The Astronomy Discussion Thread

[Kensuke]

BBC: "A Russian cosmonaut has made golfing history by firing a tee shot from a precarious perch outside the International Space Station (ISS)."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6164988.stm

Like the article mentions, the first person to play golf outside Earth was Alan Sheppard in 1971.

But I wonder what direction he shot the ball, and how it would go after that. NASA says it will re-entry Earth's atmosphere in just three days.
I would have shot it against what direction the station is traveling, even if the speed difference between station and the ball is very small, so that the ball would fall into lower orbit and burn in atmosphere.

[NoSanninWa]

Originally Posted by Kensuke

But I wonder what direction he shot the ball, and how it would go after that. NASA says it will re-entry Earth's atmosphere in just three days.
I would have shot it against what direction the station is traveling, even if the speed difference between station and the ball is very small, so that the ball would fall into lower orbit and burn in atmosphere.

I would have rather sent the ball into outer space and gone for longest drive EVER. That ball probably wouldn't have stopped until long after it left our solar system.

[Kensuke]

Originally Posted by NoSanninWa

I would have rather sent the ball into outer space and gone for longest drive EVER. That ball probably wouldn't have stopped until long after it left our solar system.

Heh true, but unfortunately it is not possible to achieve such speeds by just hitting the ball. Escape velosity from the surface of the Earth (so that the ball don't fall back) is about 11 km/s, escape velosity from low earth orbit is of course lower, but still far too fast.

[Aoie_Emesai]

So that's the escape velocity eh? 11 km/hr. Quite informative (for me).

[Kensuke]

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

So that's the escape velocity eh? 11 km/hr. Quite informative (for me).

Just to make sure that you just didn't make a typing mistake. It is 11 kilometers per second.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by Kensuke

Just to make sure that you just didn't make a typing mistake. It is 11 kilometers per second.

Ahhh hahahah ^^. Now that I think back on it. 11km/hr is too slow ^_^. 6.83 miles a hour.

[Kensuke]

Comet C/2006 P1, or more commonly known as Comet McNaught is now bright enough that you can see it during daytime.

And of cource, if you try to find it on day, remember to block out the sun (behind building for example) and never look directly at the sun!

How to find it:

Source: http://www.spaceweather.com

Last comet I saw was Hale-Bopp back in 1997, I hope weather improves before it disappears, I haven't seen it yet.

[Suiseiseki]

Originally Posted by Kensuke

Comet C/2006 P1, or more commonly known as Comet McNaught is now bright enough that you can see it during daytime.

And of cource, if you try to find it on day, remember to block out the sun (behind building for example) and never look directly at the sun!

How to find it:

Source: http://www.spaceweather.com

Last comet I saw was Hale-Bopp back in 1997, I hope weather improves before it disappears, I haven't seen it yet.

Saw it with the naked eye after 1pm and then took a pic of it through my telescope.

[EtherNEZ]

Originally Posted by Kensuke

Last comet I saw was Hale-Bopp back in 1997, I hope weather improves before it disappears, I haven't seen it yet.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed to eyeball it nearer sunset but it will be a close call. The damn thing will probably decide to fade when I do though. This is the first day it's been mostly clear for bloody ages but that cirrus in the west will not help my chances later. Hope you spot it at some point!

Hale-Bopp was great, easily visible at night and way on it's way to Zenith. Shame I didn't have my photography equipment then.

I remember Halley's latest visit from the 80's (86 I think... yep) - which wasn't particularly impressive, though I do remember seeing it. I'll be a bit grey before the next visit ...

Originally Posted by Suiseiseki

Saw it with the naked eye after 1pm and then took a pic of it through my telescope.

Nice! I've seen some very pretty sunset/dawn images with nice tails but this just goes to show how bright it is at the moment. A little histogram adjustment on this image shows the coma nicely.

Anyone else lucky enough to eyeball it or snap it?

[phantom_ryder]

i heard somewhere that NASA was going bankrupt cos all the US budget was being spent on other things.. is this true? (i thought this might be the place to ask around here)

[raikage]

Originally Posted by phantom_ryder

i heard somewhere that NASA was going bankrupt cos all the US budget was being spent on other things.. is this true? (i thought this might be the place to ask around here)

Well, the US is caught in the middle of a war right now...so yes.

[Kensuke]

Total lunar eclipse next saturday (March 3rd).

NASA's page about the eclipse.
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclips...tml#2007Mar03T

And how the eclipse is visible.
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclips...2007Mar03T.GIF

I can only hope clear weather, like always.

[Vexx]

@phantom_ryder: NASA has been underfunded since the last days of the Apollo Moon Missions. The Shuttle itself is a regular camel of persistent starvation funding. The ISS suffers from the same long term starvation funding. The unmanned missions do okay with their budget but one could imagine how much more bang they'd get if they didn't have to cannabilize each other for funding. NASA gets far less than a penny out of every federal tax dollar -- to put it another way, entire space missions cost less than one bomber or fighter jet.

For something useful the NASA, EU, and Asian folks could be working on -- the Apophis asteroid will tell us when it passes in a few years whether it is going to smack on one of its later flybys in the mid-21st century:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/arti...660485,00.html
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/asteroid-05d.html

If it hits the Pacific Ocean, estimates of damage start at over a trillion dollars, never mind the colossal effects of evacuating hundreds of millions of people around the Pacific Rim. Current estimates place a hit at 1:45000 but the odds will change dramatically with new information after the next flyby (when it will pass between our geosync satellites and Earth). Even now, your odds of winning the lottery are much worse.

