New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#26 Re: Unmanned probes » Cassini-Huygens III - Continued from previous » 2005-01-21 04:47:20
Watched the press conference......
Liquid methane flowing on the surface, precipitation, blocks of ice. What was interesting is that they compare the processes going on on Titan to the processes on Earth with just different constituents of course.
Dr Tomasko said
The liquid was within a few centimetres of the surface. Our feeling is that in the place we landed it must have rained not that long ago
They also mention the fact that when the probe touched down the heat it was emitting caused a small emission of gas from the surface (touching the liquid methane).
The comment that the people behind the Mars rovers would like to send a rover to Titan was interesting!
I'd like a look a the spectograph they showed on screen (now off to look for it).
Graeme
#27 Re: Unmanned probes » Cassini-Huygens III - Continued from previous » 2005-01-21 02:16:22
No Graeme, I haven't tried it.
But then, I'm 'digitally deficient'. :;):
Some people maintain that I'm deficient on many different levels, which I strenuously deny.
Thanks Shaun, I needed a laugh this morning, I did have a joke about being able to maintain things, but I'll leave it at that 
I know that astrophotographers use Registax alot to improve the quality of deep sky/planentary photographs from telescope images, just not sure if it would help much here - perhaps I'm just going to have to do it to find out.
Graeme
#28 Re: Unmanned probes » Opportunity & Spirit **8** - ...More... » 2005-01-21 02:08:45
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s … tions]Heat Shield Rock a treasure!
*An update. It's approximately the size of a basketball, made mostly of nickel and iron, first meteorite ever found on another planet (we knew that, right?).
Lots of questions (no surprise).
I think the quote from that article...
So what fraction of the rocks on the plains are meteorites? We haven't really thought much about meteorites until now, but this discovery has really opened our eyes to the question. As we work to answer it, we may learn quite a bit about the long-term history of the plains, Squyres said.
........ is a bad omen, we now really need Oppy to carry on a while longer and see if the meteorite is a one off or not, so whats the chances as its year on Mars comes ever closer that it will stop working? Fingers crossed time again - it's starting to hurt now though!
Graeme
#29 Re: Not So Free Chat » A New World Order - Balance of Power? » 2005-01-21 01:49:54
*America's been proud for a long time. And every civilization falls eventually. The sun used to rise and set on the British Empire. It doesn't anymore. (No offense to the Brits here).
Well someone could have told me!
Graeme
#30 Re: Unmanned probes » Cassini-Huygens III - Continued from previous » 2005-01-21 01:14:34
Has anyone tried using something like Registax on the images from Huygens yet? I don't want to mess around with a couple of hundred images if the results are not much different (I did try half a dozen images with a slight image quality improvement) the problem being of course that I've not much experience with Registax to start with :;):
Graeme
#31 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-21 01:11:32
A good UV scope such as Hopkins Ultraviolet Telescope (better range than Hubble) is useful if you wish to research cosmology. Spectographs from UV scopes are particularly useful. The chances of the Hopkins scope going up any time soon however is slim in my view.
Graeme
#32 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-21 00:44:22
They are doing well then to continue using a completely obsolete piece of equipment. I have never disputed the fact that a modern replacement for Hubble would have improved resolution, better cameras etc., I have simply disputed the fact that Hubble is obsolete and not worth saving. We do not currently have a replacement that we can send up right now and instantly start working (nor do we have a service mission for Hubble that we can send up realistically now before it drops). A replacement for Hubble should not just be a collection of leftover parts and whatever is available off the shelf.
Graeme
#33 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-21 00:25:54
Lets say you have a completely obsolete 20-year-old computer that is starting to break down. Do you pay someone a lot of money to try and fix it, or do you just get a new computer?
Buy a new computer, but your opening line makes that obvious completely obsolete something which Hubble is not. If Hubble was completely obsolete I don't think anyone would object.
It really depends on how you measure performance. You could argue that, for many purposes, the $30 telescope is effectively useless and has a performance of 0. In any case, your comparison does not really apply here, since we are talking about getting a better telescope that might still cost less then repairing Hubble. If the price and the performance are both better, then it is clearly a better option.
