Slashdot Mirror


Study of Recent Interstellar Asteroid Reveals Bizarre Shape (bbc.com)

JoeRobe writes: A few weeks ago an interstellar asteroid, now named "Oumuamua," was discovered passing through our solar system. Being the first interstellar asteroid to ever be observed, a flurry of observations soon followed. This week, an accelerated article in Nature reveals that Oumuamua is more bizarre than originally thought: it is elongated, with a 10:1 aspect ratio, and rapidly rotating. This conclusion is based upon comparisons of its time-dependent light curve to those from 20,000 known asteroids.

144 comments

  1. A possible weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For all we know it could be a possible weapon which went haywire during an intra-galactic war somewhere between the Aliens...

    1. Re:A possible weapon by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      All I've seen are somewhat vague artists' renderings. From the description, it could be shaped like a giant Bugles snack.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re: A possible weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Project "Wormwood"

    3. Re:A possible weapon by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Given George Carlins observations about the phallic shape of our weapons this conclusion would make sense. Of course the most obvious counter argument would be that we have no idea what shapes an alien phallus might take.

    4. Re:A possible weapon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My first thoughts were 'Rendezvous with Rama' by AC Clarke since cylindrical L-5 colony would have similar dimensions

      Alos, the way that the object came from 'above' the plane of the planets and did a 90 deg turn to get level to the plane before heading back out again...

      At best, it leaves the solar system, middling would be if it enters an elliptical orbit and we get further chances to visit it... worst case, it heads at the planet small end first like an impactor...

    5. Re:A possible weapon by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      From the description, it could be shaped like a giant Bugles snack

      This, this could be a problem.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    6. Re:A possible weapon by mcswell · · Score: 1

      The Sparrow: the author of that book assumed that the Jana'ata aliens' phallus was pretty much the same size and shape as human ones.

    7. Re:A possible weapon by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Not sure what "level to the plane" means. If it passes through the solar system, it will necessarily pass through the ecliptic at least once, and possibly twice. If I'm understanding the diagrams correctly, since it passed close enough to the Sun (0.25 AU) and slow enough (although still faster than the Sun's escape velocity) that the Sun's gravity significantly affected its path, it will pass through the ecliptic twice (I'm not clear when the second such passage will be, or even whether it has already happened).

  2. It's the first trans-galactic rock we've noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's not name it or decide how weird it is yet, thanks.

  3. Space boomerang! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They exist!

  4. Wild thought by TFlan91 · · Score: 2

    There are all these objects flying all over the place to various destinations, most of which we have no clue about. And they are traveling fast. Without propellant. On a fairly confident trajectory.

    Would it be plausible for us to find an incoming object that is near enough not only to Earth when it passes by, but then also, say, near Mars, or Jupiter's moons?

    I am by no means at all knowledgeable about space-fairing. But it seems to me this would be a, somewhat, easy shortcut. We've already landed on an asteroid, the next logical piece is to find a way to launch from it.

    1. Re: Wild thought by aliquis · · Score: 2

      I assume the chances of it getting where you want and making use of it make it ... difficult and uninteresting.

      We can swing our own objects.

    2. Re:Wild thought by Gavagai80 · · Score: 4, Informative

      In order to land on such an asteroid rather than be smashed into a trillion pieces by it, you have to match the speed of the asteroid. At that point, you can already go wherever the asteroid is going -- or lots of better places -- just as quickly without landing on it. How is that a shortcut? Seems to make the whole process immensely more complicated and fuel-consuming than just going from point A to point B.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    3. Re:Wild thought by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      If you are so fast that you can intercept the satellite and orbit around or land on it, you can as well fly the way yourself. For what would you need it? Radiation shield?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:Wild thought by mentil · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the g-forces caused by grabbing onto it would destroy the vessel (unless it matches the celestial object's speed and trajectory... in which case there's no point). I could foresee some kind of grabber connected to the vessel in an elastic fashion, which dampens the g-forces, but simply getting nearby enough to grapple the object (without crashing into it) would be tricky. Just getting the craft to the celestial object would take nearly as much energy as just going directly toward the destination. For vessels built in space, it could however be a more significant cost savings. A bigger problem is that although the size and speed of a body can be (relatively) easily observed, its mass (and thus total kinetic energy) is much harder to ascertain, as its core composition and density are unknown. Something with low mass will significantly slow down if grabbed onto, throwing off all calculations, and it's a surprise until you grab onto it. For a sufficiently large asteroid, I could see this being useful in some situations... probably so few situations that it will never be developed for that purpose. Catching space junk/dust to fuel a mass driver seems more likely, and would require much of the same tech, so who knows.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    5. Re:Wild thought by Kaenneth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Depends in it's made of useful materials for the trip, like ice (H2O)

