Seriously, wouldn't sending a handful of robotic spacecraft to characterize larger asteroids be much more worthwhile? While it could be argued that astronauts on the surface of Mars with good geologic training and tools could be more productive than a robot, I'm not sure what value sending astronauts to such a small asteroid in lunar orbit really adds.
The asteroids that really threaten Earth are an order or two of magnitude bigger -- a hundred meters to a few kilometers in size. A 7 meter asteroid may give us some insight into their composition, but it would be better to actually go an analyze the actual type of asteroids we are worried about. Knowing details of their structure and how they are held together could immediately eliminate some solutions for diverting their course if the need ever arises and provide insight that could spark creative solutions that haven't yet been thought of. This kind of work could actually be done much cheaper with robots than astronauts if what we really care about are actual results.
A Mars ship with the capacity of Skylab for a 3 or 4 person crew would seem the ideal way to travel compared anything else that has been proposed. The Saturn 3rd stage provided a volume of a small townhome with large area the crew could even 'run' in. Probably the closest thing that could be managed today would be a few Bigelow modules to provide a bit of elbow room to a crew.
Food storage is indeed a problem. 800 days is just beyond the outer limits of what can be done with current freeze-dry technology -- at least according to a Nova Science Now program that was on a few years ago. Seems that growing food would be the best solution to supplement a pretty bland diet and provide recreation activity for the crew, but that in itself involves a lot of untried technology that could be problematic on a multiyear long space trip.
The Dragon's are designed to be reused. However, if I recall correctly, NASA requested that SpaceX use a brand new capsule for each of the 12 scheduled delivery missions. This likely means that SpaceX is building up a stock of used Dragon capsules that can be repurposed to other missions at a reduced price.
If someone could confirm this, I would like to know if this is because NASA is stuck in the old ways of doing things with capsules, or if there is a legitimate safety/efficiency reason used Dragons could not be recycled for future supply missions.
Oh come on. Comparing the progressives in Iceland to the Taliban is a bit extreme. At least in Iceland they aren't stoning women for their own good. At least not yet.
Hmmm, the icelandic political policies in general match up very well with progressive policies in the rest of Europe. Nice how you suddenly start calling them conservative when they start stepping on your toes.
On the other hand, being (necessarily, due to temperature issues) much closer to their star, these planets are likely to be tidally locked, which is *not* a good thing for complex life trying to evolve.
Larger gas planets in the habital zone could have Titan/Mars size moons that may be tidally locked to their parent planet, but have an apparent "day" with respect to the parent star on the order of 48 to 200 hours long. Given that we believe there are many more moons than planets in any given system, it seems that moons would likely to be where the interesting biological action may be occurring.
For the great majority of Raspbian users, for practical purposes the answer is "No". Packages from the Debian repositories cannot and should not be used with Raspbian. However, if you really know what you are doing and can deal with a file system that may no longer boot, it may be possible to get certain select Debian packages working with Raspbian. The rest of this answer deals with how that might be done.
Debian armel packages use the soft float ABI which is incompatible with the hard float ABI used by Raspbian. In theory it should be possible to install Debian armel packages in parallel with Raspbian packages using multiarch. However multiarch setups conflict with a hack we had to make to support the videocore libraries and there are other potential issues too. As such we don't currently recommend or support multiarch configurations with Debian armel and Raspbian armhf.
Debian armhf packages should be compatible with raspbian packages but a system with such a mixture WILL NOT RUN ON THE PI. Furthermore there may be corner cases where libraries build slightly differently on Raspbian. Such mixed systems can be useful for development (they were used heavily in the process of creating Raspbian) but are not recommended for general use.
Architecture independent ("arch all") packages are compatible between Debian and Raspbian. Source packages should in general be compatible though some may need modification to adjust compiler settings (most Debian packages just use the compiler defaults but some use their own settings for various reasons).
Debian armhf in testing and unstable has a minimum CPU requirements of ARMv7-A+VFPv3-D16+Thumb2. Unfortunately, the Raspberry Pi CPU doesn't meet these specs.
What Raspbian did was rebuild virtually all Debian Wheezy packages to the ARMv6+VFPv2 specs of the Raspberry Pi. Fortunately, the armhf ABI is fully supported on ARMv6 which means that Raspbian built packages run fine under Debian Wheezy armhf. This made the port much easier than it otherwise might have been as all building occurred on Debian armhf systems and the resulting binaries just needed to be verified free of ARMv7 code.
Based on all the negative comments above concerning SETI, it sure seems like the Slashdot crowd has sure changed a lot. I base this on what the comments this topic might have engendered a number of years ago. I'm not criticizing, just commenting on my subjective observation. Now get off my lawn...
