UFO Streaks Through Martian sky 440
lkatz writes "The BBC is reporting that the Spirit rover has observed an object streaking across the Martian sky. They believe it was either a meteor or possibly the Viking 2 probe which still orbits Mars."
Or perhaps... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:4, Funny)
It got so bad we turned mars into a desert because we realized they prefer wet worlds. (Probably something to do with the lubing of the probes or something equally disgusting)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Uranus (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:4, Funny)
---
Aliens?
Aren't rednecks probed by sheep?
Or was that the other way 'round?
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:4, Funny)
"No, I don't think I should. I don't think I should question the leadership of our Great Leader"
"Oh, come on! I mean, we've been coming here for 50 years and performing anal probes and all that we have learned is that 1 in 10 doesn't really seem to mind."
"oh really? and you have a better plan in mind than our great leader?"
"yes. yes I do. My plan is to have no plan. That we don't travel 250,000 light years, we don't come here. And the best part is that we don't do any anal probes."
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:5, Funny)
If you are going to probe anything on Mars... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Or perhaps... (Score:4, Insightful)
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&
i won't probe Google with safe=off while at work, thats for damn sure.
Meteor? (Score:3, Interesting)
Blogzine.net [blogzine.net]
Re:Meteor? (Score:5, Funny)
Absolutely. It skimmed the atmosphere of Mars and bounced off and then travelled to Earth at a substantial fraction of the speed of light, to miss Earth by a few Earth radii. Rocket Scientists call this "Vogon pin-ball." It's one of those geeky jokes.
Re:Meteor? (Score:5, Interesting)
joke? immanuel velikovsky [knowledge.co.uk] has made himself quite a reputation positing such events. calling himself a "scientist" he's claimed that venus was "ejected" from jupiter 3500 or so years ago whereupon it cruised around the solar system with a whole bunch of near misses of larger bodies before settling into its current orbit.
the majority of his "proof" for all this are biblical stories about astrological events. for instance, velikovsky posits that the friction of venus passing closeby earth raised the surface temperature of this planet " sufficient to make the vermin of the earth propagate at a very feverish rate" thus resulting in the plagues in exodus. that's just a sample.
wildly improbable to say the least - but velikovsky has managed to sell millions of books to the heroically undereducated public flogging this theory. a nutbar... but a rich nutbar.
right. sensical talk about velikovsky can be had here [skepdic.com].
Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not saying that anyone should junk the work that we've been building on since the Greeks through Galileo, Kepler and the like up till today.
But when someone comes along like him I think that instead of outright dismissal, it's helpful and healthy to re-examine and re-articulate those assumptions.
When speculative and sensational shows like the Fox "alien autopsy" and "faked moon landing" appear, it's a perfect time to re-explain that there hasn't been a single verifiable piece of evidence that UFOs are actually alien spacecraft, and that we DID go to the moon, and went there after creating an amazing space launch infrastructure in a very short time.
Somewhat tangenitally, I sincerely believe we need heretics in any field to shake up orthodoxies and make people think a bit, even about how the basic assumptions came to be.
Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:3, Funny)
Merely asserting something doesn't necessarily make it true. I seriously believe that the moon landing may have been faked, not based on nit picky evidence and counter-evidence. Instead, I base it on the fact that supposedly we did all this in the 60s and early 70s with such great success. Since then, NASA hasn't taken a human outside of earth orbit and has killed a lot of people with the Space Shuttle.
Plus, I just don't trust the US government not to lie big time. They had the means, motive, and opportunity to fake the moon landing. That plus the fact that the US hasn't been back, or done anything significant with human space flight since the suppoed moon missions leads me to believe that it was fake.
Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:4, Informative)
Scientists have been bouncing lasers off of them since the lunar landings, scientists all around the world. So either:
A. The USA did manage to send men to the moon.
B. The USA has a vast conspiracy organized encompassing a significant percentage of the international scientific community.
C. The USA engaged in a huge cover-up; filming fake lunar missions somewhere, while sending a half dozen robots to moon, to plant the reflectors. All (almost, except for 13) of which worked flawlessly, and has maintained a significant cover-up of the filming.
