Slashdot Log In
Phoenix Mars Lander Updates
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed May 28, 2008 08:36 AM
from the still-no-water-yet dept.
from the still-no-water-yet dept.
spandex_panda writes "There are a few pictures of the Mars Lander on the ground — you can see its parachute and its heat shield a few kilometers away, too. There's a very cool looking picture of it floating down, actually captured while it's in the air with its parachute out!" We also have a YouTube video all about the robot arm that will dig down and probably find a groundhog who we all hope will see his shadow.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:5, Funny)
Re:First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:4, Interesting)
What is keeping NASA and the ESA from working together to create a tiny habitat to send to mars? I'm not talking anything fancy. How about sending a plant to Mars and keeping it alive? You have all the challenges of putting a living organism into space, getting it to mars, landing it on mars, and getting a habitat inflated, powered up, and surviving, all without having to risk the life of a human being.
Think about it. Establishing green houses on mars, while a daunting task, will be incredibly valuable, and incredibly interesting. It will challenge our ability to remotely deploy and manage habitats, and provide the appearance of starting a human habitable colony on another world (even though scientists will know, and openly and repeatedly explain that it isnt, people will still come to that conclusion and be fascinated) without having to sacrifice human life.
All we need to do is start with just 1 little plant.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Criminals probably aren't such a good idea, since if they're on death row already, they're probably not the kind of people you can trust.
I've often thought that offering the chance of a "one way trip" to suitably qualified people would still bring in a lot of volunteers. Some might be perfectly healthy and fine, but I expect a lot of the volunteers would be people who don't really expect to be alive much longer anyway.
Right now, personally, I wouldn't take it... but if, for example, I found out tomorrow
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Criminals probably aren't such a good idea, since if they're on death row already, they're probably not the kind of people you can trust.
I've often thought that offering the chance of a "one way trip" to suitably qualified people would still bring in a lot of volunteers. Some might be perfectly healthy and fine, but I expect a lot of the volunteers would be people who don't really expect to be alive much longer anyway.
Right now, personally, I wouldn't take it... but if, for example, I found out tomorrow that I have a terminal disease with only 5 years to live TOPS (but sufficiently close to 100% chance of survival within 3 years), I'd happily take a research job on Mars to live out the end of my days doing research in the most amazingly DIFFERENT place that I can imagine.
The contract could even say that when someone is too sick to work, you simply chuck them out the airlock (what's the point in prolonging their life at that point anyway)
That's a noble sacrifice, but suppose that they develop a cure within five years, and you're stuck up there on a frozen dustball with no way to come back and recover?
Re:First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:5, Insightful)
Aliens everywhere agree with you! We're not their concern until we're at least as intelligent as a very stupid Narfeneg.
Don't let the big filter hit you on the way out.
Parent
Re:First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:4, Interesting)
I am WELL aware of how important the bacteria and other little organisms in my body are to my life. I'm also even well aware of how important Earth bacteria are to our entire ecosystem. However, Martian bacteria can all be blasted off the face their planet once we've studied them for all I care.
We are a conquering species, and we can "conquer" the bacteria of Mars and commit genocide if you want to look at it like that. I have no issues with this concept.
We, as a species, need to get out in the universe, and if we have to crush some bacteria in to non-existence to do it, that's fine. I only draw the line once I see creatures exhibiting intelligence (the natural "intelligent behaviour" of chemicals up to and including very complex multicellular life such as bacteria does NOT count in this case! But get much more complex than that (plants, dumb fish, etc) and at that point I wouldn't be fine with it)
(and yes, it IS an arbitrary line I'm drawing, and I'm comfortable with that too!)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:First Mars Blooper Released by NASA (Score:4, Funny)
Great, the first interplanetary privacy breach. Good work NASA, you've managed to upstage everybody on this one.
Parent
Anonymous Coward (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Anonymous Coward (Score:5, Informative)
Abandoned Spaceships on the Moon [redorbit.com]
Basically, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter [nasa.gov] will get some 0.5 meter resolution pictures of the Apollo landing sites. It launches sometime after November 28th of this year (which really is 2008 - the government's telling the truth on that one). Enjoy!
Parent
Re:Anonymous Coward (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is very simple: because the Apollo moon landing equipment is on the moon, not on Mars.
They have never done mapping of the moon on such a detailed resolution because the moon is not considered as interesting as Mars. Since there is no reason to believe the moon has ever had the smallest chance of developing life, it doesn't have the same scientific and popular appeal as Mars, where the possibility that life existed at some time in the past hasn't yet been disproved.
Parent
Re:Anonymous Coward (Score:4, Funny)
Fixed that for you!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Eternal Winter (Score:2, Funny)
hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
See more... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3232035.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
Shame they did not land near the other probes, then they could have filmed each other. Yes, I know that is scientifically pointless, but you have to admit it would have been cool.
