> There is one manufacturer here in the UK who still glue things together - it's damn annoying trying to change a drive and finding both the power and data cables have been glued in (with hot-melt glue)!
No, think farther back. Back then, when computers came in components, they meant components, as in loose LEDs, connectors and wires. Assembly was supposed to be affected with solder, since glue is non-conductive. This wasn't a case of gluing ribbon cables down, it was a matter of gluing resistors and power lines in.
> How the hell does BS like this get modded up to 5? I'm sorry, but thats not believeable at all. For one, no adult is that stupid, you would literally have to jam & crumple that floppy in to get the tray to close.
Careful, you're showing your age, child. Back in the days when many machines had CD-ROM drives and 5.25" drives at the same time, many CD-ROM drives were cartridge drives (put the CD in a carrier and insert the carrier into the drive), and I have personal experience with many attempts to slide a 5.25 incher into the cartridge slot, into which it fit fairly comfortably.
> Second, besides the tray being jammed shut, I really don't think there would be any "horrible sound" as a CD-Rom doesnt try to spin up unless a real disc is inserted.
See above. The sound is the lever that opens the sliding door on the carrier rending the diskette asunder. Again, I've personally heard it, and when the disk inside contains valuable information that you know the user never backed up, it can be truly sickening.
No, no, there's no time machine. You remember the whole Atari ad campaign about "gaming at the speed of light"? See, when you do that, time slows down, so you can game longer. Get it?
> You'd need to define "Jedi" a bit loosely to include Anakin/Vader
Very loosely. Anakin was a Jedi, but when he turned to the dark side, he became Sith, which is opposed to Jedi, not equal to it. To lump them together is equivalent to labelling a murdering Satanist as a Christian.
> Interesting how you explicitely give a description of the law that allows this then proceed to declare it illegal.
Not quite. It's legal to arrest someone and hold them for 24 hours without charging them, at which time they must be charged or released. However, as his example illustrates, the violation of intent stems from the reason for arrest. These people were purportedly arrested for loitering, but were processed and entered into this database. It does not take a large leap of logic to arrive at the conclusion that they were arrested as an excuse to gather information. If it can be proven that they were targetted for arrest based on police desire to put them in the database (admittedly hard, but not impossible), then the police are guilty of false arrest, which is indeed both reprehensible and illegal.
>...settlements don't create any precedent whatsoever.
Precedent of behavior, not precedent of ruling. It can be used to prove that they've admitted to doing this in the past, so the judge is less likely to be lenient in sentencing, if they're convicted of it again.
> That's what the antitrust suit should have been all about...
If it's any comfort, it's been done. Digital Research (and now Caldera) have successfully sued the heck out of Microsoft for predatory licensing practices which they used to get DR-DOS out of the way. It's not much (MS settled, so they never went to court) but at least if they try it again there's precedent that a judge can use to pummel them.
> maybe im not up on the 'new units', but isnt current in amperes?
Um, when I said, "It will carry a current, but it's in the range of milliwatts..." I, um, meant, uh, "it'll currently carry power in the milliwatt range..." Yeah, that's it.
> Substantial evidence for historical changes in the Earth's axis of rotation has been accumulated, although as a non-geologist, I cannot say whether it is widely accepted.
Oh, okay, now I get where you're going. If you're referring to the Earth's axis wandering, that's not really an issue with a space elevator. Although you're right that the Earth's axis changing will change where geostationary stuff needs to be to stay geostationary, there are two things that work in favor of the elevator. First, polar wander happens slowly enough not to put huge stresses on the ribbon. Second, the ribbon isn't a free flyer, it's anchored at one end and counterweighted at the other. The counterweight will arguably have navigation engines, and these can handle the minor corrections in course to keep the ribbon functionally geostationary as the planet wobbles away under it.
> At the geosynchronous orbit you can move to any other point on that orbit in a simple way. An easy push will do. Just be careful not to hit any satellites.
