Starship Asterisk*

by **BMAONE23** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 6:16 pm

What I find interesting is just how rough and fragile looking the surface appears to be, almost like standing on volcanic glass. It is intresting to note that this particular comet surface is rather dark, rough and craggy and is similar to the hollywood imagined comet surface in Armageddon

by **DavidLeodis** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:42 pm

Congratulations for what is to me an already very successful mission and to be honest one that I thought may not succeed even to land on the comet.

I am curious why this comet (and presumably others) has such a rough terrain as I would have expected its surface to have been smoothed out over its already assumed long life. Perhaps even tiny meteorite impacts help maintain the rough surface. Are there 'weathering' erosional effects in space

.

by **Guest** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:56 am

Looking at this image, I noted an lighter shaded oval shape between the 7 to 8 o'clock position relative to the center of the image, out on a fairly homogeneous 'plain'. A crater that size, on this object, seems improbable because such impact would have destroyed both. Volcanoes are out of the question, as in internal liquid leaking to the surface. Out-gassing, sublimation, etc. could not account for such a smooth edge. And nature hates straight (evenly curved) lines without cause. Leaving the question.... What is it?

by **alter-ego** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 2:33 am

Here's a pretty good update:
[quote="NY Times"]
...
Because of the failure of a thruster that was to press it against the comet’s surface after touching down, the European Space Agency’s Philae lander, part of the $1.75 billion Rosetta mission, bounded up more than half a mile before falling to the surface of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko again nearly two hours later, more than half a mile away. That is a considerable distance across a comet that is only 2.5 miles wide.

Philae then bounced again, less high, and ended up with only two of its three legs on the surface, tipped against a boulder, a wall of rock or perhaps the side of a hole.

“We are almost vertical, one foot probably in the open air — open space. I’m sorry, there is no air around,” Jean-Pierre Bibring, the lead lander scientist, said at a news conference on Thursday.
...
[/quote]

by **Guest** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 1:04 am

Nitpicker wrote:No worries. I just didn't want anyone to think I was being a downer about this exciting event. (I don't often quote from the classics.)

I didn't get the impression you did frequently and did get the sense of your offering.

How about that taking 2 hours to contact again after the 1st bounce of the lander?

by **geckzilla** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:48 am

hlwelborn wrote:what is the artifact in the upper right corner?

In the upper right corner a segment of the Philae landing gear is visible.

http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2014/11/12 ... he-lander/

by **hlwelborn** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 12:42 am

what is the artifact in the upper right corner?

by **Astronymus** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:12 pm

Philae's adventure doesn't seem to be over. New information reveals its stuck sideways between rocks. Aside from the doability of some experiments the shadows there are threatening the power supply.

Chris Peterson wrote:
geckzilla wrote:Alright, most of us here know that Rosetta, its lander, and other missions are all providing valuable scientific data to the world despite all the horrible things going on back here at home.
And of course, most of us know that if the funding were removed from Rosetta and all the other space missions, absolutely nothing would change back here at home. Except we'd know a little less about the Universe, of course.

Look up the funding for space exploration in different countries in comparison to other budgets like the military. Space is peanuts.

by **Nitpicker** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:52 pm

Douglas wrote:
Nitpicker wrote:
Douglas wrote: As that must have been a fine piece of universal negativism, I'll conjoin the "candidate's" offering with the guy above him with the whale ..

Nitpicker's whale, rather than named Moby Dick, had a truer, inner identity and that was Transparency.
I want you to know that I had to look up the actual meaning of "universal negativism" and you're way off (and so is the "candidate", for other obvious reasons). The Rosetta/Philae mission is incredible and exciting in many ways, including scientifically. Melville's words are wondrously evocative, so I'm sorry you didn't like my metaphor, which was meant to be felt rather than analysed (so I won't explain further).
No need to feel offended, I figured I'd emphasize "candidate's" impossible negativity by taking him into the realm of fiction.
Could he have been more anti-science? Ok.

