Weekly Science Headlines

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

Yeah, honestly, what 1950's science fiction movie did they get that 2030 figure from? Unless of course they didn't specify living humans; I think they could probably get an urn up there.

Sorry I missed this one: whose ruins are on mars?

No, "urn" was correct. The implication being that they'd never get a living human to mars by 2030, but they could cheat and land a cremated body there in a container and say "we got a human to Mars!"

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

And, in addition to resources and the environment, we also need backup civilizations out of ICBM range so everything isn't wiped out when one of the shitheads in charge of the world hits the big red button

I find it hard to conceive of a nuclear war that would make Earth less habitable than Mars (or the Moon).  Even if you take into account nuclear winter, massive fallout, large sections of geography glassed over, 99% extinction rate, it's not as if nuclear war would actually rip the atmosphere off the planet.  There's a pretty big difference between "if you leave the bunker without protection, you might die of cancer in six months" to "if you leave the base without a space suit, you'll asphyxiate in 60 seconds".

No, I don't think we should go to Mars with any practical objectives in mind.  Someone is going to need to make up some sort of plausible justification to generate the necessary political will, but I doubt the reasons will be legitimate.

I think we should go to Mars just for the lulz.  Humanity needs to get out of the house once in a while, try new things.  We can figure out if there were any tangible benefits afterward.

1000 mT inside of a month kills off EVERYTHING except maybe vent worms.

And we have an ecological crash happening right now.  Wasted resources are wasted.  There's actual work to be done.

What is that figure based on? That's not nearly enough to glass the entire planet, the ice age didn;t kill everything, plenty of animals are resistant to radiation, and most importantly the Chicxulub impact is extimated to have released the equivalent explosive force of 20 million megatons of TNT, with all that entails.

EDIT:
@CN Observer: However, what I said was "civilization" not "life" or even "humans". The survivors of a full scale nuclear war would quickly be reduced to savagery, especially given that the most savage areas of the planet (the flyover states, the third world, etc.) would probably be hit the least hard whereas cities and other bastions of civilization would probably get most of the brunt of it

[minuspace]

Yeah, honestly, what 1950's science fiction movie did they get that 2030 figure from? Unless of course they didn't specify living humans; I think they could probably get an urn up there.

Sorry I missed this one: whose ruins are on mars?

No, "urn" was correct. The implication being that they'd never get a living human to mars by 2030, but they could cheat and land a cremated body there in a container and say "we got a human to Mars!"

Yes, yes, they would certainly clear cremation by destination. I take it she was alluding to possible 'investitures' of relatedly good intention.

[Doktor Howl]

And, in addition to resources and the environment, we also need backup civilizations out of ICBM range so everything isn't wiped out when one of the shitheads in charge of the world hits the big red button

I find it hard to conceive of a nuclear war that would make Earth less habitable than Mars (or the Moon).  Even if you take into account nuclear winter, massive fallout, large sections of geography glassed over, 99% extinction rate, it's not as if nuclear war would actually rip the atmosphere off the planet.  There's a pretty big difference between "if you leave the bunker without protection, you might die of cancer in six months" to "if you leave the base without a space suit, you'll asphyxiate in 60 seconds".

No, I don't think we should go to Mars with any practical objectives in mind.  Someone is going to need to make up some sort of plausible justification to generate the necessary political will, but I doubt the reasons will be legitimate.

I think we should go to Mars just for the lulz.  Humanity needs to get out of the house once in a while, try new things.  We can figure out if there were any tangible benefits afterward.

1000 mT inside of a month kills off EVERYTHING except maybe vent worms.

And we have an ecological crash happening right now.  Wasted resources are wasted.  There's actual work to be done.

What is that figure based on? That's not nearly enough to glass the entire planet, the ice age didn;t kill everything, plenty of animals are resistant to radiation, and most importantly the Chicxulub impact is extimated to have released the equivalent explosive force of 20 million megatons of TNT, with all that entails.

EDIT:
@CN Observer: However, what I said was "civilization" not "life" or even "humans". The survivors of a full scale nuclear war would quickly be reduced to savagery, especially given that the most savage areas of the planet (the flyover states, the third world, etc.) would probably be hit the least hard whereas cities and other bastions of civilization would probably get most of the brunt of it

It is based on SDI studies in the 1980s.  1000 mT kicks up a radioactive cloud that kills what the freezing doesn't.