The comparison does apply though, if you want the lowest cost, no risk option.
Graeme
#34 Re: Unmanned probes » Disappointment pictures from titan » 2005-01-21 00:13:18
Hyg probe landed in a mud according to ESA. Yes it’s true just look at crystal clear high resolutions images send by probe and see all that mud.
One positive thing about images:
When Mars rovers landed on Mars Nasa was flooded with people seeing worms, mushrooms, plants, numbers etc. Esa don’t have that problem. Esa images from Titan are so bad that people can’t se anything (although some can see lakes, big waves). Because of that all ESA staff can now concentrate on making even better camera.
You obviously do not read the responses to your posts. I think it was djellison who replied with the fact that the camera was made in America. Logically they would be the people to build future cameras as they can build on what they've done before. As to NASA being flooded with calls about worms, mushrooms, plants, and numbers, I'm sure that the ESA are glad they don't have that problem thousand upon thousands of calls about things that people only think they can see, I'd pass on that as well thanks.
Journalist:
I ask how can journalist applaud at panorama image when they can’t se anything on that image.
<SNIP>
4.Comedy
Yesterday ESA release one blurred unfocused panorama image and all journalist oohed and aahed and applauded at the panorama ESA put together. Only one thing was strange nobody couldnot se anything on that image.
Perhaps this is because the assembled journalists understand the science behind the mission and understand the implications of the images they are seeing.
Let me get this straight... $3 billion and we get 3 MB of jpgs out of it? This is it. There are no hires. Just this motley collection of fogged out and blacked out shots interspersed with 1960s vintage digital photography.
You are starting to sound more and more like a troll, if you just want pretty pictures I suggest you go to a gallery, if you want science read what the mission was really about before passing judgement.
from esa's website
The scientific objectives of the Huygens mission are to perform detailed measurements of the physical properties, the chemical composition and the dynamics of Titan's atmosphere and to characterise the surface of the moon along the descent ground track and near the landing site.
Huygens is a sophisticated robotic laboratory equipped with six scientific instruments provided by Principal Investigator institutions
It does not say Huygens mission is to land on Titan and send back pretty pictures for your desktop.
Graeme
#35 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-20 23:50:40
Ground telescopes have already reached parity with Hubble in the IR, and will in the visible spectrum shortly, perhaps even before a Hubble SM can be put together and will not long after Hubble fails irreperably. The technology is possible today, its just a matter of the application.
Its strange, I say that Hubble still has a usefull life ahead of it, if its repaired, you counter with but we can match it in IR with AO groundbased scopes and will in the visible shortly - now don't groan as I'm about to use a car analogy - I would not throw away my car as in five years time there is a possibility a better option will be available, what happens five years down the line when I suddenly discover that the better option replacement is actually going to take another ten years and will not be much good after all, I'll have spent all those years in which I could have been using my car making do with a bicycle.
"I just don't believe its come to the end of its usefull life yet"
What you believe about Hubble is irrelivent, the question if we should spend the money to try and fix Hubble is a simple, cold, numbers game... a cost/bennefit/risk analysis. Whichever option gives you the best performance for the lowest cost and risk is the one that should be employed... And it is quite obvious that this preferable option is NOT going up to fix Hubble. Sentimental attachment or a breif hiatus of ultrahigh performance astronomy is simply not worth the excessive investment, the high risk failure, and low scientific payoff. Thats the way it is.
Its not just a numbers game though is it, because you have already argued that we don't need Hubble as we can use ground based scopes, money in that argument is not relevant. Your point "whichever option gives you the best performance for the lowest cost and risk is the one that should be employed..." is basically flawed as well, best performance for lowest cost would be a 30 dollar/pound/whatever telescope from your local store, because for the lowest cost it will give you the best performance, and risk is not as much of an issue when you use it in your back garden. "High risk failure, low scientific payoff"? This is a Hubble thread not an ISS one :;): The scientific payoff from Hubble however is and has been something you can not put a value on, we've learnt a great deal from Hubble and can continue to do so.
""Why then worry how long it lasts if we live in such a throw away culture..."