    6. Re:Wild thought by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      We can only land on an asteroid which is going slowly enough to catch. If you try to land on a fast moving object you will go splat. There is a theoretical idea of using tethers to attach your vehicle to a fast moving object but you would need to know how the attachment point works, you would need many kilometers of tether, and a damping system so that slack is taken up gradually.

    7. Re:Wild thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a beautiful engineering challenge that you pose. Landing on it, as others have pointed out, is probably a no-go, as the closure speeds are barely imaginable. However, if you can get a tether to stick to it (think the harpoon that NASA is looking into) then letting that tether drag your spacecraft to "slowly" accelerate it, then you've got a chance. I'm guessing that there's a chance against a metallic cored object, but getting a few miles of tether and brake mechanism is going to be an impressive challenge. Not at all impossible, but a worthy challenge.

      We've modeled a few other approaches (gravity tug, electrostatic, etc) to try to grab some energy from comets, and it's really looking like tether or giant bungee cord is the answer, as non-contact approaches don't give you much time to get a good delta-v, and matching speed pretty much gets you there already.

    8. Re: Wild thought by athmanb · · Score: 1

      You could land an engine on the asteroid, then use the asteroid for fuel, allowing you to cheat the rocket equation.

    9. Re:Wild thought by careysub · · Score: 1

      But it seems to me this would be a, somewhat, easy shortcut. We've already landed on an asteroid, the next logical piece is to find a way to launch from it.

      All space travel is nothing but things in ballistic trajectories. It is all about the velocity vector, and velocity requires rocket propulsion which is expensive. Landing on an asteroid requires two major velocity changes - getting on a solar orbit that intersects with the object, then matching velocities (in addition to getting away from Earth's gravity field). You only go through all that energy-expense to investigate the object, there is no other reason. It is not like a piece of land, where airplanes land and take off, since airplanes do have to land sometimes. This is just an object you matched velocities with at great expense.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    10. Re:Wild thought by careysub · · Score: 1

      It's a beautiful engineering challenge that you pose. Landing on it, as others have pointed out, is probably a no-go, as the closure speeds are barely imaginable. However, if you can get a tether to stick to it (think the harpoon that NASA is looking into) then letting that tether drag your spacecraft to "slowly" accelerate it, then you've got a chance.

      Having something "stick" to the asteroid is exactly the same thing as "landing on it". Anything touching an asteroid at astronomical velocities turns into a cloud of vapor.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    11. Re:Wild thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not necessarily. When I say I'm "landing" something, I'm implying something that has some electromechanical function after impact. However, this sort of harpoon doesn't necessarilly have to be anything less mechanically sound than a tungsten dart, and consequently may be able to accept significantly higher accelerations than that. Consider an artillery shell. 7500 g's on firing, and they still have radar fuzes with electromechanical stuff that starts the explosive train. Completely plausible to build a harpoon that can handle those velocities ... if we know what the target is made of. Completely plausible to impact-weld to a metallic asteroid, etc. It's not an impossible ask, but it is a significant one. Thermal management of the harpoon is one we're concerned about.

    12. Re: Wild thought by msauve · · Score: 1

      Put some rocks in your gas tank and let us know how far you get.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    13. Re:Wild thought by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      To do what you're proposing, it would help if we had something like a hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    14. Re: Wild thought by athmanb · · Score: 1

      You can split H2O and CO2 using electrolysis powered by a nuclear reactor. That'd save a whole lot of weight compared to having to drag the oxygen with you.

      And even if the asteroid is 100%, those are still free reaction mass.

    15. Re: Wild thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mining is a lot more complicated - you donâ(TM)t just order a resource collector over there homewold style.

