[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by croxis [/i]
[B][url]http://www.croxis.net/gallery/v/events/eclips/IMG_1272.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1[/url]
I don't think its that bad for a $150 camera! [/B][/QUOTE]
I didn't see that one before, that's much better indeed. Nice picture.
Yeah, it's not easy to get decent shots in the dark with a pocket camera. I tried once to take a picture of a full moon, whose light created some sort of halo effect but the picture turned out just grey. The film wasn't meant to take that kind of pictures. It's not an easy thing to do right.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]Actually, it's a fair bet that if another race finds it, they understand the principle of hydrogen and so will be able to decipher it. Provided they don't, as you say, melt it for scrap. [/B][/QUOTE]
Given the vastness of space, I don't know if the probability for some intelligence to find the probes is much greater than 0. Even if the probes would survive the gas giants or stars they fly past, they'll probably have a bigger chance of crash landing on some rock and with the velocities involved, there wouldn't be much left of those disks. :D
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
The paths they are taking are known. As I recall, the mean time before coming close to a star is 40,000 years. So yes, the chances of actually being found are miniscule.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Stingray [/i]
[B]I didn't see that one before, that's much better indeed. Nice picture.
Yeah, it's not easy to get decent shots in the dark with a pocket camera. I tried once to take a picture of a full moon, whose light created some sort of halo effect but the picture turned out just grey. The film wasn't meant to take that kind of pictures. It's not an easy thing to do right. [/B][/QUOTE]
With a pocket camera? Hell i've got a $1500 DSLR, a $200 telephoto and a $100 2x teleconverter and its STILL hard to get good shots, lol.
you need a good tripod, remote shutter release (or self timer) and to guarentee no shake, lock the mirror up.
Hey, these talks about the probes reminds me of that B5 episode with the sleeper ship with that woman and the Shadow ally on it. Wouldn't it take WAY longer than about 100 years for that ship to reach Epsilon Eridani (or however the hell it's spelled)?
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
Epsilon Eridani is only ~10.5 light years away. That's only 9.9338 * 1013 kilometres. To get there in 100 years would require an average velocity of 113400000km/h. To get there in 100 years would require an acceleration of 258.9km/h/h, or 71.9m/s/s.
It was stated (as I recall) that the ship was fusion-powered, which suggests a plasma drive of some sort. Using such a drive, it is possible that the acceleration could be maintained for 100 years, assuming large enough thrusters, and that enough fusion fuel and reaction mass could be sucked up along the way.
Now, what's questionable is the whole "passed a small moon, changed course and came near B5, all within the decade or so since the Minbari War" bit.
Uh... the Shadow ally used jump gates! That's it! And uh.... to reach that point during the war... let's see... other aliens hi-jacked it to get around too! And the Shadow ally left hyperspace on his way to Z'ha'dum because..... uh.... he needed to get his bearings, then he got lost and just kept heading to Z'ha'dum!
THAT'S THE TICKET!!!!
You know there was a very small part of me that was secretly hoping that Atlantis would have to stay in orbit. I know, it probably would have been the death knell for the shuttle program, but it would have forced NASA to really stretch itself and prove it could do things, and it would have created two firsts.
The first: two ships would be docked to the ISS at the same time, as the diabled Atlantis and the Souyez capsule and later Discovery, would be in orbit simultaniously.
The second, NASA would have two shuttles in orbit simultainously as Discovery would need to prepped and launched to retreive Atlantis' crew.
I know, I know, it is not a happy thought, but a little part of me wanted to see it just to know we clumsy mammals could do it.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
[B]You know there was a very small part of me that was secretly hoping that Atlantis would have to stay in orbit. I know, it probably would have been the death knell for the shuttle program, but it would have forced NASA to really stretch itself and prove it could do things... [/B][/QUOTE]
More likely the death knell of NASA itself...
NASA these days is being run like a write-off corporation...
You only get so much wiggle for so long when you strangle an entity...
It's called paralax distortion, or a lack therof. Extreme telephoto has a tendency to remove it and make such things look substantially less distant due to the lack of the normally expected curvature.
Comments
[B][url]http://www.croxis.net/gallery/v/events/eclips/IMG_1272.jpg.html?g2_imageViewsIndex=1[/url]
I don't think its that bad for a $150 camera! [/B][/QUOTE]
I didn't see that one before, that's much better indeed. Nice picture.
Yeah, it's not easy to get decent shots in the dark with a pocket camera. I tried once to take a picture of a full moon, whose light created some sort of halo effect but the picture turned out just grey. The film wasn't meant to take that kind of pictures. It's not an easy thing to do right.
[B]Actually, it's a fair bet that if another race finds it, they understand the principle of hydrogen and so will be able to decipher it. Provided they don't, as you say, melt it for scrap. [/B][/QUOTE]
Given the vastness of space, I don't know if the probability for some intelligence to find the probes is much greater than 0. Even if the probes would survive the gas giants or stars they fly past, they'll probably have a bigger chance of crash landing on some rock and with the velocities involved, there wouldn't be much left of those disks. :D
[B]I didn't see that one before, that's much better indeed. Nice picture.
Yeah, it's not easy to get decent shots in the dark with a pocket camera. I tried once to take a picture of a full moon, whose light created some sort of halo effect but the picture turned out just grey. The film wasn't meant to take that kind of pictures. It's not an easy thing to do right. [/B][/QUOTE]
With a pocket camera? Hell i've got a $1500 DSLR, a $200 telephoto and a $100 2x teleconverter and its STILL hard to get good shots, lol.
you need a good tripod, remote shutter release (or self timer) and to guarentee no shake, lock the mirror up.
but it sure is fun to try.
It was stated (as I recall) that the ship was fusion-powered, which suggests a plasma drive of some sort. Using such a drive, it is possible that the acceleration could be maintained for 100 years, assuming large enough thrusters, and that enough fusion fuel and reaction mass could be sucked up along the way.
Now, what's questionable is the whole "passed a small moon, changed course and came near B5, all within the decade or so since the Minbari War" bit.
THAT'S THE TICKET!!!!
[url]http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/09/20/shuttle-and-iss-transit-the-sun/[/url]
[IMG]http://www.badastronomy.com/pix/bablog/2006/iss_suntransit.jpg[/IMG]
The first: two ships would be docked to the ISS at the same time, as the diabled Atlantis and the Souyez capsule and later Discovery, would be in orbit simultaniously.
The second, NASA would have two shuttles in orbit simultainously as Discovery would need to prepped and launched to retreive Atlantis' crew.
I know, I know, it is not a happy thought, but a little part of me wanted to see it just to know we clumsy mammals could do it.
Jake
Not sure if the space program needs another setback right now. Things aren't moving along fast enough as it is.
Space tourism at $20M a trip, every year or so isn't going to cut it either.
But no, it's more important to take care of the queers... :D
[B]But no, it's more important to take care of the queers... :D [/B][/QUOTE]
[I]*JackN winces...*[/I]
[B]You know there was a very small part of me that was secretly hoping that Atlantis would have to stay in orbit. I know, it probably would have been the death knell for the shuttle program, but it would have forced NASA to really stretch itself and prove it could do things... [/B][/QUOTE]
More likely the death knell of NASA itself...
NASA these days is being run like a write-off corporation...
You only get so much wiggle for so long when you strangle an entity...
:rolleyes: :(
[B][URL=http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=3183]Shuttle launch seen from ISS[/URL] [/B][/QUOTE]
Great shots, but isn't the ISS at a higher altitude than that?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:138687main_image_feature_458_northeurope.jpg[/url]
Jake