[minuspace]

And, in addition to resources and the environment, we also need backup civilizations out of ICBM range so everything isn't wiped out when one of the shitheads in charge of the world hits the big red button

I find it hard to conceive of a nuclear war that would make Earth less habitable than Mars (or the Moon).  Even if you take into account nuclear winter, massive fallout, large sections of geography glassed over, 99% extinction rate, it's not as if nuclear war would actually rip the atmosphere off the planet.  There's a pretty big difference between "if you leave the bunker without protection, you might die of cancer in six months" to "if you leave the base without a space suit, you'll asphyxiate in 60 seconds".

No, I don't think we should go to Mars with any practical objectives in mind.  Someone is going to need to make up some sort of plausible justification to generate the necessary political will, but I doubt the reasons will be legitimate.

I think we should go to Mars just for the lulz.  Humanity needs to get out of the house once in a while, try new things.  We can figure out if there were any tangible benefits afterward.

1000 mT inside of a month kills off EVERYTHING except maybe vent worms.

And we have an ecological crash happening right now.  Wasted resources are wasted.  There's actual work to be done.

See, tiene to capitalize deh 'm' in T
What is that figure based on? That's not nearly enough to glass the entire planet, the ice age didn;t kill everything, plenty of animals are resistant to radiation, and most importantly the Chicxulub impact is extimated to have released the equivalent explosive force of 20 million megatons of TNT, with all that entails.

EDIT:
@CN Observer: However, what I said was "civilization" not "life" or even "humans". The survivors of a full scale nuclear war would quickly be reduced to savagery, especially given that the most savage areas of the planet (the flyover states, the third world, etc.) would probably be hit the least hard whereas cities and other bastions of civilization would probably get most of the brunt of it

It is based on SDI studies in the 1980s.  1000 mT kicks up a radioactive cloud that kills what the freezing doesn't.

Must capitalize 'm' in T.

[Brother Mythos]

Get your genuine, artificial Martian dirt here!

UCF Selling Experimental Martian Dirt — $20 a Kilogram, Plus Shipping

As per the article:

'This is not fake news. A team of UCF astrophysicists has developed a scientifically based, standardized method for creating Martian and asteroid soil known as simulants.

The team published its findings this month in the journal Icarus.

“The simulant is useful for research as we look to go to Mars,” says Physics Professor Dan Britt,  member of UCF's Planetary Sciences Group. “If we are going to go, we’ll need food, water and other essentials. As we are developing solutions, we need a way to test how these ideas will fare.”
For example, scientists looking for ways to grow food on Mars — cue the 2015 film The Martian — need to test their techniques on soil that most closely resembles the stuff on Mars.'

Hardcore dirt enthusiasts can download the UCF scientific paper, “Mars global simulant MGS-1: A Rocknest-based open standard for basaltic martian regolith simulants,” from the following site:


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103518303038?via%3Dihub

[Doktor Howl]

And, in addition to resources and the environment, we also need backup civilizations out of ICBM range so everything isn't wiped out when one of the shitheads in charge of the world hits the big red button

I find it hard to conceive of a nuclear war that would make Earth less habitable than Mars (or the Moon).  Even if you take into account nuclear winter, massive fallout, large sections of geography glassed over, 99% extinction rate, it's not as if nuclear war would actually rip the atmosphere off the planet.  There's a pretty big difference between "if you leave the bunker without protection, you might die of cancer in six months" to "if you leave the base without a space suit, you'll asphyxiate in 60 seconds".

No, I don't think we should go to Mars with any practical objectives in mind.  Someone is going to need to make up some sort of plausible justification to generate the necessary political will, but I doubt the reasons will be legitimate.

I think we should go to Mars just for the lulz.  Humanity needs to get out of the house once in a while, try new things.  We can figure out if there were any tangible benefits afterward.

1000 mT inside of a month kills off EVERYTHING except maybe vent worms.

And we have an ecological crash happening right now.  Wasted resources are wasted.  There's actual work to be done.

