That's because they did it twice, the second rover lands a week from saturday.
And the 400M (each) includes all of the research, developement, construction, launch costs, operations, radio telescope time, etc until the end of the mission.
You believe that a/. poster's interpretation of the facts has anything to do with reality?
The colors don't match simply because they are being viewed through filters, and not the same filters in every image. The 2 different 'pancam' cameras have different sets of filters, and IIRC only the near infrared filter common to both. Most of the images coming back form mars will not be true color, and unless NASA specifically says that an image is true color, don't expect it to be.
Lying on your back is not a simulation of space, it's just reversing the effect of gravity on the pen. In that position, the pen has 1G fighting the flow of ink. In space, that 1G is gone, and surface tension alone is enough to make the pen work.
There's a huge difference between 0 gravity (yes i know freefall isn't really 0G) and 1G in the wrong direction. In space, surface tension is enough to keep a ball point pen working, on earth with the pen upside down, it has to overcome 1G in the wrong direction also.
That's a myth. Pens don't rely on gravity to work, they are all about surface tension. Both nasa and the soviets used both pencils and pens, and the "space pen" was developed by a pen company with no relationship with nasa.
This rover isn't equiped to study the atmosphere, that's not why it's there. The fact that they noticed wind effects on the surface dust is just a little bit of extra data they happened to notice and point out to us.
It's a 90 day mission, they haven't even finished unpacking the rover yet. There will be alot of much more interesting data, although most likely it won't be interesting to you.
Although NASA may like us to believe this is one image, it's really a composite.
In NASA's defense, I don't think they claim that it is a single shot, I've heard them refer to the images as mosaics many many times and describe how the panoramas are taken as a series of images stitched together.
And if you look at earth from the moon while it is eclipsing the sun, it is red around the edge. doesn't mean the atmosphere is red here, just that red light is refracted at that angle from that point of view. If you see blue around the edge of mars I wouldn't expect the sky to be blue when seen from the ground, just means blue is being refracted or reflected towards earth.
Because they aren't talking about banning cell phones (or guns) outright, they are talking about banning them in a specific situation where being destracted for even 1-2 seconds can potentially kill someone. Not too long ago about a mile from my house, a lady slowed down to make a left, while the person behind her was answering the phone. The person answering the phone was sufficiently distracted to not see the car stopping in front of him, and he proceeded to rear end it, pushing it into oncoming traffic on the other side of the road and the driver was killed in a head on collision. This sort of thing happens daily because people think they can do other things while driving. The reality is, when you are driving you in control of something with a million times the energy of a bullet (no i didn't do the math), that can easily kill, and if you aren't giving it your full attention you should lose your license (IMHO).
The article say that he will begin including a legit return address and will have to pay $3000/month to setup/maintain his new opt-out lists. Sounds to me like he can't be honoring the lists if they don't exist yet.
The difference is, when you "steal" by copying an mp3, the original is still there, you haven't taken anything away. When you "steal" bandwidth, cpu, etc, you are depriving the legit owners of their access to it.
1) first, the obvious... what happens when the repair rover breaks down?
2) it would cost more than 10 missions do now if it had to carry spare parts and the tools to install them
3) missions now are one off, there are no interchangeable parts, everything is custom made. The technology is changing to fast and every mission is a learning experience, it will be a long time before interchangable parts on this type of mission.
4) that would limit landings to a single spot on the surface, mars has many different areas that we want to study
5) the environment on mars isn't robot friendly, the radiation and dust can cause all sorts of problems. That's why these missions only have expected lifetimes of a couple months. Building a rover to stay there for years would increase the costs tremendously.
The mission is in 2 parts, the lander is actually the smaller of them. The orbiter will happily continue its mission if the lander is lost.
Re:Driving a Truck Through This One
on
Global Dimming
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Some counterpoints:
2) Astronomers tools have been improving and changing alot over the time period in question, and as a result their measurements may not be consistant enough going back for them to compare and notice the trend, especially if they aren't looking for it.
3) It's not necessarily just absorbed by the atmosphere, it could be reflected back into space by increased cloud cover.
4) In the long run it could be consistant with either warming or cooling, depending on the mechanism that is reducing the light levels (absorbtion vs reflection). There are other factors that could have a bigger impact on short term warming/cooling that could easily overpower the temp change from dimming in the 80s.
The drop is in the visible spectrum, ultraviolet isn't affected. So if anything, skin cancer will increase, because people may stay in the sun longer. Also, ultraviolet can damage the eyes, but since it's not visible our eyes don't directly react to it. If you lower the visible spectrum and not the ultraviolet, our pupils open wider for more visible light and as a result let in more UV. Good news for eye doctors I guess...
Slashdot Mirror
That's because they did it twice, the second rover lands a week from saturday.
And the 400M (each) includes all of the research, developement, construction, launch costs, operations, radio telescope time, etc until the end of the mission.
I think the cover of the 4th book said 'The fourth book in the increasingly inaccuratly named hitchhiker's trilogy". Or maybe it was the 5th.
hey asshole, they paid for the watches out of their own pockets, no nasa budget was involved.
It gets better than that, the team members who got the watches BOUGHT THEM ON THEIR OWN. Not a penny of nasa budget went to them.
Hey dumbass... the team members bought the watches themselves, not a penny of nasa budget went to them.
He said the MAIN one was broken. They have backups.
Which is exactly what they are talking about discontinuing and getting back to the basics.
You believe that a /. poster's interpretation of the facts has anything to do with reality?
The colors don't match simply because they are being viewed through filters, and not the same filters in every image. The 2 different 'pancam' cameras have different sets of filters, and IIRC only the near infrared filter common to both. Most of the images coming back form mars will not be true color, and unless NASA specifically says that an image is true color, don't expect it to be.
Lying on your back is not a simulation of space, it's just reversing the effect of gravity on the pen. In that position, the pen has 1G fighting the flow of ink. In space, that 1G is gone, and surface tension alone is enough to make the pen work.
There's a huge difference between 0 gravity (yes i know freefall isn't really 0G) and 1G in the wrong direction. In space, surface tension is enough to keep a ball point pen working, on earth with the pen upside down, it has to overcome 1G in the wrong direction also.
And who would use a fountain pen in space?
That's a myth. Pens don't rely on gravity to work, they are all about surface tension. Both nasa and the soviets used both pencils and pens, and the "space pen" was developed by a pen company with no relationship with nasa.
A quick google search found this
Well to be fair, you're judging an entire planet by what you can see in one picture, we haven't seen 99.999% of it except from orbit.
This rover isn't equiped to study the atmosphere, that's not why it's there. The fact that they noticed wind effects on the surface dust is just a little bit of extra data they happened to notice and point out to us.
Just you I think. :) Notice the lights on the ceiling are pretty white and the red toolbox in the background is exactly the right shade of red.
It's a 90 day mission, they haven't even finished unpacking the rover yet. There will be alot of much more interesting data, although most likely it won't be interesting to you.
Although NASA may like us to believe this is one image, it's really a composite.
In NASA's defense, I don't think they claim that it is a single shot, I've heard them refer to the images as mosaics many many times and describe how the panoramas are taken as a series of images stitched together.
And if you look at earth from the moon while it is eclipsing the sun, it is red around the edge. doesn't mean the atmosphere is red here, just that red light is refracted at that angle from that point of view. If you see blue around the edge of mars I wouldn't expect the sky to be blue when seen from the ground, just means blue is being refracted or reflected towards earth.
That would be awesome, but unfortunatly the other rover is landing on the opposite side of the planet, so it's not gonna happen. :(
Because they aren't talking about banning cell phones (or guns) outright, they are talking about banning them in a specific situation where being destracted for even 1-2 seconds can potentially kill someone. Not too long ago about a mile from my house, a lady slowed down to make a left, while the person behind her was answering the phone. The person answering the phone was sufficiently distracted to not see the car stopping in front of him, and he proceeded to rear end it, pushing it into oncoming traffic on the other side of the road and the driver was killed in a head on collision. This sort of thing happens daily because people think they can do other things while driving. The reality is, when you are driving you in control of something with a million times the energy of a bullet (no i didn't do the math), that can easily kill, and if you aren't giving it your full attention you should lose your license (IMHO).
The article say that he will begin including a legit return address and will have to pay $3000/month to setup/maintain his new opt-out lists. Sounds to me like he can't be honoring the lists if they don't exist yet.
The difference is, when you "steal" by copying an mp3, the original is still there, you haven't taken anything away. When you "steal" bandwidth, cpu, etc, you are depriving the legit owners of their access to it.
Several problems with this:
1) first, the obvious... what happens when the repair rover breaks down?
2) it would cost more than 10 missions do now if it had to carry spare parts and the tools to install them
3) missions now are one off, there are no interchangeable parts, everything is custom made. The technology is changing to fast and every mission is a learning experience, it will be a long time before interchangable parts on this type of mission.
4) that would limit landings to a single spot on the surface, mars has many different areas that we want to study
5) the environment on mars isn't robot friendly, the radiation and dust can cause all sorts of problems. That's why these missions only have expected lifetimes of a couple months. Building a rover to stay there for years would increase the costs tremendously.
The mission is in 2 parts, the lander is actually the smaller of them. The orbiter will happily continue its mission if the lander is lost.
Some counterpoints:
2) Astronomers tools have been improving and changing alot over the time period in question, and as a result their measurements may not be consistant enough going back for them to compare and notice the trend, especially if they aren't looking for it.
3) It's not necessarily just absorbed by the atmosphere, it could be reflected back into space by increased cloud cover.
4) In the long run it could be consistant with either warming or cooling, depending on the mechanism that is reducing the light levels (absorbtion vs reflection). There are other factors that could have a bigger impact on short term warming/cooling that could easily overpower the temp change from dimming in the 80s.
The drop is in the visible spectrum, ultraviolet isn't affected. So if anything, skin cancer will increase, because people may stay in the sun longer. Also, ultraviolet can damage the eyes, but since it's not visible our eyes don't directly react to it. If you lower the visible spectrum and not the ultraviolet, our pupils open wider for more visible light and as a result let in more UV. Good news for eye doctors I guess...