Ah yes more metaphysical/sentimental "recycling good" talk... Again, this is a simple cost/bennefit analysis. Hubble-II will live for a very long time, easily until 2020 if it is launched by decades' end, will cost no more then Hubble SM4, and have much higher performance.
You do have a problem with anything environmental in terminology don't you? But a decade lifespan is not a very long time.
Ultimatly, the cost of servicing missions to repair or upgrade obsolete space telescopes does not make good sense being that replacement telescopes are little if any more expensive, servicing missions really do cost an arm and a leg. Again, thats the way it is.
No, thats just how you perceive it. Servicing missions cost so much because thats the way space agencies want it to be to a certain degree! Put it this way, a car company will never make you a car for life, one that requires servicing every ten years or so, no, you'll be back to the garage twice a year for a service (or whatever, I do it myself so have little idea on that :;): ) and why is that, because it keeps the whole car industry working to do it that way. If you worked for NASA, would you want your staff working on equipment that would last for ever, because once its built you only need a small number of staff to keep it going, or do you build items that have a limited lifespan?
Graeme
#36 Re: Not So Free Chat » Apropos of Nothing -3- » 2005-01-20 05:13:07
But it doesn't end there. I could say to you: "Methinks, stout fellow, thou art forsooth privy to knowledge most arcane". Or: "Hey dude, I think you really know what's goin' down". Again, neither version is actually wrong, though someone learning English would be completely confused that these two sentences mean the same thing!
Well...
Methinks - it seems to me. Middle English me thinkes, from Old English m thyncth : m, to me; see me + thyncth, it seems;
Stout - Having or marked by boldness, bravery, or determination; firm and resolute.
Strong in body; sturdy.
Strong in structure or substance; solid or substantial.
Bulky in figure; thickset or corpulent. See Synonyms at fat.
Powerful; forceful.
Stubborn or uncompromising. Middle English, from Old French estout, of Germanic origin. See stel- in Indo-European Roots
Fellow - n.
A man or boy.
Informal. A boyfriend.
A comrade or associate.
A person of equal rank, position, or background; a peer.
One of a pair; a mate: found the lost shoe and its fellow.
A member of a learned society.
A graduate student appointed to a position granting financial aid and providing for further study.
Chiefly British.
An incorporated senior member of certain colleges and universities.
A member of the governing body of certain colleges and universities.
Obsolete. A person of a lower social class.
adj.
Being of the same kind, group, occupation, society, or locality; having in common certain characteristics or interests: fellow workers.
Middle English felau, from Old English folaga, from Old Norse flagi, business partner, fellow, from flag, partnership : f, property, money; see peku- in Indo-European Roots + lag, a laying down; see legh- in Indo-European Roots
Thou - pron. Used to indicate the one being addressed, especially in a literary, liturgical, or devotional context.
[Middle English, from Old English th, second person nominative sing. personal pron.. See tu- in Indo-European Roots.]
Art - v. Archaic. A second person singular present indicative of be.
[Middle English, from Old English eart. See er-1 in Indo-European Roots.]
Forsooth - adv : an archaic word originally meaning `in truth' but now usually used to express disbelief
Privy - adj. Made a participant in knowledge of something private or secret: was privy to classified information.
Belonging or proper to a person, such as the British sovereign, in a private rather than official capacity.
Secret; concealed.
Middle English prive, from Old French, from Latin prvtus, private, from prvus, single, alone. See per1 in Indo-European Roots
To - from Old English
Knowledge - n.
The state or fact of knowing.
Familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience or study.
The sum or range of what has been perceived, discovered, or learned.
Learning; erudition: teachers of great knowledge.
Specific information about something.
Carnal knowledge.
[Middle English knoulech : knouen, to know; see know + -leche, n. suff.]
Most - Middle English, from Old English mst, mst; see m-3 in Indo-European Roots.
Arcane - adj : requiring secret or mysterious knowledge; "the arcane science of dowsing"
____
So the message could be...
It seems to me sturdy boyfriend, you are in truth concealed to carnal knowledge most arcane.
It sort of ties in with your second version :;):
Graeme
#38 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Einstein Year - A year celebrating physics » 2005-01-20 03:24:05
http://www.einsteinyear.org/]WEBLINK
from the website
What is Einstein Year?
