Appalling quality of live coverage of Asteroid DA14 2012

reply to post by TrueBrit


Oh my god, what do you want? Its basically a white dot moving across the sky.

Who cares? It was NEVER going to do anything else and it DIDN'T!

Maybe you expect a Fox News anchor to report live from the scene??

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by TrueBrit

 

AH! I HAVE DISCOVERED THE REASON! They have had volunteers watching this thing in Australia (despite the fact that there are perfectly decent ACTUAL observatories out there).

Im going to have to send a rude email to Nasa. Thanks for your time everyone.

Speaking as a fellow Brit - what gives you the right to pass comment, have you paid a penny to NASA?

Originally posted by TrueBrit I have passed many an hour, watching paint dry. However, knowing that one is looking upon an object from the guts of space, where no man has ever trod, nor, at this rate, is ever likely to, is actually quite a thing to witness.

Mate, its a ROCK. Go in the garden, pick one up - it is as awe inspiring as the one you really want to see on a computer screen. Difference is, you can touch it, consider how it was created, how long it has been there, what has happened around it in the time it has existed and ultimately - where the elements which created it came from.

Nobody is going to be inspired by a dot on a screen.

reply to post by TrueBrit


There have been numerous fly-pasts by NEOs in the recent past, and there will probably be a few more this year. Okay, this one was a bit coser than most, but otherwise it looks the same: a faint object moving (comparatively) slowy across the night sky visible only by telescope and really only of interest to astronomy geeks.

True, if it had been brighter (and the skies not cloudy) I'd have gone out to look and maybe try and photograph it. But for 99.99% of the population, what an Essex TV reality actor is eating tonight is much more interesting.

Obviously someone doesn't have the first clue how space observation actualy works. It isn't done with a webcam out in space, like they were expecting.

Not everyone can bring in 3d pictures. Why? That is not how telescopes work. If you actually look at most pictures, there is a disclaimer telling you that it is a composite, or a picture drawn up by cgi, to show you how the data is interpreted to look like.

Astonomers don't receive direct pictures like a telescope, they receive signals and data, that must then be interpreted by the people who understand the language.

It is like being given the code to a computer program, you won't see an icon on the screen, you see the crunched numbers fed into the computer, and only the programer can read it and interpret it. This is why you don't see pictures for 6 months after an event, they have to translate the data and figure out what it is showing.

So to even see a white dot moving through space, live, 17,000 miles away,finding its trajectory and following it, is nothing short of a miracle.

Also, NASA, and the NEO society, are the only ones to look for NEO. Since this is passing a trajectory that can't be viewed from the US, they have to rely on volunteers to watch it.

Somebody has watched too much science channel that cgi all the data to show you what it would look like, and they think it actualy looks like that too cosmologists.

There is no "real time" camera or Web cam on board the telescope for live relay links. The images that the Hubble takes are digital pictures and spectra released to the public after one year (to allow the investigators time to do their research).

hubblesite.org

reply to post by nixie_nox


No kidding right? Can you imagine if Kepler or Newton or Copernicus were alive today watching people complain they don't have some HD 3D visual of this object? I wonder sometimes about humanity....

Aww c,mon with the budgets of all the satellites and the Hubble, we cannot get even one close picture of this thing! This is as bad as any moon photos. The SOHO gives us clearer pics of stuff around the sun, 186,000 mi. away. WTF?

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by nixie_nox

 

No kidding right? Can you imagine if Kepler or Newton or Copernicus were alive today watching people complain they don't have some HD 3D visual of this object? I wonder sometimes about humanity....

If any of those came back right now and see that its bloody 2013 and we havent been to mars yet they would be calling us retards.

I see where you're coming from, but you're dealing with visionaries, men way ahead of their time... show this to those guys, lets say Copernicus, he would see it, be amazed at first then he'd ask you "what year is this" - you'd answer "2013" he would do the math, stop and say something "Ah! ok, makes sense... now... you have more or... its just this tiny picture thing... you know... its like 470 years after my death... in my time I ALREADY SAW TINY DOTS OF LIGHT... come on, show me the real stuff you have... huh... " "oh this is our most advanced stuff sir" "I see... So... Either you're joking or you turned lazy and dumb"

Would be a fun, although humiliating exchange of words... specially with Newton. For that reason alone, I'm glad they're dead so we dont get lectured on laziness, stupidity and... well.. for being kind of retarded. For that reason they're glad they're dead also

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni


Oh quite true to a certain degree but considering our imaging technology and its advances are in its infancy relatively. We aren't talking about a static piece of sky (so to speak) that a space telescope (explain that one to those fellers...."We have a telescope in space that can collect data from the furthest reaches of the known universe) can be trained on for weeks on end collecting the light to construct an image.

