Space

Options
1…2627293132…110

Replies

  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,841 Member
    Options
    Lots of great images of Saturns rings coming out right now!
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    Timshel_ wrote: »
    Lots of great images of Saturns rings coming out right now!

    bvmmlrqcbc61.jpg
    witlw3eq3524.png
    zzz1djryv3x8.png
    gnesyf221a2q.png
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    Columbia disaster (on this day, 14 years ago)

    mf6jw62yhxhv.jpg
  • LittleLionHeart1
    LittleLionHeart1 Posts: 3,655 Member
    Options
    cee134 wrote: »
    Columbia disaster (on this day, 14 years ago)

    mf6jw62yhxhv.jpg

    <3o:)
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    Saturn's moon Enceladus appearing dwarfed in front of the massive gas planet.

    3bokift52j0t.jpg
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    Moons don't actually influence the tides, that's science fiction. Try this experiment at home: fill your bath tub, wave a tennis ball around over it, see if the water follows.

    :wink:
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    Milky Way with Airglow Australis

    0pmsq8idnq0h.jpg
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    MadMaxV8 wrote: »
    cee134 wrote: »
    Saturn's moon Enceladus appearing dwarfed in front of the massive gas planet.

    3bokift52j0t.jpg

    I bet that moon has a tremendous impact on the tides.

    They said some of these huge planets probably ate their moons and will consume some more
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    cee134 wrote: »
    Milky Way with Airglow Australis

    0pmsq8idnq0h.jpg

    This one is really spectacular. I would buy a print.

    If you zoom in, the ground is sharp and detailed, but the stars have a bit of the dreamy look. I've got pictures like that. It's something going on in the atmosphere, it's just luck (eg it's outside the photographer's control), but it's beautiful.
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    The Porpoise Galaxy

    rgrnmd6exh40.jpg
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,841 Member
    Options
    Dark side of the sun looks like it could be good. Will have to watch.

    https://corporate.discovery.com/discovery-newsroom/discoverys-the-dark-side-of-the-sun-takes-a-look-at-how-scientists-are-working-to-understand-our-brightest-star-and-protect-against-its-potential-to-devastate-modern-civilization/

    I remember that there was something like this when I was in 7th or 8th grade too.
  • SueSueDio
    SueSueDio Posts: 4,796 Member
    Options
    cee134 wrote: »
    The Porpoise Galaxy

    rgrnmd6exh40.jpg

    Beautiful picture, but I see a penguin rather than a porpoise... :)
  • cee134
    cee134 Posts: 33,711 Member
    Options
    The Calabas Clash Node.

    a50o5y28i92x.jpg
  • Jimb376mfp
    Jimb376mfp Posts: 6,232 Member
    Options
    gjr6s03i8eu6.jpg

    Why? BECAUSE I live on the ONLY planet that has intelligent life forms!
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,841 Member
    Options
    Okay, so I was reading about theories on Mars water and came across this interesting opt-ed piece on the collective progression of research. More so the that change from a stalwart front of discovery to a (subjectively) stranded, or thin collection of scientists.
    Here there is a paradox: Today, there are many more scientists, and much more money is spent on research, yet the pace of fundamental innovation, the kinds of theories and engineering practices that will feed the pipeline of future progress, appears, to some observers, including us, to be slowing. Why might that be the case?

    Interesting read, if your into this science.

    Opinion: Science in the age of selfies
  • SueSueDio
    SueSueDio Posts: 4,796 Member
    Options
    Timshel_ wrote: »
    Okay, so I was reading about theories on Mars water and came across this interesting opt-ed piece on the collective progression of research. More so the that change from a stalwart front of discovery to a (subjectively) stranded, or thin collection of scientists.
    Here there is a paradox: Today, there are many more scientists, and much more money is spent on research, yet the pace of fundamental innovation, the kinds of theories and engineering practices that will feed the pipeline of future progress, appears, to some observers, including us, to be slowing. Why might that be the case?

    Interesting read, if your into this science.

    Opinion: Science in the age of selfies

    I only read through that quickly, but one thing I didn't see mentioned was war. "Necessity is the mother of invention", and all that. An awful lot of technological progress has been due to war or the aftermath of it, and there hasn't been such a need for that pace of development in the past 50 years. (I realise that many of the areas of research mentioned might not necessarily seem related to that sort of endeavor, but making your armies and weapons more efficient trickles down into many other things eventually.)

    I have an interesting book written in the 50's about the future of rocket development, which was so driven by the Cold War that the author couldn't really describe the concepts he was trying to explain since "the enemy" might read it and know what America was up to!
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,841 Member
    Options
    SueSueDio wrote: »
    I have an interesting book written in the 50's about the future of rocket development, which was so driven by the Cold War that the author couldn't really describe the concepts he was trying to explain since "the enemy" might read it and know what America was up to!

    Agree with you on all of that. The article could be considered fringe science opinion as there is always strong suggestion that gov-sci is where the real cutting edge development and break-thru happen. And as you mention, very much driven by military wants and needs. I remember reading a 1960's book on NERVA engines for space exploration. It was presented as a generic hypothetical piece, with some mathematics, but there was a lot left out that everyone at the time in-the-know new was being developed and tested. But because of world politics and powers, we never get anything of substance.

    Most scientists believe that discoveries are at least 10 years behind because of govt black-outs on research. I dunno if that is true, but we are still finding out today discoveries, developments, and projects from 50 years ago because of classification.

  • SueSueDio
    SueSueDio Posts: 4,796 Member
    Options
    Timshel_ wrote: »
    Most scientists believe that discoveries are at least 10 years behind because of govt black-outs on research.

    That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest! :)

Categories