China Reveals Most Detailed Geological Map of the Moon Ever Created (nature.com) 61
Longtime Slashdot reader AmiMoJo shares a report from Nature: The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) has released the highest-resolution geological maps of the Moon yet. The Geologic Atlas of the Lunar Globe, which took more than 100 researchers over a decade to compile, reveals a total of 12,341 craters, 81 basins and 17 rock types, along with other basic geological information about the lunar surface. The maps were made at the unprecedented scale of 1:2,500,000. The CAS also released a book called Map Quadrangles of the Geologic Atlas of the Moon, comprising 30 sector diagrams which together form a visualization of the whole Moon. [...] China will use the maps to support its lunar ambitions and Liu says that the maps will be beneficial to other countries as they undertake their own Moon missions. Three spacecraft have launched aiming for the Moon so far this year, and in May, China intends to send a craft to collect rocks from the Moon's far side.
China dominates the moon now (Score:4, Funny)
Re:China dominates the moon now (Score:4, Informative)
Ya, because it is sooooo much easier to land something successfully on Mars than it is the moon. Maybe you could tell NASA what it is doing wrong, I'm sure they'd listen to you.
Moon is hard. So is Mars [Re:China dominates t...] (Score:4, Interesting)
Ya, because it is sooooo much easier to land something successfully on Mars than it is the moon. Maybe you could tell NASA what it is doing wrong, I'm sure they'd listen to you.
NASA went with the low-cost approach to landing on Mars (tagged "faster better cheaper") with the 1998 Mars Polar Lander [americaspace.com] (MPL) and Deep Space 2 probes, which were built for half the price of the previous Mars missions. They failed. When you go bargain-basement, you take risks. The following Mars missions, MER, Curiosity, Perseverance, took that lesson to heart, and were not "go for the lowest cost regardless of what corners you have to cut."
With the Commercial Lunar Payload Services [nasa.gov] landers, twenty-five years later, NASA went back to the idea of prioritizing low cost and took a completely commercial approach, "you bid on it, and we won't tell you how you design the mission, you just land our payload on the moon." NASA did this knowing that there were risks, but with the approach that taking risks will, in the long run, reduce price, and they hedged the risks by choosing several different companies to deliver landing services. The first one failed; the second one l(from a different company) anded on the moon but broke a strut and fell over. NASA knew it would be risky, and accepted the risk. Unlike previous failures, this time they did not cancel the program with the first failure.
As an afterward, one of the ways the Mars Polar Lander was cheap was that they built several landers in an assembly line. The second one, Mars Surveyor 2001, was cancelled after MPL failed... but the spacecraft was already finished, and after the failure mechanisms were known, the design flaw was fixed and the spacecraft was flown to Mars as the Phoenix mission. Which worked, and the design was then used again for Insight. If there's a lesson there, it is that when a low cost mission fails, you can learn from the failure and fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
That troll did not deserve a serious response.
Re: (Score:2)
Explain how the Earth is really, flat, too, oh wise one. And how NASA faked the moon landings. Let's call this bullshit!
LOL
Re: (Score:1)
"AI, enhance image!"
way cool (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Pretty much everything "useful" comes from military budgets, they're the only ones able to spend...
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, enforcing environmental laws, keeping bean counters at airlines from figuring in an acceptable rates of crashes, OSHA to keep your company from "expending" you, etc.
Re:way cool (Score:5, Informative)
If there's anything useful, you can be sure, it won't be on those maps.
Re: (Score:2)
What does that mean?
Do they skip craters shaped like Winnie the Pooh or Tank Man?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
LOL! No, I mean water or useful caves, that sort of thing. Any helpful features will be left off as to not help us in any way. This is just propaganda to make the CCP look not totally incompetent, pushed by their usual propagandist here on /., AmiMoJo.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey there, AmiMoJo!
Re: (Score:3)
It's not that sort of map.. The resolution isn't enough to show things like caves, and it only shows the topology which doesn't include any potential ice water.
It's useful for identifying locations where there might be water, and where landing is possible. It's also very useful for navigation, as the recent precision landing by Japan demonstrated.
Re: way cool (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Only in the same sense that NASA rockets were repurposed/evolved missiles from the US and Nazi militaries.
China also has private space sector, which has had some successes and firsts.
Re: (Score:1)
While all Allie members picked up scientists from Germany and Japan, American missiles had little in common with 'NAZI' missiles. Why? Because theirs were designed more like cruise missiles.
And in the end, there is a HUGE difference between grabbing unemployed scientists, vs stealing their tech OR having tech that is 100% from the military like CHina is. But you know that. After all, I suspect that China IS your home nation.
Waiting for a political map (Score:2)
What territories will china claim? Where is the border to the moon nazis?
Re:Waiting for a political map (Score:5, Funny)
They've already claimed Tibet on the grounds that it is nearest to the moon.
Re: (Score:1)
... we're still number one at things like pronoun management! So there's that.
Are you though?
I mean... you'd think "pronoun management" would be not unlike names... use what you're asked to use. But no, that's apparently too complicated, too respectful, too offensive to just do without complaining about it.
Walk with me for a moment.
Every seen the stereotypical "gay guy"? The stereotype exists for a reason. It's not that all gay guys - or even probably most gay guys - are effeminate, sensitive, fashion-conscious, lisping, art-loving dudes. But there's enough truth in that s
Re: (Score:2)
Walk with me for a moment. Every seen the stereotypical "gay guy"? The stereotype exists for a reason. It's not that all gay guys - or even probably most gay guys - are effeminate, sensitive, fashion-conscious, lisping, art-loving dudes. But there's enough truth in that stereotype to merit consideration.
Actually no, there isn't. I've know quite a few gay guys, and none of them looked or acted like that. Not a single one.
But... somebody with mod points please moderate this off-topic, since this post (and the whole thread) is.
Re: (Score:1)
Just because you know no one where the stereotype is fitting, does not mean the stereotype does not exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the stereotype definitely exists.
It just doesn't actually match real human beings.
Re: (Score:1)
It does match.
In the 1980s, all gays matched.
That is how they signaled to each other: we could match.
Now I live in Thailand. Still 30% to 40% (rough estimate) match.
And if one of the gays actually started the operation and has now breasts and is waiting for the rest: they are 111% that stereotype.
I understand what you mean. You do not want to be anti gay, neither do I want. But: the stereotype and the people living it, does exit.
Re: (Score:2)
There were some actual studies around 10 years ago that confirmed the stereotype to be very true. Effeminate speakers with stereotypically gay gestures are very much more likely to be actually gay. There is a strong genetic correlation.
I love it when stuff like this comes out and some on the left are just so hilariously depressed about it. They want to believe in social constructionism in all things, and it just isn't so. Just like the huge differences in how men and women think, our preferences, and ou
Re: (Score:2)
There were some actual studies around 10 years ago
citation needed.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really care to go find it, but it was not long before that Curb episode with the gay kid. :D
Re: (Score:2)
P.S. Man, that show seriously overstayed its welcome!
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, very few gays act that way, but the people who do, are often gay.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why everyone hates the woke. They demand you conform to their way of thinking, even to the point of demanding you flog yourself constantly to make each of them feel extra special.
I mean... you'd think "pronoun management" would be not unlike names... use what you're asked to use.
So suddenly you think you rate not just a specific name, but also custom pronouns? LOL!
Ok. Answer this question: What is the purpose of a pronoun, generally? Why did humans in all cultures develop such a concept? I mean proper nouns are pretty much necessary. proper pronouns are a contradiction. They go against the
Re: (Score:2)
So suddenly you think you rate not just a specific name, but also custom pronouns? LOL!
This is weird, but I'll engage. Have you ever met a doctor? Or a professor? Or anyone serving in the military? Titles are a thing. Heck... Mister, Missus and Miss are titles too. Turns out we already have completely arbitrary extra monikers for people and somehow the world hasn't ended.
Ok. Answer this question: What is the purpose of a pronoun, generally? Why did humans in all cultures develop such a concept? I mean proper nouns are pretty much necessary. proper pronouns are a contradiction. They go against the whole purpose of pronouns, which is to make it far easier to speak and refer to other people!
