NASA tried this impact project with Lunar Prospector in 1999. But it did not lead to any substantial ejection of water vapor off the impact point. No water vapor was observed with the Hubble/STIS (spectrograph). I believe (have not RFTA) that NASA wants to do it right with a proper impactor at this time.
Have scientists actually seen the cloud of gas and dust from which Earth emerged 4.6 billion years ago, or is this just wild speculation?
Ever heard of Zodiacal light?
Any cloud of gas would have been blown out of the system at the early stage of the Sun's evolution (T-Tauri phase), but some dust remains in the solar system. We see that today, too.
It's a legitimate question that can be asked, though I think that the radiometric measurement takes the thought into account already (admittedly I don't remember the detail of such measurement).
CMOS is nice since you can make a large format detector easier; but then the downside is to make the detector sensitivity uniform (quantum efficiency uniformity), which determines the flatness of the field.
Quite frankly I'm impressed with what Cannon did with its CMOS detectors. It must have a good on-board correction?
As far as regular consumers go, this regulation is not a big deal in Japan. Many Japanese would prefer buying new hardwares/appliances to buying them used (the same goes to automotives).
Yes, there is a niche market to resell the used materials, but the market is not as big as it is over here in the U.S. (I'm thinking eBay or craiglist). So from consumers' stand point I don't think this would cause major headaches.
As far as the recycling of old gadgets go? For *that*, I would like to know what the government is planning to do./no I didn't RTFA.
Have you ever heard of things called "propaganda"?
And "cancellation" and "postpone indefinitely" mean different things. I think that TPF is listed as the latter (but correct me if I am wrong, of course!).
No. The "big bang" issue was addressed since Deutsch has been quoted (via his email) that he wants NASA to consider the possibility of Intelligent Design by a creator ass a possible explanation for it.
The Big Bang theory is a theory, indeed. It's fully testable scientifically, too.
That's probably a good place to start learning about the current state of cosmology. It usually takes more than a decade of dedicated learning to master the topic, so take your time.
Personally I'd rather increase manned exploration, which will have more immediate benefits.
Such as?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for manned space research (and one day I hope to be up there, too). But seriously, think about what "living in space" alone would accomplish in the next decade or so. Especially on board the ISS, which cannot function in the foreseeable future (I'm thinking the number of 10 yrs right now).
At this point the ISS is simply a money drain. It's not doing anything at all. It cannot do much of anything til it is fully staffed (can't do, b/c we don't have a vehicle to ferry them back & forth...such vehicle isn't even designed yet). Quite frankly the ISS was a failure from the gecko; it is still not canned because it's an international mission (and it'd kill Russia's space program for sure).
Or, stated another way, that claim seems extraordinary. May I see what evidence you have to support it?
The underlying implication leads to the potential changes in the gravity theory (yes, theory, not just an idea) and other branches of physics. It opens up a door, possibly, that the physics as we know may not be the same in the past.
A number of researches do tackle this question from time to time, i.e., the studies of fine structure constant are the famous example. As you may or may not know, researchers are observing emission line branch ratio of an ancient astrophysical object called quasar (typicallly found at a distant corner of the Universe) to see the observed line emission ratio is exactly the same as we expect to see in our local Universe. There were extraordinary claims in the past that some researchers had seen some descrepancies, though only to be rejected afterward with much careful peer review and further observations of such targets...
That's an anecdote from the past "extraordinary" claim. By no means it doesn't provide to satisfy *your logics* (which is ID like, I will have to tell you, that isn't scientific). But when you shake the foundation of physics that is often proven to be accurate (your ipod works, right?), you will need to provide an accurate prediction of what to look to prove him right or wrong in terms of Physics. That may not be his job, but until he provides something more firmer in terms of evidence, you are not going to move a horde of physicists to prove / refute his claim.
Slashdot Mirror
NASA tried this impact project with Lunar Prospector in 1999. But it did not lead to any substantial ejection of water vapor off the impact point. No water vapor was observed with the Hubble/STIS (spectrograph). I believe (have not RFTA) that NASA wants to do it right with a proper impactor at this time.
Ah moderation has gone to hell these days.
Have scientists actually seen the cloud of gas and dust from which Earth emerged 4.6 billion years ago, or is this just wild speculation?
Ever heard of Zodiacal light?
Any cloud of gas would have been blown out of the system at the early stage of the Sun's evolution (T-Tauri phase), but some dust remains in the solar system. We see that today, too.
How could that parent post be "offtopic"??
It's a legitimate question that can be asked, though I think that the radiometric measurement takes the thought into account already (admittedly I don't remember the detail of such measurement).
I insist that subscribers be not forced to see this bloody pink...
OMG Ponies!!!
