory XDCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Farewell Voyager 1! You're a reminder of an era of possibility and exploration. A time when man in space, the moon, and beyond, was a real possibility for humanity in the coming decades. Thanks for the nostalgia, and a reminder of the engineering possibilities during a time of technological beginning. You will be missed, and watched, as you say hello from your new frontier!

    So long! And thanks for all the fish!

  44. not the furthest out human made object by dns_server · · Score: 1

    This is probably not the first human made object to reach interstellar space.
    The real furthest object is a man hole cover.

    During testing of nuclear weapons they were doing tests underground. They had a nuclear weapon at the bottom of a long shaft.
    On top of the shaft was a metal cap.

    It's not known how fast it is going or if it actually left the atmosphere but if it did survive it would have been going really fast

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

  45. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by baKanale · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but Pioneer 11 doesn't really count towards the whole "this is how the universe will remember us" thing, since the Klingons are going to use it for target practice at the beginning of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

  46. Mods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What made the parent post interesting?

  47. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

    Should be pointed out that this is the first, not the only, man made object on a straight course for interstellar space. It will be joined not only by it's sister Voyager probe, but also the Pioneer 10 & 11 probes with their golden plaques, and the New Horizons mission with its CD. All in all, we're getting pretty good at littering the cosmos with our civilization's mementos.

    Let's see. Five pieces of litter. Volume of space littered (once they all cross into interstellar space): ((Pi*(24 billion miles)^3)/6)/5 = one peice of litter per 1.45*10^30 cubic miles. That is one piece of litter per 1.45 million trillion trillion cubic miles.

    You call that littering!?* We need to do at least a trillion trillion times better than that!

    *Where is my interrobang key when I need it?

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  48. Good work, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, Mr Paris, Set a course.

    For Home.

  49. That's pretty damned fast! by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    11 billion miles / 35 years / 365 days / 24 hours = 35,877 miles per hour.

    The fastest plane that has ever flown on earth is the SR71 blackbird and it topped out at around 2,200 mph. This humble probe beat it by a long shot.

    Of course, Voyager doesn't have to worry much about friction, or gravity... But still an impressive speed.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  50. V'ger's future by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Off on it's way to become V'ger, come back looking for its creator, build a probe in the image of a carbon unit, then merge with a carbon unit, leave our dimension, and finally, some suspect, go psychotic and eventually evolve into the Borg.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  51. Cosmic rays? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i was wondering what was outside of our solar system. I heard that NASA turned off its cameras to save power. The earth-based telescopes can take take photos of space instead of Voyager.

  52. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by TMB · · Score: 1

    There was no Star Trek V - it jumped straight from IV to VI! Now if only they'd make the prequels to the Star Wars movies...

    [TMB]

  53. Kudos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kudos to the guys that imagined, designed and built this amazing piece of technology.

  54. Re:Is it strange that this is sort of a tear jerke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You call that littering!?

    Depends on if a cop saw it or not.

  55. Check your facts next time by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    Wrong.

    The '55 patent covers a variation on the 3-hook bra closure.

    Thank you for playing "Fraudulent Evidence that I provided no links for."

    Please take your place behind blah blah your an idiot

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Check your facts next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that patent is pretty clearly for Velcro, even if it is a crappy hard to produce kind. The figure is a cross-section, and in the text it makes it clear it is a 2D fabric, not something like a bra closure. A US trademark was even filled for the name in 1957. You can find evidence of it being used in a fashion show before it was used in space travel related uses, as the inventor struggled to make it fashionable.

  56. Necessity by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    is the mother of invention...

    ...was made to fill a need.

    exactly my point...pushing ourselves to other worlds is the next logical step

    you really proved my point for me there...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  57. data from Voyager 1 still giving goosebumps... by sky770 · · Score: 1

    holy shit that thing is older than me..! Bobak Ferdowsi...yea..you keep that Mohawk man.. +1

  58. Summary is wrong by PassMark · · Score: 2

    Summary appears to be wrong.
    "...were able to deduce that Voyager was traveling through a less dense medium — i.e. interstellar space."

    Interstellar space is apparently 40 times more dense than space in the solar system. The solar wind pushes the particles back to the edge of the solar system, making the plasma more dense at the edge (not less dense).

    To quote from NASA
    http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-277
    "Voyager 1's plasma wave instrument detected the movement. The pitch of the oscillations helped scientists determine the density of the plasma. The particular oscillations meant the spacecraft was bathed in plasma more than 40 times denser than what they had encountered in the outer layer of the heliosphere. Density of this sort is to be expected in interstellar space."

  59. Profitable yes, monetizable no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is profitable, just not monetizable. That means it will not help pay fat-bottom decision makers next yacht. But the profits for humanity as a whole are clear.

  60. exactly by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    as the inventor struggled to make it fashionable.

    exactly...it was the seed of an idea that kind of worked...THEN...b/c of *necessity* someone at NASA developed it into the fully functional, fashionable product we have today

    'THANKS NASA'

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:exactly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was fully functionally before NASA, and the inventor has argued that NASA used it hurt its marketability, because people saw it as too utilitarian. Not sure how NASA helped their either way, other than maybe luck. They certainly discover and develop a lot of new things trying to get to their end goals, but in this case it is at best a bump in marketing. If you are trying to champion NASA's contribution to the world, emphasizing they're ability to advertise already existing products seems rather myopic and misguided.

  61. It's Official: Voyager 1 Is an Interstellar Probe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great.. and how long before V'ger comes back looking for the creator?

  62. you agree with me by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    They certainly discover and develop a lot of new things trying to get to their end goals

    yep, *that's all I was ever trying to say*, just one point among many to lead to a thought question about human space exploration....**ONE** point among many...I wasn't myopic in any way

    you ever play the game 'telephone'?

    you know, it's a kids game: you get in a circle and each person whispers a story to the next and you see if it is the same as when it started

    YOU AGREE WITH ME...read my original post

    go on...read it...this is a lesson for you and anyone who continued reading this far...there **IS** a reason why human spaceflight isn't where it could be...and this exchange is **definitely** part of the problem!!!

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:you agree with me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the previous AC, the issue never was with the statement about NASA being useful about inventing things, just that you were flat out wrong about Velcro and were using that to attack others. Picking such a bad example and beating other people over the head with it is what was myopic. You're right this exchange is part of the problem, because I find it annoying when people supporting the same position as me do such a bad job at arguing what should be more straightforward.

  63. V'Ger by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1
    --
    The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
  64. Oort Cloud? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would think that it shouldn't be called interstellar until it's external to the Oort Cloud, since it's associated with our Sun and not neighboring stars...

  65. not true by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    you were flat out wrong about Velcro and were using that to attack others.

    wrong...show me in blockquotes where I 'attacked' someone...

    i used an example to make a greater point...by *definition* an analogy will 'break down' at some point and therefore not be suitable as evidence for a statement

    I made **several** statements...pointing to a greater point

    those idiots blasted my greater point....and as evidence found the inevitable area where my analogy breaks down and attack that...whether it is salient or not...

    it's fucking stupid and makes anyone who reads it stupid...that's the point

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  66. say it yourself then by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    people supporting the same position as me do such a bad job at arguing what should be more straightforward.

    man...screw you twice..

    you **claim** to have productive ideas to add to the discussion...and express anger that 'your side' is misrepresented...

    so, you type a post to bitch about pedantic shit unrelated to the main point...

    instead of just **TYPING YOUR IDEA** and letting the community judge

    typical attitude of space enthusiasts...mimicking NASA's administration...chasing your tail instead of doing something that *matters*

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett