NASA Selects Inexpensive Space Project Candidates 37
coondoggie brings us a Networkworld report detailing NASA's selection of six mission proposals for further study by the Small Explorer (SMEX) Program. The goal of the program is to develop cheap, tightly focused science missions (PDF). Among the selected proposals are a satellite telescope bank for use in detecting exoplanets, and a solar coronograph which will study solar wind and coronal ejections. Networkworld provided links with more detailed information on most of the projects.
Inexpensive space project candidate... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
proudly brought to you by, (Score:3, Funny)
Re:proudly brought to you by, (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Finally we will be able to quantify the exact length of half a piece of string.
By Grabthar's hammer (Score:2, Funny)
Guarunteed Pick (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
I liked that part... how the hell do they know it will be more than 1,000? And how do they know what size?
If they are already aware that there is these planets, then wouldnt it be more accurate to say "and finally see over 1,000 planets that we already assume exist mathematically"?
Or is it working by an average, one telescope usually tends to find 184 planets, and for some reason they never exceed Jupiters size?
Re:Guarunteed Pick (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Guarunteed Pick (Score:4, Informative)
Try "non-existent"
Re:Guarunteed Pick (Score:4, Informative)
The smallest known exoplanet [physicsworld.com] is the fourth planet of the pulsar B1257+12, with a mass considerably smaller than Earth. Many of the pulsar planets [exoplanet.eu] are Earth sized and smaller.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
HSTs primary mission isn't planet-hunting, so it was neither designed for that nor does it spend most of its time doing it.
Meanwhile, discoveries of "Earth-sized" planets remain rare despite the technology that has been developed within the decade.
How much of that technology has reached space in the last decade ? Off the top of my head, I can name only one planet-hunt
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When looking for political sponsors it's best to keep the explaination dramatic, simple, and confident. If that's not enough offer them naming rights for some of the new planets, maybe a ribbon cutting cermony for the rocket, a ride in an air-force jet
Re:Guarunteed Pick (Score:4, Informative)
Statistics. We now know that planetary systems are fairly common.
And how do they know what size?
Well, the lower size limit is given by the detection sensitivity ("If we're lucky, we can find an Earth-sized rock, but not a Mars- or Mercury-sized one."). The upper limit is given by the mass at which a lump of gas and rock starts initiating nuclear fusion and doesn't count as a planet anymore.
If they are already aware that there is these planets, then wouldnt it be more accurate to say "and finally see over 1,000 planets that we already assume exist mathematically"?
No, we don't know anything about these planets yet, but from our current knowledge about the likelihood of planetary systems we can guess how many planets we're likely to find if we examine X million stars.
Re: (Score:2)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6934603.stm [bbc.co.uk]
They call that one a "planet" and its 70% larger than Jupiter.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
70% larger is still in the same ball park as Jupiter, at least as far as astronomers are concerned. Heck, anything below a brown dwarf is in the same ball park as Jupiter. (Astronomers also have weird definitions of "metal" and "ice" that may not quite correspond to their meanings in other fields of science).
A planet 70% more massive than Earth would count as an Earth-sized planet, too. Sure, we may not find the gravity there too appealing,
But will anyone care? (Score:4, Interesting)
Astronomers are using up their mainstream exoplanet currency very quickly. Already "we found another planet" is delegated to the "how about that" section of the news. Soon it won't even make that. So what happens when they find a really *interesting* planet?
Nothing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a logical contradiction in your argument. By definition, an "interesting" planet will generate interest.
By your logic, the Shoemaker-Levy comet would have gotten no media attention at all, on account of hundreds of years of astronomers using up their mainstream comet currency. But in fact Shoemaker-Levy got a lot of interest, from a wide range of people, precisely because it was "really interesting" in a way that most comets are no
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Mars Society? (Score:3, Informative)
Sounds a bit similar to the Mars Project Challenge that was deadlined last week.
If you are a logged in member of MS, you can view the 28 entries that were submitted [marssociety.org] and will be considered for funding at an upcoming conference in Boulder CO.
Personally, I think the most worthwhile projects related to Mars exploration are the ones dealing with In Situ Resource Utilization and the idea of "manufacturing products" from the stuff that is available there (which is mainly CO2 and rocks). ;)
What is the point? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are also a lot less capable, but can solve one specific science problem while Hubble, Chandra etc. are general facilities that can solve many different science problems - but not all problems, which leaves some nice 'discovery space' for the small missions. Also, SMEX missions are done in a finite number of years, and ar
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Telescopes R espensive (Score:2)
Man the scopes, america
Something wrong here... (Score:2)
probe cartman? Explore the solar system (kindof) looking for alien beings [wikipedia.org] Cheap? On who's terms? Define cheap.
With GTA 4 rumoured to have cost a mere $100 million , $4-5 billion per long duration mission seems like nothing. How many minutes in Iraq is that anyway? Worse still, smaller faster cheaper oops it broke won't cut it for the outer solar system. I'd hate to be the researcher who spends 10+ years working on a pro
I support the project (Score:1)