It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Today (April 14) NASA TV Briefing -- Pluto Mission Update

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Today, Tuesday April 14 at 2:30 PM U.S. Eastern Time (18:30 UTC), NASA will hold a televised mission status briefing to update us on the New Horizons mission to the dwarf planet Pluto. The New Horizons spacecraft is now 90 days away from its closest encounter with Pluto, after traveling for nine years.

This encounter is a fly-by mission, meaning the spacecraft will zoom past Pluto rather than orbiting it. This is due to the inability to slow down the craft in order to achieve orbital insertion (to be grabbed by Pluto's gravity). However, after passing Pluto, the tentative plan for New Horizons is to visit another Kuiper Belt object.

Below are links to NASA TV and to an article about the briefing:

NASA TV
NASA Hosts Briefings on Historic Mission to Pluto




Here is the planned trajectory of New Horizons as it speeds through the Pluto system on July 14. The plan is for the spacecraft to fly-by Pluto at a distance inside the orbit of Charon:

Source: The Path to Pluto - Mission Timeline


New Horizons should get us unprecedented images of Pluto during its July 14 fly-by. The best image we have of Pluto at the current time is shown below, and is from the Hubble space telescope. Even that image is not exactly a traditional image, and has been somewhat computer manipulated to show more pixels and more detail that Hubble could actually capture:

Description of image dithering technique explained on the Hubble website: The Hubble images are a few pixels wide. But through a technique called dithering, multiple, slightly offset pictures can be combined through computer-image processing to synthesize a higher-resolution view than could be seen in a single exposure. "This has taken four years and 20 computers operating continuously and simultaneously to accomplish," says Buie, who developed special algorithms to sharpen the Hubble data.

However, thanks to New Horizons, we are about to get a much more detailed view of Pluto and its features. By late June (a couple of weeks prior to the fly-by) details of the images will begin to get so much better. By the time New Horizons reaches pluto, we could see images something like the artist's conception on the right below:





posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Thanks for the heads up about the broadcast. This is an interesting mission, and shows the pinpoint accuracy of these machines. Will try to watch the NASA event, thanks again.



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I think the Government knows all to well what the Planets of our solar systems looks like in detail and intimately.

Not only do we have the technology to back up our statements...but we have Astral Projectors working in the government. Stanford Scientists OBE for Government

So when the article says, "this is an artist rendering of what it may look like" I don't believe that he randomly used his skills for the Very Detailed Rendering, especially using the photo on the left as a starting point...seems ridiculous.

Earthly Uses for Astral Projection

Bottom Line is Agenda 21



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: SirKonstantin

So when the article says, "this is an artist rendering of what it may look like" I don't believe that he randomly used his skills for the Very Detailed Rendering, especially using the photo on the left as a starting point...seems ridiculous...


I don't understand what you find "ridiculous" about an artist's impression.

If he is a space artist who knows what rocky bodies look like, and he has a starting point (the Hubble image), then why do you find it ridiculous for him to have come up with his artist's impression image? It seems to me he simply took the Hubble image and re-created it by drawing the splotchy areas with the finer details that we would expect to see on a rocky world.

I'm not sure what you think the artist should have necessarily done differently.

Personally, I think the colors are probably over-saturated and exaggerated, but it's only an artist impression, which is meant to be evocative.


edit on 4/14/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Yes,

I do find it ridiculous that this artist gave his rendering in such detail that it almost borderlines actual photos...the groves and cuts, the landmass locations...the coloring too...almost as if he was there...
...I am impressed IF this is a genuine wild theory idea rendering of Pluto. Can you agree to this?That this is a Wild Interpretation of what "we" think Pluto looks like?

But i think its an Agenda 21 project. Thanks to the use of Astral Projectors, we are able to map our solar system and the planets in great detail. I think the government gave him drawings prior to his task from an Astral Projectors pencil sketching s, or he is one himself. Just look at the photo on the left and compare it to the right....just a wild imagination???Right??? Such detail...

...Every Heresy comes from a bit of Truth...



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: SirKonstantin
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Yes,

I do find it ridiculous that this artist gave his rendering in such detail that it almost borderlines actual photos...the groves and cuts, the landmass locations...the coloring too...almost as if he was there....

I still don't get your criticism of the fact that a artist who is trying to show us what Pluto may look like would try to make an illustration look as real as possible. With computer graphics these days and the CGI used in movies (where fictional planets and Moons are made to look like this by CGI artists), I really don understand why you think this artist should have made his image of Pluto look less real.

It just seems like an odd criticism.


edit on 4/14/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I just looked at the NASA TV schedule, and it seems that this briefing (which starts very soon) is on the Media Channel only, not on the other two NASA TV channels (the public channel and the education channel).

Here is the link to the media channel:
NASA TV Media Channel



posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin
Just wait a couple of months, and compare newhorizons's pictures against the artist rendition, then we will know if your criticism is well founded.
I think its not but that is just my opinion.

I personally can't wait for these pictures, been waiting for them since 1989.




posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Thanks for the updates Soylent,
I'm really looking forward for this mission, the spiritual successor of the voyager missions.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: SolidGoal


When asked what kind of things they were really hoping they would find on Pluto, one of the panelists yesterday mentioned the potential for exotic liquids. Specifically, due to the cold temperatures, it would be possible that there could be rivers of neon or other substances that are normally gaseous here on Earth flowing on Pluto.

Granted, he didn't predict this, nor did he have any specific reason to believe in such rivers on Pluto, but it still remains a possibility. Pluto is known to undergo visible surface changes as it heads into its winter season as it moves further from the Sun (seasons on Pluto last dozens of years; one Pluto year = 248 Earth years), and with that change of seasons it is possible that changes occur with the volatiles in Pluto's atmosphere -- i.e., the summer atmosphere could condense and fall to the surface as rain or snow in the winter, only to be re-evaporated from the surface in the summer.


edit on 4/15/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: SolidGoal
a reply to: SirKonstantin
Just wait a couple of months, and compare newhorizons's pictures against the artist rendition, then we will know if your criticism is well founded.
I think its not but that is just my opinion.

