The reference mission profile for a manned mission to Mars (which is the worst case scenario for a launch in 2006/7 I think) gives a total mission duration of 879 days (outbound journey 150 days, surface stay 619 days, return journey 110 days). A typical duration for the reference manned Mars mission is about 600 days.
Of course, the journey time can be massively increased depending when launch takes place, but they give a rough idea.
You know a lot of great things have come about because someone, somewhere, at some time has thought "Because it's there". See my sig for the classic (and my favoursite) example, but there are many others.
In fact, you could say that it is that inquisitive attitude that is the reason we (as a human race) are so successful.
Oh for fuck's sake, get off your god-damned high horse. I was simply passing comment on the original poster who wrote that the private thoughts of people (in chapter XX of the book, to keep on topic) who were in Hiroshima/Nagasaki at the time they were bombed were very moving. I wasn't trolling, just providing my own, different (and also moving) perspective on that.
I never made any judgement about the events that lead up to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or even mentioned WWII. I never made any comment about the politics of deciding to drop the bomb. I never even gave my opinion of whether (in hindsight) it was the right thing to do. I have also been to the US memorials in Okinawa and Iwo Jima (where the famous photo was taken) and found those moving as well, and if I had been to the Arizona Memorial, I am sure that would have moved me too.
And if you seriously, honestly believe that there is anything that can justify dropping a nuclear bomb on an entire city, then I really pity you.
Congratulations, you kicked a dog, and I bit. Now fuck off and grow up.
One of the most powerful chapters in the book is amost nothing but direct quotes from interviews and diaries of folks who were in Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they were bombed. It's very powerful, and a good reminder of just what a nuke actually does to people.
I have been to Nagasaki and my lasting memory of the place is that the whole city seems to have devoted itself to worldwide peace. The millions of chains of folded origami figures (I was told these came from all over Japan) all over the city were quite a powerful symbol of peace.
The atomic bomb museum in particular is a real eye-opener - quotes, video footage, writings and photographs. The sheer devastation of the bomb defies any kind of real description and I defy anyone to go there and not be affected in some way by it I shudder to think what these weapons are capable of today.
The real problem in London is that the city (central London) was built a long time before the roads carried cars, or even horse-and-carts. The idea that traffic congestion could possibly be a problem in London was never even conceived of being possible.
In the meantime, the central area of London has become one the busiest places on the planet, and the roads are just incapable of coping. True, it's not as crowded or densely populated as Tokyo or New York for example, but the situation in London is fairly unique because of the way in which London has evolved. As others have said, the land has become so valuable that rebuilding or acquiring more land for roads (or replanning the central city area) is just not a realistic option.
The only option is to reduce the traffic - cars mostly - on the roads. And to do this, you have to discourage people from driving in central london, and encourage the use of public transport. It's a very serious problem and getting worse all of the time.
This argument doesn't stand-up. Some of the changes are entirely unnecessary moves away from the source material. For instance, diminishing the roles of the ents but increasing the roles of the elves undermines one aspect of Tolkien's story, adds nothing, and really takes away a portion of the coolness factor.
It only takes away some of the coolness factor because you've (I assume) read LoTR so you understand Ents and that whole story angle. But just imagine trying to explain the whole concept of Ents properly to an audience who has not read LoTR (which is the majority of the audience)? There's too much background and complication there which, on film, would have been boring and turned people away. True, the Ents are cool, but there is just so much more to them.
Another example is Aragorn falling over the cliff. There was absolutely no conceivable need for this scene. It doesn't add to the drama because it's obvious Aragorn isn't dead.
I partly agree with this, though it does give them another chance to put Arwen on screen, a character who really doesn't feature at all in the books. Where it does add to the story IMO is in showing the friendship that's grown between Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas.
And yet another is with Faramir, where he doesn't pass the test of the ring and leads Frodo and Sam on another 20-minute waste of time, wherein we see that Gondor is under attack, but just long enough for Samwise to make a kitschy speech and change Faramir's mind. What was the point of that? How did that make TTT a better movie? Nothing happens and the plot is dragged backwards.
