More Information..

Message boards : SETI@home Science : More Information..
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
CG

Send message
Joined: 26 Sep 06
Posts: 1
Credit: 2,014,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 884500 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 7:54:09 UTC

so all satellites get much better pictures/signals from space...(i.e. hubble/kepler and yes i know kepler hasn't started observation yet). The Earth's atmosphere blocks out many rays that have come to it so why not just spend seti's funds to a satellite to search for a signal instead of a huge array.
ID: 884500 · Report as offensive
Profile Borgholio
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 99
Posts: 654
Credit: 18,623,738
RAC: 45
United States
Message 884518 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 9:49:46 UTC - in response to Message 884500.  

Doesn't work that way with radio. Radio transmissions can typically pass through the atmosphere just fine. It's higher-wavelength energy such as X-rays and Gamma Rays that tend to have problems. Putting an orbital radio telescope really wouldn't help very much.

Putting a radio telescope on the other side of the moon where there will be no interference from terrestrial sources...now THAT would be a good idea.
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

ID: 884518 · Report as offensive
John McCallum
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 04
Posts: 877
Credit: 599,458
RAC: 8
United Kingdom
Message 884520 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 10:32:08 UTC - in response to Message 884518.  

Doesn't work that way with radio. Radio transmissions can typically pass through the atmosphere just fine. It's higher-wavelength energy such as X-rays and Gamma Rays that tend to have problems. Putting an orbital radio telescope really wouldn't help very much.

Putting a radio telescope on the other side of the moon where there will be no interference from terrestrial sources...now THAT would be a good idea.

Agreed,now can we have a fund raising drive for umpteen squillion £/$/€
Old enough to know better(but)still young enough not to care
ID: 884520 · Report as offensive
Profile Dirk Villarreal Wittich
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Apr 00
Posts: 2098
Credit: 434,834
RAC: 0
Holy See (Vatican City)
Message 884523 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 10:42:28 UTC

The dark side of the Moon must be highly interesting for scientific and Physics projects, specially for those involved or sensitive to magnetic interferences.
Having instruments on that side of the Moon would be the same as having all those satellites rotating around the Earth´s orbits.
I guess a 10 meters in diameter mirrow telescope would bring astonishing images.
But the price and efforts to bring it there as well as maintenance is prohibitive.
But what about Mars? If we could send a probe like "Spirit" or "Opportunity" with updated and higher performances capabilities,
they could provide first class information from a more distant and bigger orbit/cristal clear sky, provided there´s no planetary sandstorms active.

ID: 884523 · Report as offensive
JRK Beyer

Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 09
Posts: 27
Credit: 122,978
RAC: 0
Germany
Message 884644 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 17:08:56 UTC - in response to Message 884523.  

"But what about Mars? ... provided there´s no planetary sandstorms active."

That will become the real problem in any mars missions I think. Optical instruments and solar cells will lose much effectiveness over the time, even with dust covers.
ID: 884644 · Report as offensive
Profile Borgholio
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 99
Posts: 654
Credit: 18,623,738
RAC: 45
United States
Message 884683 - Posted: 12 Apr 2009, 18:50:08 UTC - in response to Message 884644.  

"But what about Mars? ... provided there´s no planetary sandstorms active."

That will become the real problem in any mars missions I think. Optical instruments and solar cells will lose much effectiveness over the time, even with dust covers.


Plus, since Mars rotates, it will still bring radio telescopes into line with Earth and all it's interference once a day. And yeah all the dust will be hell for non-radio telescopes.
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

ID: 884683 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 20147
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 884930 - Posted: 13 Apr 2009, 14:15:05 UTC - in response to Message 884518.  
Last modified: 13 Apr 2009, 14:16:48 UTC

... Putting a radio telescope on the other side of the moon where there will be no interference from terrestrial sources...now THAT would be a good idea.

Much better would be a telecope array at the Sun - Earth Lagrange point beyond Earth.

The most powerful radio source in the solar system is the sun. The sun is also the hottest source in the solar system. Best is to be somewhere cold and quiet yet still accessible.

Also, using the moon has severe problems with electrostatically charged dust that makes for a very hostile environment for any equipment on the surface...


Other ideas?

Keep searchin',
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 884930 · Report as offensive
Profile Clyde C. Phillips, III

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 00
Posts: 1851
Credit: 5,955,047
RAC: 0
United States
Message 884994 - Posted: 13 Apr 2009, 17:26:29 UTC

I think that the LaGrangian Point is almost a million miles from Earth. From that distance the Earth will not quite cover the Sun. But I could be wrong.
ID: 884994 · Report as offensive
Profile Virtual Boss*
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 May 08
Posts: 417
Credit: 6,440,287
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 885528 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 12:53:42 UTC - in response to Message 884930.  

But what about power? Not much sunlight in a shadow! Exit solar panels.
ID: 885528 · Report as offensive
Profile jason_gee
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 06
Posts: 7489
Credit: 91,093,184
RAC: 0
Australia
Message 885587 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 16:51:02 UTC - in response to Message 885528.  

But what about power? Not much sunlight in a shadow! Exit solar panels.


Doh!
"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.
ID: 885587 · Report as offensive
Profile Borgholio
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 99
Posts: 654
Credit: 18,623,738
RAC: 45
United States
Message 885589 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 16:51:27 UTC - in response to Message 885528.  

But what about power? Not much sunlight in a shadow! Exit solar panels.


Deep space probes have been using nuclear decay reactors since the 60's...that would provide enough power for years service in the shadows.
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

ID: 885589 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 885597 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 17:07:33 UTC - in response to Message 885528.  