Not only it's one day early, the site turned to really pinkish Ghey.
Who gives a flying fark about the name?
How about the specification of the vehicle, instead?
CMOS is nice since you can make a large format detector easier; but then the downside is to make the detector sensitivity uniform (quantum efficiency uniformity), which determines the flatness of the field.
Quite frankly I'm impressed with what Cannon did with its CMOS detectors. It must have a good on-board correction?
As far as regular consumers go, this regulation is not a big deal in Japan. Many Japanese would prefer buying new hardwares/appliances to buying them used (the same goes to automotives).
/no I didn't RTFA.
Yes, there is a niche market to resell the used materials, but the market is not as big as it is over here in the U.S. (I'm thinking eBay or craiglist). So from consumers' stand point I don't think this would cause major headaches.
As far as the recycling of old gadgets go? For *that*, I would like to know what the government is planning to do.
Have you ever heard of things called "propaganda"?
And "cancellation" and "postpone indefinitely" mean different things. I think that TPF is listed as the latter (but correct me if I am wrong, of course!).
It's really about time that a suborbital travel in space becomes "engineering challenge" rather than "explorations".
It's never easy; but it should no longer be impossible for a private entity to venture into a suborbital flight business.
What should I worry about? Not much.
But I have to say that I can't always trust police. They are only human, too.
You are mean.
Apologize to the parasites.
Shhhhh, be quiet! Don't give DARPA any idea!
I wonder how many people are going to blame their inability to work harder (if at all) on this parasite on Monday.
Second time, you've got it right. The parent above (my second post) is a troll post. And this one is probably just so, too.
We have a moderator who really likes to mod down with "troll" here. Might as well give them some baits. I can afford it.
Heh, I suckered the moderator to lose a point. See if it works again.
No. The "big bang" issue was addressed since Deutsch has been quoted (via his email) that he wants NASA to consider the possibility of Intelligent Design by a creator ass a possible explanation for it.
The Big Bang theory is a theory, indeed. It's fully testable scientifically, too.
Meta-moderation ought to take care of the moderator.
Troll? I think not. I wouldn't moderate up, but I wouldn't moderate down, either.
Look up "cosmic microwave background" on google.
That's probably a good place to start learning about the current state of cosmology. It usually takes more than a decade of dedicated learning to master the topic, so take your time.
Personally I'd rather increase manned exploration, which will have more immediate benefits.
Such as?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for manned space research (and one day I hope to be up there, too). But seriously, think about what "living in space" alone would accomplish in the next decade or so. Especially on board the ISS, which cannot function in the foreseeable future (I'm thinking the number of 10 yrs right now).
At this point the ISS is simply a money drain. It's not doing anything at all. It cannot do much of anything til it is fully staffed (can't do, b/c we don't have a vehicle to ferry them back & forth...such vehicle isn't even designed yet). Quite frankly the ISS was a failure from the gecko; it is still not canned because it's an international mission (and it'd kill Russia's space program for sure).
Give me the sensible error bar estimate on the mass, if they want to be scientific about it.
The ISS cannot do anything until the station is staffed with adequate number of astroengineers and researchers.
To make that happen, it has to have a capacity of evacuating the entire staff in case of emergency.
To make that happen, it has to have a vehicle(s) capable of carrying back 10+ humans to the Earth. Also it requires more ports to hitch vehicles.
Since we have no vehicle capable of doing such in a foreseeable future, you can imagine the fate of the ISS in the next decade or so.
You need to be modded up.
Or, stated another way, that claim seems extraordinary. May I see what evidence you have to support it?
The underlying implication leads to the potential changes in the gravity theory (yes, theory, not just an idea) and other branches of physics. It opens up a door, possibly, that the physics as we know may not be the same in the past.
A number of researches do tackle this question from time to time, i.e., the studies of fine structure constant are the famous example. As you may or may not know, researchers are observing emission line branch ratio of an ancient astrophysical object called quasar (typicallly found at a distant corner of the Universe) to see the observed line emission ratio is exactly the same as we expect to see in our local Universe. There were extraordinary claims in the past that some researchers had seen some descrepancies, though only to be rejected afterward with much careful peer review and further observations of such targets...
That's an anecdote from the past "extraordinary" claim. By no means it doesn't provide to satisfy *your logics* (which is ID like, I will have to tell you, that isn't scientific). But when you shake the foundation of physics that is often proven to be accurate (your ipod works, right?), you will need to provide an accurate prediction of what to look to prove him right or wrong in terms of Physics. That may not be his job, but until he provides something more firmer in terms of evidence, you are not going to move a horde of physicists to prove / refute his claim.
matter != energy.
Well, in this particular term that is.
I'm sure some nerds will bring in on Einstein reference that is E = mc^2.