No Thread On Europe Landing a Rocket on a Comet?

Domingo Halliburton

Handmade in USA
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
12,611
Reputation
1,370
Daps
15,442
Reppin
Brooklyn Without Limits
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...ding-european-craft-due-to-make-contact-today

Hundreds of millions of miles from Earth, a man-made object was flung at a comet Wednesday — and now it's sticking to the rock as it hurtles through space.

"We are on the comet," Stephan Ulamec, Philae Lander Manager, announced Wednesday, marking a historic achievement.

The news came after the European Space Agency endured tense hours of uncertainty following the lander's separation from the Rosetta spacecraft, as scientists awaited a message from the lander that would tell them whether it landed safely – or suffered a calamity.

As Ulamec said that the lander was secured to the comet's surface by ice screws that had been shot by the craft's harpoons — and that it was now doing its job and communicating with Earth — he sparked an uproar of applause from workers and spectators at the European Space Operations Center in Darmstadt, Germany.

It took 10 years for the Philae lander to reach a point where it could be sent toward Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. The ESA said this morning that it had received a signal from the lander as it headed toward its rendezvous with the comet, indicating that if all went well, the lander would be able to communicate and send photos from the comet's surface.

We'll update this post with developments from space. You can also follow the news at the ESA's Rosetta page, and at NASA TV, starting at 9 a.m. ET.

Update at 11:05 a.m. ET: Philae Has Landed

In a first, the Philae lander is on the comet's surface. We've updated the top of this post to reflect the news.

Update at 10:15 a.m. ET: New Images, And 'A Boot'

"Everything looks really, really good," says Stephan Ulamec, Philae program manager at DLR, in a progress report.

The ESA has released new images from the area around the comet, including one shot of Philae breaking away from the Rosetta craft and heading toward 67P.

Another image shows the lander from the view of its parent spacecraft.

The two scientists who discovered the comet 45 years ago — Klim Ivanovych Churyumov and Svetlana Ivanovna Gerasimenko — are in the unique position today of watching humanity's attempt to land on it.

The two scientists are part of an event hosted by the ESA that's equal parts news conference and viewing party.

When Gerasimenko was asked the tongue-in-cheek question of how she likes the comet that she and her colleague spotted decades ago, she responded by saying, "I like the form very much — it reminds me of a boot."

The operation was also being monitored by space veterans.

Our original post continues:

Comet 67P has several surprising qualities. First of all, it smells really bad.

"It stinks," researcher Kathrin Altwegg told NPR's Geoff Brumfiel last month.

That's because of a mixture of ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, formaldehyde and methanol.

The comet also emits "a mysterious song," according to the ESA blog.

"The comet seems to be emitting a 'song' in the form of oscillations in the magnetic field in the comet's environment," the ESA says. "It is being sung at 40-50 millihertz, far below human hearing, which typically picks up sound between 20 Hz and 20 kHz. To make the music audible to the human ear, the frequencies have been increased by a factor of about 10,000."

Here's what that sounds like — close your eyes and you might be able to pick out "Flight of the Bumblebee":

As Geoff reports, scientists here on Earth see Philae, which is about the size of a refrigerator, as "our remote hands." The lander will take many readings from the comet's surface, in addition to drilling into it.

But before any tests can occur, Geoff notes, the comet's rocky and uneven surface could make the landing very tricky — and that's why the lander has harpoons.

"Moments after its feet touch down, the harpoons will fire," Geoff says, "along with some thrusters to keep the lander grounded. Then screws in the feet will try to get a grip."

Here's how the ESA says things should work if all goes well, with music by Vangelis (we'll warn you: the music is dramatic).

Pictures, sounds and videos in the link.

Meanwhile in America we're figuring out how to put a burger on a chicken sandwich.
 
Last edited:

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
I am simply in awe of this feat
on a deeper level this seems to have implications that maybe just maybe quantum mechanics (or our analysis thereof) has it all wrong and the basic fabric of reality is not so probabilistic or that its probabilistic nature is plainly irrelevant; this has to be man's greatest test yet of locality.
 

