Subject: I give up...
Time: 10:02:51 AM EDT
Author: stuartatk
The "astrology vs astronomy" battle is as eternal and endless as the battles between good and evil, dark and light, Dr Who and the Daleks... but I was stunned and more than a little shocked to find the two clashing so noisily in a discount bookshop here in Kendal recently, when I saw a small (and pretty useless, it has to be said) telescope on sale in there. This is what is printed on the box...
That's a bit hard to see, I know, so take a look at the proper pic here...
No, you're not seeing things, that really is a telescope that you can use to "explore the wonders of astrology".
AAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
And from the "University of Oxford", too! Now, I'm not even sure there IS a "University of Oxford"... I suspect that could be a sneaky play on words by the makers, designed to make people think the scope is recommended by Oxford University. I'll have to do a little digging.
Unbelievable, eh?
Update: I just Googled "University of Oxford" and that is, apparently, the official name for 'Oxford University'. So, being charitable, I'm tempted to believe it's just a printing error... but even so it's something the printers and the University people should have spotted. I'm going to email them a link to this post and see what they have to say.
Written by
stuartatk
Permalink
|
Blog about this entry
| 
Add to del.icio.us | 
digg this
This entry has comments:
Add your own
Subject: So what IS NASA about to announce..?
Time: 8:46:43 AM EDT
Author: stuartatk
Now this is interesting...
On the always-excellent Universe Today website, there's a teaser story about a big NASA announcement next week...
This past Wednesday, NASA announced they have scheduled a press conference for next Wednesday, May 14, at 1 p.m. EDT, to reveal the discovery of an object in our galaxy that astronomers have been hunting for more than 50 years.
Hmmm, what could that be?
Well, the internet - okay, the space geek community on the internet! - is already approaching meltdown as the news conference approaches. Inevitably some people think it will be the announcement of the detection of an alien signal. Others think we'll be hearing that NASA has finally discovered a truly Earth-like planet in orbit around a distant star. And others still are confident NASA has found liquid water on Mars, and are setting the stage for the landing of Phoenix on May 25th...
All of them are wrong, I'm pretty sure.
There are clues in the story. The object discovered is in our GALAXY, not solar system, so it's a long, long way away. And an alien signal isn't an "object", is it? And if you read on the story goes on to say...
NASA says the finding was made by combining data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory with ground-based observations...
X-rays, eh? That means it's a very distant, very high energy object. I think that helps us narrow down the possibilities a lot...
My personal prime suspects are:
* A super-massive black hole
* A supernova on the other side of our Galaxy
* Two colliding black holes.
.... but of course, I'm just guessing, and have no idea, really! We'll have to wait until teatime Wednesday to find out... Watch this space! :-)
Written by
stuartatk
Permalink
|
Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments:
Add your own
Subject: Preserving Tranquility Base
Time: 7:26:01 AM EDT
Author: stuartatk
WELCOME TO CARNIVAL OF SPACE READERS!!
Isn't it weird how some things just come together?
Last night I was browsing the forum on unmannedspaceflight.com - as I do, oh, once or twice an hour! - and found that the discussion about the Google Lunar X-Prize and the need to preserve the Apollo 11 landing site (indeed, all the Apollo landing sites) had started up again. I thought I should write something about it here, because it's something I feel very strongly, even passionately about. But I didn't want to just launch into full "Stu rant" mode; I wanted to find a side way into the topic.
And I found it, when I went to the wonderful moonpans.com website.
For those people unfamiliar with the website, it features stunning panoramas of all the Apollo landing sites, for download and sale. Looking at the site this time I found that Mike Constantine, the guy behind the site and the photo creations, had "found" a new image of Neil Armstrong on the Moon. I was fascinated and intrigued! After all, it's common knowledge that there are just two or three images from the Apollo 11 mission that are KNOWN to show Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface, thanks to a combination of (in my opinion) bad planning at NASA, in not insisting that Buzz Aldrin carefully record Armstrong's activities, and also - many people believe - Buzz's inability to take images of Armstrong, thanks to having a painful nose, that nose having been put out of joint by the fact that Armstrong, and not he, was first down the ladder...
Anyway, back to the picture. When I read on, I learned that what Mike had done - and this is such a face-slappingly obvious idea I'm amazed it hasn't occurred to anyone before... I wish I'd thought of it! - was to take the classic image of Aldrin standing on the Moon, zoom in on his visor and enlarge, clarify and correct the image of Armstrong's reflection seen upon it...