No worries. I just didn't want anyone to think I was being a downer about this exciting event. (I don't often quote from the classics.)

by **Beyond** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:12 pm

geckzilla wrote:Alright, most of us here know that Rosetta, its lander, and other missions are all providing valuable scientific data to the world despite all the horrible things going on back here at home. Just for the record, failed-phd-candidate replied in agreement with himself using another guest name sheriffofnothingham and is now banned. Don't bother responding to him anymore. As they say, don't feed the trolls.

Geck, you shot the sheriff and his deputy (failed-phd-candidate). Good show!

by **Douglas** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:59 pm

Nitpicker wrote:
Douglas wrote: As that must have been a fine piece of universal negativism, I'll conjoin the "candidate's" offering with the guy above him with the whale ..

Nitpicker's whale, rather than named Moby Dick, had a truer, inner identity and that was Transparency.
I want you to know that I had to look up the actual meaning of "universal negativism" and you're way off (and so is the "candidate", for other obvious reasons). The Rosetta/Philae mission is incredible and exciting in many ways, including scientifically. Melville's words are wondrously evocative, so I'm sorry you didn't like my metaphor, which was meant to be felt rather than analysed (so I won't explain further).

No need to feel offended, I figured I'd emphasize "candidate's" impossible negativity by taking him into the realm of fiction.
Could he have been more anti-science? Ok.

by **Chris Peterson** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:10 pm

geckzilla wrote:Alright, most of us here know that Rosetta, its lander, and other missions are all providing valuable scientific data to the world despite all the horrible things going on back here at home.

And of course, most of us know that if the funding were removed from Rosetta and all the other space missions, absolutely nothing would change back here at home. Except we'd know a little less about the Universe, of course.

by **geckzilla** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:56 pm

Alright, most of us here know that Rosetta, its lander, and other missions are all providing valuable scientific data to the world despite all the horrible things going on back here at home. Just for the record, failed-phd-candidate replied in agreement with himself using another guest name sheriffofnothingham and is now banned. Don't bother responding to him anymore. As they say, don't feed the trolls.

by **BMAONE23** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 5:47 pm

starsurfer wrote:
failed-phd-candidate wrote:There is nothing of science or space exploration to be gleaned from landing a robotic craft on a lonely comet core. The Deep Impact excursion with comet 9P Tempel was an exercise in celestial navigation and robotics - nothing of scientific worth was extracted from impacting a comet with a bulkhead. What was most distressing was the manner in mission control operators cheered and carried on like kids on supposedly a job well done. Ofcourse you land robots on celestial icebergs; ofcourse you can play bulls-eye with asteroids.. but this is not space exploration.
And. it is obvious by now that rocketry is not a viable means for space exploration.
Expending the Earth's precious resources on merry-go-round missions is neither prudent nor profitable in terms of current environmental trends. If a space probe cannot be retrieved the mission should not be carried out.
When a viable space exploration mechanism is achieved the first thing which must be done is collect the space junk orbiting the Earth and retrieve the space probes which have been abandoned to space.
Says the failed phd candidate.
Why not be happy instead? I think it's fantastic that the landing has been successful and scientific information can be gleaned from analysis of the comet such as the presence of organic molecules. Analysis of the data will provide a clearer view of the role comets might have played in the early days of the Solar System.

Try being optimistic! Most people that are miserable are because they choose to be, I choose happiness!

P.S. Maybe you could do with a hug?

Not to mention the waste of resources (and money) trying to recapture or retrieve "space junk". Now other than the futile exercise of being able to deorbit inoperative satellites the question begs...Why would you want to expend resources? I can understand perhaps some Iconic Satellites like Hubble being brought back for the Smithsonian or something but most of the In-ops are junk.
How many engineers does it take to change a light bulb?