Regardless, I think it's clear that NASA at the very least sent significant amounts of stuff to the moon. This plus the HUGE amount of internally consistent data from the missions, some of which can/has been verified independently contributes to a high probability that the moon missions really happened.
Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:3, Interesting)
but... how are the laser reflectors evidence for manned landings? Couldn't they have been placed by a robot?
Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:3, Insightful)
Putting together a robotic mission that could emplace laser reflectors and return samples of lunar regolith would have been as technically challenging in the 60s as sending a manned mission. Automation and/or remote operation were very primitive back then.
The technical problems would have been different challenges of course, but still bloody awkward; plus the technology and engineering spin-offs from Apollo would have been very different.
Regards
Luke
Re:Velikovsky serves a purpose... (Score:4, Insightful)
The only explanation is that they managed to con the entire Russian security/intelligence structure. It'd be easier to go to the moon, so I have to assume they did.
Also, I know people who worked on Apollo, and I tend to believe their word.
Re:Meteor? (Score:5, Insightful)
-
Re:Meteor? (Score:5, Interesting)
Since the speed of light is approximately 670,616,629 mph, a mere 3,500,000 mph seems quite stately in comparison. (although still a nice percentage of c)
Re:Meteor? (Score:3, Funny)
-
Hmmm. (Score:5, Funny)
Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:5, Interesting)
believing in what sense? That one had been observed? I don't think so.
That it could be built? You'll need nearly Jupiter's mass of a substance with the same tensile strength as an atomic nucleus. In sort, not known to our physical theories (I'll stop just short of saying it's impossible). And then to spin the thing up to 1 gravity, you'll need the amount of energy that our sun puts out in 1000 years. In short, extremely difficult. Even then it's unstable.
His concept of the "Dyson Sphere" was very different from the SF concept of "a solid shell around the sun". He merely observed that the end-point of putting stuff in space to soak up the sunlight, is that all the sunlight is soaked up by millions upon millions of things, and all that gets out is the waste heat.
More info here [everything2.com]
Re:Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:3, Interesting)
Larry Niven was talking about the fact that he orginally had no plans to go back to ringworld, but the amazing amount of interest that his story had generated had made it very palitable to him. (I would love to see a recording of the MIT students chanting "the ringworld is unstable" in the halls)
Either way, when Freeman Dyson says something along the lines of "Hmmmm, I like it, but why not do build a lot of little ones instead?" it certainly would get a pen in my hand.
Re:Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmm, that all seems to depend on the size of the sun. What if you build your ring around a white dwarf? Since it's not technically in orbit around the sun, the size of your ring is only determined by the distance the surface needs to be from the sun to get earthlike sunlight, which is determined both by the size and type of the sun. A small sun means a small ring. Also, you'd need less spin to get 1g for a smaller ring.
I'd like to see someone do the math for the smallest stars we know.
Re:Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:3)
Oh why stop - we humans know everything there is to know about what is possible or not possible.
Re:Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:5, Informative)
There's info at the end of the link given. Sorry it's long, but the gist re that idea is that in order to provide 1g gravity on the innder surface, a ringworld rotates a lot faster than earth orbits the sun. A point on Niven's ringworld goes right around the sun every 9.3 days. This is one of the reasons why it has to be so strong. Orbital speed is a small fraction of what you need
If it breaks, the fragments have escape velocity from thier solar system.
It doesn't matter at what phase of the construction you spin it up, you still need to put in heaps of energy.
I had to have this explained to me too, but the ringworld is not actually in orbit. That's why it's in constant danger of falling into its star. For more info, follow the link or read The Ringworld Engineers
Re:Offtopic - Dyson sphere (Score:3, Funny)
but I'm sure the necessary Impossibilium we're buying to glue it all together will only take a little longer.
Dude, don't use the name brands. Improbabilium is just as good and a helluva lot cheaper.
Or a manhole cover... (Score:4, Funny)
In A.D. 2004 (Score:5, Funny)
Martian Captain: What Happened?
Martian Soldier: Somebody set us up the bomb!
Martian Soldier: We get signal!
Martian Captain: Main Screen Turn On!
Martian Captain: It's you!
Viking: How are you gentlemen!!
Viking: All your rover are belong to us
Viking: You are on the way to destruction
Martian Captain:What you say!!
