Crashed Spacecraft Yields Data on Solar Wind 44
Hugh Pickens writes "After the Genesis mission spent 27 months in space gathering tiny samples from different types of solar wind, Hollywood stunt pilots swooped in with a helicopter to catch the falling capsule when it returned to earth. Unfortunately the spacecraft's parachute did not open, and the spacecraft ploughed a hole into the desert. Now scientists are starting to recover data from the salvageable pieces of Genesis. Nature Magazine reports that an analysis of isotopes of neon and argon shows that the elements of main interest to the researchers have the same isotopic signature in the solar wind as in the Sun itself. Because dirt contains relatively little neon and argon, the current Science study wasn't affected too much by contamination and the the team remains hopeful that they will be able to get results on oxygen and nitrogen isotopes from the mission."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Delicate uncontaminated dust samples (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
i remember reading the thread on fark [fark.com] and laughing so hard, that i had tears running down my face...
scroll halfway down - it's comedy in realtime
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the instruments and samples were so delicate that the researchers were afraid that a parachute landing would be too hard and destroy the samples. But, but, wait! We really didn't need the helicopters.
And parachutes? We don't need no stinking parachutes!.
And so it begins (Score:4, Funny)
Re:And so it begins (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Joke -woosh--->
O <--you
/ \
Brilliant! (Score:2)
Also, one peeve - You only capitalize "science" if speaking about the magazine.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, if they find only what they expect (or want) to find, they can conclude that the samples are valid? Or, conversely, if they find something that is different than their theories predict, they can conclude that the sam
Re: (Score:2)
we know from the light spectrum of the sun what elements are in the sun and what amounts of each, pinpointing the isotopic composition however is more difficult. what I meant by the part
was that if we find that the sample consists of mainly oxygen and nitrogen with little hydrogen or helium, it isn't likely to be part of
Re:Brilliant! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
in addition to that, we know the general composition of the sun which shouldn't deviate too much from the composition of soalr wind so if we find something statistically off about the oxygen/nitrogen composition then we know that it is likely that the samples were contaminated.
In other words, if they find only what they expect (or want) to find, they can conclude that the samples are valid? Or, conversely, if they find something that is different than their theories predict, they can conclude that the samples must be contaminated?
Obviously, we also know the composition of the atmosphere. If the isotope ratios are different from solar wind and they are actually more similar to terrestrial sources, the scientists might conclude the samples are contaminated while they are not. In all other cases, the analysis will produce correct results.
The magazine it is (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There, fixed that for you.
Re:Argon (Score:4, Interesting)
"Murphy's Law", corrected and correctly applied (Score:5, Insightful)
Also can't say that I knew Murphy was a "rocket scientist", literally. How ironic. You'd think NASA would have learned from him by now?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Only a fool believes that Murphy can be circumvented - in the long run he always wins.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
KHAAAAAAN! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was called 'Project Scoop'? (Score:2)
http://www.1000misspenthours.com/reviews/reviewsa-d/andromedastrain.htm [1000misspenthours.com]
Uhh, *solar* wind (Score:2)
NASA's big Divot (Score:5, Informative)
Back in the 60's, legends Chuck Yeager and Neil Armstrong took a Beech twin up for some landing practice on some of the salt flats. Neil set up on a approach for one such flat, on his judgment that it was dry and stable.. Yeager, being the "desert rat" knew of certain flats that stay muddy under the salt crusts, and the one they set up to land was just that. He told Neil that he should abort and go find another flat. Neil, being the analytical computer, declared that it would hold. The Beech's tires touched down on the crust, and proceeded to keep going down into the muddy substrate, sinking up to the struts, coming to a halt.
So the Beech sat there shaking and vibrating, engines going at full throttle. Chuck, ever being the wisecracking pilot turned and said to Armstrong "I told you so". Neil turned to respond, and his computer for a brain clicked and went kerCHUNK! He had nothing to say in return. They hiked to another flat so a DC3 could pick them up on the run.
Re: (Score:2)
He's an inspiring man, I just wish he'd talk about it more.
Re: (Score:2)
*Brazil'd* (Score:2)
So....What? (Score:2)
Does the "Five-second Rule" apply here?