See, tiene to capitalize deh 'm' in T
What is that figure based on? That's not nearly enough to glass the entire planet, the ice age didn;t kill everything, plenty of animals are resistant to radiation, and most importantly the Chicxulub impact is extimated to have released the equivalent explosive force of 20 million megatons of TNT, with all that entails.

EDIT:
@CN Observer: However, what I said was "civilization" not "life" or even "humans". The survivors of a full scale nuclear war would quickly be reduced to savagery, especially given that the most savage areas of the planet (the flyover states, the third world, etc.) would probably be hit the least hard whereas cities and other bastions of civilization would probably get most of the brunt of it

It is based on SDI studies in the 1980s.  1000 mT kicks up a radioactive cloud that kills what the freezing doesn't.

Must capitalize 'm' in T.

Did you just assume my dialect?

[Doktor Howl]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/oct/23/oldest-intact-shipwreck-thought-to-be-ancient-greek-discovered-at-bottom-of-black-sea

[Brother Mythos]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/oct/23/oldest-intact-shipwreck-thought-to-be-ancient-greek-discovered-at-bottom-of-black-sea

Having been a sailor in my misspent youth, I have a particular interest in ship design, and ship building techniques, as well as ancient metallurgy, tools, and technology.

I had posted an earlier response to Dok's post. But, upon further study, I realized my first impressions of the wreck were completely wrong, and deleted that post. I'm still not certain of exactly what I'm seeing in the wreck's single photo. For instance, the ship may, or may not, have “bilge keels.” And, I can not clearly gauge the ship's beam (width), or understand it's superstructure construction.

I searched the net, but could not find any additional photos of this ship. Hopefully, the Black Sea Maritime Archaeology Project (MAP) will release much more information in the near future.

I did, however, find the following YouTube video:

Experts find graveyard of 60 preserved ancient shipwrecks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raBbcdXM50c

[Doktor Howl]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/oct/23/oldest-intact-shipwreck-thought-to-be-ancient-greek-discovered-at-bottom-of-black-sea

Having been a sailor in my misspent youth, I have a particular interest in ship design, and ship building techniques, as well as ancient metallurgy, tools, and technology.

I had posted an earlier response to Dok's post. But, upon further study, I realized my first impressions of the wreck were completely wrong, and deleted that post. I'm still not certain of exactly what I'm seeing in the wreck's single photo. For instance, the ship may, or may not, have “bilge keels.” And, I can not clearly gauge the ship's beam (width), or understand it's superstructure construction.

I searched the net, but could not find any additional photos of this ship. Hopefully, the Black Sea Maritime Archaeology Project (MAP) will release much more information in the near future.

I did, however, find the following YouTube video:

Experts find graveyard of 60 preserved ancient shipwrecks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raBbcdXM50c

Yeah, I was reading that the other day. The one is the earliest shipwreck we've ever found, I guess, and it's in near perfect condition due to the depth it's at.

[Brother Mythos]

Could Oumuamua Be an Extra-Terrestrial Solar Sail?

I first read this speculation on a political website that often sensationalizes the titles of its articles. But, I followed the lead, and found this.

As per the article:

“On October 19th, 2017, the Panoramic Survey Telescope and Rapid Response System-1 (Pan-STARRS-1) in Hawaii announced the first-ever detection of an interstellar asteroid, named 1I/2017 U1 (aka. ‘Oumuamua). In the months that followed, multiple follow-up observations were conducted that allowed astronomers to get a better idea of its size and shape, while also revealing that it had the characteristics of both a comet and an asteroid.

Interestingly enough, there has also been some speculation that based on its shape, ‘Oumuamua might actually be an interstellar spacecraft (Breakthrough Listen even monitored it for signs of radio signals!). A new study by a pair of astronomers from the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) has taken it a step further, suggesting that ‘Oumuamua may actually be a light sail of extra-terrestrial origin.

The study – “Could Solar Radiation Pressure Explain ‘Oumuamua’s Peculiar Acceleration?”, which recently appeared online – was conducted by Shmuel Bialy and Prof. Abraham Loeb. Whereas Bialy is a postdoctoral researcher at the CfA’s Institue for Theory and Computation (ITC), Prof. Loeb is the director of the ITC, the Frank B. Baird Jr. Professor of Science at Harvard University, and the head chair of the Breakthrough Starshot Advisory Committee.”