Viking: You have no chance to survive make your time
Viking: HA HA HA HA...
Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:3, Insightful)
by Stile 65 (722451) on Thursday March 18, @11:29PM (#8603357)
(http://www.freestateproject.org/)
Remember your towel!
Only on slashdot
Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:4, Insightful) by Stile 65 (722451) on Thursday March 18, @11:29PM (#8603357) (http://www.freestateproject.org/) Remember your towel!
Only on slashdot :-)
.... would such a lame thread actually exist. You know, Douglas Adams was funny for a lot of reasons, but he was never predictable.
Re:Or was it the Vogon Constructor Fleet? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now who are we going to blame the UFO's on....? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Now who are we going to blame the UFO's on....? (Score:5, Funny)
Why not? Seeing a UFO on mars proves that that's where UFO's come from. And I find it very interesting that you start trying to cover it all up, mr anonymous spook.
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Wouldn't that be us?
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually yes! But then again I'd say this would exclude you!
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
The Administration has declared ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Would you think up something new already? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Would you think up something new already? (Score:3, Informative)
And now you're beginning to discover what the rest of us did.
Either a UFO or.. (Score:5, Funny)
And the kooks will be yapping about it in.... (Score:5, Funny)
I predict the wackos at Enterprise Mission [enterprisemission.com] will have some far fetched explanation for it by the end of the day.
-S
Re:And the kooks will be yapping about it in.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And the kooks will be yapping about it in.... (Score:3, Funny)
Swap "moths" with "foil hat wearing kooks" and "birds" with "us" to understand the point.
It's a defense mechanism, plain and simple.
Re:And the kooks will be yapping about it in.... (Score:5, Funny)
It could be Dick Cheney (Score:5, Funny)
Aliens! (Score:3, Funny)
Its A Bird, Its a Plane Its..... (Score:2, Funny)
I was wondering where my spaceship was (Score:2)
Delusional kooks. (Score:3, Funny)
It was only the Enterprise going back to the 23rd century with a whale from Earth. Anyone screaming "UFO!" tells me that some idiots will believe anything...
Re:Delusional kooks. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Delusional kooks. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Delusional kooks. (Score:4, Funny)
Except that it's currently the 21st century.
streaking, eh? (Score:4, Funny)
How indecent, call the FCC.
Re:streaking, eh? (Score:5, Funny)
I called out "Don't look Ethel!", but it was too late -- she'd been MOONED
Or would that be PHOBOS'ED in this case?
LGM (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously though, at the very least, the cool thing is that we have seen a "shooting star" from the surface of another planet for the first time. The timing of NASA and JPL on both Spirit and Opportunity so far has been impeccable. Let's hope their luck continues.
UFO? (Score:2, Funny)
In related news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In related news (Score:3, Funny)
Us who are REALLY in the know , know you can only buy the good Tin at a supply house.
And in the rest of the English Speaking world (Score:4, Funny)
Good old BBC (Score:2, Insightful)
Beagle 2? (Score:5, Funny)
Streaking was actually due to long exposure (Score:5, Informative)
Likely origin of the "UFO" - Earth. Cool, there's finally real evidence that the UFO sighted is actually from another planet. Unfortunately if it's true then it would really be an identified flying object, not an unidentified one.
Asteriod? (Score:3, Funny)
Marvin (Score:5, Funny)
-Marvin
P.S. Where was the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
Re:Marvin (Score:3, Informative)
"The Illudium Pew 36 Explosive Space Modulator"
http://looneytunes.warnerbros.com/stars_of_the_
Unless the WB site has it wrong, which wouldnt suprise me either.
Re:Marvin (Score:5, Informative)
- 1948; Haredevil Hare - It's a "Uranium Pew-36 Explosive Space Modulator."
- 1953; Duck Dodger's in the 24 1/2 Century - Duck Dodgers (a.k.a. Daffy) and Marvin both try to obtain the only known quantity of "Illudium Phosdex", the shaving cream atom and our first exposure to Illudium.
- 1958; Hare-way to the Stars - Now we finally have the "Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator."
I think the third one is the one you want since it contains the the line, "Where's the Kaboom? There was supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom!"Re:Marvin (Score:3, Funny)
It wasn't a UFO, it was ... (Score:5, Funny)
Could it be!? (Score:4, Funny)
In other news... (Score:3, Funny)
Let me get this straight... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm so confused!...
X-Prize test flight? (Score:3, Funny)
I smell trouble... (Score:3, Funny)
**cue X-Files Theme**
Silly /.ers... (Score:5, Funny)
---
"Just once, I wish we would encounter an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets"
reduced drag (Score:5, Informative)
Ghost ship (Score:3, Interesting)
The thing about real ghost ships, and abandoned cars, etc., is that they either sink or rust or are towed away in the end. Interplanetary space probes generally do not.
reminds me of a joke (Score:3, Funny)
When NASA was preparing for the Apollo Project, it took the astronauts to a Navajo reservation in Arizona for training. One day, a Navajo elder and his son came across the space crew walking among the rocks. The elder, who spoke only Navajo, asked a question. His son translated for the NASA people:
"What are these guys in the big suits doing?" One of the astronauts said
that they were practicing for a trip to the moon. When his son relayed this comment the Navajo elder got all excited and asked if it would be possible to give to the astronauts a message to deliver to the moon.
Recognizing a promotional opportunity when he saw one, a NASA official accompanying the astronauts said, "Why certainly!" and told an underling to get a tape recorder. The Navajo elder's comments into the microphone were brief. The NASA official asked the son if he would translate what his father had said. The son listened to the recording and laughed uproariously. But he refused to translate.
So the NASA people took the tape to a nearby Navajo village and played it for other members of the tribe. They too laughed long and loudly but also refused to translate the elder's message to the moon.
Finally, an official government translator was summoned. After he finally stopped laughing the translator relayed the message: "Watch out for these assholes - they have come to steal your land."
Makes me curious... (Score:5, Funny)
A way to check for repeated sighted (Score:5, Interesting)
Although orbital mechanics is not my specialty, I think NASA should be able to calculate an approximate orbit and take more images to see if it might be Viking 2.
The height of the streak in the image, the distance away and the orientation of camera will give the position. Put this with velocity to get the orbit. So, we just need to know distance away and velocity. The length of the streak plus the exposure time can give them a equation of velocity vs. distance away. Orbital mechanics gives another equation for velocity vs. height. Use these 2 equations to solve for the orbit, assuming the object is in orbit and not just passing by. NASA knows the orbital elements of Viking 2 when it was in use and can use these to see if the calculated orbit is reasonable.
Then using the orbit, calculate times the object would be visible to either rover and make some long exposures at the predicted times to look for it again. The only problem I can see is that the measurement error might be too much to make accurate predictions about future approaches.
This assumes NASA cares whether it's Viking 2.
Astronomical odds? (Score:5, Interesting)
The odds against this kind of coincidence must be staggering. Any math geniuses want to take a stab at it? We could estimate how often the half-dozen (?) satellites around mars would pass through that particular section of the sky, and we know roughly how many photos the rovers take in a given day... The odds must be something like one in a billion, or worse. I can't help but think of the slashdot sig I see once in a while... something like "The face of the moon is covered with the results of astronomical odds."
Re:Astronomical odds? (Score:4, Informative)
It is VERY easy (relatively) to photohgraph a meteor, especially, as you asked "when you're expecting a meteor shower that night." Go to any local amateur astronomy "star party" next time there's a meteor shower. You should see at least half a dozen cameras attached to the scopes, which will take plenty of pics that night. Quite lovely pics too.
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Funny)
Even has a pronounable acronym. You not go!
Re:Misleading title (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Misleading title (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Misleading title (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Misleading title (Score:4, Funny)
Then again... (Score:3, Insightful)
Mars has about 0.5% of Earths atmosphere. I suspect that means that virtually every rock that would burn in our atmosphere to become a "shooting star", ends up instead hitting the ground and becomes a "crater".
Re:Atmospheric phenomenon? (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? I thought the Northern Lights [wikipedia.org] were due to solar wind hitting out magnetosphere. Mars lacks a magnetosphere so I don't think it's the same event. Are you perhaps thinking of something different?