I'll assume you meant geostationary, and you're right, but egad, that'd have to be a very long ribbon indeed to reach that altitude (more than 11,000 miles, since geostation for free flyers is 22,000+ miles and even with the cable itself counted in for mass you can't get shorter than that realistically). More likely is that the end of the ribbon would be far below that, with a counterweight at the top end to keep it vertical, which would still allow for switching ribbons (remember that I said two-way trips were only a problem with one ribbon up).
> Also, that spot at the cable in the geoshnchronous orbit would be a perfect for a space station, which would easily grow because it is cheap to send new modules up.
It's not really necessary to put a space station in geosynch orbit. First, since it's easy to bring stuff to it with the elevator, it's better to bring up fuel for station keeping instead (remember that geosynch for free flying no-power maintenance is 22,000 miles), and second, the cable's not going that high anyway.
> I guess you could even suspend an electricity cable on the ribbon.
Nah. Solar panels. I do like the idea of hotels up there, though. I'd be in line, for certain.
> However, Earth's poles have changed before and as far as I know, we don't know why.
I can't tell if you're goofing me or not. I hope you're aware that when scientists refer to the Earth's poles changing, they mean the north-south orientation changes (that is, compasses start pointing south, then go back to pointing north) and not that the actual Earth did flip-flops.
> Why haul around all that expensive re-entry weight when you have the perfect mechanism to come back down on the elevator itself.
I can think of two reasons, although neither of them is a complete show stopper. First, until more than one ribbon is up, while something comes down, nothing can go up. It's faster to deorbit and reenter by falling, because the next cargo lift can happen concurrently. Second, lowering is harder (not much, admittedly, but still somewhat) than lifting because of the anchor point on the ground and the direction of the gravity well. For now at least, it'll still be cheaper to lift a reentry module for return trips, keeping in mind that (at least early on) much more stuff is going to go up than down.
In the long term, I think we'll find that your solution will get more feasible eventually.
Based on your comment, even if you're no the first to have sex on this thing, you're certainly likely to be the first asshole to do it.
Virg
A Miasma of Bad Science
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
> It seems to me that this project will never work. There are to many forces at play. The elevator would probable snap in half do to all the strain. If we did manage to build it there would be a HUGE problem: Earth's rotation would slow down, forcing us toward the Sun. Imagine the Earth as an ice skater in rotation. The person keeps their arms close to their body to rotate fast. What happens when the person's arms raise away from their body? They slow down. It is a simple concept of centripetal acceleration. The elevator
would act as an arm of the Earth, thus causing it to slow down.
Wow. There are so many scale errors here it's hard to tell where to start. First, What strain exactly would "snap the elevator in half"? It's a ribbon, and while it's certainly possible to break the ribbon, it's not likely to happen under normal operation, and the design specifies that they'll set it up in a location that minimizes the likelihood of high winds or lightning. Second, "Earth's rotation would slow down"?!? You can't be serious with this. The mass of this thing is so much less than that of the Earth that the slowdown would be indetectable with the most sensitive instruments we have, if we were actively looking for it. To take your example of the figure skater, imagine her spinning, then letting out a one inch long piece of the finest hair you can find. How much do you think she'll slow down? And last, why exactly would slowing Earth's rotation cause us to head for the Sun? The day would get to be more than twenty-four hours, but the speed the Earth moves around the Sun (that's "revolution", not "rotation") would not change in the least.
Go buy a book on physics.
Virg
Size and Composition
on
Going Up?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
They covered this on the web site. It will carry a current, but it's in the range of milliwatts because of the size and makeup of the ribbon. The comment was based on using a cable (like an Earthbound elevator) and so doesn't really apply here.
Um, getting down from orbit has never posed many problems. We on Earth call that "falling" and the trick isn't getting down, it's getting down slow enough not to vaporize one's arse. In more serious terms, no, it's not likely that anyone will ever use the elevator to reenter Earth's atmosphere. Most likely, if anything needs to come back down in one piece, they'll lift a reentry module with the elevator and then let it drop with the precious payload the old fashioned way.
> The consumer shouldn't be expected to have a clue. Or would you rather computers remained niche items owned only by the technological elite?
