newsonaut
Turning inner space into outer space
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Why landing a space vehicle on a comet is such an amazing achievement
To get a true appreciation for the scientific feat accomplished with the landing of a space vehicle on a comet, you have to wrap your mind around two astonishing facts — the vastness of the space between here and there, and tininess of the comet itself.
I found two websites that a great job of this.
The first, created by Josh Worth, is called If the Moon Were Only One Pixel: A Tediously Accurate Scale Model of the Solar System. Be prepared to do a lot of horizontal scrolling without much to see but a few minuscule dots in a sea of black. Luckily, the tedium is broken up with the occasional witty observation.
Bearing in mind that the moon is only one pixel in Worth’s model, it would still dwarf Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. The moon is 3,475 kilometres in diameter while the comet is a mere four kilometres across. To put it in terms that Star Trek fans would understand, it’s not much bigger than a Federation Space Dock.
What would that look like? As it turns out, Christopher Becke, a high school physics teacher, has created graphics (like the one above) showing not only Star Trek comparisons, but also other science fiction and more reality-based comparisons. The comet could, for example, fit in Manhattan.
One way to think of it would be to imagine two specks of sand a mile apart with nothing in between them. Some microbes on one speck somehow figure out that the other speck exists and fire off a microbe-sized vehicle to hit the other speck. Complicating matters, the two specks are in constant motion at different rates of speed.
And of course there’s that time thing. If you shoot an arrow from a bow, you’ll generally know within seconds whether you have hit your target. But with the comet, scientists had to wait 10 years before knowing whether they reached their goal. And even then they didn’t exactly hit it — they came really close and soft-landed Philae on the surface. Remember when the new version of Battlestar Galactica started up on TV? That’s when this mission began.
Speaking of time, we should also be aware of old the comet is. The pictures transmitted back to Earth may be showing leftover rocks dating from the formation of the solar system 4.6 billion years ago. How old is that? According to the Cosmic Calendar, if you compressed the history of the universe (13.8 billion years) into a year-long calendar, the solar system would have shown up on Aug. 31. Our age of modern science wouldn’t appear up until Dec. 31 at one second before midnight.
As if the photos posted by the European Space Agency on Flickr weren’t breath-taking enough, the story behind how they came to be makes them all the more remarkable.
More posts in the Science category
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Online petition works with a push from PZ Myers
When University of Minnesota professor PZ Myers visited Kamloops back in May, he set off a firestorm of controversy in the evolution vs. creationism debate. His view is that creationism and intelligent design are bunk and should not be considered science.
By taking a strong stand in such a polarizing debate, he has placed a target on his back. Most of the people who oppose him try to at least sound reasonable, but there are some on the fringe who go over the edge.
One such person is a Montreal resident who goes by the online handle of David Mabus. He is alleged to have made threats against atheists and secular scientists, including Myers, for the past 20 years. Lately, it has escalated to death threats.
Myers has said on his blog that deleting these threats had become a part of his daily routine. But when an online petition was started to put pressure on Montreal police to investigate the matter, he encouraged his readers to join in. Apparently, past requests for action had fallen on deaf ears.
The thing about this petition is that every signature automatically triggered an email to the Montreal police. This resulted in them being inundated with thousands of complaints. It got so bad that they pleaded with the public to stop and promised that they would investigate.
Today came word that they were true to their word. In a curt news release, Montreal police say they have made an arrest. There were no details.
No doubt Myers is relieved, but I have a feeling there are plenty of other bizarre threats out there to fill the void.
More posts in the Science category
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
The evolution debate in a Wordle
With more than 200 comments, you’re forgiven if the thought of wading through the debate on evolution seems daunting. So here’s the executive summary, courtesy of Wordle:
In case you’re wondering, Shakespeare4u2 and Docmuzak1 are the handles of two frequent commenters. The rest should be self-explanatory.
More posts in the Science category
Monday, May 16, 2011
Google has the final word in the great debate
Evolution vs. creationism. Atheism vs. God. The debate is still in full force at The Daily News website. Editor Mel Rothenburger’s column on the subject has generated more than 200 comments, which may very well set some kind of record for the site.
But what does the data say? For that, we have to go to the highest authority of them all — Google. Here are a couple of trends charts I put together.
When it comes to searches for evolution vs. creationism, evolution wins hands down. Creationism is a barely a blip.
But atheists needn’t be doing high-fives. When compared with God, the blip is on the other foot.
So what is the great oracle Google telling us? It seem to me that evolution and God can co-exist peacefully, and that atheists and creationists should get over themselves.
More posts in the Science category
Friday, May 13, 2011
Sorry, but our poll doesn't count as evidence
The Daily News poll asking people where they stand on evolution has suddenly received hundreds more votes and has skewed heavily in favour of “scientific fact.”
Here’s what it looked like Thursday night.
We’ll soon be moving on to a different question, but I’m betting the total votes will wind up far surpassing the current total of 944.
No doubt the sudden interest is because noted evolutionist PZ Myers wrote on his blog about Daily News editor Mel Rothenburger’s column on the subject, sending a flood of his supporters to offer rebuttals in the comments. Many apparently decided to take part in the poll as well.
I have no problem with any of that. It’s the way of the world on the Internet. I do find it ironic, though, that people who profess to be enamoured with science would be so eager to take part in a poll that is labelled thus: “Survey results are meant for general information only, and are not based on recognised statistical methods.”
In other words, the results do not offer verifiable evidence one way or the other for what most people think of evolution. And what is that Myers and his band of atheists keep asking of believers? Where’s your evidence!?
More posts in the Science category
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Humans — who can figure 'em?
I’m hesitant to wade into the debate that’s been raging in The Daily News comments ever since ads for atheism first showed up on Kamloops buses. But I do find it bizarre when people call atheism a belief system. The whole point of atheism is that they do not believe — not in God, not in anything. They want verifiable evidence, and even then they’re open to the idea that someone might come along with other evidence that negates it.
What it comes down to is whether this is a good way to live your life. There are many things in the human experience that can’t be quantified. Many, if not most, of us are bundles of conflicting emotions, making important decisions based on little more than hunches or gut feelings. Things like love and heroism, hatred and depravity are all part of what makes us tick. Few of us are able to step outside of our everyday lives long enough to ponder how the firing of particular brain synapses caused us to act in a certain way — not unless we’re absolutely forced to.
It may be rational thought that creates, for example, breakthroughs in medicine that benefit society, but what is it that inspires us to share with those can’t afford them? We humans may never be able to come up with a satisfactory explanation of ourselves.
More posts in the Science category
