No, we don''t. If for the price of one manned mission we can build 10 unmanned missions and 50% of those fail, we're still ahead by 4 missions. And did the presence of humans help with Columbia or Challenger?
The trick comes with "slow[ing] down your revolution around the sun." That takes energy and the solar sail is the source of energy. Many people don't realize this but it takes a lot of energy to get to Mercury. We're moving way too fast out here at Earth orbit.
The original poster was quite serious. The photo is in my Optics textbook. You seriously overestimated the mass of the sphere. It is a glass sphere 1/1000 inch in diameter. It rests comfortably on a 250 mW laserbeam.
Judging from the replies to grandparent and to an anonymous coward who linked to the same CNN story, there originally were photos which were removed sometime between 5:19 AM and 7:38 AM, and then put back in before 11:11 AM. Those of us who looked during that period were justifiably upset, but we should have flamed CNN, not the posters.
I already have mine, thank you
on
Microbe Processors
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Imagine thousands of preprogrammed cells coursing through your bloodstream, checking cholesterol levels and patrolling for cancer. I already have thousands of preprogrammed cells coursing through my bloodstream patrolling for cancer. They are known as T cells. My liver handles the cholesterol.
Getting Ready To Map The (Visible) Universe is a bad title, as the word 'visible' in astronomy means light with wavelengths between ~380 nm and 780 nm, while Arecibo looks at stuff from 3 cm to 6 m.. Also, the AP news article repeatedly equates the radio telescope with a listening device, though it can map the sky at resolutions better than most telescopes.
John Forbes Nash Jr. was mad. Theodore
Kaczynski is evil. Both are/were mathematicians. The point is that mathematicians are not usually allowed into labs to give physical form to what is in their heads.
I don't read Chinese, so it was difficult. Here are some colorized images superimposed on fanciful daytime scenes from this page. The originalimages are not in color, and they come from this mostly illegible (to me) page. Most of the other images appear to be of sprites. I'm not certain how they know the tops are red and the bottoms are blue.
Doh..... I wasn't the idiot you were referring to, but apparently I am an idiot. Detritus is the bestest poster ever, and you can quote me on that. Mod my previous post to same parent and the parent's parent down, please. Nothing nests right unless I browse at -1. That sucks.
While you replied to the parent of the same post I did, it appears your problem is with my post, as I am the one who mentioned the article in Geophysical Research Letters. I never claimed atmospheric phenomena weren't geophysical. I was pointing out that the images linked in the parent and the article they came from were not of the newly discovered gigantic optical jets, but of already fairly well studied sprites. So who's the idiot?
Nice sig. If you disagree, reply, don't moderate. I disagree with your post. Mercury does not always keep the same side towards the sun. One side is hot and the other is cold because Mercury has no atmosphere, which would otherwise distribute the heat more evenly. Another poster replied to the same parent with the proper answer, and posted before you did. If I was a moderator, I'd mod your post Redundant so people would be more likely to see only the post with the correct information.
Yes, they are nice images, but oddly enough I found the same images in the same directory without the annoying lettering. The lettering tipped me off to the fact that the images were the front cover of an issue of Geophysical Research Letters from last year (a pdf copy can be found in the same directory). The images are of a type of sprite known as a carrot, although the top one could be columniform.
The link in the parent post is to an old paper on blue jets. The newest form of lightning is certainly not a blue jet. To quote:
One, called blue jets, also streams upward but does not rise as high or spread over as wide an area as the giant jets in the new study.
Here is a link to the two articles in the most recent Nature, though w/out a site license or subscription all you can see is the first paragraph of the paper by Su et al.
A load of crap, supported by some very low quality gif's. Let's start with A. Their shadows would be the same length if they were on a flat surface, but they are not. Armstrong's shadow is falling on a rising hill (obvious because it is illuminated better by the low angle sun). B, the moon's surface is the other source of illumination. C, any competent photographer would recognize this as a simple depth-of-field issue (they'd have to use a pinhole camera to get everything perfectly sharp). D, I need to look at a better version of the photo, but it could be the flag, the seismic instrument package,or something similar. E, it's not Earth and there is no atmosphere. 3,6,J, exposing for stars would overexpose the lunar surface. K, it looks to me like that's not the side of the lander, its the interior of the craft where they stored the lunar rover. The flag shows up because it is made of more reflective material. L, he couldn't just lean back to get the shot of the head? M, ha! Go outside near sunset and look for yourself. N, even the conspiracy theorist realized his argument was lame. 7, they almost photographed the sun R, I like the other poster's theory about a hair on the negative. S, a child driving a Tonka truck in a sandbox could leave nice tracks. P, that part of the rover is overexposed and so the crosshair was bled into.
At least part of the cable has to be conductive. That's the Electrodynamic Reboost mentioned in insufficient detail in the article. They run a current through the cable, and the Earth's magnetic field then exerts a force on the cable that pushes it up into a higher orbit. Each cable will have multiple layers.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean the e-/n cross section of hydrogen in water is lower than expected relative to the e-/n cross-section of hydrogen in elemental form.
No, we don''t. If for the price of one manned mission we can build 10 unmanned missions and 50% of those fail, we're still ahead by 4 missions. And did the presence of humans help with Columbia or Challenger?
The trick comes with "slow[ing] down your revolution around the sun." That takes energy and the solar sail is the source of energy. Many people don't realize this but it takes a lot of energy to get to Mercury. We're moving way too fast out here at Earth orbit.