It would be much better to plan for deorbiting at the end of the assets useful lifespan and send what is needed in the initial orbiting launch

by **Ron-Astro Pharmacist** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 5:45 pm

LocalColor wrote:I hope this is not off topic, this Smithsonian article has a "song" from the comet.

Comet 67P Has a Welcome Song for Rosetta And Philae

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-new ... 03/?no-ist

Good thought. It makes me wonder what the comet would sound like once it starts outgassing (and if it develops an atmosphere.) I don't suppose it has enough gravity or would produce enough gasses to make a peep (how convenient)

: Peep.jpg (8.62 KiB) Viewed 93576 times

but it would be interesting to hear.

Of course then I would wonder what it would smell like too. I can't imagine it would be good. But maybe??

: Philly.jpg (25.84 KiB) Viewed 93576 times

That might be appropriate but the" seeing" alone is going to be fine. As for other senses – I hope Philae sends us the chemistry to clue us in.

by **LocalColor** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 4:25 pm

I hope this is not off topic, this Smithsonian article has a "song" from the comet.

Comet 67P Has a Welcome Song for Rosetta And Philae

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-new ... 03/?no-ist

by **MargaritaMc** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 3:30 pm

Nitpicker wrote:...The Rosetta/Philae mission is incredible and exciting in many ways, including scientifically. Melville's words are wondrously evocative, so I'm sorry you didn't like my metaphor, which was meant to be felt rather than analysed (so I won't explain further).

Nit, I LOVED your Melville quote!

Felt the shivers of wonder and true awe. The mouth opened, heart stopping sense of wonder. The feeling of sheer joy when Accomazzo and Co were seen to grin and then hug had husband and me hugging and hi-fiving here.

It was/is a STUPENDOUS achievement of an impossible and audacious mission. I'm giving myself full permission to be OTT!

WOW!!!

M

by **tomatoherd** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 3:19 pm

I'm not sure the candidate believes all he said, and therefore may have been indulging in trollism. If so, he succeeded.
I too wish the likes of say, China, would focus first on cleaning up the mercury spilling into their rivers and thither the worlds oceans before embarking around the moon. But in re: Rosetta, I'd much rather have the European powers spending money this way than the way they were exactly 100 years ago. Although I believe their current experiment in humanism will end in barbarism, there exists now a nice little reprieve in which it is good to live, and to enjoy things like photos from the surface of comets.

by **Nitpicker** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 2:58 pm

Douglas wrote: As that must have been a fine piece of universal negativism, I'll conjoin the "candidate's" offering with the guy above him with the whale ..

Nitpicker's whale, rather than named Moby Dick, had a truer, inner identity and that was Transparency.

I want you to know that I had to look up the actual meaning of "universal negativism" and you're way off (and so is the "candidate", for other obvious reasons). The Rosetta/Philae mission is incredible and exciting in many ways, including scientifically. Melville's words are wondrously evocative, so I'm sorry you didn't like my metaphor, which was meant to be felt rather than analysed (so I won't explain further).

by **Tszabeau** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 2:10 pm

failed-phd-candidate wrote:There is nothing of science or space exploration to be gleaned from landing a robotic craft on a lonely comet core. The Deep Impact excursion with comet 9P Tempel was an exercise in celestial navigation and robotics - nothing of scientific ....

As opposed to what disenfranchised carping and droning?

by **Douglas** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:56 pm

failed-phd-candidate wrote:There is nothing of science or space exploration to be gleaned from landing a robotic craft on a lonely comet core. The Deep Impact excursion with comet 9P Tempel was an exercise in celestial navigation and robotics - nothing of scientific worth was extracted from impacting a comet with a bulkhead. What was most distressing was the manner in mission control operators cheered and carried on like kids on supposedly a job well done. Ofcourse you land robots on celestial icebergs; ofcourse you can play bulls-eye with asteroids.. but this is not space exploration.
And. it is obvious by now that rocketry is not a viable means for space exploration.
Expending the Earth's precious resources on merry-go-round missions is neither prudent nor profitable in terms of current environmental trends. If a space probe cannot be retrieved the mission should not be carried out.
When a viable space exploration mechanism is achieved the first thing which must be done is collect the space junk orbiting the Earth and retrieve the space probes which have been abandoned to space.