    16. Re:Wild thought by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      But wouldn't it be easier and more energy efficient to launch something small like a harpoon or whatever that has maneuver capabilities, so that when it gets close or makes contact it doesn't vaporize? Then as others have said use a tether to slowly accelerate the ship or what have you and use the speed increase to springboard off of it?

    17. Re:Wild thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In order to land on such an asteroid rather than be smashed into a trillion pieces by it, you have to match the speed of the asteroid. At that point, you can already go wherever the asteroid is going -- or lots of better places -- just as quickly without landing on it. How is that a shortcut? Seems to make the whole process immensely more complicated and fuel-consuming than just going from point A to point B.

      Tether capture. A 1 km line shoud do it for a few kilograms.

    18. Re:Wild thought by skids · · Score: 1

      Never underestimate the power of bungee.

  5. Hello Rama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We will not be coming this time.

    1. Re:Hello Rama! by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      It did come from the direction of Vega. I think the coincidences are lining up too well. Get Clarke on the line, he needs to answer some questions.

    2. Re: Hello Rama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That may be a little difficult, since he passed away in 2008.

    3. Re:Hello Rama! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get Clarke on the line, he needs to answer some questions.

      Bee-wah-boop

      We're sorry; you have reached a number that has been disconnected or is no longer in service. This is a recording. If you feel you have reached this recording in error, please check the number and try your call again.

    4. Re:Hello Rama! by sabbede · · Score: 1
      It's way too small to be a Rama. Only 400 meters, less than 1% of Rama's length.

      So it's clearly a probe with less impressive mission specs.

    5. Re:Hello Rama! by gtarthur · · Score: 1

      Obviously, AC Clarke has foretold that we should wait for the 3rd one.
      Just in case, let's make sure we don't kill all the humpbacks for a few decades.

      --
      Every change is not progress, but there is no progress without change.
    6. Re:Hello Rama! by mcswell · · Score: 1

      I believe the dimensions were calculated based on its brightness and an assume albedo. If it were much darker than assumed, then it could be much larger.

    7. Re:Hello Rama! by sabbede · · Score: 1

      But certainly not 100x larger, so it is definitely a probe launched ahead of Rama to help determine its course.

  6. Longer than it is Wide by mentil · · Score: 3, Funny

    So a massive, rock-hard, spinning space phallus is penetrating our solar system? Hopefully it avoids us and finds its way to a Black Hole.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re: Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It missed Venus and is heading straight for Uranus

    2. Re: Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://oglaf.com/allconsuminganus/

    3. Re:Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its name resembles "Oh my my!" and its measurements are quite delightful indeed.

    4. Re:Longer than it is Wide by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Nothing surprising, the Sun being a giant ovary. Genetically, what is that going to produce is interesting.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    5. Re:Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is slashdot, you had us at space phallus.

    6. Re:Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, feminists demand an equal number of vagina shaped rocks.

    7. Re:Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In other news Pluto said that 'Oumuamu groped it 2000 years ago without consent.

    8. Re:Longer than it is Wide by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      Hey, dwarf sex is best.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    9. Re:Longer than it is Wide by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      There's a Uranus joke in there somewhere, I just can't quite see it.

    10. Re:Longer than it is Wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      *just can't quite fit it in. FTFY.

  7. What's the real story? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Funny

    The story leaves out the most important part, one we know by direct empirical evidence is more newsworthy than anything else: What kind of shirt was the spokesman wearing when he made the announcement? This critical piece of information is missing and we cannot possibly judge the impact of this news release without it.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:What's the real story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the question on all our lips:
      Has any part of his anatomy ever come into momentary contact with any part of the anatomy of another person, and has he apologised for this disgusting sexual assault ?

      #fuckmetoo

    2. Re:What's the real story? by CrybabiesArePeople · · Score: 0

      People talk and blabber, it's not always interesting or right or smart, get over it :)

    3. Re:What's the real story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So you are mansplaining now? Jesus, did you people learn nothing from #shirtstorm?

      No no women are toooootally welcome in our community, just ask the dude in this shirt.

      You think a shirt like this makes women feel welcome in science?