I personally can't wait for these pictures, been waiting for them since 1989.



I can be a patient man for the results.

Regards,



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
New Horizons just took it's 1st color photo of Pluto and Charon. It still looks like a couple of fuzzy dots at this point though.

www.space.com...



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: SirKonstantin

originally posted by: SolidGoal
a reply to: SirKonstantin
Just wait a couple of months, and compare newhorizons's pictures against the artist rendition, then we will know if your criticism is well founded.
I think its not but that is just my opinion.

I personally can't wait for these pictures, been waiting for them since 1989.



I can be a patient man for the results.

Regards,


Whether or not the artist's rendering is accurate was not my point. My point is that there is nothing wrong with the artist trying to make Pluto look as "realistic" as possible, even if it is just hypothetical.

It could be hypothetical and realistic-looking at the same time. I'm not sure why the fact that they do not know what Pluto looks like in reality should mean that the artist NOT show a realistic looking -- albeit hypothetical -- artist rendering.

I guess I'm not sure what you want the artist to show? Are you saying that he should make his rendering look all fuzzy because that's what the best telescope can see of Pluto at the present time? I mean, artists show realistic-looking-yet-hypothetical renderings of exoplanets (planets around other stars) all the time. Why should this artists' rendering of Pluto be any different (i.e., hypothetical, yet realistic-looking)?


edit on 4/15/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I want to know if this a secret Agenda 21 ploy. To use Astral Projector Sketch Artist to Accuracy Portray Pluto. Credibility, that this is what Pluto will look like. I want to know what his credentials where to make up this bullsh**. Any artist with a wild imagination can Render fuzzy tennis-ball-like planet work.

What i did not see, what the Percentage of his work. How much do they/us/TPTB believe his Rendering is close to accurate? Or is this just made up bull# that a 13yr old can draw?

You get it now?



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Ignoring the conspiracy crackpots op. I love this type of onfo and am looking forward to the next couple of months.
We are goong to see alsorts.
S n f cheers.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

We have "artist impression" images of many, many, many things when it comes to space art.

Sometimes the images an artist produces are based upon actual images of other celestial bodies, giving them an idea of what something might actually look like.

A person used their imagination and informed opinion to create an image.....and you go off on it with wild claims.

Did you expect the artist to make it look like something out of a Dr. Seuss book? Maybe something more along the lines of something out of Bugs Bunny?

Artist have been producing "space art" for many decades now. As more images from space probes are able to provide us with detailed images of different bodies we visit, it gives artist who wish to create an impression more detail to work with with.

There are literally hundreds of paintings that have been done by artists of exo-planets that we do not even have a fuzzy image like we do of Pluto from Hubble. It doesn't mean that is what that body will look like, only what an artist thinks it MIGHT look like.

Since you seem to think any 13 year old can make the same type of images: Let's see you do it.

I'll even make it simple and ask you do do one of a body we have photographed: Mars.

Go ahead, since you're so critical of people using their imaginations to create something beautiful (yet at the same time are showing us that you have one heck of a imagination of the boggy man called TPTB controlling and running everything), I want to see just how easy it is as you claim.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Go ahead, since you're so critical of people using their imaginations to create something beautiful (yet at the same time are showing us that you have one heck of a imagination of the boggy man called TPTB controlling and running everything), I want to see just how easy it is as you claim.


I expect NASA to hold a higher level of credibility than the rest of the artist out there. Sorry if it seems that i was attacking the artist directly, i need to be more clear. NASA approved his Interpretation of Pluto...why? What makes his drawing more important than the thousands out there to choose from? I want to know why they picked his?do they know he is an astral projector? credentials...if its bullsh**, then i want NASA to make it clear that this artist could be WAAAAY off and to NOT hold NASA responsible for false or Imaginary renders.

My ability to draw is invalid, What i draw is only important if it is real (for this debate only)- i would claim to state it is really what it looks like...and people will ask me for my credentials...if i told them i just made it up, why post on media that it is or...they wont care...and tell me it looks good but not to lie about it being the most accurate interpretation of a fuzzy tennis ball (which is what i expected from a high level government organization).
If i told them i had astral projected and this is what i saw...then we can have fun with it and dive deeper into the rabbit hole.


Getting to make sense now?



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin

No. Makes no sense at all. Starting with Astro projection.

The painting is to fire the imagination. Not to impart accurate information to be used with science.

Making a painting like that realistic helps to fire the imagination of both young and old people.

An artist may be picked, or their work used because of how good they are at making that work. Not because they really know what is there.

You are trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. The image the artist displayed is to show how much more detail we will see of Pluto's surface as compared to what the Hubble telescope can provide us.

No where does anything say that what the artist produced is what we will actually see, but gives an idea of the amount of detail we will be able to see after the fly by of New Horizons.

That is all it's for. You're trying to make it into something that it is not.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: SolidGoal
a reply to: SirKonstantin
Just wait a couple of months, and compare newhorizons's pictures against the artist rendition, then we will know if your criticism is well founded.
I think its not but that is just my opinion.

I personally can't wait for these pictures, been waiting for them since 1989.



I agree.

I think the artist rendering will be oversaturated compared to the real photos but visiting the dwarf planet Pluto and other Kuiper Belt objects (New Horizons will visit other objects beyond Pluto) is very exciting.

Slowly but surely we are a baby out of its crib and coming to know our backyard. Next stop, the neighborhood.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
I remember reading about this somewhere.

Got it.
Source



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join