Disqus - Latest Comments for astroengine

Re: Bennu Is Not Boring

astroengine — Wed, 05 Jun 2019 16:23:22 -0000

Testing

Re: JPL Employee Complains When People Believe A Website They Developed

astroengine — Sat, 17 Nov 2018 14:44:44 -0000

I was a little weirded out by the sharp reaction of some space enthusiasts/professionals/reporters over this "Opportunity's Ghost" saga. NASA makes this information public to drive public interest in NASA missions, a recipe that has incredible advantages for science and society at large. So when a few eagle-eyed enthusiasts saw the MER signal downlink on the DSN website, why would anyone be pissed (let alone any NASA employee) that someone was paying attention? Heaven forbid should anyone misinterpret the data! This is akin to enthusiasts poring over Curiosity photos and seeing aliens and Mars gophers in random rock configurations. Sure, it probably gets a bit tiring for NASA personnel to repeatedly debunk fringe theories, but is that reason to lash out and claim the intellectual high-ground over people who are not "in the know"? I understand that Opportunity is beloved and no one wants to get anyone's hopes up unnecessarily, but this whole episode is bizarre. It's a teaching opportunity, not a reason to deride the public who love a sleeping robot on Mars

Re: Alphas, Bittervets and Citadels – An ABC of Factional War Today

astroengine — Thu, 01 Dec 2016 23:57:29 -0000

Shit, this King Wank dude knows what he's talking about!

Re: Mystery Plumes: Did the Sun Bruise Mars?

astroengine — Tue, 24 May 2016 20:26:38 -0000

Well, I AM an intellectual coward, so good call!

Re: LHC Opens the Quantum Physics Floodgates

astroengine — Sun, 22 May 2016 03:20:59 -0000

My bad, it was supposed to be "countless quadzillions." Will let my editors know.

Re: 'Peeping Tom' Hubble Spies Mars' Full Frontal

astroengine — Sat, 21 May 2016 01:49:18 -0000

Thank you!! Love you!!

Re: Europa's Ocean Chemistry Could Be Earth-Like

astroengine — Wed, 18 May 2016 03:11:41 -0000

It's ideal for scuba diving.

Re: ALMA 'Weighs' Monster Black Hole to Highest Precision

astroengine — Fri, 06 May 2016 03:37:54 -0000

Faith has never been as precise as measuring the mass of a 660 million solar mass black hole at 75 million light-years distant.

Re: Mercury Transit: Smallest Planet to Make a BIG Entrance : Discovery News

astroengine — Wed, 04 May 2016 14:57:14 -0000

I can only advise you that looking at the sun directly with no form of protection is a bad idea. Scientific observations of the sun, particularly sunspots, traditionally use some kind of projection method. Later, telescopes were fitted with filters. It is a well-known fact that sunlight, particularly UV wavelengths, can damage the eye, so why not be cautious?

Re: UK Astronaut Completes 60,000 Mile London Marathon

astroengine — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 16:58:55 -0000

You are absolutely correct, it was a 26.2 mile marathon.

Re: Is Hawking's Interstellar 'Starshot' Possible?

astroengine — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:41:10 -0000

Thank you very much!

Re: Jupiter Got Smashed by a Speeding Space Rock

astroengine — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:07:10 -0000

Speeding Space Rock is the name of my part time dubstep label. Trying to get it into the public lexicon before my debut album makes platinum.

Re: Jupiter Got Smashed by a Speeding Space Rock

astroengine — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:04:40 -0000

That would be interesting, but I doubt this impact is as big as the 2009 and 2010 impacts. I think it was the 2010 hit that produced an atmospheric bruise that could be seen by Hubble

Re: Jupiter Got Smashed by a Speeding Space Rock

astroengine — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 16:03:24 -0000

Nah, I'm good thanks. I'm not unfamiliar with being unprofessional.

Re: Seeking the Aliens Who Are Looking Right At Us

astroengine — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 21:26:47 -0000

Indeed I did, thanks for the correction!

Re: When the World Went Gravitational Wave Crazy: Photos

astroengine — Tue, 01 Mar 2016 13:12:22 -0000

Sorry for the frustration -- it's a strange bug that seems to impact specific browser versions. I know a few fixes have gone out, but we have a redesign planned in the not-so-distant future that will use an entirely new platform. Thanks for letting us know that the problem persists, will send a note to our tech team regardless ~Ian

Re: Mysterious 'Fast Radio Burst' Pinpointed for First Time

astroengine — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 23:14:58 -0000

Bye

Re: What You Need to Know About Gravitational Waves

astroengine — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 03:02:00 -0000

Thank you very much Eduardo!

Re: What You Need to Know About Gravitational Waves

astroengine — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:11:06 -0000

Wow, tough crowd.

Re: What You Need to Know About Gravitational Waves

astroengine — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:02:02 -0000

Pagination is common across websites to cut up long articles into more digestible chunks. Sorry the format upset you. But on the upside, at least you have an account and can now post more positive comments :)

Re: Gravitational Waves vs. Gravity Waves: Know the Difference!

astroengine — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:47:50 -0000

Read the first line of that (English) Wikipedia entry for "Gravitational wave" again. It says "Not to be confused with gravity wave." The "Gravity wave" entry says "This article is about waves in fluid dynamics. For gravitational waves in general relativity, see gravitational wave." I think this is fairly clear and in agreement with what I've written. Scientists may well talk about gravity waves being gravitational waves, but that's their choice, I'm not about to chastise them and have no business to. You can agree or not with what I've written, that is your right.

Re: Hundreds of Galaxies Found Hiding Behind Milky Way

astroengine — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 16:36:00 -0000

I'll go with "yes" and... "yes."

Re: Gravitational Waves vs. Gravity Waves: Know the Difference!

astroengine — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:01:47 -0000

It's not *my* convention, it's what they are called. Gravity waves are atmospheric waves. Gravitational waves are ripples in spacetime. It's that simple. Sure, you can interchange them and call them all gravity waves. Scientists also do that. Yes, there are papers citing "gravity" waves and not "gravitational" waves, but those papers are incorrect. The English is fine, this isn't a debate about linguistics, it's purely labeling 2 different phenomena. It's an exercise in definitions, nothing deeper. Even Wikipedia gets it -- look up "gravitational wave" and see what it says underneath: "Not to be confused with gravity wave."

Re: Gravitational Waves vs. Gravity Waves: Know the Difference!

astroengine — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:17:01 -0000

Phew, I'm happy this was the biggest fault you could find.

Re: Gravitational Waves vs. Gravity Waves: Know the Difference!

astroengine — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:08:43 -0000

I wouldn't go so far as saying "it is wrong" to refer to gravitational waves as gravity waves, I'm merely pointing out that they are two distinct phenomena and often the mainstream media interchanges between both. Nice to get a clear definition sometimes.