I disagree with this - I think it again emphasises how powerful and corrupting just the presence of the ring is. In FoTR, the ring was almost a separate character, but this was slightly lost in TTT because the ring itself was not so central to the plot. I think this whole scene brings the ring back into perspective and reminds the audience just how evil it is. Faramir does pass the test, but only in the end.
I find it difficult to put into words quite how bad it is.
Well, I'm prepared to give it a go for you. I saw GoNY a few weeks ago. I'm the kind of movie viewer who is pretty easy to please - I just want to see something that will entertain me for a couple of hours. Well, Gangs fo New York failed on every level - it was shit, and I'm trying to be kind here. The only thing I enjoyed about the film was Daniel Day-Lewis's performance, and the fact that I actually noticed shows you just how bored I was.
Leo was shocking, as was Diaz, and why, oh why is Hollywood completely incapable of getting people with real irish accents to play the part of irish people? OK, I can understand that Hollywood thinks that nobody in the world can do an accent better than them (I cringer when they try australian or cockney accents), but if you're going to do an accent, at the very least you could try and make it consistent for the entire film!
Actually, I just checked the amazon link, and almoost laughed out loud at this review:
THis film is a piece of infantile moronic trivia, the first 15 minutes is fine, the rest is a piece of tacky overblown drivel tinged rubbish with absolutely no redeeming merits.
I'm not a cryptologist, so can someone who knows what they're talking about in this field please explain to me how there can ever be an encryption method that is unbreakable?
By my I-know-nothing-about-this-subject "knowledge", surely while there is somebody out there who knows how the encryption works (presumably the inventor), it is breakable... ?? It might be difficult to break, but it is breakable.
It'd probably be an effort on the level of Apollo 13.
Except that with Apollo 13 they were never looking at sending another Saturn V up to rescue the crew. The things done to save Apollo 13 were done from inside Apollo 13 - this would not have been possible with Columbia if the damage was external as is being speculated since they had no way of getting outside the shuttle.
hmmm... seen the list, and while I agree with some (Mr Plow, Monorail, Homer Badman) it misses out some of my all-time favourites
Deep Space Homer the one where Homer gets fat to work from home the episode where Bart wins the elephant any episode where Barney is sober
and now for some classic simpsons quotes (all atributed to Homer of course - who else!):
"I'm a white male, aged 18 to 49. *Everybody* cares what I think!" "Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try." "I know I'm not usually a praying man, but if you're up there, Please Superman help me!" "Homer no function beer well without." "Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel." "To alcohol - the cause of, and solution to all of life's problems."
and my all-time favourite...
"Maybe for once, someone will call me 'sir' without adding 'You're making a scene'." - Homer J Simpson
Bloody good question - anyone out there got any good fool-proof methods for curing hiccups? Usual hiccups are OK, even if they last half an hour, but those really annoying ones that actually cause pain - they're the ones I want to know how to get rid of.
It's really strange - the only way I seem to be able to get rid of hiccups is to forget that I have them. Unfortunately it's bloody impossible to actively try and forget that you have them!
Please don't try and twist my words into something they are not. That is not what I said - nowhere did I say that it wasn't worth the effort.
The two are completely different cases - in the case of Columbia, you are talking about launching another shuttle, skipping all of the safety checks on the ground. There was nothing the astronauts on Columbia could have done to fix any external damage (and we still don't know what caused Columbia to break up) - they had no equipment on board to spacewalk, not enough fuel to dock with the ISS.
In the case of Apollo 13 (I assume that was what your analogy was with), there was something the astronauts on board could do about the situation inside the craft, but there was nothing they could do about the external damage (except hope that there wasn't too much) because they couldn't see it. This wasn't a case of launching another Saturn V to go save them.
yes, but look at what the article says properly (emphasis mine):
Could another shuttle have been sent up? Shuttle Atlantis might have been rushed into service, and if normal testing were skipped, it might have been in space in a week or so. The Columbia crew had enough supplies to last through Wednesday, Feb. 5 and might have been able to stretch those supplies a few more days.