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
Live feed (though it's done already) in English :


PD0OBxf.png

Those chairs are fresh as hell, must get for my lair of evil:ehh:
 

Hawaiian Punch

umop-apisdn
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
17,970
Reputation
6,318
Daps
76,881
Reppin
The I in Team
I am simply in awe of this feat
on a deeper level this seems to have implications that maybe just maybe quantum mechanics (or our analysis thereof) has it all wrong and the basic fabric of reality is not so probabilistic or that its probabilistic nature is plainly irrelevant; this has to be man's greatest test yet of locality.

I'm curious as to how this feat would disprove quantum mechanics?
 

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
I'm curious as to how this feat would disprove quantum mechanics?
doesn't disprove it
but it seems to me that its mercurial nature and observer dependent proclivities don't seem to be expressed macroscopically in any significant way, or at least in any way that concerns human faring in space-time. There seems to be some size threshold after which quantum phenomena has no relevant effect on matter*

* I say this having well heard of the interference (as well as entanglement, IIRC) experiments with buckyball sized objects
 

Hawaiian Punch

umop-apisdn
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
17,970
Reputation
6,318
Daps
76,881
Reppin
The I in Team
doesn't disprove it
but it seems to me that its mercurial nature and observer dependent proclivities don't seem to be expressed macroscopically in any significant way, or at least in any way that concerns human faring in space-time. There seems to be some size threshold after which quantum phenomena has no relevant effect on matter*

* I say this having well heard of the interference (as well as entanglement, IIRC) experiments with buckyball sized objects


I don't think you answered the statement you initially proposed. How does this particular experiment show us the non probabilistic nature of our reality? After all we know quantum mechanics breaks down at the macroscopic scale. I could see for instance if the probe carried a particle that we attempted to entangle with a partner particle on earth. But in this case we landed a probe on a comet. A monumental feat, no doubt, but still a feat. Granted one that is a bit harder than landing a man on the moon, but still nothing more than landing a moving object on another moving object.

Keep in mind I'm not trying to argue what you said, but rather I'm intrigued and wanted more insight.
 

88m3

Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
85,546
Reputation
3,536
Daps
150,969
Reppin
Brooklyn
So what? I'm supposed to be impressed by what those Trotskyites accomplish?
 

tmonster

Superstar
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
17,900
Reputation
3,205
Daps
31,786
I don't think you answered the statement you initially proposed. How does this particular experiment show us the non probabilistic nature of our reality? After all we know quantum mechanics breaks down at the macroscopic scale. I could see for instance if the probe carried a particle that we attempted to entangle with a partner particle on earth. But in this case we landed a probe on a comet. A monumental feat, no doubt, but still a feat. Granted one that is a bit harder than landing a man on the moon, but still nothing more than landing a moving object on another moving object.

Keep in mind I'm not trying to argue what you said, but rather I'm intrigued and wanted more insight.
This breakdown is not logical for all intents and purposes, it would indicate the quantum world as a whole other universe with rules that never translate to reality. But more importantly we have already staked macroscopic claims on the quantum landscape with our forays into quantum computing and attempts at teleportation.

to explain my point, consider the idea of tunneling and the oft heard mental experiment of an idle car tunneling uphill or the moon tunneling a million light years away, and how these things don't happen not because they can't but because they are of very low probability, our 10 year voyage is a similar experiment in my opinion, given the low margin of error or, conversely, the high probability of missing the mark* on a purely mathematical level and that the entire trek dependent on mostly the clockwork curving curvature of spacetime within our solar system, this has to point to a certain degree of rigid stability and reliability of natural forces and states. Whatever quirkiness and whimsy that is happening at the most fundamental levels must certainly lead to such stable reality or be completely irrelevant to it.

*basically the size of space divided by the size of the comet
 

CHL

Superstar
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
13,456
Reputation
1,480
Daps
19,580
I am simply in awe of this feat
on a deeper level this seems to have implications that maybe just maybe quantum mechanics (or our analysis thereof) has it all wrong and the basic fabric of reality is not so probabilistic or that its probabilistic nature is plainly irrelevant; this has to be man's greatest test yet of locality.
I'm curious, can you expand on this?

Edit: :russ: sorry looks like you already did, I should have scrolled down.
 
Top