Clearly, humans invented pronouns organically, as way to make speaking and referring to others manageable. Imagine if we had no pronouns at all, and had to literally use proper nouns (names) to refer to every single individual. Think of how fucking difficult that would be. It's fucking hard. Well, that's what you're asking. Sorry that hurts your feelings, or the feelings some activist university professor told you should be hurt.
Every single time you simply had to indirectly refer to someone (who you often don't know), you'd have to stop and consider "what is their name?" And if you don't know that person's name, you have to consider what to call them just for that fleeting indirect reference. Go on, try it. And remember, the custom pronoun is different for every single individual and you have to remember them all. And if you mess up, you risk have an army of woke crybullies on social media trying to cancel you.
Well, that's just total bullshit, and you know it. Using custom per-person pronouns when simply indirectly referring to particular individuals is not something anyone else in your life demands, just you.
Stop trying to make it happen. It's never going to happen. Not even with you guys trying to force people into it with deeply coercive and dangerous laws that kick Lady Liberty right in the face. Sorry not sorry. :)
Wow. What a bunch of really off-the-point vitriol. Which is pretty much what the people who are opposed to using chosen pronouns tend to resort to because they've got nothing better.
First up, nobody (by which I mean
Re: (Score:2)
Honorary titles like "doctor" ARE NOT DIFFERENT PER PERSON, you absolute imbecile. So they are nothing like pronouns.
Heck, the only reason we even have different pronouns per sex is because that's extremely easy to know without thinking about it. Some languages don't even do that!
The only other solution is to cleanse the language of gender, which most people absolutely want to do just to appease some oversensitive, dumb as dirt crybully like you.
Re: (Score:2)
Honorary titles like "doctor" ARE NOT DIFFERENT PER PERSON, you absolute imbecile. So they are nothing like pronouns.
Heck, the only reason we even have different pronouns per sex is because that's extremely easy to know without thinking about it. Some languages don't even do that!
The only other solution is to cleanse the language of gender, which most people absolutely want to do just to appease some oversensitive, dumb as dirt crybully like you.
So, it turns out that some people are incapable of being educated. Can't say I didn't try.
Oh, and you forgot to use bold last time, so you forgot the first rule of the clueless: louder must mean righter. Yes. Righter.
Re: (Score:2)
Save your "education" for your next Politburo meeting. Now run, wokie, run! :)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know, Canada passed a bill a few years ago forcing all citizens to use each other's custom personal pronouns, pay a fine, or go to jail.
Proudly signed into jail by crybully in chief and lifetime PM, Justine Trudeaux.
Re: (Score:2)
Heheheh. Priorities.
Selenological, right? (Score:3)
It is my understanding that the moon was once part of our planet but, "geo" refers to Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
They tried that back in the '60s and '70s, but it turns out that reporters are too stupid to figure out how to use words correctly. Scientists would finally get one person educated, then the editors would assign them to some other beat and they'd get a new idiot. Didn't take long before they gave up, since the congresscritters who fund them to a great extent are even dumber. We all have to settle for 'lunar geology' and the like.
Re: (Score:2)
They tried that back in the '60s and '70s, but it turns out that reporters are too stupid to figure out how to use words correctly.
If there's a different word for lunar geology, then do we need new words for the geology of Phobos, the geology of Ceres, etc.? On balance, the uneducated reporters got it right. Keep it simple.
Re: (Score:2)
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 2020 released a map of the Moon that shows its geological features is called a "Unified Geologic Map of the Moon."
I guess if the scientists can get it wrong, so can the science reporters.
Re: (Score:2)
Geo is a made up English prefix based on a Greek word that means (E/e)arth, dirt, land or ground. You can insist on making up new Greek or Latin derived prefixes for every body, but after a few people get tired of it and do the snesible thing: make one term generic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, if I have to use different personal pronouns for every person I encounter, you can learn to love "lunological map!" ;)
Re: (Score:2)
They abandoned the terminology of giving a different name to the geology of every moon and planet decades ago.
American response (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So, now any project you don't like, you're going to link to Boeing, even if they have zero to do with it?
All 'interesting' parts will have been removed. (Score:3)
You can count on it.
The moon will be owned by those who defend it (Score:2)
The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, they're not, troll.
Where is it? (Score:2)
The images in the article are low res. Searching just turns up the same low res images.