Einstein Year is the UK & Ireland's contribution to World Year of Physics (WYP) and marks the centenary of the publication in 1905 of Einstein's three ground-breaking papers on special relativity, the photoelectric effect and Brownian motion. These papers provided the foundation of modern physics, and activities throughout Einstein Year will explore ideas in contemporary physics as well as showing how our everyday lives are influenced by Einstein's legacy.
Experiments, info, etc on the website, what I found funny though was the poem by Sir Patrick Moore (full version on website)
"Futility" - Sir Patrick Moore
The deep futility of all ephemeral things
Which stir the soul to unimagined dreams
Of Brussels sprouts, and spinach in the snow...........
Have a look.
Graeme
-EDIT- I did search for a while on this topic as I thought I'd posted it before, could not see it anywhere though.
#39 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Heliopolis » 2005-01-20 02:22:00
With the recent solar activity I've been keeping an eye on various Aurora prediction/alert sites I've also been having a trawl through various websites on the subject http://www.sec.noaa.gov/pmap/pmapN.html]THIS SITE seems quite a good one.
If the sun keeps on churning it may coincide with a break in the weather and i'll get to see some activity.
Graeme
#40 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-20 01:57:28
Why then worry how long it lasts if we live in such a throw away culture we can just send up replacement after replacement. We can stop designing improved versions of anything and just replace, replace, replace.
Graeme
#41 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Iceberg B-15A to Ram Glacier » 2005-01-19 23:38:18
http://www.esa.int/export/esaEO/SEMIWT7 … subhead3]A Few Animations too big file size wise to place here but worth a look on the original site.
Graeme
#42 Re: Unmanned probes » Cassini-Huygens III - Continued from previous » 2005-01-19 22:59:39
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/titan … 34a.html]I love those rocks. But supposedly they're actually pebble-sized. I like to imagine they're large enough to curl up and daydream an afternoon away on, while looking out towards the horizon. :;): (Yes, I do know it's horrendously cold there and then the atmosphere...yipes...but imagination can take you there)
Its strange (at least to me) that the pebble-sized-shaped rocks stop in the foreground and in the background the rocks look more rugged. I won't pass any other comment on that until I see the images cleaned up a bit. Perhaps it'll be something thats covered in the news release.
Graeme
#43 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-19 22:53:01
"Could" be extended to 2013? Thats pretty wishful thinking, I doubt that can be achieved, perhaps 2011 or so at best. The AAS has a vested interest in keeping Hubble around for the same reason the NBA kept around Michael Jordan, that its good for publicity... People will jump and click at anything marked "new Hubble pictures" because of its notarity, but will blithely pass over somthing marked "New SIRTF images!" or whatnot.
But earlier in this thread (or previous) you said that a service mission would only give us a couple of years or so. You also claim that ground based AO scopes have parity with Hubble, yet thats really only at infrared wavelengths and will be for some time to come. I'm not claiming or entertaining ideas that Hubble can survive forever, I just don't believe its come to the end of its usefull life yet. Maybe the AAS have a vested interest in Hubble, thats not to say that the reasons they give for saving it or the methods they support are invalid - I'll trust you on the Michael Jordan point (I'm English remember and don't know the guy (I was trying to work our NBA - National B? of Astronomers ))
Many people may just select Hubble images to view and ignore all others, however, you'd have to admit that they are unlikely to have any real interest in the images other that classing them as pretty. If you have a real interest in astronomy/cosmology then you take any image you can, from whatever the source as long as the image is good enough. So with this in mind I regularly try to view as many images as I can from as many sources as I can.
And as I have said on several different occasions, you can simply put the new super Hubble cameras into a brand new optical space telescope for far less money and have far more life then an HST service mission and be in a much better orbit to boot. The Alternative Options report believes that a new telescope to carry these instruments would cost a mere $800M including launcher.