    4. Re:What's the real story? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      More importantly, we need Kardashian and Bieber opinions.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    5. Re:What's the real story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think a shirt like this makes women feel welcome in science?

      No. And we don't care. If you can't handle a flamboyant shirt, you aren't cut out to handle the frustrations of science anyway.

    6. Re:What's the real story? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      CNN: "Interstellar space rock flies through solar system at alarming pace, possibly with Russian influence. Women and minorities disproportionately impacted by Trump administration's unwillingness to act."

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  8. Close up image here: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b5/RedDwarfShip.jpg

  9. Dr. Evil? by boudie2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Johnson: [Noticing Dr. Evil's spaceship on radar] Colonel, you better have a look at this radar
    . Colonel: What is it, son?
    Johnson: I don't know, sir, but it looks like a giant--
    Jet Pilot: Dick.
    Dick: Yeah?
    Jet Pilot: Take a look out of starboard.
    Dick: Oh my God, it looks like a huge--
    Bird-Watching Woman: Pecker.
    Bird-Watching Man: [raising binoculars] Ooh, Where?
    Bird-Watching Woman: Wait, that's not a woodpecker, it looks like someone's--
    Army Sergeant: Privates! We have reports of an unidentified flying object. It has a long, smooth shaft, complete with--
    Baseball Umpire: Two balls.
    [looking up from game]
    Baseball Umpire: What is that. It looks just like an enormous--
    Chinese Teacher: Wang, pay attention!
    Wang: I was distracted by that giant flying--
    Musician: Willie.
    Willie Nelson: Yeah?
    Musician: What's that?
    Willie Nelson: [squints] Well, that looks like a giant--
    Colonel: Johnson?!
    Johnson: Yes, sir?
    Colonel: Get on the horn to British Intelligence and let them know about this.
    Later, as Dr. Evil is escaping: Basil: Did we get Dr. Evil?
    Johnson: No, sir. He got away in that rocket that looks like a huge--
    Schoolteacher: Penis. The male reproductive organ. Otherwise known as tallywhacker, schlong or--
    Dad: Weiner? Any of you kids want another weiner?
    Son: Dad? What's that? points at rocket
    Dad: I don't know, son, but it's got great big--
    Peanut seller: Nuts! Hot salty nuts! Who wants some-- Lord Almighty!
    Woman: That looks just like my husband's--
    Ringmaster: One-eyed monster! Step right up and see the One-Eyed Monster!
    One-eyed Monster: jumps out and scares crowd, then points to the rocket Hey, what's that? It looks like a big--
    female Fan: Woody! Woody Harrelson? Can I have an autograph?
    Woody Harrelson: Sure thing. [Sees rocket] Oh my lord.
    Female fan: It's big!
    Woody: Nah, I've seen bigger, it's--
    Dr. Evil: (To Mini-Me) Just a little prick. It's a flu shot. You've been in the coldness of space.

  10. RAMA ? by ei4anb · · Score: 1

    Would it not be wonderful to know that there is life out there, even if the probe they sent had been en route for millions of years?

    1. Re:RAMA ? by sheramil · · Score: 1

      Option 1: blow it up

      Option 2: tell everyone it's fake news and it doesn't exist

      Option 3: retrieve it and put it in a theme park

    2. Re:RAMA ? by PPH · · Score: 1

      We should have searched it for Chuck Berry recordings.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  11. KICKSTART A PROBE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets kickstart some money and give it to, say, SpaceX, to send a probe flyby the next one we detect! I'd pay good money for that. I mean, how expensive it'd be? You just need some quality instruments and a fast ship. No landing complexity, and being the inner solar system, not even celestial mechanical complexity (given we've successfully sent a probe to Pluto!)

    No, I'm serious! Let's do it!

    (and someone please observe this one for as long as possible, something tells me it's gonna start accelerating when it flies past Jupiter's orbit)

  12. Star Trek? by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

    The artwork makes me think of the whale probe in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home...

    --
    You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    1. Re:Star Trek? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

      The plot of Star Trek IV : The Voyage Home can be summed up as

      [cetacean needed].