The government should not be stepping in on behalf of the people on top of the rocket. Those people presumably are adults and have balanced the risks they are taking against the rewarding experience of flying into space.
It's the people that live under the rocket that need some regulation. Presumably launching rockets out over water should minimize many of the risks to the public, but it would still be useful to have the government provide some oversight to minimize the chance of 100's of tons of high explosives raining down on a neighborhood someday.
Would you want to live in a structure that the contractor who built it knew that it was not intended for human habitation? To keep costs reasonable, the contractors building the town would likely stipulate that the buildings never be occupied.
You are being purposely obtuse with regards to the term "denier". You know damn well the term is historically and culturally linked with those that deny the Holocaust and the murder of millions of innocent people occurred in Nazi Germany. Your obtuseness and straw man argument regarding creationism only serves to reinforce the original posters point and detracts from own credibility. However, from the tone of your posting, I suspect you could care less.
Part of the problem is the common misperception that the court is the final arbiter in our country as to what our rights are. The founding fathers envisioned a much more balanced system by which all three branches of government were checks and balances against each other. Somehow, we are now at a state where the branch that wears black robes seems to have the final say on what rights we have. If all three branches of government are conspiring to steal our rights, we need to exercise our disapproval at the ballot box to restore balance by electing representatives that understand the courts operate under the consent of the governed every bit as much as the other two branches of government.
Given the current administration that created and is running this program is extremely "progressive" I fail to understand the logic of your emphasis on the word "conservative". If you would perhaps open your mind a bit you may come to understand there are principled conservatives who are appalled by these types of policies. In doing so, together we could fight back together against those who would take our rights away, regardless of which political persuasion they associate themselves with.
By "about half the country feeling directly opposite of us" I have to assume you are talking about the more conservative part of the country. I guess I need to remind you that this program is being put in place and run by the liberals. The fact is, neither end of the political spectrum lack people willing to stomp on the rights of their countrymen to advance their political agendas and consolidate power. Until we get over the "left vs right" paradigm and focus on a "right vs wrong" paradigm this kind of crap will prevail no matter which party is in power.
Even a pressurized plane could be dangerous for someone recovering from a stroke as they usually keep cabin pressure equivalent to 10,000 to 12,000 feet.
... will be that the criteria for residing at the South Pole will be tightened to not include people at risk for common age related conditions -- ie. people over 40 or so. Granted, a stroke can occur at any age, but strokes predominantly occur in older individuals. This means that future qualified people will denied such opportunities because one person couldn't accept the concequences of risks that common sense would dictate are associated with living at such a remote outpost.
First and foremost, Mythbusters is entertainment. It may not be your cup of tea, but a lot of people seemingly like to watch the show. I don't watch it that often, but my kids are devoted fans. It allows me to get into discussions with my kids around "what do you think will happen?" or "what are Jamie or Adam doing wrong?". As such, it a lot better value value than 98% of the shows on TV. It's one of the few "Dad approved" shows I let my kids watch on Tivo after all the days activities are done.
It bothers me how often I hear absolutes with regards to "If not for XXX, life would not exist on Earth." Life has proven to be a lot more robust than such simple statements imply. Certainly, without a magnetic field, life on Earth would look a lot different than it does today as it would have adapted to a much different environment, but it would most certainly still exist with all other things being equal.
I gotta agree with your prognosis on the economics that it certainly is an unworkable "Shit! Corporations'll fall for any bullshit!" business model. Doesn't make any sense and at best it's laughable that even a small fraction of the trillions of dollars required for a serious colonization effort could be paid for that way.
Also, if economics justify heading mining resources from asteroids, corporations will do it much smarter than trying to house hundreds or thousands of people in deep space. 98% of it will be done with robotics and perhaps a handful of people MAY actually travel to deep space to fix things when they go wrong.
I love the fact that we do spend some of our national resources exploring, studying and understanding the cosmos, but working to not treat the Earth like a toilet will have a much greater impact on the billions of us living on Earth than any fantasy Mars colony will have for the foreseeable future.
You can interpret this in various ways; one could say that this means the observer, or even the whole universe for that matter, branches all the time, and/or all possible states of the observer/universe exist simultaneously, however that again is just a description, not what might really be the case.
I'm not a physicist either, but I've often wondered about the same thing. Is the true nature of the universe that it exists in all possible states simultaneously? Each instant we experience is actually the sum total of a cascading sequence of collapsed states (what we interpret as history) that make that one instant possible.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, wouldn't sending a handful of robotic spacecraft to characterize larger asteroids be much more worthwhile? While it could be argued that astronauts on the surface of Mars with good geologic training and tools could be more productive than a robot, I'm not sure what value sending astronauts to such a small asteroid in lunar orbit really adds.
