It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mothershipzeta
Originally posted by Patriotgal
Just remember, rule #1 at nasa- "NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER"!!
When it comes to cosmology, physics, etc, anyone who can give you a straight (simple) answer is misinformed, misunderstanding the subject, or flat-out lying. And if you accept the "straight answer," you're part of the problem because you'll be speaking from the same ignorance as the original guy.
It's a lot like the Richard Feynman quote:
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics."
Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by mother1138
Which begs the obvious question...if they plan to lie about something as benign as finding other 'Earth like' planets in the galaxy, one can imagine they would not be exactly forthright regarding really important issues and discoveries eh?
Kepler in brief
The scientific objective of the Kepler Mission is to explore the structure and diversity of planetary systems.
Considering that we want to find planets in the habitable zone, the time between transits is about one year. To reliably detect a sequence one needs four transits. Hence, the mission duration needs to be at least three and one half years.
Originally posted by mothershipzeta
Information is not power unless you can apply it. Just knowing there are Earth-sized planets out there gives me NO power I didn't already have. Reading ATS definitely doesn't add to my net power. But if I learned something here that could actually be applied to my daily life, it would have some power.
So, do you think NASA should just dump data? Constantly. No analysis, no thought, nothing. Would you know what you were looking at? Or would you have to defer to people who actually understand the information?
If they did just dump information by the gigabyte, people like you wouldl criticize them for dumping too much information and overwhelming us, saying they were trying to hide something amid the chaff.
I manage servers for a medium-sized firm. Should I run to my boss the moment I come across a problem? Of course not - I need to analyze the issue. A failed backup doesn't mean I replace the servers affected - I have to see WHY it failed. And, since he's not a techie, I also have to phrase it without a lot of jargon. It's not because he's "stupid" - his expertise just lies in an area separate from mine. He's an accountant - and I know NOTHING about tax law, so he'd have to reduce something tax-related to a level I would understand.
Raw data means nothing. It has to be processed to be meaningful to 99.9% of the population.
Originally posted by Kandinsky
I think people are getting carried away here. Kepler has found 'indications' of Earth-like planets...not yet conclusive. Sasselov's disclosure wasn't so much a leak as an enthusiastic 'blab' in front of a receptive, informed crowd at the TED talk.
Originally posted by fooks
what do they mean, "earth-like"?
moon? water? o2? size?
i know what i think of when i hear that description.
i am loading it now but it's 22mins to watch.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
This is making such a mountain out of a molehill!!!
Harkens back to months ago, when the ridiculous spate of "NASA is Going to Bomb the Moon!!" threads were popping up, like a game of "Whack-a-Mole"....
This is paradigm shifting stuff. Its about confirmation of centuries of speculation and dreaming as to the nature of our world’s uniqueness and/or commonness with regard to the universe around us. Now the Kepler team is fumbling its way through clarification of what was said and was not said, implied and miscommunicated. If you are going to go out and talk about things with such an epochal potential for all humans to think about, you owe it to everyone involved (in other words everyone, everywhere) to make damn sure you know how to convey this information. If not, then find someone who can do it.”
We Could Certainly Use Carl Sagan Right Now