But what about power? Not much sunlight in a shadow! Exit solar panels.

there are 5 legrange points. So as long as you dont pick the one that is in the shadow you'll have all the sunlight you need


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 885597 · Report as offensive
Michael Watson

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 08
Posts: 1383
Credit: 2,098,506
RAC: 5
Message 885622 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 19:03:46 UTC - in response to Message 884930.  

The anti-solar side any body in the solar system that happened to have its spin tidally locked with the Sun (like the Moon does with the Earth, or the way they used to think Mercury did with the Sun) would be a good place to avoid solar interference with radio, infra-red, or visible light observations. I am not aware of solid evidence for such a body, but one or more of them may exist, quite close to the sun. There have been occasional reports over the years of a planet, or planets inside the orbit of Mercury. If they exist, it seems likely that they would have tidally locked spin. Receiving radioed data from an automated observatory sent to such a planet would be a problem, as we would have to aim our receivers almost directly at the Sun, a strong source of radio interference. It would probably make more sense for the observatory to send its data to us by laser beam. A very narrow field optical telescope might be able to avoid much of the Sun's interfering light, and pick out the signal. This would be easiest when the planet was at greatest elongation, in its orbit. In such a close-in planet, the orbital period would be short, and these would occur frequently. The observatory could store its data and forward it to us periodically. Michael
ID: 885622 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 885624 - Posted: 15 Apr 2009, 19:11:40 UTC

you'd think that someone would have thought as they've sent out numerous probes to the outer planets that they'd have looked back to see any large objects in an anti-earth orbit


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 885624 · Report as offensive
Michael Watson

Send message
Joined: 7 Feb 08
Posts: 1383
Credit: 2,098,506
RAC: 5
Message 885693 - Posted: 16 Apr 2009, 0:17:56 UTC - in response to Message 885624.  

By 'anti-Earth' you mean a large planet in the same orbit as Earth, but on the opposite side of the Sun? This is generally called 'counter Earth' Such an object would perturb the gravitational balance of the inner planets sufficiently to be detectable, even though it remained unseen. No such perturbation has been detected. Space probes sent to other planets would have gone astray if this planet existed, since its gravitational effects were not allowed for. A large body could not stably occupy the libration point opposite the Earth in its orbit, only a very small object might do so. A counter Earth would have drifted out of this position a very long time ago. If such a planet ever existed it might have been the one that struck the Earth billions of years ago and caused the Moon to fission off it. Michael
ID: 885693 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 885699 - Posted: 16 Apr 2009, 1:11:43 UTC - in response to Message 885624.  

you'd think that someone would have thought as they've sent out numerous probes to the outer planets that they'd have looked back to see any large objects in an anti-earth orbit

They did. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/photo_gallery/photogallery-solarsystem.html
ID: 885699 · Report as offensive
Profile Dywanik
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 02
Posts: 29
Credit: 1,913,940
RAC: 0
Message 887294 - Posted: 22 Apr 2009, 15:15:41 UTC - in response to Message 884994.  

I think that the LaGrangian Point is almost a million miles from Earth. From that distance the Earth will not quite cover the Sun. But I could be wrong.


There are 5 points and the most interesting one is L2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point) and to answer other question about power NASA is going to put the James Webb Space Telescope in that point and as you can see there will be solar panels on the telescope http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/JWST.jpg.

Some time ago I read about an array of around 5 telescopes that could be put on the Jupiter's orbit and look exclusively for exoplanets. Unfortunately I don't have any more info about that and probably it was something more like science-fiction.
"Failure is not an option."
Gene Kranz, Apollo 13 Flight Director

"Be the change you want to see in the World"
Mahatma Gandhi

My web-page:
www.dywanik.eu
ID: 887294 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 887310 - Posted: 22 Apr 2009, 15:57:51 UTC - in response to Message 885693.  

By 'anti-Earth' you mean a large planet in the same orbit as Earth, but on the opposite side of the Sun? This is generally called 'counter Earth' Such an object would perturb the gravitational balance of the inner planets sufficiently to be detectable, even though it remained unseen. No such perturbation has been detected. Space probes sent to other planets would have gone astray if this planet existed, since its gravitational effects were not allowed for. A large body could not stably occupy the libration point opposite the Earth in its orbit, only a very small object might do so. A counter Earth would have drifted out of this position a very long time ago. If such a planet ever existed it might have been the one that struck the Earth billions of years ago and caused the Moon to fission off it. Michael
by anti-earth orbit I meant the orbit that is opposite the earths. I in no way implied that there was a planet there. there is however a possibility of small objects in that area.



In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 887310 · Report as offensive
zpm
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Apr 08
Posts: 284
Credit: 1,659,024
RAC: 0
United States
Message 887372 - Posted: 22 Apr 2009, 20:12:26 UTC - in response to Message 887310.  
Last modified: 22 Apr 2009, 20:13:22 UTC

the only problem with this idea, is steaming data back...... as we have seen the, server status page shows, 50 GB of data for each night. i don't know what the highest upload speed of any current generation of space probes or rovers but thats a lot of data. compressed or not idk.
ID: 887372 · Report as offensive
Profile Borgholio
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 99
Posts: 654
Credit: 18,623,738
RAC: 45
United States
Message 887377 - Posted: 22 Apr 2009, 20:41:07 UTC - in response to Message 887372.  

the only problem with this idea, is steaming data back...... as we have seen the, server status page shows, 50 GB of data for each night. i don't know what the highest upload speed of any current generation of space probes or rovers but thats a lot of data. compressed or not idk.


Just string a cat 5 cable from Earth to the satellite. Jeez, it's not rocket science. Oh wait it is...
You will be assimilated...bunghole!

ID: 887377 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : SETI@home Science : More Information..


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.