Genius! Absolute genius! Here it is, reproduced with Mike's generous permission...
Now, that image isn't going to win any photographic awards, but it is a picture of the First Man On The Moon, and as such isbeyond precious. Thanks Mike for letting me show it here.
... but what has this got to do with the Google Lunar X-Prize? I was coming to that.
Just in case you don't know what this competition is, here's the synopsis from the site...
The Google Lunar X PRIZE is a $30 million international competition to safely land a robot on the surface of the Moon, travel 500 meters over the lunar surface, and send images and data back to the Earth. Teams must be at least 90% privately funded and must be registered to compete by December 31, 2010. The first team to land on the Moon and complete the mission objectives will be awarded $20 million; the full first prize is available until December 31, 2012. After that date, the first prize will drop to $15 million. The second team to do so will be awarded $5 million. Another $5 million will awarded in bonus prizes. The final deadline for winning the prize is December 31, 2014
COMPETITION GUIDELINES: To win the Google Lunar X PRIZE, a team must successfully land a privately funded craft on the lunar surface and survive long enough to complete the mission goals of roaming about the lunar surface for at least 500 meters and sending a defined data package, called a “Mooncast”, back to Earth.
So far so good. I mean, what could be wrong with that? How exciting! Private companies... universities... schools... nerds in garages... coming together to design, build, launch and land rover-bots on the Moon! How could anyone be against such an inspiring venture? Well, not me. I'm not against the venture, the competition, or the idea of sending private robots to the Moon. But contained in the competition guidelines is this section which set alarm bells ringing with me, and many other people too...
• BONUSES: An additional $5 million in bonus prizes can be won by successfully completing additional mission tasks such as roving longer distances (> 5,000 meters), imaging man made artifacts (e.g. Apollo hardware), discovering water ice, and/or surviving through a frigid lunar night (approximately 14.5 Earth days). The competing lunar spacecraft will be equipped with high-definition video and still cameras, and will send images and data to Earth, which the public will be able to view on the Google Lunar X PRIZE website.
Ah. Two key words there: APOLLO HARDWARE. They are encouraging the Teams to land rovers near the Apollo landing sites, trundle over to them, and explore them. This will inevitably lead to these historic sites - such as the one seen on the new Moonpans.com image of Neil Armstrong - being disturbed, and I think that would be wrong.
As an Outreach Educator here in the UK, and a lifelong spaceflight enthusiast and advocate, preserving the historic nature and integrity of the Apollo landing sites really is something I feel strongly about, and I am convinced it is an issue that the Google people will need to sort out before hardware starts landing. I’m sure they’re already thinking about it, but I think they need to be aware of just how important an issue this is - and what a responsibility they have.
Of course, there's no "virgin site" to preserve, no "first footprint" to protect. Armstrong's "first footprint" as probably obliterated by Armstrong himself as he hopped around the foot of the ladder, and if not by him than by Aldrin when he descended to the surface. And it's well known that when the Eagle ascent stage lifted off from the Moon at the end of Armstrong and Aldrin's all-too-brief stay, the blast from its rocket engine toppled the Stars and Stripes flag, scattered dust in all directions and made a real mess of things. But that doesn't matter. The site should be preserved AS IT WAS LEFT at the end of the mission.
Some people might think it would be no big deal if Apollo footprints and rover tracks were disturbed by Google rovers. I disagree. These are important and historic sites, and need to be preserved for as long as possible. There will almost certainly come a day when these landing sites are visited, for genuine and scientifically sound reasons (to see how material there has been affected by long exposure to the lunar environment perhaps?), but those visits should be made by people, not robots. The only visitors allowed near to these "Apollo Heritage" sites should be trained professional astronauts who are fully aware of the significance of the sites and the hardware at them, who will make every effort to respect the sites and do as little damage to them as possible. I honestly shudder at the thought of little rovers scudding and scuffing around in the shadows of the lunar landers, obliterating the astronauts' footprints and kicking up dust everywhere.
And if that sounds a bit "rock huggy" and sentimental, or over-romantic, then fine, hands up, guilty as charged,because I seriously believe that a thousand years from now, when there are people living on Mars, Enceladus, Europa, Titan and planets orbiting other stars too perhaps, those people will look back at us, through the wrong end of the telescope of time, and will either praise us for preserving and protecting some of the most significant and - I hesitate to use the word, but I will - sacred sites in human history, or think us pitiful for allowing them to be ruined.
