Coby Foden

Phil Deakins wrote: You've really got into this discussion, haven't you? It's all your fault. :matte-motes-big-grin:

Phil Deakins wrote: I'm in brown this time Drongle McMahon wrote: . . . . Phil replied in brown: If the project had been to research possibilites of deflecting dangerous asteroids, for instance, I wouldn't have posted any of this. It's true that the landing experience will help in that respect, but the mission isn't about that. It's primarily about origins. If it had been about deflecting asteroids, it would have been completed years ago, because it wouldn't have taken so long to reach one. Going to, or landing on, one or more asteroids is the only way to do that research, so that ideas can be found to deflect them. Comets don't come into that. I think that Rosetta passed a couple of asteroids on its journey, and did a bit of study on them, so maybe it sent back some useful data for that purpose, but nothing like the value of doing with an asteroid what it did with a comet. One final point... I still love Coby :heart: :smileyhappy: :smileywink: Comets do come into that. Actually they are greater threat than asteroids are. Due to their higher approach speeds and greater distance where they originate from, they are harder to detect and deflect than asteroids are. Quotations from some links are due (again): http://pan-starrs.ifa.hawaii.edu/public/asteroid-threat/asteroid_threat.html "That such cosmic collisions can still occur today was demonstrated graphically in 1994 when Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 broke apart and 21 fragments, some as large as 2 km in diameter, crashed into the atmosphere of Jupiter. If these fragments had hit Earth instead, we would have suffered global catastrophes of the kind that inspire science fiction movies." http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0128_030128_comets_2.html Consider this example. An asteroid 0.6 mile (1 kilometer) wide with a density of 187 pounds per cubic foot (3,000 kilograms per cubic meter) traveling at 12 miles per second (20 kilometers per second) would impact Earth with a force approximately 15 times greater than the world's total nuclear arsenal. A comet of just over half the size and one-third the mass traveling at 37 miles (60 kilometers) per second could achieve an impact of similar force if it were to strike Earth. "Size matters," said Mazanek. "But so does density and speed." Long-period objects like comets, are not easily detected until they enter the solar system. "A long-period object by definition may not have any records of sightings in written history," said Mazanek. "If it came back into the solar system and it was on [an Earth-bound trajectory], we would not have much warning." Mazanek leads NASA's Comet/Asteroid Protect System, a program that would expand on the Near-Earth Object Program to include the detection of long-period comets, as well as small asteroids and short-period comets that pose an Earth impact threat. The space-based system, not to be in place for at least 25 years, would provide constant monitoring and a system to divert and modify the orbits of threatening objects. Confirmation of a long-period object on an impact trajectory would be possible at least a year before impact, allowing more time to take defensive action than current detection systems allow. - - - - - -

Phil Deakins wrote: The documents don't even suggest that landing on a comet will help when trying to land on an asteroid. It will, of course, but it's not part of the stated objectives for Rosetta. Darn, they shoud have stated in the documents all the benefits what will come and also what benefits may come from the mission. It would had put a lot more value to this mission if they had done so. :smileyvery-happy: Actually they may have done so and most likely have done so. It would be strange if all things had not been considered and weighted carefully in the planning stages of a mission. As not all documents from any mission are made available to the general public, we just don't all the details.

Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Of course planets get hit by metorites, Coby. It happens continuously here on Earth. We don't need to land a piece of equipment on a comet to deal with it. Of course we need to study the comets; to know well what exactly they are. It's valuable information for the development of methods how to deal with the nasty ones. So far we know relatively little about them. Therefore we need keep sending those small probes on the comets to learn more about them. How do we deal with a threat of which we know almost nothing about? Phil Deakins commented (in blue): But comets are not meteorites and, unless I'm mistaken, the chances of being hit by a big meteorite are massively greater than being hit by a comet. So let's land on a meteorite. It's true that it would be good to develope some way(s) of maybe deflecting dangerous meteorites. I wouldn't be writing all this it that's what the Rosetta mission did. But I see no point in landing on a snowball to find out what meteorites are made of so that we can maybe find ways of defelecting one. I think it's good to get the definitions here now . :matte-motes-big-grin: http://www.sciencekids.co.nz/sciencefacts/space/cometasteroidmeteoroiddifferences.html Comet • A comet is a relatively small solar system body that orbits the Sun. When close enough to the Sun they display a visible coma (a fuzzy outline or atmosphere due to solar radiation) and sometimes a tail. Asteroid • Asteroids are small solar system bodies that orbit the Sun. Made of rock and metal, they can also contain organic compounds. Asteroids are similar to comets but do not have a visible coma (fuzzy outline and tail) like comets do. Meteoroid • A meteoroid is a small rock or particle of debris in our solar system. They range in size from dust to around 10 metres in diameter (larger objects are usually referred to as asteroids). Meteor • A meteoroid that burns up as it passes through the Earth’s atmosphere is known as a meteor. If you’ve ever looked up at the sky at night and seen a streak of light or ‘shooting star’ what you are actually seeing is a meteor. Meteorite • A meteoroid that survives falling through the Earth’s atmosphere and colliding with the Earth’s surface is known as a meteorite. - - - - - Yes, let's land on a meteorite, we can do it with no cost at all, we just step on it and it's done. Naturally if we want to study it in detail it will cost something. Anyway, seriously; meteoroids are not serious large scale threat to earth due to their small size. They burn up as meteors in the atmosphere - only from the largest ones something of it may survive and end as a meteorite on the ground. Comets and asteroids are totally different beasts due to their size. Those we need to study in detail to learn more about them.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Coby, as your research intimates, there are technical objectives for all space missions as well as scientific. Those aren't as easy to find, as they're secondary objectives that go along for the ride. Yes indeed Maddy. Even the Rosetta mission's space navigation was an amazing achievement. The experience gathered from that alone will be of great value to any future missions.

Drongle McMahon wrote: It would be interesting to see the project proposal documents that were accepted by the funders. . . . . . Alas, I haven't been able to find the relevant documents (yet?). I have found some original Rosetta mission definition documents. This is a very good source for ESA's documents: Explore ESA's Planetary Science Archive! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - And now, the facts about the mission objectives. ftp://psa.esac.esa.int/pub/mirror/INTERNATIONAL-ROSETTA-MISSION/OSIWAC/RO-A-OSIWAC-2-AST1-STEINSFLYBY-V1.4/CATALOG/MISSION.CAT Science Objectives The prime scientific objectives as defined in the Announcement of Opportunity [RO-EST-AO-0001] by the Rosetta Science Team can be summarized as: - Global characterisation of the nucleus, determination of dynamic properties, surface morphology and composition - Chemical, mineralogical and isotropic compositions of volatiles and refractories in a cometary nucleus - Physical properties and interrelation of volatiles and refractories in a cometary nucleus - Study of the development of cometary activity and the processes in the surface layer of the nucleus and in the inner coma (dust-gas interaction) - Origin of comets, relationship between cometary and interstellar material. - Implications for the origin of the solar system - Global characterisation of the asteroid, determination of dynamic properties, surface morphology and composition. ...and: The two asteroids Rosetta flew by are secondary science targets of the Rosetta mission, with comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko being the primary science target. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There it is, officially stated facts. (It's interesting to note that the two asteroid flybys already have revealed new valuable information about those objects. That information was not possible to get from earthbound observations. One addition to our knowledge about near space.) To Phil: It is clear that the origins is not the sole purpose of the mission. :smileywink: The information gathered by Rosetta mission will help even NASA in their coming mission. Never Mind Philae’s Topsy-Turvy Touchdown, Its Brief Mission Advances Comet Science "All of Philae’s events, good and bad, will inform future missions to small solar system bodies. Many of the glitches reinforce just how difficult it is to land on a comet, which does not have enough gravity to pull objects into orbit around it or hold them on its surface. Scientists planning NASA’s Origins Spectral Interpretation Resource Identification and Security Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx) mission, which will launch in 2016 to return a sample from an asteroid, is taking particularly close notes. “We are eagerly watching what you learn from actually operating in this environment and will apply that,” Gordon Johnston, OSIRIS-REx program executive at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C., said during the ESA broadcast."