That statement is so full of ambiguities that it's not worth the (cyber)paper it's written on. And, as you say, it would dramattically increase the risks of something going wrong with Atlantis.
My personal feelings on the future of the space program are...
A really interesting read, mostly because my views and feelings of space exploration match yours very closely. But I have a different perspective on this, being (a) from a country that has never, nor will ever, show any interest at all in space, and (b) being just a plain mechanical engineer trying to redirect a career towards building rockets, not a real rocket scientist!
I've been lucky enough to meet and speak with Andy Thomas, the Australian astronaut employed by NASA, and I understand exactly what you mean by "feeding the human soul and imagination". The guy is an inspiration.
Not being from the US, I don't have any real understanding of how NASA/congress funding works, but I thought your final comments were really interesting.
One thing I have always thought NASA have done badly is not promoting the idea that ISS (and hence missions to LEO) is a first step in going to Mars. NASA (the US government) has always publicly given the impression that sending people to Mars is not a goal of the space program, even for the distant future. If NASA had actively stated (at every opportunity) that the long-term goal of the manned space program was to either return to the moon, or (longer term) go to Mars, and that the ISS was a first - and necessary - step toward realising this, do you think this would have changed your (or public) perception of the ISS/LEO program?
wow. That has to be one of the most insightful posts I've read on slashdot in a long time. Fantastic> post mate. Says everything I was trying to say and says it very well.
I too count myself a very lucky person for realising that "money aint shit".
Seriously though, that's fantastic advice, but completely impractical for many people for one, simple reason: They don't really know what it is they completely love to do. Anyone who has figured out that one thing that totally inspires them and that they really enjoy doing is one damn lucky son-of-a-b*%$h.
Life's too short to waste an entire day with a hangover. I have never heard anyone lament on their deathbed "I never should have bought that nice stereo".
I think most of my friends would trade that expensive stereo for the New Year's Day hangover we all had this year without blinking, and that hangover cost us each at least a whole day. It's all about what's important to you.
Is it really just that simple to chuck it all, sell the house and the cars,... $50k if you're lucky?
No, it's not that simple, and it takes guts to do - as you say, most people hate risk. BUT, at least in this situation you have enough financial security to have the option to make this decision.
nope, you're not the only one. I never understood where the fuss about that site came from/started. And the reviews were, for the most part, rants about something or other and gave away the entire plot.
Not to mention that the site was completely unreadable. I've seen some very simple, elegant sites, but AICN was NOT one of them!
Actually, yes I did....Wow. Some snow gets pushed around. I think the arctic environment can handle that.
I accept that, but that's not the point. I'm sure the arctic environment can handle some snow being pushed around, but once you build a "highway" to the South Pole, what is that saying? I guess I just don't like the precedent this is setting.
If the environmentalists haven't knotted their collective panties over this then why should you?
Because I'm allowed to have an opinion? Because I happen to believe that there are some damn awesomely beautiful places in this world (Antarctica would definitely get on my list) that should be preserved simply because they exist.
I'm no environmentalist, but Antarctica is a pretty special place.
This is bad, sad news. Antarctica is one of the last remaining great wilderness areas on the planet and they want to build a fucking highway? There must surely be other ways to accomplish this without impacting the environment so much?
... copies of those songs I already legally own. Why should the RIAA have any problem with that?
In all honesty, they shouldn't.
But while we're being honest, let's start by admitting that (hopefully!) honest people like you are in the minority. The vast majority of people downloading mp3's from p2p networks are doing it purely because they can get music for free. They can try and justify it anyway they like, but when you get right down to it, that is stealing/copyright infringement. And that is illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
The reference mission profile for a manned mission to Mars (which is the worst case scenario for a launch in 2006/7 I think) gives a total mission duration of 879 days (outbound journey 150 days, surface stay 619 days, return journey 110 days). A typical duration for the reference manned Mars mission is about 600 days.
Of course, the journey time can be massively increased depending when launch takes place, but they give a rough idea.
You know a lot of great things have come about because someone, somewhere, at some time has thought "Because it's there". See my sig for the classic (and my favoursite) example, but there are many others.