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:Star Trek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what immediately came to my mind when I saw the artist's rendition of the object. Who knows, maybe a space ship formed of rock is an ideal interplanetary medium? It's not too far fetched to think that a relatively 'local' planetary star system (maybe within 50 light years) could have formed an intelligent civilization far before us, detected earth as a habitable planet in our star system, and sent an interplanetary probe out way (who knows how long ago, it would depend on how advanced their propulsion systems were). To me that is a fascinating posibility. Most likely though, it is an interesting space object.

    3. Re:Star Trek? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well played sir!

    4. Re:Star Trek? by CeasedCaring · · Score: 2

      It's posts like yours that make me wish I had mod points this week!

    5. Re:Star Trek? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      The plot of Star Trek IV : The Voyage Home can be summed up as

      [cetacean needed].

      Bravo!

      This is the essential Slashdot joke. You should be gifted a month of all your posts at +5!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  13. Can we not think of a way to capture the next one? by mi · · Score: 1

    It would seem, such "visitor" from outside of our Solar system would be a very interesting thing to study. Can we, perhaps, think up a way of capturing the next one somehow? Change the speed and direction of it just enough for it start orbiting the Moon, for example (too dangerous to mess with an Earth orbit, where a mistake can send it on our heads).

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  14. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by irrational_design · · Score: 1

    To be honest, we were all sort of hoping you would think of a way. So far you are letting us down.

  15. payload has already been dropped off by advocate_one · · Score: 2

    the invasion is coming...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  16. Rapid rotation? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

    Is it rotating at 4 RPM? Is it around 34 miles long? Unfortunately, we don't have any craft like the solar survey vessel Endeavour to intercept it. There will be another extrasolar intruder almost like this in about another 70 years.

    1. Re:Rapid rotation? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Minimum angular velocity (length wise) of 11 km / second. Still far from c.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Rapid rotation? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      I don't think your grokked my reference....

  17. ram rama rama by bferrell · · Score: 2

    RAMA!

    1. Re: ram rama rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thank you, came here for this, was not disappointed. I am slightly awed that it took this long. Slashdotters above, please turn in your nerd cards.

    2. Re: ram rama rama by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      You can't say that without linking to the source of this supposedly funny reference.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:ram rama rama by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      The Ramans do everything in threes. The next craft in will do scary things.

    4. Re:ram rama rama by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they say its a rock, but the dimensions.... Where are the photos? Where is HUBBLE photo?-

    5. Re:ram rama rama by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re: ram rama rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are working on it. Got 10 images in a sequence. Preliminary data processing looking good. We'll post it soon.

  18. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... so it's just a turd.

  19. No Ian Banks references? by Required+Snark · · Score: 1

    The shape so reminiscent of a Culture Mind ship .

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  20. ...now named "Oumuamua," by Black.Shuck · · Score: 1

    ...do doo, dododoo!

  21. That's no asteroid by Solandri · · Score: 1

    It's a spaceship!

  22. My favorite scene from Star Trek IV: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KIRK: Scotty, we've got to find some humpbacks. SCOTT: Humpbacked ...people? KIRK: Whales, Mister Scott, whales!

  23. It has the shape of a spaceship !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From the looks of it that thing could be fossilized spaceship

    1. Re:It has the shape of a spaceship !! by wafflemonger · · Score: 2

      It's not a space ship, it is a monitor from the future that has fallen back through time. They were using the past as a way to throw away their outdated equipment when they went to the new and more productive 12:1 aspect ration on their screens.

  24. Might not have a fixed rotational axis by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

    Only the maximum and minimum moments of inertia are stable in rotation. If you try to spin an object around any other axis, it will tumble - the axis of rotation varies relative to the body. Every spacecraft or satellite that's launched had some poor slob whose job was to get the exact mass, location, and inertia tensor of every single component put into the spacecraft, and put it into a huge spreadsheet. Then he uses that to calculate the minimum and maximum moments of inertia of the spacecraft. If the desired spin axis doesn't line up with either of these moments, then he has to change the location of some of the components of the spacecraft until it does (like positioning weights on a tire when you balance it)..

    With round or nearly round objects, the min/max moment of inertia isn't very different from from the inertia around other axes, so this oscillation tends to be very slow and not noticeable. But it's much more likely to be pronounced with an elongated and flattened body.