Unfair assessment. One can be a regular consumer and still have a small clue, and it's reasonable to expect the customer to understand a few basics. After all, should someone who owns a car not be expected to understand the terms, "ignition", "steering wheel" and "driver's side"? While I accept that someone calling for technical support shouldn't have to understand installing drivers to get a device to work, when someone gets on the phone and doesn't understand what I mean when I say "double click" or turns off the monitor when I tell them to turn off the base unit, I have a right to complain when they say that I suck at supporting them. They don't have to know the intimate details of IRQs and BIOS configuration, but it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to know how to use the computer and understand the terms that are defined on the Quick Start card.
> So about Beagle 2, can Earth organisms survive several months in vacuum, high radiation and extremely low temperature for months?
In a word, yes. Microbes (and bigger stuff) have survived in hard vacuum space for long times (the mold growing on the outside of Mir and stuff (from Earth) found contaminating parts brought back from Moon missions are two examples).
> As the earth have been hit by asteroids originating from Mars, it makes sense to believe that pieces of Earth have found its way to Mars, right?
While it's possible, it's not very likely. First, Earth has a much denser atmosphere, which has two dampening effects. First, less stuff gets to impact on the surface, since stuff that would penetrate to the surface of Mars would get eaten by friction on the way to Earth. Even when something gets to the ground, the ejected material has to plow its way back up through that same thicker, higher-air-drag atmosphere to get away, which means the same impact is less likely to send off ejecta with sufficient force to clear the atmosphere. Then, of course, there's the fact that Earth is bigger, so even without the atmosphere, it takes more to break free of the gravity well, so stuff that's just sufficient to get clear of Mars and come visit us would not be able to get free of us for the trip to Mars.
> Question is, how long is the average time for such debris to hit another planet, and can life survive, first of all the impact on our planet that caused the rocks to fly into space, secondly the long long travel in space before it hits Mars and thirdly, the impact on Mars?
If such an event were to happen, it's again possible but not likely for life to survive, since the life that made the trip would have to be hardy enough to survive extremely high and extremely low temperatures and be anaerobic. Such organisms do exist, however, so there's no ruling it out. As to time frames, under the best circumstances (distance between planets and impact points as small as possible and optimal factors for weather and such) the trip would still be measured in years, possibly decades and very likely centuries.
> That sounds all well and good - but what about non-organic contamination?
This is a lot easier to detect and compensate for, since the reactions involved are only chemical in nature.
> What if a silicone boot on the lander's leg has an adverse reaction with/to Martian soil? How about the lander's alloy components? Emissions, anyone?
These things would actually be good for science, and the mission. The goal is not to avoid any contamination of the Red Planet (if it was, we'd have to find a way to get back all of the ships we've already sent!) but to avoid biological contamination, since that's more unpredictable and can also compromise any search for Martian life. However, if a silicone boot reacts with Martian soil, that would be scientifically significant, since it would indicate that there's some chemical (or other) reason for it to happen, despite our not expecting it, which would in turn point to some compound or process on Mars we've never encountered on Earth. The same goes for alloy components and engine exhaust, since if there's something in the Martian atrmosphere that affects aluminum struts in an unexpected way, we'd want to know what that something is, both for any future Mars missions and for possible use on Earth.
> Not to sluff off the importance of this mission, but it's not hard to concede that the only definitive evaluation of "life on Mars" (past/present/future) would be a method to observe and detect phenomena non-obtrusively!
From a biological standpoint, this mission is specifically being designed and built to be non-obtrusive, which is why it's being planned and built to minimize the possibility of Earthly contamination. A lump of sterile metal and plastic is not likely to have any effect on Martian biological organisms, other than the joking reference I saw in a comic book where life had just formed on Mars, and the creature raised its appendage for the first time, only to have a Terran probe with "Search for Martian Life" painted on the side land on it and squash it.