In fact, you could say that it is that inquisitive attitude that is the reason we (as a human race) are so successful.
Oh for fuck's sake, get off your god-damned high horse. I was simply passing comment on the original poster who wrote that the private thoughts of people (in chapter XX of the book, to keep on topic) who were in Hiroshima/Nagasaki at the time they were bombed were very moving. I wasn't trolling, just providing my own, different (and also moving) perspective on that.
I never made any judgement about the events that lead up to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or even mentioned WWII. I never made any comment about the politics of deciding to drop the bomb. I never even gave my opinion of whether (in hindsight) it was the right thing to do. I have also been to the US memorials in Okinawa and Iwo Jima (where the famous photo was taken) and found those moving as well, and if I had been to the Arizona Memorial, I am sure that would have moved me too.
And if you seriously, honestly believe that there is anything that can justify dropping a nuclear bomb on an entire city, then I really pity you.
Congratulations, you kicked a dog, and I bit. Now fuck off and grow up.
One of the most powerful chapters in the book is amost nothing but direct quotes from interviews and diaries of folks who were in Hiroshima and Nagasaki when they were bombed. It's very powerful, and a good reminder of just what a nuke actually does to people.
I have been to Nagasaki and my lasting memory of the place is that the whole city seems to have devoted itself to worldwide peace. The millions of chains of folded origami figures (I was told these came from all over Japan) all over the city were quite a powerful symbol of peace.
The atomic bomb museum in particular is a real eye-opener - quotes, video footage, writings and photographs. The sheer devastation of the bomb defies any kind of real description and I defy anyone to go there and not be affected in some way by it I shudder to think what these weapons are capable of today.
The real problem in London is that the city (central London) was built a long time before the roads carried cars, or even horse-and-carts. The idea that traffic congestion could possibly be a problem in London was never even conceived of being possible.
In the meantime, the central area of London has become one the busiest places on the planet, and the roads are just incapable of coping. True, it's not as crowded or densely populated as Tokyo or New York for example, but the situation in London is fairly unique because of the way in which London has evolved. As others have said, the land has become so valuable that rebuilding or acquiring more land for roads (or replanning the central city area) is just not a realistic option.
The only option is to reduce the traffic - cars mostly - on the roads. And to do this, you have to discourage people from driving in central london, and encourage the use of public transport. It's a very serious problem and getting worse all of the time.
This argument doesn't stand-up. Some of the changes are entirely unnecessary moves away from the source material. For instance, diminishing the roles of the ents but increasing the roles of the elves undermines one aspect of Tolkien's story, adds nothing, and really takes away a portion of the coolness factor.
It only takes away some of the coolness factor because you've (I assume) read LoTR so you understand Ents and that whole story angle. But just imagine trying to explain the whole concept of Ents properly to an audience who has not read LoTR (which is the majority of the audience)? There's too much background and complication there which, on film, would have been boring and turned people away. True, the Ents are cool, but there is just so much more to them.
Another example is Aragorn falling over the cliff. There was absolutely no conceivable need for this scene. It doesn't add to the drama because it's obvious Aragorn isn't dead.
I partly agree with this, though it does give them another chance to put Arwen on screen, a character who really doesn't feature at all in the books. Where it does add to the story IMO is in showing the friendship that's grown between Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas.
And yet another is with Faramir, where he doesn't pass the test of the ring and leads Frodo and Sam on another 20-minute waste of time, wherein we see that Gondor is under attack, but just long enough for Samwise to make a kitschy speech and change Faramir's mind. What was the point of that? How did that make TTT a better movie? Nothing happens and the plot is dragged backwards.
I disagree with this - I think it again emphasises how powerful and corrupting just the presence of the ring is. In FoTR, the ring was almost a separate character, but this was slightly lost in TTT because the ring itself was not so central to the plot. I think this whole scene brings the ring back into perspective and reminds the audience just how evil it is. Faramir does pass the test, but only in the end.
I find it difficult to put into words quite how bad it is.