Some people say that with so many thousands – if not tens of thousands – of exciting places to visit on the Moon, i.e. natural features, then the Apollo sites aren’t that special. I can kind of see the sense in that. I can imagine standing in the shadow of the Straight Wall and watching blazing sunlight slide down it as dawn breaks, or gazing across Copernicus crater from its rim, marvelling at the mountains looming up from its centre... but the Apollo 11 landing site is unique in the history of mankind as being the place where human beings first set foot on another world. Buit when people say that the Apollo sites don’t deserve any special treatment, I think they’re wrong. I think Tranquility Base is – and will remain – absolutely unique in human history. In the future there'll be similar "First Landing" sites on Mars, Europa, Proxima Centauri B1 or whatever, and a thousand other worlds, but there'll only ever be one "Tranquility Base", where visitors will be able to see the actual spacecraft that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin flew from Earth to the Moon… and the carefully preserved footprints of the first human being in history to walk on another planet..!
I’m not suggesting for a moment that the Moon shouldn't be explored or built on; I’m just saying that in the particular case of these rovers, they shouldn't be allowed to disturb, more than absolutely necessary, the Apollo landing sites, which are scientifically, historically and culturallysignificant. Think of it this way: if someone suggested to you removing all the barriers and guard rails in the Smithsonian to allow people to run their grubby, scratching hands all over the Kitty Hawk Flyer, damaging it, would that be acceptable?
If someone suggested allowing ice-cream and Coke-stained kids to climb over the preserved bodies in the ruins of Pompeii, would that be acceptable?
No. It wouldn't be acceptable to go pull pieces off, or spray graffitti onto, Scott's Antarctic hut either, would it?
...or hack a piece out of the Liberty Bell?
...or spray paint an advertising message on the side of what's left of the Titanic? Or let dogs wander around and squat into those preserved early human footprints in Africa?
Of course not. There'd be absolute hell on if anyone suggested any of those things. So I can't imagine why anyone would be happy to sit back and see the Apollo landing sites - the sites of Man's first landing on another world - ruined either.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying "Ban the rovers!" I think the Google rovers project is a fantastic idea, an excellent idea, with enormous potential to inspire a lot of people, especially kids, and I’m sure that as an Outreach educator I can “use” the project to inspire kids about lunar exploration in particular and space exploration in general. I'm also sure that a successful rover landing NEAR theApollo landing sites would provide excellent publicity for NASA, and help make the Moon an exciting, inspiring and REAL destination in people's minds. But personally I'd be gutted if any of the rovers were allowed to tear around an Apollo landing site like the General Lee. There's no scientific benefit to be gained from that, no reason why any of the rover teams has to drive close to any of the LEMs, not with the high-magnification, high-definition cameras available today. They could keep a respectful distance and still take fantastic pictures that would be stunning.
Here's my idea: land nearby, drive a bit closer, take your pictures of the LEM descent stage and rovers and flags from a respectable distance, get a killer front page shot of Earth shining above an Apollo landing site,then go look at new stuff, show us exciting landscapes and scenes we haven't seen before. It's not rocket science. Oh, okay, it is rocket science, but it's common sense too...
The Lunar Google rovers could - if handled properly, and operated with dignity and respect - be the catalyst for a revival of interest in "space" amongst kids, as long as we make it clear that they are precursors to manned expeditions, not substitutes for them. There's a lot of scientific potential with them - studies of rocks and minerals - as well as the potential for great Outreach imagery too. I worry that there'll be too much emphasis placed on imaging Apollo sites simply because of the financial rewards such images could bring. As others have said to me, there's a lot more Moon to see up there!
If the goal simply becomes Land, Take Apollo Hardware Picture, Count the Money, well, the whole thing will be a waste of time. But if Google Rovers do more, if they take amazing images of other sites, if they return useful scientific data, if they flood the media with lunar images, then they really could make a difference, and hasten the return of Man to the Moon – and not just Man’s machines.
But is all this a lot of fuss over nothing? Are any of the teams actually planning on visiting Apollo sites? Well, one of them definitely is, and in such a way that affecting - spoiling - the integrity of the Apollo 11 landing site, the famous Tranquility Base, would be inevitable.