    1. Re:Might not have a fixed rotational axis by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Every spacecraft or satellite that's launched had some poor slob whose job was to get the exact mass, location, and inertia tensor of every single component put into the spacecraft, and put it into a huge spreadsheet. Then he uses that to calculate the minimum and maximum moments of inertia of the spacecraft. If the desired spin axis doesn't line up with either of these moments, then he has to change the location of some of the components of the spacecraft until it does (like positioning weights on a tire when you balance it)..

      Thrusters give very predictable thrust, right? Why can't you just calculate the necessary thrust from the reaction, like the tire balancing machine does?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Might not have a fixed rotational axis by bidule · · Score: 1

      Mu. The length of rope used doesn't change the way the spinning top wobbles.

      The OP was talking about the 20 years it'll stay in orbit, not the launch phase.

      --
      ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
    3. Re:Might not have a fixed rotational axis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thrusters give very predictable thrust, right?

      Take your Weinstein jokes elsewhere.

  25. It'd be hilarious by mad-seumas · · Score: 1

    It'd be hilarious if it turned out to be a generational ship hit by a chunk of space debris that made it spin out of control, and we couldn't tell - just a foreign asteroid passing through our solar system. Whoops.

    1. Re:It'd be hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who says it's out of control ?. Think about it spin solves a couple of problems.
      First you have gravity at the ends and the larger biological stuff we know of seems to do better with up and down.
      Secondly making course corrections is easy. No need to use steering thrusters, just fire up whatever the main drive is when you are pointing in the right direction.

      Too late now, but it's hard to believe something with that aspect ratio was natural, most of the naturally occurring crap within the solar system would break up so it could certainly be classed as highly unusual.

      Best guess. Einstein got it right, there's only one way to travel across interstellar distances (i.e. the slow way) and that was was doing just that.

    2. Re:It'd be hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too late now, but it's hard to believe something with that aspect ratio was natural, most of the naturally occurring crap within the solar system would break up so it could certainly be classed as highly unusual.

      But you are aware it is not from within the Solar System, yes?

    3. Re: It'd be hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the centrifugal force at the tip of the asteroid is larger than its gravity. This implies the object is solid. The cohesive strength does not need to be very strong to keep it in 1 piece: about 10Pa, which is not a problem.

  26. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by msauve · · Score: 2

    ...and they're slightly off, it doesn't have a 10:1 aspect ratio, it's 9:4:1.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  27. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's not name it or decide how weird it is yet, thanks.

    Really ... what the fuck is that name anyway. At least give us a name we can pronounce.

  28. Re:It's the first trans-solar rock we've noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFY. If you'd read anything about this, you'd know it's not from outside the milky way. They think it's from where Vega used to be a long time ago.

  29. Bad name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should bei called Rama.

  30. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by CeasedCaring · · Score: 1

    'Oumuamua' means "a messenger from afar arriving first" in Hawaiian.

  31. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    You can't even write it on Slasdot

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

    The common name ÊOumuamua was chosen by the Pan-STARRS team. The name is Hawaiian in origin ("Êou" means "reach out for", and "mua", with the second "mua" placing emphasis, means "first, in advance of"), and reflects the nature of the object as a "scout" or "messenger" from the past.[4] The first character is a Hawaiian Êokina, not an apostrophe.

    Seems quiche-eatery to me

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  32. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    Let's not name it or decide how weird it is yet, thanks.

    With all this flood of celebrities and politicians admitting to sexual harassment . . . now we even start off on innocent interstellar flying objects!

    Where will this Harassment Hell ever end . . . ?

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  33. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by darthsilun · · Score: 1

    You can't even write it on Slasdot

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

    Sure you can.`Oumuamua. That's an Okina before the O. According to [1] you can use a grave accent or an apostrophe when the correct typographical mark is not available.

    I'm not an authority but that seem somewhat akin to whether the dots – e.g. over the e in ë – is called an umlaut or a diaeresis.It depends on whether you're using it in English or in German.

    [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okina

  34. Re:It's the first trans-solar rock we've noticed by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    They think it's from where Vega used to be a long time ago.

    Damned annoying Vegans! Can't they let us eat in peace? They have to send us a giant interstellar carrot?