The asteroids that really threaten Earth are an order or two of magnitude bigger -- a hundred meters to a few kilometers in size. A 7 meter asteroid may give us some insight into their composition, but it would be better to actually go an analyze the actual type of asteroids we are worried about. Knowing details of their structure and how they are held together could immediately eliminate some solutions for diverting their course if the need ever arises and provide insight that could spark creative solutions that haven't yet been thought of. This kind of work could actually be done much cheaper with robots than astronauts if what we really care about are actual results.
A Mars ship with the capacity of Skylab for a 3 or 4 person crew would seem the ideal way to travel compared anything else that has been proposed. The Saturn 3rd stage provided a volume of a small townhome with large area the crew could even 'run' in. Probably the closest thing that could be managed today would be a few Bigelow modules to provide a bit of elbow room to a crew.
Food storage is indeed a problem. 800 days is just beyond the outer limits of what can be done with current freeze-dry technology -- at least according to a Nova Science Now program that was on a few years ago. Seems that growing food would be the best solution to supplement a pretty bland diet and provide recreation activity for the crew, but that in itself involves a lot of untried technology that could be problematic on a multiyear long space trip.
The Dragon's are designed to be reused. However, if I recall correctly, NASA requested that SpaceX use a brand new capsule for each of the 12 scheduled delivery missions. This likely means that SpaceX is building up a stock of used Dragon capsules that can be repurposed to other missions at a reduced price.
If someone could confirm this, I would like to know if this is because NASA is stuck in the old ways of doing things with capsules, or if there is a legitimate safety/efficiency reason used Dragons could not be recycled for future supply missions.
Oh come on. Comparing the progressives in Iceland to the Taliban is a bit extreme. At least in Iceland they aren't stoning women for their own good. At least not yet.
Please tell me you forgot the "sarcasm" tag...
Hmmm, the icelandic political policies in general match up very well with progressive policies in the rest of Europe. Nice how you suddenly start calling them conservative when they start stepping on your toes.
On the other hand, being (necessarily, due to temperature issues) much closer to their star, these planets are likely to be tidally locked, which is *not* a good thing for complex life trying to evolve.
Larger gas planets in the habital zone could have Titan/Mars size moons that may be tidally locked to their parent planet, but have an apparent "day" with respect to the parent star on the order of 48 to 200 hours long. Given that we believe there are many more moons than planets in any given system, it seems that moons would likely to be where the interesting biological action may be occurring.
From the Raspbian FAQ:
For the great majority of Raspbian users, for practical purposes the answer is "No". Packages from the Debian repositories cannot and should not be used with Raspbian. However, if you really know what you are doing and can deal with a file system that may no longer boot, it may be possible to get certain select Debian packages working with Raspbian. The rest of this answer deals with how that might be done.
Debian armel packages use the soft float ABI which is incompatible with the hard float ABI used by Raspbian. In theory it should be possible to install Debian armel packages in parallel with Raspbian packages using multiarch. However multiarch setups conflict with a hack we had to make to support the videocore libraries and there are other potential issues too. As such we don't currently recommend or support multiarch configurations with Debian armel and Raspbian armhf.
Debian armhf packages should be compatible with raspbian packages but a system with such a mixture WILL NOT RUN ON THE PI. Furthermore there may be corner cases where libraries build slightly differently on Raspbian. Such mixed systems can be useful for development (they were used heavily in the process of creating Raspbian) but are not recommended for general use.
Architecture independent ("arch all") packages are compatible between Debian and Raspbian. Source packages should in general be compatible though some may need modification to adjust compiler settings (most Debian packages just use the compiler defaults but some use their own settings for various reasons).
Debian armhf in testing and unstable has a minimum CPU requirements of ARMv7-A+VFPv3-D16+Thumb2. Unfortunately, the Raspberry Pi CPU doesn't meet these specs.
What Raspbian did was rebuild virtually all Debian Wheezy packages to the ARMv6+VFPv2 specs of the Raspberry Pi. Fortunately, the armhf ABI is fully supported on ARMv6 which means that Raspbian built packages run fine under Debian Wheezy armhf. This made the port much easier than it otherwise might have been as all building occurred on Debian armhf systems and the resulting binaries just needed to be verified free of ARMv7 code.
Based on all the negative comments above concerning SETI, it sure seems like the Slashdot crowd has sure changed a lot. I base this on what the comments this topic might have engendered a number of years ago. I'm not criticizing, just commenting on my subjective observation. Now get off my lawn...