In its very inspiring and professional YouTube presentation on the Google Lunar X-Prize site, the ASTROBOTIC team declare that they'll make a precision landing close to the Apollo 11 site, after which their rover will drive to the site, eventually seeing "Apollo 11 on the horizon". After that the rover will "see the American flag, or what remains of it... the footprints of the astronauts...up close, the plaque..."
Now, I'm no rocket scientist or space expert, but even I can figure out that for their rover to get "up close" to the plaque on the landing leg of Eagle's descent stage they will have to go over and through footprints. That means they will be changing the very nature of the site, scuffing their way through traces of history that could never, ever be replaced, and would then be lost forever.
That can't be right, surely? What kind of "inspiring message" would that send to the kids watching back home? "History doesn't matter"? "It's okay to trample over the past kids, if it means a fat cheque in your bank account after!"?
I know it's early days for this competition yet, and a lot of rules, guidelines and restrictions need to be set in place, and I'm not suggesting for a moment that the competition organisers don't care about this issue, but Ithink now is the time to raise these concerns and try to ensure the Apollo landing sites are preserved and protected for future generations to see, celebrate and honour.
Discuss..!
Written by
stuartatk
Permalink
|
Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments:
Add your own
Subject: Pssst... want to go to the Moon?
Time: 3:43:46 AM EDT
Author: stuartatk
Not in person, sadly, but you can send your NAME to the Moon by going to a NASA website and adding your name to the list of names being taken to the Moon on a disc which will be fitted to NASA's Lunar Reconaissance Orbiter probe, due for lift off later this year. You can send your name, names of family members, pets, anyone you like... or even the name of your favourite astronomy blog...!
Unlike the star-naming scam / con / trick this is entirely legitimate, absolutely free, and purely for fun. Here's what the Cumbrian Sky certificate looks like, and yours would look exactly the same when you printed it out...
Full size here
I've also added "EDDINGTON ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY" to the list of names too, because it's very fitting: there's a large crater on the Moon named after Sir Arthur Eddington. Only fair the Society of his name should orbit it too!
If you want to send your name to the Moon it's simple: just go to the NASA website...
Written by
stuartatk
Permalink
|
Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments:
Add your own
Subject: So what's this "LHC" fuss all about then?
Time: 2:10:14 PM EDT
Author: stuartatk
I'm sure you've heard on the radio, or seen on the TV news, that a huge new piece of scientific kit is about to be turned on, and that it "has the potential to revolutionise our understanding of the universe" etc, etc. I'm talking, of course, about the Large Hadron Collider at CERN.
What is it? Well, as I understand it, basically it's a big underground laboratory where scientists will smash particles together to try and figure out what conditions were like in the early universe. Why bother? Because - as I understand it - that will tell us a lot about how the universe formed, what it formed out of, and...
I know... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
I have to be honest, I’ve usually been left absolutely stone cold and unmoved by the whole particle physics/cosmology thing. Any aspect of astronomy that is displayed on a blackboard has always been about as interesting to me as the latest episode of BIG BROTHER or MIDSUMMER MURDERS. I know I should be interested, that it's "all astronomy", but, well, I can't help it, it just seems - to me - boring compared to all the more visual things in astronomy. I love the pretty pictures of Mars taken by Spirit and Oppy, of Saturn and its rings and moons taken by Cassini, etc. I’m an amateur astronomer and Outreach educator who can show a field full of people the stars and constellations, or take a classroom on a breathtaking Powerpoint tour of the solar system... but dark matter, dark energy, and all these particles whizzing about… naaah, not bothered.
Until I heard this talk by Prof Brian Cox, which I was pointed to via a story on Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy blog. It's stunning, just stunning. And although yes, I do feel a little embarrassed admitting it, after listening to Brian's truly excellent talk I “get” for the first time why this is such a big deal.
(Who's Prof Brian Cox? Find out here...)
Give it a listen - and a watch - you won't be disappointed. Brian Cox is a superb speaker, one of the best science translators out there at the moment, and I am absolutely sure he is destined for huge, huge success on TV and in the media as an astronomy commentator and "expert" in the not too distant future. If there's a picture in your mind of an astrophysicist, Brian is the exact opposite. He looks like a rock star - in fact, he was once (kind of) a pop star, so that's not surprising. He's a sickeningly perfect combination of a brain the size of a planet and a gift for communication. He'll go a long way.
Anyway, if, like me, you didn't "get" astrophysics before, then this talk will open up, literally, a whole new universe of possibility and wonder for you...
Written by
stuartatk
Permalink
|
Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments:
Add your own