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  35. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

    ...and they're slightly off, it doesn't have a 10:1 aspect ratio, it's 9:4:1.

    I am a member of the intergalactic consortium that founded the Open UFO Specifications Society, and it just happens that those are the ideal flying saucer dimensions, as defined by the latest review version of the OUFOSS-1.2.

  36. ALL THESE SYSTEMS ARE YOURS. . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . except Sol. The locals aren't worth bothering. . . .

  37. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Hal_Porter · · Score: 0

    If God could write the bible in English and use only 7 bit ASCII characters, they should be enough for anyone.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  38. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it was written in ancient greek not english

  39. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by darthsilun · · Score: 1

    If God could write the bible in English and use only 7 bit ASCII characters, they should be enough for anyone.

    This is why I should have posted AC – so I could mod your stupid ass post down.

  40. Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is essentially the prelude of the book Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke.

  41. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by careysub · · Score: 1

    The reason why we know this is from outside the solar system is that it is moving much too fast for anything that was ever part of the solar system. `Oumuamua has a solar velocity excess (V_infinity) of 26 km/sec.

    The fastest thing (in terms of V_infinity) we have ever sent by rocket technology is the little New Horizons probe at 16 km/sec. Even rendezvousing with any of these objects is going to be a major undertaking. This would require a mission (or more likely missions) kept ready to go on mere days notice to send a probe in chase as it heads back out. The extremely high probe velocity required would probably call for an ion drive or other exotic propulsion option.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  42. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Let's not name it or decide how weird it is yet, thanks.

    Really ... what the fuck is that name anyway. At least give us a name we can pronounce.

    FTA: oh MOO-uh MOO-uh

    Now, you too can sound erudite at the office water cooler.

    Segue to the "I'm a cow" poster.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  43. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    OOH WALLAH WALLAH

    FTFY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  44. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoosh!

  45. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    again,

    Whoosh!

  46. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those who are actually informed about the story are aware that at any moment there are 10,000 interstellar objects like this one in the Solar System. Three of them enter [and an equal number leave] the Solar System every single day.

    Oh, has anyone noticed that they move at 110,000 km per hour in a hyperbolic trajectory?

  47. No! Throw a giant rubber band around it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The band can then accelerate you to the asteroid's speed at an acceptable pace!

    Duh!

    Why does everyone here always cling.to thinking in the tiny box in a box that is his rigid programming? Stop being a fixed-function robot and be at least an android!

  48. Re:I have the fartsies tonight by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    According to South Park, it means it's now time to go buy yourself a Prius.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  49. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    That right there is an ironic reply that could apply to 96.145% of the posts on Slashdot.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  50. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or 7:1, or 8:1, or 10:1. Whatever.

  51. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

    Which "mua" means "from afar", and which "mua" means "arriving first"?

    --
    If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  52. Movie promo for Rendezvous with Rama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is just new marketing action for the new movie:

    Rendezvous with Rama

  53. Classic cigar shaped UFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Possibly a derelict drifting through space.

  54. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Bloxclay · · Score: 1

    Aw I see its been named I would of suggested Meteorite mcmeteorite face! XD

    --
    Switch it Off,Switch it On[SOSO] Solves 95% of all IT problems!
  55. Star Trek Planet Killer, Or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.nexusroute.co.uk/wp... or Cheech & Chongs new movie "Up In Space"

  56. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some people though just like to jump to conclusions. Sign of the times...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42WNHGr1jGI

  57. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by PPH · · Score: 1

    we have ever sent by rocket technology

    It's good that you qualified that statement. We could catch it with a manhole cover.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  58. How could something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    come about with that shape? I think it is artificial.

  59. Earth Ship - First Contact by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Interstellar asteroid with a 10:1 ratio, 400m long and rapidly rotating...

    Sounds like an Earth ship. Be curious to calculate the equivalent gravity of the rotational speed if the asteroid was hollow. Also, what is the mass, density.

    Here come the "other guys" from Outer Space.

  60. Re:Can we not think of a way to capture the next o by mi · · Score: 1

    I'm not a rocket scientist. But it would seem, making contact with an interstellar rock — and even forcing it to change speed/direction enough to become a Moon's satellite — would be more achievable than a meaningful Mars expedition.