[sarc]

As that must have been a fine piece of universal negativism, I'll conjoin the "candidate's" offering with the guy above him with the whale ..

Nitpicker's whale, rather than named Moby Dick, had a truer, inner identity and that was Transparency.

ESA's Rosetta mission scientists, engineers, have solved the vexing problem of orbiting an irregular object under way in space of low mass that the engineers developing the Sprint AERCam claim to not have done. We can call Rosetta's success Reflections On Distance/Space Within That Most Nettlesome of Tendencies: 20/20 Hindsight (Time).

The comet could float in a large enough body of water, and Sprint AERCam probably shared a similar mass relation to the Shuttle.

Congratulations Rosetta engineers for a fine performance to-date. Impressive.

Now, where did that orbiting AERCam go to?

[/sarc]

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap971210.html

by **bls0326** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:54 pm

I now realize I thought of comets as a "kind of smooth" structure with long tail. Obviously rough, craggy, boulders, etc. Great pictures.
Way to go Philae, Rosetta, and ESA.

by **starsurfer** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:47 pm

failed-phd-candidate wrote:There is nothing of science or space exploration to be gleaned from landing a robotic craft on a lonely comet core. The Deep Impact excursion with comet 9P Tempel was an exercise in celestial navigation and robotics - nothing of scientific worth was extracted from impacting a comet with a bulkhead. What was most distressing was the manner in mission control operators cheered and carried on like kids on supposedly a job well done. Ofcourse you land robots on celestial icebergs; ofcourse you can play bulls-eye with asteroids.. but this is not space exploration.
And. it is obvious by now that rocketry is not a viable means for space exploration.
Expending the Earth's precious resources on merry-go-round missions is neither prudent nor profitable in terms of current environmental trends. If a space probe cannot be retrieved the mission should not be carried out.
When a viable space exploration mechanism is achieved the first thing which must be done is collect the space junk orbiting the Earth and retrieve the space probes which have been abandoned to space.

Says the failed phd candidate.

Why not be happy instead? I think it's fantastic that the landing has been successful and scientific information can be gleaned from analysis of the comet such as the presence of organic molecules. Analysis of the data will provide a clearer view of the role comets might have played in the early days of the Solar System.

Try being optimistic! Most people that are miserable are because they choose to be, I choose happiness!

P.S. Maybe you could do with a hug?

by **Astronymus** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:15 pm

Indigo_Sunrise wrote:Plus, they think it may have bounced.

It bounced and has landed 3 times but seems to be stable now. It already has send a panorama of the landing sight.

http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images ... to_a_comet

by **failed-phd-candidate** » Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:03 pm

There is nothing of science or space exploration to be gleaned from landing a robotic craft on a lonely comet core. The Deep Impact excursion with comet 9P Tempel was an exercise in celestial navigation and robotics - nothing of scientific worth was extracted from impacting a comet with a bulkhead. What was most distressing was the manner in mission control operators cheered and carried on like kids on supposedly a job well done. Ofcourse you land robots on celestial icebergs; ofcourse you can play bulls-eye with asteroids.. but this is not space exploration.
And. it is obvious by now that rocketry is not a viable means for space exploration.
Expending the Earth's precious resources on merry-go-round missions is neither prudent nor profitable in terms of current environmental trends. If a space probe cannot be retrieved the mission should not be carried out.
When a viable space exploration mechanism is achieved the first thing which must be done is collect the space junk orbiting the Earth and retrieve the space probes which have been abandoned to space.

Starship Asterisk*

APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)

Re: APOD: Descent to a Comet (2014 Nov 13)