This is only one way, and may not be the way they choose, but it'd work. First, build the probe in sterile conditions (they got that part). Next, encase it in an airtight package. Then transport and mount the package. Hit it with X-rays at the mount points (if you design the package correctly you can do that without compromising the payload). After launch, before the boost to take it to interplanetary trajectory, jettison the package shell, leaving just the booster (that you can dump before orbital insertion at Mars) and the payload/deorbit engines, which were encased in the package and so are germ-free.
There's one major problem with running the PC at all times. While your machine gets juice from the power company, he's got to run it off of batteries or locally generated power. Running it all out may not be an option, considering he's got to carry his electricity with him.
This might work, though, at the factory. Would be worth a shot with a cheap PC.
> I've been at sea with laptops and desktop machines. The only thing we've ever had to worry about is securing the machines so that they aren't tossed about (especially the monitors). Of course, if you have them on deck and there is a chance of spray, then I guess you'd have to waterproof them.
Precisely my point, and no fair comparing this guy's sailboat to a navy ship 8). In a small boat the system will get a lot more exposure to damp conditions than your computers saw, since you'll have to admit the amount of sea spray is rather more limited on a big ship than on his little boat. Granted, if he's got a US$500,000+ yacht, it's likely to be sealed up tight, but let's be honest. If he's planning on living on the boat full time I can only guess he's not Donald Trump.
Donate it to someone who can put it to good use, but don't expose it to this treatment. It will turn to junk pretty quickly. We had major problems with this when I was in college, and the computer lab sat fairly close to the furnaces (and steam pipes; this is Rutgers, which has some fairly old buildings) and would regularly get doused with very humid air when the pressure valves on the boilers would open (almost all winter long). The systems would have to be cleaned with board wash every week, and they still failed yearly, but since they were controlled by the Economics department, and I was the only one who understood what was going wrong (I know, Econs. and a geek; it's a wonder I ever got a date...) my pleas fell on deaf ears. For all I know, they're still junking computers left and right.
Slashdot Mirror
> There is one manufacturer here in the UK who still glue things together - it's damn annoying trying to change a drive and finding both the power and data cables have been glued in (with hot-melt glue)!
No, think farther back. Back then, when computers came in components, they meant components, as in loose LEDs, connectors and wires. Assembly was supposed to be affected with solder, since glue is non-conductive. This wasn't a case of gluing ribbon cables down, it was a matter of gluing resistors and power lines in.
Virg
> How the hell does BS like this get modded up to 5? I'm sorry, but thats not believeable at all. For one, no adult is that stupid, you would literally have to jam & crumple that floppy in to get the tray to close.
Careful, you're showing your age, child. Back in the days when many machines had CD-ROM drives and 5.25" drives at the same time, many CD-ROM drives were cartridge drives (put the CD in a carrier and insert the carrier into the drive), and I have personal experience with many attempts to slide a 5.25 incher into the cartridge slot, into which it fit fairly comfortably.
> Second, besides the tray being jammed shut, I really don't think there would be any "horrible sound" as a CD-Rom doesnt try to spin up unless a real disc is inserted.
See above. The sound is the lever that opens the sliding door on the carrier rending the diskette asunder. Again, I've personally heard it, and when the disk inside contains valuable information that you know the user never backed up, it can be truly sickening.
Virg
> What she did was got into the settings area, played with numbers, changed addresses, and basically sent Windows to hell.
Sent it back for a refund, I presume?
Virg
No, no, there's no time machine. You remember the whole Atari ad campaign about "gaming at the speed of light"? See, when you do that, time slows down, so you can game longer. Get it?
Virg
> You'd need to define "Jedi" a bit loosely to include Anakin/Vader
Very loosely. Anakin was a Jedi, but when he turned to the dark side, he became Sith, which is opposed to Jedi, not equal to it. To lump them together is equivalent to labelling a murdering Satanist as a Christian.
Virg
> Interesting how you explicitely give a description of the law that allows this then proceed to declare it illegal.
Not quite. It's legal to arrest someone and hold them for 24 hours without charging them, at which time they must be charged or released. However, as his example illustrates, the violation of intent stems from the reason for arrest. These people were purportedly arrested for loitering, but were processed and entered into this database. It does not take a large leap of logic to arrive at the conclusion that they were arrested as an excuse to gather information. If it can be proven that they were targetted for arrest based on police desire to put them in the database (admittedly hard, but not impossible), then the police are guilty of false arrest, which is indeed both reprehensible and illegal.