The original poster was quite serious. The photo is in my Optics textbook. You seriously overestimated the mass of the sphere. It is a glass sphere 1/1000 inch in diameter. It rests comfortably on a 250 mW laserbeam.
Never in the history of the universe has there been a perfect vacuum in a vacuum tube. The effect is due to residual gas.
Judging from the replies to grandparent and to an anonymous coward who linked to the same CNN story, there originally were photos which were removed sometime between 5:19 AM and 7:38 AM, and then put back in before 11:11 AM. Those of us who looked during that period were justifiably upset, but we should have flamed CNN, not the posters.
Imagine thousands of preprogrammed cells coursing through your bloodstream, checking cholesterol levels and patrolling for cancer. I already have thousands of preprogrammed cells coursing through my bloodstream patrolling for cancer. They are known as T cells. My liver handles the cholesterol.
Getting Ready To Map The (Visible) Universe is a bad title, as the word 'visible' in astronomy means light with wavelengths between ~380 nm and 780 nm, while Arecibo looks at stuff from 3 cm to 6 m.. Also, the AP news article repeatedly equates the radio telescope with a listening device, though it can map the sky at resolutions better than most telescopes.
Nova Scotia != Chile
Sept. 2002 != June 2003
Whale shark != gelatinous invertebrate blob
The only "photos" you'll see are in advertisements.
There are actually 5 oceans. In 2000, the International Hydrographic Organization defined the Southern Ocean, all water below 60 degrees south.
It's offensive no matter what the "correct" answer is. Your post is offensive, too. Where's a moderator when you need one?
John Forbes Nash Jr. was mad. Theodore Kaczynski is evil. Both are/were mathematicians. The point is that mathematicians are not usually allowed into labs to give physical form to what is in their heads.
of course it does't make any sense out of context, which is the case if its parent is modded so low nobody sees it.
I don't read Chinese, so it was difficult. Here are some colorized images superimposed on fanciful daytime scenes from this page. The original images are not in color, and they come from this mostly illegible (to me) page. Most of the other images appear to be of sprites. I'm not certain how they know the tops are red and the bottoms are blue.
Doh..... I wasn't the idiot you were referring to, but apparently I am an idiot. Detritus is the bestest poster ever, and you can quote me on that. Mod my previous post to same parent and the parent's parent down, please. Nothing nests right unless I browse at -1. That sucks.
While you replied to the parent of the same post I did, it appears your problem is with my post, as I am the one who mentioned the article in Geophysical Research Letters. I never claimed atmospheric phenomena weren't geophysical. I was pointing out that the images linked in the parent and the article they came from were not of the newly discovered gigantic optical jets, but of already fairly well studied sprites. So who's the idiot?
Nice sig. If you disagree, reply, don't moderate. I disagree with your post. Mercury does not always keep the same side towards the sun. One side is hot and the other is cold because Mercury has no atmosphere, which would otherwise distribute the heat more evenly. Another poster replied to the same parent with the proper answer, and posted before you did. If I was a moderator, I'd mod your post Redundant so people would be more likely to see only the post with the correct information.
Yes, they are nice images, but oddly enough I found the same images in the same directory without the annoying lettering. The lettering tipped me off to the fact that the images were the front cover of an issue of Geophysical Research Letters from last year (a pdf copy can be found in the same directory). The images are of a type of sprite known as a carrot, although the top one could be columniform.
Naturally you reply "What kind? It's either ice cream or it isn't."
He gives you vanilla.
One, called blue jets, also streams upward but does not rise as high or spread over as wide an area as the giant jets in the new study.
Here is a link to the two articles in the most recent Nature, though w/out a site license or subscription all you can see is the first paragraph of the paper by Su et al.
A load of crap, supported by some very low quality gif's. Let's start with A. Their shadows would be the same length if they were on a flat surface, but they are not. Armstrong's shadow is falling on a rising hill (obvious because it is illuminated better by the low angle sun). B, the moon's surface is the other source of illumination. C, any competent photographer would recognize this as a simple depth-of-field issue (they'd have to use a pinhole camera to get everything perfectly sharp). D, I need to look at a better version of the photo, but it could be the flag, the seismic instrument package,or something similar. E, it's not Earth and there is no atmosphere. 3,6,J, exposing for stars would overexpose the lunar surface. K, it looks to me like that's not the side of the lander, its the interior of the craft where they stored the lunar rover. The flag shows up because it is made of more reflective material. L, he couldn't just lean back to get the shot of the head? M, ha! Go outside near sunset and look for yourself. N, even the conspiracy theorist realized his argument was lame. 7, they almost photographed the sun R, I like the other poster's theory about a hair on the negative. S, a child driving a Tonka truck in a sandbox could leave nice tracks. P, that part of the rover is overexposed and so the crosshair was bled into.
degree n. ... 6. A unit division of a temperature scale.
Kelvin adj. Of or relating to an absolute scale of temperature whose zero point is ~ -273.16Â C.
So a degree Kelvin, a.k.a. a kelvin, is the unit division of the Kelvin temperature scale.
Solar wind speed 1,944,000 km/hr
Temperature 200,000 degrees K
At least part of the cable has to be conductive. That's the Electrodynamic Reboost mentioned in insufficient detail in the article. They run a current through the cable, and the Earth's magnetic field then exerts a force on the cable that pushes it up into a higher orbit. Each cable will have multiple layers.