Ozymandias_the_Goat

It is exceptionally ironic that this meme is itself a PowerPoint

As far as I’m concerned, skydiving is great fun! so long as someone else is doing it

Interesting...could be akin to a sort of “Take on Mars lite” Definately worth checking out, especially since it’s free.

@mikegarrison may be of aid. Hence, I summon thee!

It is possible that they exist, but simply cannot be detected by the Doppler method. To be fair, if aliens of s singular technology level as us observed the Solar System, they very well may determine that it is a system of 4 gas giants. In the case of this system, this is a bit less likely, as some of these large planets are actually in the habitable zone, one of them being much closer, and since we all know that smaller planets do not typically form around gas giants, it is likely that they never formed at all, or did become moons. Nevertheless, it is a landmark find, which will no doubt vindicate every single elementary school science teacher who told us that that sun is an “average sized star”. Wait a sec I just realized that this thread is years old.

I suppose most systems have few planets because their protstellar nebulae were generally small, reflected in the small size of the star itself, and thus there simply was not enough material close enough to form many planets (?). Because the sun is a relatively large star, perhaps there was s just more dust orbiting it, and there was simply a greater probability of more planets forming. It is also probable that the other systems mentioned have planets, but they are either too small to be detected through the Doppler method, or not properly lined up for the transit method. Breakthrough starshot, anyone?

Though at that point, natural selection would ensure that all the aero drivers are highly qualified.

Yes, this is primarily due to the size of the planet. It was discovered using the Doppler method, a technique which usually works for large planets, but cannot truly detect smaller planets. However, since Barnards star is so close to the earth, it was easier to detect the minuscule effect the orbiting planet has on its sun. It also probably helps that Barnards star is so low mass, because that will amplify the effect of the gravitational pull from the planet. If this star system were further away from earth, or the planet was smaller and the star larger, it is likely that we would have never discovered the planet. Of course, it took decades of collected data to prove with reasonable accuracy that this is truly a planet. There is still a small possibility that this is a glitch, but probably there is a 100% certified real planet here.

How dare Brian Weeden presume our incompetence regarding the complexity of the process of relayig satellite data? Anyway, I don’t suppose that bezos has any idea who his biggest customer is going to be? His own company? Never!

I’m assuming that a higher quality image is being suggested, as a planet a few pixels across seems very possible very soon.

Yes, this probe is going to look for direct signs of Ancient microbial life, where as previous missions have attempted to search for organic molecules that suggest that mars was once habitable, and may still harbor life. Anyway, the rover will look for sites that have carbonate minerals, a sign of long-term chemical reactions between water and water the atmosphere, and then seeks signs of microbial life akin to fossils. As well as that, there is the obvious need to account for the fact that Martian life may have been significantly different from Terran life, but that is more of an issue for researchers back on earth than for the rover.

Had to stay on budget

11/10 if you’re actually Santa Otherwise, I’d say 5/10. Gives some seasonal cheer, but it’s a bit too bland. Unless, of course, there is some blatant pop culture reference that I’m missing here.

Delta-v budget captures Jeb on dead

A day in the life of a geologist.

done

Furthermore, I think that we need a repository of technical symbols such as Greek characters and whatnot, as it is rather inconvenient to copy-paste the delta symbol from Wikipedia or something all the time. (If there is a functionality to do this already in the forums, I would duly appreciate being brought up to speed on it)

Even so, I feel that the sample return mission is still very much “speculative”, and would seldom be funded. It is indeed rather amusing that the best way to analyze a tiny sample of Martian soil is to send an entire autonomous geology laboratory to Mars, rather than return the aforementioned tiny sample to earth.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-46288054 ”Some things last forever, others not for an hour”

It gives gaseous state a miss and goes straight to plasma. My kind of sort of proto plasma droplet universe.

8/10 Quite familiar with you

Actually, the true concern is not necessarily the change in color, rather, it is a subtle change in value that would truly be a clear- cut sign of trouble.

Unfortunately this does smell of a political maneuver, rather than a legitimate concern. Now, it has been previously established that safety is not SpaceXs forté, and it “may” happen that legitimate production issues are discovered. However, simply saying that this is an investigation of, among other things, “corporate culture” simply does not sound proper. Though I certainly don’t advocate Elon Musks recent forays into drug use in public, they are certainly not as big a matter of concern as, err...holes in the Soyuz? So although on paper, there is nothing wrong with the little “investigation”, conditionally, it is rather clear that it is a big lump of...bogus.

True.

Moving on... I would have suspected that the kilogramme would be redefined as a some number of atoms of a specific isotope. Does anybody know why this was not done? I am under the impression that the consensus of the scientific community was to relate SI measurements with universal constants, which admittedly does make a lot of sense, but still. Wasn’t that a proposed definition once? Moving on... I would have suspected that the kilogramme would be redefined as a some number of atoms of a specific isotope. Does anybody know why this was not done? I am under the impression that the consensus of the scientific community was to relate SI measurements with universal constants, which admittedly does make a lot of sense, but still. Wasn’t that a proposed definition once?