The government should not be stepping in on behalf of the people on top of the rocket. Those people presumably are adults and have balanced the risks they are taking against the rewarding experience of flying into space.
It's the people that live under the rocket that need some regulation. Presumably launching rockets out over water should minimize many of the risks to the public, but it would still be useful to have the government provide some oversight to minimize the chance of 100's of tons of high explosives raining down on a neighborhood someday.
Would you want to live in a structure that the contractor who built it knew that it was not intended for human habitation? To keep costs reasonable, the contractors building the town would likely stipulate that the buildings never be occupied.
You are being purposely obtuse with regards to the term "denier". You know damn well the term is historically and culturally linked with those that deny the Holocaust and the murder of millions of innocent people occurred in Nazi Germany. Your obtuseness and straw man argument regarding creationism only serves to reinforce the original posters point and detracts from own credibility. However, from the tone of your posting, I suspect you could care less.
Part of the problem is the common misperception that the court is the final arbiter in our country as to what our rights are. The founding fathers envisioned a much more balanced system by which all three branches of government were checks and balances against each other. Somehow, we are now at a state where the branch that wears black robes seems to have the final say on what rights we have. If all three branches of government are conspiring to steal our rights, we need to exercise our disapproval at the ballot box to restore balance by electing representatives that understand the courts operate under the consent of the governed every bit as much as the other two branches of government.
Given the current administration that created and is running this program is extremely "progressive" I fail to understand the logic of your emphasis on the word "conservative". If you would perhaps open your mind a bit you may come to understand there are principled conservatives who are appalled by these types of policies. In doing so, together we could fight back together against those who would take our rights away, regardless of which political persuasion they associate themselves with.
By "about half the country feeling directly opposite of us" I have to assume you are talking about the more conservative part of the country. I guess I need to remind you that this program is being put in place and run by the liberals. The fact is, neither end of the political spectrum lack people willing to stomp on the rights of their countrymen to advance their political agendas and consolidate power. Until we get over the "left vs right" paradigm and focus on a "right vs wrong" paradigm this kind of crap will prevail no matter which party is in power.
Even a pressurized plane could be dangerous for someone recovering from a stroke as they usually keep cabin pressure equivalent to 10,000 to 12,000 feet.
... will be that the criteria for residing at the South Pole will be tightened to not include people at risk for common age related conditions -- ie. people over 40 or so. Granted, a stroke can occur at any age, but strokes predominantly occur in older individuals. This means that future qualified people will denied such opportunities because one person couldn't accept the concequences of risks that common sense would dictate are associated with living at such a remote outpost.
First and foremost, Mythbusters is entertainment. It may not be your cup of tea, but a lot of people seemingly like to watch the show. I don't watch it that often, but my kids are devoted fans. It allows me to get into discussions with my kids around "what do you think will happen?" or "what are Jamie or Adam doing wrong?". As such, it a lot better value value than 98% of the shows on TV. It's one of the few "Dad approved" shows I let my kids watch on Tivo after all the days activities are done.
It bothers me how often I hear absolutes with regards to "If not for XXX, life would not exist on Earth." Life has proven to be a lot more robust than such simple statements imply. Certainly, without a magnetic field, life on Earth would look a lot different than it does today as it would have adapted to a much different environment, but it would most certainly still exist with all other things being equal.
I gotta agree with your prognosis on the economics that it certainly is an unworkable "Shit! Corporations'll fall for any bullshit!" business model. Doesn't make any sense and at best it's laughable that even a small fraction of the trillions of dollars required for a serious colonization effort could be paid for that way.
Also, if economics justify heading mining resources from asteroids, corporations will do it much smarter than trying to house hundreds or thousands of people in deep space. 98% of it will be done with robotics and perhaps a handful of people MAY actually travel to deep space to fix things when they go wrong.
I love the fact that we do spend some of our national resources exploring, studying and understanding the cosmos, but working to not treat the Earth like a toilet will have a much greater impact on the billions of us living on Earth than any fantasy Mars colony will have for the foreseeable future.
As Oxford University scientists, they should know that intelligence is inversely related to social behaviour!
I guess they never hung out around a typical American high school.
Dogs have owners. Cats have staff.
You can interpret this in various ways; one could say that this means the observer, or even the whole universe for that matter, branches all the time, and/or all possible states of the observer/universe exist simultaneously, however that again is just a description, not what might really be the case.
I'm not a physicist either, but I've often wondered about the same thing. Is the true nature of the universe that it exists in all possible states simultaneously? Each instant we experience is actually the sum total of a cascading sequence of collapsed states (what we interpret as history) that make that one instant possible.
The only thing that doesn't surprise me is that this is Business and they are being shown the too big to fail theory close up and personal.
Bingo!