Virg
> ...settlements don't create any precedent whatsoever.
Precedent of behavior, not precedent of ruling. It can be used to prove that they've admitted to doing this in the past, so the judge is less likely to be lenient in sentencing, if they're convicted of it again.
Virg
> That's what the antitrust suit should have been all about...
If it's any comfort, it's been done. Digital Research (and now Caldera) have successfully sued the heck out of Microsoft for predatory licensing practices which they used to get DR-DOS out of the way. It's not much (MS settled, so they never went to court) but at least if they try it again there's precedent that a judge can use to pummel them.
Virg
> maybe im not up on the 'new units', but isnt current in amperes?
Um, when I said, "It will carry a current, but it's in the range of milliwatts..." I, um, meant, uh, "it'll currently carry power in the milliwatt range..." Yeah, that's it.
Virg
> Substantial evidence for historical changes in the Earth's axis of rotation has been accumulated, although as a non-geologist, I cannot say whether it is widely accepted.
Oh, okay, now I get where you're going. If you're referring to the Earth's axis wandering, that's not really an issue with a space elevator. Although you're right that the Earth's axis changing will change where geostationary stuff needs to be to stay geostationary, there are two things that work in favor of the elevator. First, polar wander happens slowly enough not to put huge stresses on the ribbon. Second, the ribbon isn't a free flyer, it's anchored at one end and counterweighted at the other. The counterweight will arguably have navigation engines, and these can handle the minor corrections in course to keep the ribbon functionally geostationary as the planet wobbles away under it.
Virg
> At the geosynchronous orbit you can move to any other point on that orbit in a simple way. An easy push will do. Just be careful not to hit any satellites.
I'll assume you meant geostationary, and you're right, but egad, that'd have to be a very long ribbon indeed to reach that altitude (more than 11,000 miles, since geostation for free flyers is 22,000+ miles and even with the cable itself counted in for mass you can't get shorter than that realistically). More likely is that the end of the ribbon would be far below that, with a counterweight at the top end to keep it vertical, which would still allow for switching ribbons (remember that I said two-way trips were only a problem with one ribbon up).
> Also, that spot at the cable in the geoshnchronous orbit would be a perfect for a space station, which would easily grow because it is cheap to send new modules up.
It's not really necessary to put a space station in geosynch orbit. First, since it's easy to bring stuff to it with the elevator, it's better to bring up fuel for station keeping instead (remember that geosynch for free flying no-power maintenance is 22,000 miles), and second, the cable's not going that high anyway.
> I guess you could even suspend an electricity cable on the ribbon.
Nah. Solar panels. I do like the idea of hotels up there, though. I'd be in line, for certain.
Virg
> However, Earth's poles have changed before and as far as I know, we don't know why.
I can't tell if you're goofing me or not. I hope you're aware that when scientists refer to the Earth's poles changing, they mean the north-south orientation changes (that is, compasses start pointing south, then go back to pointing north) and not that the actual Earth did flip-flops.
What an image that would be.
Virg
> Why haul around all that expensive re-entry weight when you have the perfect mechanism to come back down on the elevator itself.
I can think of two reasons, although neither of them is a complete show stopper. First, until more than one ribbon is up, while something comes down, nothing can go up. It's faster to deorbit and reenter by falling, because the next cargo lift can happen concurrently. Second, lowering is harder (not much, admittedly, but still somewhat) than lifting because of the anchor point on the ground and the direction of the gravity well. For now at least, it'll still be cheaper to lift a reentry module for return trips, keeping in mind that (at least early on) much more stuff is going to go up than down.
In the long term, I think we'll find that your solution will get more feasible eventually.
Virg
Based on your comment, even if you're no the first to have sex on this thing, you're certainly likely to be the first asshole to do it.