Well, I'm prepared to give it a go for you. I saw GoNY a few weeks ago. I'm the kind of movie viewer who is pretty easy to please - I just want to see something that will entertain me for a couple of hours. Well, Gangs fo New York failed on every level - it was shit, and I'm trying to be kind here. The only thing I enjoyed about the film was Daniel Day-Lewis's performance, and the fact that I actually noticed shows you just how bored I was.
Leo was shocking, as was Diaz, and why, oh why is Hollywood completely incapable of getting people with real irish accents to play the part of irish people? OK, I can understand that Hollywood thinks that nobody in the world can do an accent better than them (I cringer when they try australian or cockney accents), but if you're going to do an accent, at the very least you could try and make it consistent for the entire film!
Actually, I just checked the amazon link, and almoost laughed out loud at this review:
THis film is a piece of infantile moronic trivia, the first 15 minutes is fine, the rest is a piece of tacky overblown drivel tinged rubbish with absolutely no redeeming merits.
brilliant!!
I'm not a cryptologist, so can someone who knows what they're talking about in this field please explain to me how there can ever be an encryption method that is unbreakable?
... ?? It might be difficult to break, but it is breakable.
By my I-know-nothing-about-this-subject "knowledge", surely while there is somebody out there who knows how the encryption works (presumably the inventor), it is breakable
It'd probably be an effort on the level of Apollo 13.
Except that with Apollo 13 they were never looking at sending another Saturn V up to rescue the crew. The things done to save Apollo 13 were done from inside Apollo 13 - this would not have been possible with Columbia if the damage was external as is being speculated since they had no way of getting outside the shuttle.
MARGE: "Homer, the plant called. They said if you don't show up tomorrow don't bother showing up on Monday."
HOMER: "Woo-hoo! Four-day weekend!"
hmmm ... seen the list, and while I agree with some (Mr Plow, Monorail, Homer Badman) it misses out some of my all-time favourites
...
Deep Space Homer
the one where Homer gets fat to work from home
the episode where Bart wins the elephant
any episode where Barney is sober
and now for some classic simpsons quotes (all atributed to Homer of course - who else!):
"I'm a white male, aged 18 to 49. *Everybody* cares what I think!"
"Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try."
"I know I'm not usually a praying man, but if you're up there, Please Superman help me!"
"Homer no function beer well without."
"Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel."
"To alcohol - the cause of, and solution to all of life's problems."
and my all-time favourite
"Maybe for once, someone will call me 'sir' without adding 'You're making a scene'." - Homer J Simpson
Bloody good question - anyone out there got any good fool-proof methods for curing hiccups? Usual hiccups are OK, even if they last half an hour, but those really annoying ones that actually cause pain - they're the ones I want to know how to get rid of.
It's really strange - the only way I seem to be able to get rid of hiccups is to forget that I have them. Unfortunately it's bloody impossible to actively try and forget that you have them!
Please don't try and twist my words into something they are not. That is not what I said - nowhere did I say that it wasn't worth the effort.
The two are completely different cases - in the case of Columbia, you are talking about launching another shuttle, skipping all of the safety checks on the ground. There was nothing the astronauts on Columbia could have done to fix any external damage (and we still don't know what caused Columbia to break up) - they had no equipment on board to spacewalk, not enough fuel to dock with the ISS.
In the case of Apollo 13 (I assume that was what your analogy was with), there was something the astronauts on board could do about the situation inside the craft, but there was nothing they could do about the external damage (except hope that there wasn't too much) because they couldn't see it. This wasn't a case of launching another Saturn V to go save them.
Why was this modded insightful?
... ??
... ??
Columbia likely was doomed by damage incurred during launch.
And you know this how exactly
However, those astronauts were likely doomed by a faulty damage analysis.
And you know this how exactly
If only NASA read slashdot, they could save themselves the entire failure investigation. sigh.
yes, but look at what the article says properly (emphasis mine):
Could another shuttle have been sent up? Shuttle Atlantis might have been rushed into service, and if normal testing were skipped, it might have been in space in a week or so. The Columbia crew had enough supplies to last through Wednesday, Feb. 5 and might have been able to stretch those supplies a few more days.