Phil Deakins wrote: Inara Pey wrote: It may lead us to a better understanding what is needed to help terraform a planet like Mars, something would might be critical to around attempts to move beyond this planet and do more than live within constrained environments elsewhere. Phil Deakins commented (in blue): It may help to enable us to terraform planets like Mars? Seriously? Surely you are pulling my leg. There are many suggestions and ideas how to terraform Mars. One idea towards terraforming Mars is this: http://science.howstuffworks.com/terraforming2.htm "Space scientist Christopher McKay and Robert Zubrin, author of The Case For Mars, have also proposed a more extreme method for greenhousing Mars. They believe that hurling large, icy asteroids containing ammonia at the red planet would produce tons of greenhouse gases and water. For this to be done, nuclear thermal rocket engines would have to be somehow attached to asteroids from the outer solar system. The rockets would move the asteroids at about 4 kilometers per second, for a period of about 10 years, before the rockets would shut off and allow the 10-billion-ton asteroids to glide, unpowered, toward Mars. Energy released upon impact would be about 130 million megawatts of power." For this scenario to have any meaningful value we need to study the comets closely and thoroughly to know exactly what they are made of. Rosetta mission is doing that - increasing our knowledge about the comets. "The Rosetta mission will orbit 67P for 17 months and is designed to complete the most detailed study of a comet ever attempted." To crash something on a planet without knowing detailed information what it is made of would be a great mistake. Many years after Rosetta mission has been completed and all the data gathered has been thoroughly examined these two space scientist can re-evaluate their idea of colliding an asteroid or a comet on Mars - does the idea have some sence in it or not. Of course we don't know now will humanity ever attempt to terraform Mars. There are enormous amount of pieces in that puzzle. All the data from Rosetta mission will be one piece also in that puzzle. That's how science goes forward, study this, study that and gradually a clearer picture emerges. It's foolish to say "this mission has no meaninful value to us at all". That's a very naive way to look at things. We just don't know until perhaps many many years later did some mission have meaningful value or not.

Let's see... Phil Deakins wrote: Of cvourse, learning about Earth's origin has no practical value. I thought that went without saying. And learning about origins is not the mission's primary objective. It's its only objective. (Bolding mine above..) Phil Deakins wrote: I'm sorry, Coby, but there's nothing there about replenishing the Earth's water, or mining comets, or preventing NEOs from hitting us. Erm...? I just gave quotations of other objectives what the the Rosetta mission has besides "origins" what you keep repeating that it's the only objective. It has been shown to you that it is not. Unfortunately, even links to facts do not open your eyes. :matte-motes-frown:

Phil Deakins wrote: Of course planets get hit by metorites, Coby. It happens continuously here on Earth. We don't need to land a piece of equipment on a comet to deal with it. Of course we need to study the comets; to know well what exactly they are. It's valuable information for the development of methods how to deal with the nasty ones. So far we know relatively little about them. Therefore we need keep sending those small probes on the comets to learn more about them. How do we deal with a threat of which we know almost nothing about? [ETA] An alternative method (very inexpensive one) to develop space stuff, to make new inventions, would to be sit a group of scientist under an apple tree. When an apple falls from the tree and hits on somebody's head the scientist would voice out "EUREKA!" and would rush to the laboratory to test the invention. In no time at all we would have multitude of new inventions at our hands with a very low cost. Why under apple tree? Well, the apple falls down it is affected by gravity pulling it down, in space we need knowledge about gravity. The falling apple might cause space related inventions to emerge. That's why. :smileyhappy:

Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: We can do without microwaves... That is not true Phil. ETA: Didn't you suggest that the discovery of microwaves came about through space stuff? Read this please:- "In 1945 the specific heating effect of a high-power microwave beam was accidentally discovered by Percy Spencer, an American self-taught engineer from Howland, Maine. Employed by Raytheon at the time he noticed that microwaves from an active radar set he was working on started to melt a candy bar he had in his pocket." It was nothing to do with space. My reply was to your "we can do without microwaves" statement, by giving some examples how microwaves are used in various fields. That's all, nothing more, nothing less. No Phil, I made no suggestions at all how microwaves were discovered. I do know, and I have know for a long time, where the discovery originated. Indeed, the discovery has nothing to do with space. I'm glad to see that we can agree about something in this thread. :smileyhappy:

They have realized that it is not worth trying to improve this old world; instead, they are doing this: Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world Which is great. :matte-motes-smile: (Surely they are still taking care of SL as far it is profitable for them.)

Phil Deakins wrote: I just don't support totally unnecessary ventures like the Rosetta mission, the purpose of which is to learn about origins, which is something that is of no real value to anyone. It's an awesome achievement but it has no value. You are very mistaken if you think that the sole objective of the Rosetta mission was to learn about origins. It has many other objectives besides the origins. It is unfortunate that the media stresses the prime goal of the mission so much so that some people might, and will, get a wrong idea what this mission is all about. http://rosetta.jpl.nasa.gov/mission-facts/mission-science-goals

I can see the old style profiles and also the web profiles ok in Firestorm 4.6.7.42398. (Sorry, I have no idea what might be going on in your system.)