Apophis (named after the ancient Egyptian spirit of evil and destruction) is only about 3 soccer fields long but that is plenty of mass for tsunami fun (hmmm, impact on fishing/food supplies == devastating as well). Japan would be quite wet and drowned so visit soon (sorry, I'm trying to be light about it but it really isn't terribly funny).

[Joojoobees]

Originally Posted by Vexx

@phantom_ryder: NASA has been underfunded since the last days of the Apollo Moon Missions. The Shuttle itself is a regular camel of persistent starvation funding. The ISS suffers from the same long term starvation funding. The unmanned missions do okay with their budget but one could imagine how much more bang they'd get if they didn't have to cannabilize each other for funding. NASA gets far less than a penny out of every federal tax dollar -- to put it another way, entire space missions cost less than one bomber or fighter jet.

Vexx, I agree, but the folks at NASA don't seem to have realistic plans for establishing ROI for their projects. I read an article in National Geographic (IIRC) about a week ago that said they were thinking of ways to make a permanent Lunar base economically viable. The big idea they had was Reality Television. In theory, I'm happy to see work start on a moon colony, but if the rationale is so we can have more Reality TV shows, I say cancel the program! They also said a big part of the mission would be looking for inhabitable planets in other solar systems, but that really seems like putting the cart before the horse. I don't see how that will make them any money either.

They had a couple of other ideas related to mining. This seems much more practical as a rationale for establishing a colony at first, but then I read the plan was to mine for oxygen and hydrogen. Now do we really need to send folks to the moon to get oxygen and hydrogen? Finally the article suggested that the lunar colonists could mine for helium-3 because it can be used in nuclear fusion. Of course we can't do nuclear fusion with current technology.

I totally think we should continue exploring and improving our long-rang sensing and communication technologies. I also think we can spend the BILLIONS we are currently spending on a stupid war in any number of better ways, but a lunar colony just does not sound like something we need. There are plenty of other things that we do need, especially in the area of improved technologies for fuel efficiencies, and clean, renewable fuel sources. Money spent in these areas will likely also provide benefits to the space program.

Oh, and I read somewhere that our weather satellites are all falling to pieces because repairs / replacements have not been authorized for the past few years. The expense of keeping these things in good shape is trivial in comparison to the 12.7 BILLION dollars in cash that went missing, and, boy, they will come in handy as the ocean levels rise.

[USB500]

Originally Posted by Joojoobees

Oh, and I read somewhere that our weather satellites are all falling to pieces because repairs / replacements have not been authorized for the past few years. The expense of keeping these things in good shape is trivial in comparison to the 12.7 BILLION dollars in cash that went missing, and, boy, they will come in handy as the ocean levels rise.

eww, 12.7 billions? That amount can be used to help the third-world countries D:

I just read an article in our local newspaper that space shuttle Buran will be exhibited for the very first time in South East Asia (and in Malaysia, on top of that -- during Malaysian International Aerospace 2007/MIA2007 ) and the article (sorry, only available in Malay) stated that the space shuttle that will be brought here is the actual model, not a replica.

But wasn't Buran destroyed in a 2002 hangar collapse?

[Kensuke]

Originally Posted by USB500

But wasn't Buran destroyed in a 2002 hangar collapse?

Yes it was, but it wasn't the only shuttle that soviets build, thought Buran was the only one completed and that fly (once), so maybe that article just made a mistake.

What is the condition of Buran today, was it scrapped after the collapse or was it repaired, not in flying condition but to atleast look like shuttle.


Edit: Now this is a sight worth to see.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070303.html

Short movie clip from NASA's Stereo B spacecraft shows moon moving infront of slowly rotating sun.

[Joojoobees]

According to an article I just read, a giant gas cloud has been detected (6 million light years across), in an area of space where there are several black holes. According to the article the source of the cloud is supposed to be the "collective sighs" of the black holes.



I thought a black hole was a gravity phenomenon with such a strong attraction that even light could not escape. Then how did the gas escape? Isn't gas slower than light? Isn't gas susceptible to the laws of gravity?

[Jinto]

I don't know if this helps you to find an answer on your question. But there is a theory about Hawking radiation, you might want to look that up on wikipedia. According to that theory black holes radiate energy.

edit:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/0...19-502-ak-0000

This news say, that a new planet was found in Gliese 581 system, potentially habitable (it is not yet known if there is water, but the temperatures are assumed to be similar to those on the earth - thus if there is water, it is very likely in liquid form).

Well its 20 lightyears away.

[Jamezterr]

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles...00010000000001

Pretty exciting eh?! I found this extreamly interesting, so I thought I would share.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Jamezterr

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles...00010000000001

Pretty exciting eh?! I found this extreamly interesting, so I thought I would share.

That's some very interesting stuff. It makes the argument that Earth-like planets may be much more common than we have predicted. It also raises the chance of our encountering extraterrestrial life (admittedly, this is already fairly likely since we have a few decent candidate bodies within the Solar System). Too bad 20 light-years is unimaginably far away, and we certainly won't be exploring it anywhere in the near future.