Yes you have said it on many occasions, the fact that you repeat it does not make it any more attractive a suggestion. Hubble II would be good in my view, but it should be developed as a long term project, not just gather together any leftovers and throw them up there or we'll be discussing save Hubble II in ten years time
Graeme
#44 Re: Unmanned probes » Cassini-Huygens III - Continued from previous » 2005-01-19 06:28:16
By the way, ESA has announced a major news release on January 21. :up:
I'm hoping I can catch that one live, should be off that morning The website does not go into too much detail about the news release, but the panel is made up from a lot of atmospheric specialists and only one(?) surface guy. Perhaps they've got something from the descent phase thats worthy of a news release on its own, before they get down to the surface data - or they only need the one guy to say "it's life Jim but not as we know it" :;):
:blues: :band:
Graeme
#45 Re: Not So Free Chat » A New World Order - Balance of Power? » 2005-01-19 05:30:50
*Euler* You just mentioned the magic words oil fields
Graeme
#46 Re: Unmanned probes » Phoenix - North Pole Region Lander (PHX) » 2005-01-19 05:23:17
A few more bits from the website...
Launch scheduled August 2007 on a Boeing Delta II from Kennedy Space Center
It will then cruise for 10 months to Mars
In May 2008 it will start its entry into the Martian atmosphere, descent and then landing phase. This consists of - aeroshell braking, parachute descent phase, and its final touchdown will by controlled with thrusters.
On the surface its expected to last for 3 months to carry out its primary operations, there is of course a extended operations phase if all goes well which is marked up to last 2 months.
There will be no long term extension as winter will cover the lander in dry ice.
The two stated science goals for the mission are...
1. to study the history of water near Mars' north pole.
2. to search the soil for life signatures.
Above info from the mission overview pdf available http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/overview … t.pdf]here
Graeme
#47 Re: Unmanned probes » Phoenix - North Pole Region Lander (PHX) » 2005-01-19 04:03:35
phoenix site launched:
Thanks for the link.
Scheduled to last for three months, working in the summer of 2008 - looks like a good plan to me
Graeme
#48 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Iceberg B-15A to Ram Glacier » 2005-01-18 23:09:31
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,316 … 00.html]No Impact Yet
The above article says the impact could happen next week or next month, they just don't know. :realllymad:
Graeme
#49 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-18 22:46:20
6,400? Is that all?
Yes, but that would be a minimum, like anything else we always want more
The computer screen I am typing this on has 1.3 million individual cells of liquid crystal, each with wiring to activate them, with a surface area of over 100 square inches.
Honestly? I use a keyboard to type on
I'd say a monitor has a more predictable requirement than adaptive optics, plus the change the crystal cells undergo are quicker than an actuator by there nature.
Now, say you make an array on a PCB of piezo actuators coverd by the flexible polymer/aluminum mirror. This should not be that hard to accomplish, and is only a matter of time, money, and computing power.
But yet you say there is no need for Hubble as ground based adaptive optics can replace it?
In a BBC article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4184873.stm]LINK
The American Astronomical Society (AAS) said it endorsed a National Research Council recommendation that Nasa pursue a manned mission to repair Hubble.
Also in the same article
With repairs, Hubble's observing life could extend to 2013.
But I think the most compelling piece of the article would be
The telescope is also slated to be fitted with a new camera and spectrograph.
The Cosmic Origins Spectrograph would be sensitive to very faint UV light, such as intergalactic gas from the early universe, and the Wide Field Camera 3 would be optimised for infrared, ultraviolet and visible wavelengths.
Having an interest in cosmology, its something I'd like to see.
Graeme
#50 Re: Human missions » Hubble Mistake **2** - Action still Needed » 2005-01-18 05:48:41
It sounds like the adaptive optics have reached parody with Hubble for near infrared light. How well do they work for other frequencies.
From the ESA's website on adaptive optics...
For instance, a near-perfect correction for an observation done in visible light (0.6 /265m) with an 8-m telescope would require ~ 6400 actuators
Near infrared the collimation on adaptive optics is not so much of a problem with around 250 actuators required.
So if you only want to work in infrared adaptive optics are quite a good option
The use of sodium lasers to collimate adaptive optic systems has some problems, other astronomers working nearby have to avoid the area the laser is being used in; they require a lot of power; and one person suggested you should not have planes nearby whilst collimation is going on.
Graeme