    It does not have to be this one — according to an anonymous reply here, there are thousands of such objects passing through the Solar system on any given day. We could pick and choose something, that would only require an achievable delta-V to be caught...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  61. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by spun · · Score: 1

    Hawaiian doesn't really work like that. It's an oddly poetic language, even in the debased form we find it today. Repetition for emphasis is very common. The "from afar" part probably arises from the repetition.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  62. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    alien generation starship anyone?

  63. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by war4peace · · Score: 1

    Literal translation would be: "First Far Far", while "messenger" is implied.

    Note: I have no clue what I am talking about, take this as a bad attempt at a joke.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  64. Fast for the Solar System Slow for a Spaceship by careysub · · Score: 1

    The velocity excess of 26.33 km/sec makes it 'faster' (more total energy) relative to the Sun than any man-made object. This velocity is fairly typical for random stellar motions relative to each other in our region of the galaxy (with 5 km/sec of the average). This is a bit less that 0.01% c so travelling a few light years takes a few tens of thousands of years.

    Now if this an alien spaceship that was travelling much faster but simply braked to this velocity before making this approach to the Sun, to study us, it is interesting to think when they might have completed the braking maneuver. If it did so 10 AU out then it completed the maneuver a year ago, if it was 100 AU out then it was a bit less than 20 years ago. Of course now we know where it is and where it is going we are going to "keep watching the skies" where it disappeared so it a propulsion motor turns on it will have to be quite some distance out to escape detection.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  65. Aliens! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know we all don't want to get our hopes up but there doesn't seem to be much serious discussion on this possibly being an alien probe.

    So far nothing has ruled it out and what we have gathered has revealed some interesting information...

    1. The course it took isn't a simple maneuver. It can happen by accident but it's quite interesting that it took a fairly close flyby of Earth. Not too close for us to get a good read on it though or for it to hit the planet. Given the ranges and complexities involved of sending a probe like that, the distance is not something that would need a particularly special explanation. It's definitely a good enough distance to get a really good read on our planet. It's course also swings it back on a similar trajectory it came from which you would expect from an alien probe. None of this is perfect or massively raises the chance of it being an alien probe but it definitely doesn't leave us with much to rule it out easily.

    2. When it passed by the sun, it emitted no mass which is some what unusual. It's not something that can happen that uncommonly by nature but it is another thing where we can't easily rule out its artificial nature. It is also unusually dark although that's only a slight thing to consider in it being artificial.

    3. The size is around viable for an interstellar probe. However it's now the shape that has really raised some interesting questions. A highly unusual shape that's pretty much never seen in nature. It's basically, well, space ship shaped, long an thin. There is a question of why such an object might rotate. Given how close it passed to the sun that is one way to spread the radiation. It could also be to induce artificial gravity but that's unlikely for an interstellar probe which would usually be unoccupied. It could also be that it's not important.

    It's a real shame we can't check it out more closely because although the chances are extremely remote it's still the best legitimate candidate for possible alien contact we've ever had. The UFO buffs should really be more excited about it.

  66. Re: It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds like a great name for a typical cocktail.

  67. The bugger went 87 kilometers per second by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The asteroid moves 26 kilometers per second when in interstellar space. Closest to the sun it went a fair clip faster at 87 kilometers a second. That's 55 miles. Each and every second. New York to Los Angeles in 45 seconds. This thing is, well, rather rapid. To catch up you need to go quite a bit faster than it. We can't do that.

  68. traveling faster than solar escape velocity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another reason its nor a part of the solar system

  69. asteroid name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why didn't they call it "Rama" ?

  70. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Reduplication is used in many many (ahem) languages for emphasis. Think "in a galaxy far, far away."

  71. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by mcswell · · Score: 1

    It wasn't enough for the missionaries who went to Hawai`i in the 1820s. They decided to translate the Bible into Hawai`an.

    BTW, the backwards apostrophe stands for a glottal stop, the sound English has in the middle (and usually the beginning) of oh-oh.

  72. Re:It's the first trans-galactic rock we've notice by mcswell · · Score: 1

    and Hebrew, and a little Aramaic.