On the same note I always thought that Spirit or Opportunity should have been sent to visit Beagle crater...
Re:hmm (Score:5, Informative)
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080527.html [nasa.gov]
Not quite what you want, but close.
Parent
Re:hmm (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/230838main_PSP_008579_9020_descent.jpg [nasa.gov]
The wikipedia also has a link to an image from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter that lcoates the Phoenix spacecraft. It is 10 pixels wide but you still recognize the solar arrays.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/images/press/PSP_008591_2485_RGB_Lander_Inserts.html [nasa.gov]
Parent
Re:hmm (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
False color? (Score:5, Interesting)
This issue was discussed in a series of posts on the last Mars mission, that left me more confused than I was before: is the red color in these photos and the other Phoenix images the real color of the Mars surface (or at least an accurate reconstruction of what a human eye would see with ambient light there) or is it something NASA arbitrarily adds to impress viewers with notions about "the red planet"? Previous discussion focused more on whether the people complaining were or were not NASA-denialist kooks than on whether they were factually correct.
Re:False color? (Score:5, Informative)
It's as close as you can get to reconstructing the real color from a series of monochrome images taken with different color filters.
or is it something NASA arbitrarily adds to impress viewers with notions about "the red planet"?
That Mars is pretty much reddish all over, with some white at the poles, can be easily verified from Earth with a telescope.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks! That's precisely what I'd meant by "an accurate reconstruction of what a human eye would see".
That Mars is pretty much reddish all over, with some white at the poles, can be easily verified from Earth with a telescope.
Even without a telescope you can look up and see that the thing is red. But a) even that was disputed here last time and b) that aside, it seems like t
Re:False color? (Score:4, Funny)
No they won't!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Meaning they are at least as accurate as photos from your digital camera, which work exactly the same way. The three primary colors combined to make up your digital color photo are made using color filters.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I don't know if this is true with Phoenix or not, but it is true for Spirit & Opportunity and I have no reason to suspect it would be different for Phoenix.
The scientists are not really that interested in the visible light spectrum, the camera captures other wavelengths which are more telling of material composition and the like.
This is half-true. It's more accurate to say that scientists are interested in a lot more than the visible light spectrum. The MER Pancam actually mostly operates in the visible portion of the spectrum. The CCD itself is sensitive from about 400 (violet near the edge of UV) nanometers to 1100 nanometers (near IR) and the two cameras have different sets of filters (and the "left eye" camera has a filterless setting).
The Mini-TES instrument on the rovers operates mostly in the IR (167 bands!). Both V
Re:False color? (Score:5, Informative)
The second issue is when the filters do not represent the wavelengths that the human eye sees (even if they do use 3 or more). Most missions since the Voyagers carry approximately a dozen filters that span into infrared and ultra-violate, as well as the visible spectrum we are familiar with. It is usually too expensive to send back an image of the same scene through all 12 available filters. Thus, they tend to pick a few that span a wide range or that highlight features of a particular subject[1]. In most cases, these don't match what the eye sees, even if there are filters that could if used. But often one can approximate what the eye sees if the colors of the subject are fairly well known based on previous images or earth-based observations. One can then re-process the images accordingly in the lab. This was done a lot with rover images.
The bottom line is that the color images are usually only approximations for one or both of the above reasons. Because transmitting images costs lots of money, picking filters that match the human eye accurately often conflicts with the scientific goals of the mission.[2]
I'm sure better color images will come in the coming weeks and months. They're just getting their bearings right now. But they are likely to still be only approximations.
[1] For example, it was discovered from Earth scopes that one can see the surface of Titan through its clouds on a very specific wavelength. The Voyagers didn't have such a filter, but one for that very specific wavelength was added to the Cassinni probe.
[2] Another compromise technique is to send very low-resolution images of a given scene in more filters, such as human-friendly wavelengths. These are then combined with hi-res images such that the detail (texture) is clear, but the colors may bleed a bit. This is because the texture info comes from the hi-res image but the color info from the low-res ones.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's a fairly accurate representation of what Mars would look like to the human eye.
The thing is none of the cameras on board the rovers or Phoenix take pictures in a "conventional" manner. Instead the imaging devices [arizona.edu] have a series of filters designed to focus on a specific range of wavelengths (ultraviolet, infrared, etc.). Those black and white images [arizona.edu] you see are the results of a picture being taken through one
More Pictures at NASA Website (Score:5, Informative)
Resolution (Score:2)
Re:Resolution (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the best we have at the moment:
the shadow of a lander is just visible [tass-survey.org]
relevant earlier AskSlashdot [slashdot.org]
Parent
One thing that bothers me (Score:5, Interesting)
That is the true advantage of Spirit and Opportunity, not only did they use airbags instead of rockets, they could drive away from the disturbed landing site.