Virg
> It seems to me that this project will never work. There are to many forces at play. The elevator would probable snap in half do to all the strain. If we did manage to build it there would be a HUGE problem: Earth's rotation would slow down, forcing us toward the Sun. Imagine the Earth as an ice skater in rotation. The person keeps their arms close to their body to rotate fast. What happens when the person's arms raise away from their body? They slow down. It is a simple concept of centripetal acceleration. The elevator would act as an arm of the Earth, thus causing it to slow down.
Wow. There are so many scale errors here it's hard to tell where to start. First, What strain exactly would "snap the elevator in half"? It's a ribbon, and while it's certainly possible to break the ribbon, it's not likely to happen under normal operation, and the design specifies that they'll set it up in a location that minimizes the likelihood of high winds or lightning. Second, "Earth's rotation would slow down"?!? You can't be serious with this. The mass of this thing is so much less than that of the Earth that the slowdown would be indetectable with the most sensitive instruments we have, if we were actively looking for it. To take your example of the figure skater, imagine her spinning, then letting out a one inch long piece of the finest hair you can find. How much do you think she'll slow down? And last, why exactly would slowing Earth's rotation cause us to head for the Sun? The day would get to be more than twenty-four hours, but the speed the Earth moves around the Sun (that's "revolution", not "rotation") would not change in the least.
Go buy a book on physics.
Virg
They covered this on the web site. It will carry a current, but it's in the range of milliwatts because of the size and makeup of the ribbon. The comment was based on using a cable (like an Earthbound elevator) and so doesn't really apply here.
Virg
> Check an atlas.
Check the article. The phrases "floating platform" and "equatorial Pacific Ocean" are prominently featured.
Virg
Um, getting down from orbit has never posed many problems. We on Earth call that "falling" and the trick isn't getting down, it's getting down slow enough not to vaporize one's arse. In more serious terms, no, it's not likely that anyone will ever use the elevator to reenter Earth's atmosphere. Most likely, if anything needs to come back down in one piece, they'll lift a reentry module with the elevator and then let it drop with the precious payload the old fashioned way.
Virg
> The consumer shouldn't be expected to have a clue. Or would you rather computers remained niche items owned only by the technological elite?
Unfair assessment. One can be a regular consumer and still have a small clue, and it's reasonable to expect the customer to understand a few basics. After all, should someone who owns a car not be expected to understand the terms, "ignition", "steering wheel" and "driver's side"? While I accept that someone calling for technical support shouldn't have to understand installing drivers to get a device to work, when someone gets on the phone and doesn't understand what I mean when I say "double click" or turns off the monitor when I tell them to turn off the base unit, I have a right to complain when they say that I suck at supporting them. They don't have to know the intimate details of IRQs and BIOS configuration, but it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to know how to use the computer and understand the terms that are defined on the Quick Start card.
Virg
> So about Beagle 2, can Earth organisms survive several months in vacuum, high radiation and extremely low temperature for months?
In a word, yes. Microbes (and bigger stuff) have survived in hard vacuum space for long times (the mold growing on the outside of Mir and stuff (from Earth) found contaminating parts brought back from Moon missions are two examples).
> As the earth have been hit by asteroids originating from Mars, it makes sense to believe that pieces of Earth have found its way to Mars, right?
While it's possible, it's not very likely. First, Earth has a much denser atmosphere, which has two dampening effects. First, less stuff gets to impact on the surface, since stuff that would penetrate to the surface of Mars would get eaten by friction on the way to Earth. Even when something gets to the ground, the ejected material has to plow its way back up through that same thicker, higher-air-drag atmosphere to get away, which means the same impact is less likely to send off ejecta with sufficient force to clear the atmosphere. Then, of course, there's the fact that Earth is bigger, so even without the atmosphere, it takes more to break free of the gravity well, so stuff that's just sufficient to get clear of Mars and come visit us would not be able to get free of us for the trip to Mars.
> Question is, how long is the average time for such debris to hit another planet, and can life survive, first of all the impact on our planet that caused the rocks to fly into space, secondly the long long travel in space before it hits Mars and thirdly, the impact on Mars?