Here's the link: https://www.universetoday.com/140391/could-oumuamua-be-an-extra-terrestrial-solar-sail/

Still not quite convinced, I looked up the study/paper on arXiv.org, and verified that this speculation is real.

As per the study/paper:

“Known Solar System objects, like asteroids and comets have mass-to-area ratios orders of magnitude larger than our accelerating force, then ‘Oumuamua represents a new class of thin interstellar material, either produced naturally,through a yet unknown process in the ISM or in proto-planetary disks, or of an artificial origin.

Considering an artificial origin, one possibility is that ‘Oumuamua is a lightsail, floating in interstellar space as a debris from an advanced technological equipment (Loeb 2018). Lightsails with similar dimensions have been designed and constructed by our own civilization, including the IKAROS project and the Starshot Initiative₂. The lightsail technology might be abundantly used for transportation of cargos between planets (Guillochon & Loeb 2015) or between stars (Lingam & Loeb 2017). In the former case, dynamical ejection from a planetary System could result in space debris of equipment that is not operational any more₃ (Loeb 2018), and is floating at the characteristic speed of stars relative to each other in the Solar neighborhood.”

Here's the link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.11490

[minuspace]

And, in addition to resources and the environment, we also need backup civilizations out of ICBM range so everything isn't wiped out when one of the shitheads in charge of the world hits the big red button

I find it hard to conceive of a nuclear war that would make Earth less habitable than Mars (or the Moon).  Even if you take into account nuclear winter, massive fallout, large sections of geography glassed over, 99% extinction rate, it's not as if nuclear war would actually rip the atmosphere off the planet.  There's a pretty big difference between "if you leave the bunker without protection, you might die of cancer in six months" to "if you leave the base without a space suit, you'll asphyxiate in 60 seconds".

No, I don't think we should go to Mars with any practical objectives in mind.  Someone is going to need to make up some sort of plausible justification to generate the necessary political will, but I doubt the reasons will be legitimate.

I think we should go to Mars just for the lulz.  Humanity needs to get out of the house once in a while, try new things.  We can figure out if there were any tangible benefits afterward.

1000 mT inside of a month kills off EVERYTHING except maybe vent worms.

And we have an ecological crash happening right now.  Wasted resources are wasted.  There's actual work to be done.

See, tiene to capitalize deh 'm' in T
What is that figure based on? That's not nearly enough to glass the entire planet, the ice age didn;t kill everything, plenty of animals are resistant to radiation, and most importantly the Chicxulub impact is extimated to have released the equivalent explosive force of 20 million megatons of TNT, with all that entails.

EDIT:
@CN Observer: However, what I said was "civilization" not "life" or even "humans". The survivors of a full scale nuclear war would quickly be reduced to savagery, especially given that the most savage areas of the planet (the flyover states, the third world, etc.) would probably be hit the least hard whereas cities and other bastions of civilization would probably get most of the brunt of it

It is based on SDI studies in the 1980s.  1000 mT kicks up a radioactive cloud that kills what the freezing doesn't.

Must capitalize 'm' in T.

Did you just assume my dialect?

Of course not. I consumed it!

[minuspace]

Get your genuine, artificial Martian dirt here!

UCF Selling Experimental Martian Dirt — $20 a Kilogram, Plus Shipping

As per the article:

'This is not fake news. A team of UCF astrophysicists has developed a scientifically based, standardized method for creating Martian and asteroid soil known as simulants.

The team published its findings this month in the journal Icarus.

“The simulant is useful for research as we look to go to Mars,” says Physics Professor Dan Britt,  member of UCF's Planetary Sciences Group. “If we are going to go, we’ll need food, water and other essentials. As we are developing solutions, we need a way to test how these ideas will fare.”
For example, scientists looking for ways to grow food on Mars — cue the 2015 film The Martian — need to test their techniques on soil that most closely resembles the stuff on Mars.'

Hardcore dirt enthusiasts can download the UCF scientific paper, “Mars global simulant MGS-1: A Rocknest-based open standard for basaltic martian regolith simulants,” from the following site:


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103518303038?via%3Dihub

[Frontside Back]

Musk should just buy some of that shit and film fake Mars landings on the Moon.

[minuspace]

Musk should just buy some of that shit and film fake Mars landings on the Moon.

Rick^3