Phil Deakins wrote: The Earth has managed perfectly well for 4 billion years without mankind having methods of saving it from space stuff. We didn't even know such stuff existed until recently. But now we know a lot lot what is out there. We cannot bury our heads into the sand and pretend that nothing will happen. Our Moon, what has happened to it during its history: It has has been heavily bombarded. Does it still happen? Yes it indeed does. Recently on the Moon: Astronomers capture the moment a Meteorite hits the moon on 11 September 2013 with so much force that a bright flash can be seen from Earth with the naked eye. The 400kg (63st) meteorite, travelling at 40,000 mph, punches a fresh crater on the moon's surface around 40 metres wide in what is thought to be the largest lunar impact ever recorded. If that has happened on the Moon, it has happened also on earth. Because of the erosion here on earth, only the largest remnants of comet hits have remained to this day to be seen. If the hits still happens on the moon so it will happen on the earth too. The earth is by no means a safe haven. Recently on earth: The Chelyabinsk meteor was a superbolide caused by a near-Earth asteroid that entered Earth's atmosphere over Russia on 15 February 2013. The object was undetected before its atmospheric entry, in part because its radiant was close to the Sun. Its explosion created panic among local residents and about 1,500 people were injured seriously enough to seek medical treatment. Some 7,200 buildings in six cities across the region were damaged by the explosion's shock wave. What is there, in the outer reaches of our solar system? Kuiper Belt: Beyond the gas giant Neptune lies a region of space filled with icy bodies. Known as the Kuiper Belt, this chilly expanse holds trillions of objects, remnants of the early solar system. The Kuiper Belt could contain hundreds of thousands of icy bodies that range in size from small chunks of ice to worldlets larger than 100 kilometers across. Astronomers have tracked most short-period comets from their origins in the Kuiper Belt. These are comets with orbital periods of 200 years or less. Oort Cloud: Dutch astronomer Jan Oort first proposed in 1950 that some comets might come from the the solar system’s far suburbs. That reservoir later became known as the Oort cloud. The Oort Cloud is an extended shell of icy objects that exist in the outermost reaches of the solar system. The Oort Cloud is roughly spherical, and is the origin of most of the long-period comets that have been observed.

Phil Deakins wrote: We can do without microwaves... That is not true Phil. Modern world could not exist as it is now without the various applications of microwaves. (We could do without them if we were willing to go back decades in time, before the application of microwaves. Amish people might be happy with that - who else?) Microwaves have even medical applications. "Microwave energy is widely used in a number of medical fields to elevate tissue temperatures and create precise, localised cell destruction. Microwave therapy relies on dielectric heating, a phenomenon caused by dipole rotation. Microwave radiation has the benefit of heating deeper layers - resulting in a superior deposition of energy within skin lesions. As an interventional radiologist at Stanford, Gloria Hwang, MD, uses a variety of ablation techniques to kill small tumors in her patients — radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation and microwave ablation. But recent advances in microwave systems have improved Hwang's ability to destroy larger tumors, up to four centimeters in size, and tumors embedded in blood rich organs like the liver, giving patients whose diseases were once inoperable a chance to become tumor free. Microwave technology is extensively used for point-to-point telecommunications. Microwaves are used in spacecraft communication, and much of the world's data, TV, and telephone communications are transmitted long distances by microwaves between ground stations and communications satellites. Microwaves are also employed in microwave ovens and in radar technology. The modern uses of radar are highly diverse, including air traffic control, radar astronomy, air-defense systems, antimissile systems; marine radars to locate landmarks and other ships; aircraft anticollision systems; ocean surveillance systems, outer space surveillance and rendezvous systems; meteorological precipitation monitoring; altimetry and flight control systems; guided missile target locating systems; and ground-penetrating radar for geological observations."

Biarzenne wrote: Just an update to let you all know it has not been fixed yet. I am hoping this week of maintence will resolve it but so far no luck. This week's maintenance is solely a server hardware maintenance. This maintenance will not resolve any server/viewer software issues. Look here: The Hardware Issues Behind Recent Region Restarts

Perrie Juran wrote: Ghost Warblood wrote: There.com used to be in shape of a round planet with no border crossing and had an outerspace atmosphere believe it or not. There is no longer Here. I had to check. Surprisingly it is There. Old There users can even resurrect their old accounts in the new There. :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileywink: (The original There.com service was shut down early in 2010. 'New' There requires a $10/month fee for each avatar. 'Old' There did not. Pssttt... the avatars look like... cartoons, crap that is.)