Give it a week I suppose and we will see radar imaging of this asteroid. I still hold that the pioneers of old would be in awe to the fact that I am communicating via an electronic device to thousands of people scattered across the globe while watching a streaming live shot from someones telescope half way across the world. Even 15 years ago that was not the case.

We will get to the point where we have a 3D imaging "net" where we catalog and document objects near Earth and I would wager it isn't going to come from a government entity; rather a private industry enterprise that has interest in such cataloging for resource exploitation (not a dirty word by the way).

Originally posted by w8tn4it
Aww c,mon with the budgets of all the satellites and the Hubble, we cannot get even one close picture of this thing! This is as bad as any moon photos. The SOHO gives us clearer pics of stuff around the sun, 186,000 mi. away. WTF?

You don't really know how Hubble and SOHO even capture their images do you? The resolution you are demanding from earth-based telescopes of an object that will only be briefly in an advantageous viewing area is unrealistic.

reply to post by TrueBrit


I personally think the meteorite that hit Russia is the one they've been saying was supposed to pass by 17,000 miles away. I think they knew it was going to hit, but just didn't want to say anything because they knew it would cause premature panic.

Originally posted by jeramie
reply to post by TrueBrit

 

I personally think the meteorite that hit Russia is the one they've been saying was supposed to pass by 17,000 miles away. I think they knew it was going to hit, but just didn't want to say anything because they knew it would cause premature panic.

The physic just don't tell the same story though. It isn't like the asteroid is hidden to the public and only viewable to the mysterious "they" or "powers that be". Backyard, B.Y.O.T. (bring your own telescopes) in Australia tracked 2012 DA 14, using compiled data and trajectory prediction.

Also, 2012 DA 14 would have leveled the area given its size and mass, not just put a few holes in some buildings and a sonic boom with a relatively mild shock wave.

Does anyone even bother to try to educate themselves on the Internet or just post randomly thinking they will sound like they have some novel and grand idea?

Hey!
This is the "MSL cameras are crap! I want 100 megapixels!" thread Mk II...
Deny Ignorance
It starts by denying OUR own ignorance first.

If Newton/Kepler could see the images of the Andromeda Galaxy, Titan, or the analysis of the Cosmic Microwave Background they would PISS their pants for a few hours...

We are living one of the most exciting eras of scientific advance in our whole (official) history, enjoy it lads!

It would seem to me that we have the technology to actually view this thing close up. Why not just point the hubble towards it? Am I misssing something here? Probably, so let's hear it? I mean, We have images of Titan, but we can't get an image of this? And yes, I understand that we can thank Voyager for Titan's images, but you get my point I hope.

If this thing could have damaged one of our Satellites, do we not have the ability to view it from one of them? Do we even have any cameras on any of our Satellites? I dunno you tell me? We can land a rover on Mars, but no image of this Asteroid?

Something stinks, and it's not the pile of poop that one of my neighbors allowed their dog to drop on my lawn earlier today either. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SheopleNation

Do you think Hubble can provide "live coverage"? Do you know where Hubble is? Do you know where it was when the asteroid passed? Do you know if Hubble can track a fast moving object? Those might be good things to think about before declaring "they just could have used Hubble."

You don't think that if there were good reason to use Hubble it would not have been used?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SheopleNation

 

Do you think Hubble can provide "live coverage"?

Did I say that I did?

Do you know where Hubble is?

See response above.

Do you know where it was when the asteroid passed?

No, do you?

Do you know if Hubble can track a fast moving object?

No I have no idea if it can, but I did consider asking that question.

Those might be good things to think about before declaring "they just could have used Hubble."

Actually, Most of it was condescending drivel, but for the record I never said "they just could have used Hubble". What I did do was just ask a few questions.

You don't think that if there were good reason to use Hubble it would not have been used?

Why don't you tell me a little more about what I think? Same old reckless assumptions eh? ~$heopleNation

reply to post by SheopleNation

Right. You just asked questions.

Something stinks, and it's not the pile of poop that one of my neighbors allowed their dog to drop on my lawn earlier today either.

And came to a conclusion without attempting to have any answers.