That statement is so full of ambiguities that it's not worth the (cyber)paper it's written on. And, as you say, it would dramattically increase the risks of something going wrong with Atlantis.
My personal feelings on the future of the space program are ...
A really interesting read, mostly because my views and feelings of space exploration match yours very closely. But I have a different perspective on this, being (a) from a country that has never, nor will ever, show any interest at all in space, and (b) being just a plain mechanical engineer trying to redirect a career towards building rockets, not a real rocket scientist!
I've been lucky enough to meet and speak with Andy Thomas, the Australian astronaut employed by NASA, and I understand exactly what you mean by "feeding the human soul and imagination". The guy is an inspiration.
Not being from the US, I don't have any real understanding of how NASA/congress funding works, but I thought your final comments were really interesting.
One thing I have always thought NASA have done badly is not promoting the idea that ISS (and hence missions to LEO) is a first step in going to Mars. NASA (the US government) has always publicly given the impression that sending people to Mars is not a goal of the space program, even for the distant future. If NASA had actively stated (at every opportunity) that the long-term goal of the manned space program was to either return to the moon, or (longer term) go to Mars, and that the ISS was a first - and necessary - step toward realising this, do you think this would have changed your (or public) perception of the ISS/LEO program?
wow. That has to be one of the most insightful posts I've read on slashdot in a long time. Fantastic> post mate. Says everything I was trying to say and says it very well.
I too count myself a very lucky person for realising that "money aint shit".
Do what you love.
:-)
Can I do Jennifer Love Hewitt?
Seriously though, that's fantastic advice, but completely impractical for many people for one, simple reason: They don't really know what it is they completely love to do. Anyone who has figured out that one thing that totally inspires them and that they really enjoy doing is one damn lucky son-of-a-b*%$h.
Life's too short to waste an entire day with a hangover. I have never heard anyone lament on their deathbed "I never should have bought that nice stereo".
I think most of my friends would trade that expensive stereo for the New Year's Day hangover we all had this year without blinking, and that hangover cost us each at least a whole day. It's all about what's important to you.
Is it really just that simple to chuck it all, sell the house and the cars, ... $50k if you're lucky?
No, it's not that simple, and it takes guts to do - as you say, most people hate risk. BUT, at least in this situation you have enough financial security to have the option to make this decision.
heh, heh
...
Only on slashdot would someone think that the ultimate application of teleportation technology is 0.0 latency gaming
nope, you're not the only one. I never understood where the fuss about that site came from/started. And the reviews were, for the most part, rants about something or other and gave away the entire plot.
...
Not to mention that the site was completely unreadable. I've seen some very simple, elegant sites, but AICN was NOT one of them!
still, somebody got very famous from it
Did you even read the article?
...Wow. Some snow gets pushed around. I think the arctic environment can handle that.
Actually, yes I did.
I accept that, but that's not the point. I'm sure the arctic environment can handle some snow being pushed around, but once you build a "highway" to the South Pole, what is that saying? I guess I just don't like the precedent this is setting.
If the environmentalists haven't knotted their collective panties over this then why should you?
Because I'm allowed to have an opinion?
Because I happen to believe that there are some damn awesomely beautiful places in this world (Antarctica would definitely get on my list) that should be preserved simply because they exist.
I'm no environmentalist, but Antarctica is a pretty special place.
This is bad, sad news. Antarctica is one of the last remaining great wilderness areas on the planet and they want to build a fucking highway? There must surely be other ways to accomplish this without impacting the environment so much?
The George R R Martin trilogy (kings... thrones... swords... sump'n like that) is better than most (I've only read the first one so far).
I'm a big fan of this series - (so far) it's probably the best fantasy series I've read bar Lord of the Rings.
Do yourself a big favour and go pick up the rest of the series (book 4 is due out soon[ish]). Believe it or not, the books actually get better.
In all honesty, they shouldn't.
But while we're being honest, let's start by admitting that (hopefully!) honest people like you are in the minority. The vast majority of people downloading mp3's from p2p networks are doing it purely because they can get music for free. They can try and justify it anyway they like, but when you get right down to it, that is stealing/copyright infringement. And that is illegal.