If such an event were to happen, it's again possible but not likely for life to survive, since the life that made the trip would have to be hardy enough to survive extremely high and extremely low temperatures and be anaerobic. Such organisms do exist, however, so there's no ruling it out. As to time frames, under the best circumstances (distance between planets and impact points as small as possible and optimal factors for weather and such) the trip would still be measured in years, possibly decades and very likely centuries.
Virg
> That sounds all well and good - but what about non-organic contamination?
This is a lot easier to detect and compensate for, since the reactions involved are only chemical in nature.
> What if a silicone boot on the lander's leg has an adverse reaction with/to Martian soil? How about the lander's alloy components? Emissions, anyone?
These things would actually be good for science, and the mission. The goal is not to avoid any contamination of the Red Planet (if it was, we'd have to find a way to get back all of the ships we've already sent!) but to avoid biological contamination, since that's more unpredictable and can also compromise any search for Martian life. However, if a silicone boot reacts with Martian soil, that would be scientifically significant, since it would indicate that there's some chemical (or other) reason for it to happen, despite our not expecting it, which would in turn point to some compound or process on Mars we've never encountered on Earth. The same goes for alloy components and engine exhaust, since if there's something in the Martian atrmosphere that affects aluminum struts in an unexpected way, we'd want to know what that something is, both for any future Mars missions and for possible use on Earth.
> Not to sluff off the importance of this mission, but it's not hard to concede that the only definitive evaluation of "life on Mars" (past/present/future) would be a method to observe and detect phenomena non-obtrusively!
From a biological standpoint, this mission is specifically being designed and built to be non-obtrusive, which is why it's being planned and built to minimize the possibility of Earthly contamination. A lump of sterile metal and plastic is not likely to have any effect on Martian biological organisms, other than the joking reference I saw in a comic book where life had just formed on Mars, and the creature raised its appendage for the first time, only to have a Terran probe with "Search for Martian Life" painted on the side land on it and squash it.
Virg
This is only one way, and may not be the way they choose, but it'd work. First, build the probe in sterile conditions (they got that part). Next, encase it in an airtight package. Then transport and mount the package. Hit it with X-rays at the mount points (if you design the package correctly you can do that without compromising the payload). After launch, before the boost to take it to interplanetary trajectory, jettison the package shell, leaving just the booster (that you can dump before orbital insertion at Mars) and the payload/deorbit engines, which were encased in the package and so are germ-free.
Virg
There's one major problem with running the PC at all times. While your machine gets juice from the power company, he's got to run it off of batteries or locally generated power. Running it all out may not be an option, considering he's got to carry his electricity with him.
This might work, though, at the factory. Would be worth a shot with a cheap PC.
Virg
> I've been at sea with laptops and desktop machines. The only thing we've ever had to worry about is securing the machines so that they aren't tossed about (especially the monitors). Of course, if you have them on deck and there is a chance of spray, then I guess you'd have to waterproof them.
Precisely my point, and no fair comparing this guy's sailboat to a navy ship 8). In a small boat the system will get a lot more exposure to damp conditions than your computers saw, since you'll have to admit the amount of sea spray is rather more limited on a big ship than on his little boat. Granted, if he's got a US$500,000+ yacht, it's likely to be sealed up tight, but let's be honest. If he's planning on living on the boat full time I can only guess he's not Donald Trump.
By the way, very cool boat in the link.
Virg
Donate it to someone who can put it to good use, but don't expose it to this treatment. It will turn to junk pretty quickly. We had major problems with this when I was in college, and the computer lab sat fairly close to the furnaces (and steam pipes; this is Rutgers, which has some fairly old buildings) and would regularly get doused with very humid air when the pressure valves on the boilers would open (almost all winter long). The systems would have to be cleaned with board wash every week, and they still failed yearly, but since they were controlled by the Economics department, and I was the only one who understood what was going wrong (I know, Econs. and a geek; it's a wonder I ever got a date...) my pleas fell on deaf ears. For all I know, they're still junking computers left and right.
Virg