Phil Deakins wrote: What bother's me is using some of the country's pot of money on things that don't matter, when essential services are being cut or not funded because there isn't enough money for them. It does matter a great deal to be able to save earth from comet/asteroid collisions. We need to learn how to do it. The future of earth may depend on it. The Rosetta mission has aided towards this goal - how to reach accurately a fast moving object in space. Save some people now by building hospitals, or develop space technology to save the whole humanity later? That's a good question what needs careful thinking and decisions. [ETA to add] The Benefits of Space Exploration for the Safety of Humans and Ultimately the Survival of Mankind

Phil, I don't really get why you are so much against the Rosetta mission? Even though the origins is one of the main goals of the mission, it definitely is not all what will be achieved from the mission. I'm sure that you know this very well if you think it over with open mind. You're looking this particular mission through some strange glasses - why not take them off for a while? All space exploration - whatever its main purpose is - will enhance and develop space technology. There are multitude of examples how space exploration has created new innovations for the benefit of humankind. Why would Rosetta mission be any different in that respect? We never know in advance from any mission what benefits it may or may not bring. A very good article to read is: http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Benefits-Stemming-from-Space-Exploration-2013-TAGGED.pdf I'm sure that there many other articles about the benefits. Space robotic systems helped to develop this: About spin-offs:

Syo Emerald wrote: In short: + looks smoother and can give a more realistic look - more trouble with clothes I want to add this: + looks great when lots of skin is shown (i.e. wearing bikinis, or nothing at all) However if lots of clothes are worn there is no need for mesh avatar because the clothes cover the mesh. Then there is no advantage at all compared to the default avatar - only more trouble.

Phil Deakins wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Just as we could go on lamenting the costs of vacations. Why do people take them? Why do employers pay for them? Wouldn't it make more sense to just keep working until we drop? While we may need only the bare necessities to survive, we need more than that to thrive. It's nothing to do with individual spending, Maddy. Each country has just one pot of money, which is supplied from taxes of various sorts. That's where individual financial involvement ends. Things are changing. There are now independent companies geared towards space exploration. And just recently a new opportunity for anybody to participate financially, individually, to a space project has opened. All space exploration is not any more totally dependent on the decisions made by governments. Which is great. Now everyone has a chance to participate individually, financially, to a very exiting moon mission. LUNAR MISSION ONE: A new lunar mission for everyone "Lunar Mission One is the most inspirational lunar project since the Apollo landings and your chance to reserve your place in space. We plan to send an unmanned robotic landing module to the South Pole of the Moon – an area unexplored by previous missions. We’re going to use pioneering technology to drill down to a depth of at least 20m – 10 times deeper than has ever been drilled before – and potentially as deep as 100m." Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LunarMissionOne

What happens to me always is: 1. First I log into my dashboard. After that: 2. I go to the Markeplace, I'm logged in there too. 3. I go to My Seconf Life, I'm logged in there too. 4. I go to the forums, I'm not logged in. It always needs a separate log in. Today, just for an experiment I did this: I was logged into my dashboard and into the forums. Then I logged out from the forums. I went to look at my dashboard. I was logged out from there too! :smileysurprised: Aaargghhh... the login system seems to be broken in some strange way. :smileyfrustrated:

Phil Deakins wrote: I watched an hour long programme about the mission a couple of nights ago. What they've done is truly awesome (even though it went s little awry at the end). There's no denying that. It doesn't mean it was money well spent though. Maybe UK should follow the example of US politics? I feel sad for NASA that it has been crippled by the recent budget cuts. Many planned interesting space projects have been discontinued. :smileysad:

Phil Deakins wrote: Coby Foden wrote: hehe. I dispute the word 'perfectly' in that graphic. It wasn't that Ok, unfortunately it missed the planned spot by few "joyful" hops up and down. "Phew... finally here!" :matte-motes-big-grin:

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official-Second_Life_Skill_Gaming_FAQ Authorized participants Only users that meet the criteria for Skill Gaming are permitted to access Skill Gaming Regions and participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life. Participation is limited to residents who meet the following criteria: Have current billing information on file Are at least 19 years of age Do not reside in a prohibited state listed below Are not connecting from a prohibited state Note: If you believe you meet all requirements for access, but are still unable to enter a Skill Gaming Region, please try resubmitting your current billing information and re-logging into Second Life as a first step toward troubleshooting. ↑ The above means: ↑ First delete your existing payment method. Then re-enter the payment method. Then re-log into SL. Please review the list of prohibited states below and your account status to see if you can participate. Prohibited states and countries Residents of the following states and countries may not participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life: Arizona Arkansas Delaware Florida Kentucky Louisiana Maryland South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee