Japan Launches Lunar Orbiter Mission 121
Sooner Boomer writes "In a historic event, Japan today launched its first lunar probe. The mission is nicknamed Kaguya after a fairy-tale princess from Japanese myth. The news media is calling it the 'latest move in a new race with China, India and the United States' to explore the moon (don't forget Google). From the article: 'The rocket carrying the three-metric ton orbiter took off into blue skies, leaving a huge trail of vapor over the tiny island of Tanegashima, about 1,000 km (620 miles) south of Tokyo, at 10:31 a.m. (9:31 p.m. EDT) as it headed out over the Pacific Ocean. The mission consists of a main orbiter and two baby satellites equipped with 14 observation instruments designed to examine surface terrain, gravity and other features for clues on the origin and evolution of the moon. China has plans to launch an orbiter later this year, with unmanned rover lander mission scheduled for 2010. India and the US also have orbiter missions scheduled for next year.'"
SELENE (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Name (Score:1)
Interesting choice of name. Selene was a lunar deity and is the Greek word for the moon.
No, it's not an interesting choice of name! It's like Anime going to the moon or sommat. What we need here is name like Susano and he's going to go all samurai on the Moon! Good grief, what is the world coming to? ;-)
china, not to be outdone by fierce rivals Japan have announced plans to lauch their own lunar surveyor named Ripple of Leaf Falling on Water of Still Pond at Sunrise
Re: (Score:2)
Yo, what's up?
Not to be confused with (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What's with all the goddamn typoos? (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Ironically, the German (and Dutch, phonetically) word for the moon is the same as the French word for "world"...sans -e
If we're going to get picky... (Score:5, Informative)
Thank God! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Thank God! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Hmm. I've noticed the link between conspiracy theories and drugs before. There's a certain irony in some pothead insisting that pot is harmless and then launching into a conspiracy filled rant that shows strong signs of clinical paranoia. Not that they can appreciate the irony anymore of course.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never used pot on a regular basis, but I've noticed that (1) it helps the mind bring together seemingly unrelated facts, events, and patterns (2) when this happens, you get that strong sense of discovery or enl
Re: (Score:2)
You can't win an argument with a nutcase. He'll just say that the pics from the Japanese mission are fake, and probably create some conspiracy about the US paying the Japs to "keep the secret". Don't count on that $50.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
"Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience."
Re:Thank God! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thank God! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, in most cases them 'nuts' are at least partially correct, in that there usually is a conspiracy where they suppose there could be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The robots (presumably such as this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_1 [wikipedia.org] ) are the ones that collected the samples that were brought back...
Nobody is asking you to believe there was a conspiracy, so you don't need to set up stra
Re: (Score:1)
We get telemetry back from the Moon. There's a mirror array up there so that we can bounce a laser off the moon and measure its distance. There's also a seismometer that beams back earthquake data.
Are there any Russian or telescope pictures of the Apollo sites online? I get students who ask me about this occasionally and some long-distance pictures of the junk we left on the moon would satisfy most doubters.
Re: (Score:2)
Neither of those require a human presence to set them up.
Re: (Score:1)
Neither of those require a human presence to set them up.
How do you figure? In order for a seismometer to function, it must be anchored to the ground properly, be placed on level ground, and calibrated. You can't just drop one from an orbiter. Same goes for a mirror array.
Now, yes, the Mars rovers were dropped from the sky and functioning on their own within a few days. But (1) That was 2004, not the late 60's or early 70's. And (2) to my knowledge the Mars rovers aren't carrying equipment as sensitive as a seismometer. There really are limits on th
Re: (Score:2)
[tinfoil]
And precisely how do you know that its actually a functioning seismometer? Instead of just a transmitter that sends out fake signals now and again.
[/tinfoil]
There is little you can do or show to a TrueBeliever that would "prove" that we landed humans on the moon. All can be explained away. Usually very badly, but they give a good try.
Re: (Score:1)
You know what might help? Some pictures taken by the later Russian missions or from a telescope showing the Apollo sites . . . like I originally posted about.
Do such pictures exist and can someone maybe direct me/us to them? Thanks!
Re: (Score:1)
[paranoid rant]Well, that's simple really. Obviously if you can bring me to the Moon now the government would've had ample time to plant a fake lander that's supposedly from the 60's. This could've been planted here last week for all I know...[/paranoid rant]
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
(*dons tinfoil hat*)
That's no Moon!
Re: (Score:1)
Try to find the US flag here:
http://www.google.com/moon/ [google.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Three metric tons (Score:4, Funny)
Are you sure about that? [slashdot.org]
Instead of a wiki for programmers (Score:1)
Actually, I just looked randomly at docforge's article on hash tables [docforge.com], and I can tell you the Wikipedia one [wikipedia.org]is far more accurate and complete already.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What The Article Does Not Say... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Luna 2 anniversary (Score:2)
It was a great feat back then [wikipedia.org] and it is a great feat today.
Kudos to japanese space team!
Re: (Score:2)
All your base are belong to us! [wikipedia.org]
The fools!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Kaguya (Score:2, Informative)
Coincidence?
I think not.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
"The mission is nicknamed Kaguya after a fairy-tale princess from Japanese myth"
Okami is a game heavily based on Japanese myth!
In other news, 1 and 1 make 2.
Seriously, you should look the story up. It's a classic tale of boy-meets-girl, girl-returns-to-moon, guy-gets-really-sad-and-sets-fire-to-things-atop-mountain.
Re: (Score:1)
Is everyone playing nice? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But seriously, I was wondering the same thing, how are there experiments gonna vary from ours (if at all) considering the near half century technology gap between automated experiment equipment then and now.
Service To World: Shared Info In This Post (Score:2)
There, that about sums it up. For my next post, I'll share what the nations of earth have learned from Mars after spending billions trying to reach it. That post will be a dupe of this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Well
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The SELENE mission is highly awaited among NASA types because it will help produce a better lunar gravity model (the "shape" of the gravity field around the moon due to irregularities in shape, etc.), which will help in the design of the upcoming LRO mission (and missions after that).
These models are typically published in journals, then used by organizations around the world to design their own missions.
Crap, they're trying for a quick win! (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
very high Japan probe failure rate (Score:4, Informative)
The had a little better luck with a comet probe. It made it there. I was supposed to retrieve samples. They think it might have gotten some. But the probe died on the way back to Earth.
Good luck next time!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't this kinda sad? (Score:5, Interesting)
We should already have moon-based lasers to shoot down them godless foreign spy satellites before they enter orbit. We should own that goddamned moon, complete with a Disneyland! And blackjack! And hookers!
In fact, forget the moon!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
In fact, forget the moon!
Thats pretty much what happend.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Grabbing the Moon (Score:1)
When will the US leverage our huge, pioneering, and still leading Moon exploration to harness that energy? Solar panels on or orbiting the moon could send enough energy back to the Earth to power everything we do, without pumping a single barrel of oil from under treacherous sands, or emitting another gram (net) of Greenhouse gases. The way out of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Sun lands over 1.3KW:m^2 [wikipedia.org] on the Moon's surface. The Moon's surface is 3.8E7Km^2 [wikipedia.org], or 3.8E13m^2 [google.com]. The world consumes about 15TW [wikipedia.org]. 15TW is 3 hundredths of a percent [google.com] of the Lunar insolation. Even at 10% efficiency, only 0.3% of the Lunar surface would power the Earth. Since the US consumes only about 3.3TW [wikipedia.org], we'd need only about 0.075% of the Lunar surface.
Facty enough for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, it's not even necessary to travel back and forth repeatedly. We could send a robot that manufactures the solar panels and other infrastructure on site, as has already been demonstrated. Your idea about storage and "conversion" costs is similarly hairsplitting. They're more than matched by the longterm political (eg. war) and materials costs of our current energy
Re: (Score:2)
I'm happy to discuss costs with someone else. Because, as I posted, their moving the goalposts to try to "win" an argument they'd just lost, instead of acknowledging they were wrong (and maybe that they were baselessly obnoxious), made me reject the idea of discussin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This part of the technology was demo'ed to me and the Planetary Society by Grumman as long as 17 years ago. And they were pitching the Society (at Columbia U) on backing their going
Re: (Score:2)
Really, really long extension cords.
Of course, extension cords that long would probably be pretty heavy, and impractical, so we'll make them out of something with negligible or zero mass -- like photons. Like microwaves, or lasers.
See Doc Ruby's post above for details.
Re: (Score:2)
That is why W. is pushing the moon. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am hoping American private enterprise gets first crack at NASA research that will use the Moon for energy, and as a base (guiding slingshots) for further solar system expansion (for more American claims). The mining/manufacting/materials up there (other than energy) are mostly advantageous over Earthbound matter only because they're already out of the grav
My prediction and curiosity. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a computer geek, but I recognize that we switched priorities (funding and vision) too extremely in the 1980s from space to computers. I recognize that investment in space exploration also improves computers, networks, software, but it's mainly just a lot cooler and more inspiring than even getting
Re: (Score:2)
Even orbital nukes, which were discussed and explored as viable options in the 1950's and 1960's as something the U.S. Air Force was strongly considering, is something that has long been discounted and dismissed as both impractical and subject to potential counter measures that would render them useless.
By far and away the most effective device for de
The moon isn't the best choice (Score:2)
Exploiting NEA resources is a much, MUCH better choice.
I don't have the time nor room to explain why here; read "Mining the Sky" by Lewis. He presents a great case, with math to back it up.
Cheers,
SB
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I personally think there is a place for Lunar exploration and mining, but it isn't so cut and dried as some would have you think it is. But there are some very defin
Re: (Score:2)
The Moon's advantages (of which I'd like to see more analysis) for human bases isn't just a way to get into space. It's an end in itself: "homo cosmos" is what we must become, and so we must actually have humans living in space, preferably for generations without visiting Earth.
The Mo
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking about bootstrapping operations, tho. The heavier metals are worth a lot more than silicates - we aren't likely to have silica shortages soon -
Re: (Score:2)
More to the point.... can we make sending equipment + personnel to an asteroid cheap enough to extract very rare minerals (aka Uranium, Gold, Platinum) at a price that can be competitive with terrestrial-based mining operations? If you can make a business case of
Upcoming missions ... (Score:4, Funny)
Tiny? (Score:2, Informative)
tons are tons are tonnes (info) (Score:3, Informative)
The difference between the two tons (or tonnes if you must) is so small that to qualify whether you're using one or the other is nit-picking[1]. As it is, unless the weight of the spacecraft is an exact number of tons, the journalistic rounding-off of the weight far exceeds this small difference in definitions.
[1]unless of course you're using the weight in orbital mechanics calculations, in which case you'll need better accruacy than the 1 significant digit reported here.
Moon Bases (Score:1)
Why the moon-crazy? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Also, the bulk of the moon itself is useful for things like radio astronomy. A radio telescope on the lunar far side would be able to use the entire mass of the moon as a shield against the background noise of the Earth.
Other than that... It's just damn cool! Go outside some night and really take a look at the moon. It's the
Re: (Score:1)