Re:One thing that bothers me (Score:5, Insightful)
Blowing away the top layer of dust may have helped.
Parent
Re:One thing that bothers me (Score:5, Informative)
In the case of Phoenix, no - as the stuff NASA is interested in is a couple of inches down. At any rate, they use multiple small thrusters to minimize the amount of disturbance and contamination.
That advantage comes with a pair of powerful disadvantages: First, the airbag systems sharply limit the size of the probe - both in dimensions and in weight. Secondly, the airbag systems are heavy - they take up a higher percentage of the possible landed weight.
Parent
area man (Score:2)
Martian printer ad? (Score:2)
holding up pages for the lander to see?
Anyone got a link?
Answer: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:so let me ask the question (Score:5, Informative)
Today's lesson in Internet humor will discuss text-based simulations of real-life behavior.
Sometimes, it aids for delivery of humor to juxtapose two replies or comments together in such a way that one is hidden and the other is the official or formal one. A good example in common speech would be in Top Gun when the main character says one thing to the teacher and "coughs" a different response into his hand. The hidden, coughed, reply is shared with those nearby so they can share the deceit.
For the humor impaired, or non-human readers out there, humor is often a social construct of sharing the joke or hidden meaning. Get it?
A long time ago, before chat rooms or blogs, a common internet medium was a program called "talk". The primary difference of modes today was that each "talker" got half the screen and just typed away. You could type something and then backspace it away but the person on the other end would see the entire exchange. So they knew both the early response and the second.
"^H" is representative of Control-H which in several terminal types is basically backspace. When people now type one thing followed by a series of "^H" they are simulating this early behavior of "talk" or even earlier and more mundane habit of hiding a hidden response or comment (cough, cough).
Now, be sure to return next week (especially those semi-sentient programs out there) to tackle the more difficult topic of sarcasm.
Parent
Re:so let me ask the question (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:so let me ask the question (Score:5, Informative)
"^H" is representative of Control-H which in several terminal types is basically backspace. When people now type one thing followed by a series of "^H" they are simulating this early behavior of "talk" or even earlier and more mundane habit of hiding a hidden response or comment (cough, cough).
There are two more facts that will help people and machines trying to understand the funny:
1) The "talk" program would send the literal backspace key to the talk client you were communicating in order to erase the character off their screen.
2) Different terminals may be using different codes for backspace, such that it was possible that when someone tried to erase something they typed it would look to be properly deleted on their end, yet on the other end it would appear as a literal series of "^H"s, making both the original word and attempt to erase it obvious.
So an additional layer of the humor in the case of using "^H"s is that it is supposed to simulate the hidden comment, revealed unintentionally and unwittingly.
Parent
Re:so let me ask the question (Score:5, Funny)
O
-+- You
|
/ \
Parent
Re:so let me ask the question (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes.
If there is no atmosphere/air on Mars, why in the world do we have a parachute on the lander?
Because Mars does have an atmosphere, complete with weather, sandstorms and such.
Also, "captured while its in the air" might not be an appropriate way to summarize the article as there is no air on Mars.
Mars does not have "air" (as in: 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, some random other stuff). Its atmosphere is mainly CO2, and is at much, much lower pressure than Earths. Still, it is definitely an atmosphere and not a near-vaccuum like you'd find on the moon.
Parent
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes
If there is no atmosphere/air on Mars,
Wrong. Mars does have an atmosphere though it is much less dense than our own. Read the Wiki [wikipedia.org] about Mars exploration which talks about the parachutes. A quick Google will turn up much more information about atmospheric density, size of parachutes to compensate for a less dense atmosphere, size of objects to be parachuted, etc.
why in the world do we have a parachute on the lander?
Because it was too big and heavy to use the bouncing airbag routine the two rovers used to successfully land on Mars. Further, bouncing creates much more shock to the system than a one-off parachute deployment.
Also, "captured while its in the air" might not be an appropriate way to summarize the article as there is no air on Mars.
See my second comment. You are assuming something which is not correct.
Can someone please explain why we are wasting our money putting a parachute on the lander?
I just did.
And to think I gave up the opportunity to mod you a troll to explain something so basic.
Parent
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:4, Insightful)
Modding him troll would have been wrong, and an abuse of mod points. Clearly, it was a VERY dumb question, showing a COMPLETE lack of knowledge about the topic at hand, but it appeared to be a genuine question. It certainly didn't deserve any up-mods, but the down-mods would be equally as inappropriate.
Parent
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:5, Funny)
When will the government care about science?!
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What? Mars DOES have an atmosphere.
Re:This might be a dumb question... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent