Comments on: Server woes http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:11:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Buzz Parsec http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26907 Buzz Parsec Tue, 02 Jan 2007 08:31:28 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26907 TaffyBach - This has been covered before; if you look around you should be able to find some posts on the topic, but basically, even the largest earth-based or low-orbit telescopes (such as Hubble) can only resolve objects several hundred feet across on the Moon. The Apollo moon landers are only about 15 feet across and thus are much too small to see. The various unmanned landers are all much smaller than that. Now, a high-resolution telescope in lunar orbit would have no problem seeing them (both the Apollos and the various unmanned landers), just as the MRO spotted Spirit and Opportunity on Mars. It would be about 2000 times closer to the Moon's surface (100-200 miles vs. 250,000 miles for a telescope on Earth. Hubble orbits a couple of hundred miles up, so at best it is 249,800 miles from the Moon, i.e. not a significant difference. I think either Clemantine or Lunar Prospector might have been able to spot the Apollo landers. Maybe they just didn't look. They were mostly concentrating on geological features and looking for water at the poles. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, scheduled for launch in about 2 years, has a 1-meter resolution camera, and should be able to pick up all the junk that's there. Another thing I wonder about, though. Why is it always the *evil* reptiles who get the blame for murdering celebrities? Don't *good* reptiles ever contribute to celebrity elimination? TaffyBach – This has been covered before; if you look around you should be able to find some posts on the topic, but basically, even the largest earth-based or low-orbit telescopes (such as Hubble) can only resolve objects several hundred feet across on the Moon. The Apollo moon landers are only about 15 feet across and thus are much too small to see. The various unmanned landers are all much smaller than that. Now, a high-resolution telescope in lunar orbit would have no problem seeing them (both the Apollos and the various unmanned landers), just as the MRO spotted Spirit and Opportunity on Mars. It would be about 2000 times closer to the Moon’s surface (100-200 miles vs. 250,000 miles for a telescope on Earth. Hubble orbits a couple of hundred miles up, so at best it is 249,800 miles from the Moon, i.e. not a significant difference.

I think either Clemantine or Lunar Prospector might have been able to spot the Apollo landers. Maybe they just didn’t look. They were mostly concentrating on geological features and looking for water at the poles. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, scheduled for launch in about 2 years, has a 1-meter resolution camera, and should be able to pick up all the junk that’s there.

Another thing I wonder about, though. Why is it always the *evil* reptiles who get the blame for murdering celebrities? Don’t *good* reptiles ever contribute to celebrity elimination?

]]> By: TaffyBach http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26906 TaffyBach Mon, 01 Jan 2007 21:08:31 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26906 I hope I've posted this in the right place. Firstly, may I point out that I am NOT a member of the tin foil hat brigade and don't conform to every conspiracy theory put forward. But given that we have lots of high power telescopes, on earth and out there in space, that can take a high resolution image of a gnat's testicles on the surface of Pluto, wouldn't it be relatively simple to take a piccy of the junk we've left behind on the surface of the moon and shut the conspiracy theorists up once and for all........then again, they probably would think the photos were part of a new conspiracy! Taffy Bach (PS. As a former part-time - weekends only - member of the Secret Assassination Department - Government Intelligence Taskforce, I know that Princess Diana was murdered by evil reptiles working for MFI under orders from David Icke) I hope I’ve posted this in the right place.

Firstly, may I point out that I am NOT a member of the tin foil hat brigade and don’t conform to every conspiracy theory put forward.

But given that we have lots of high power telescopes, on earth and out there in space, that can take a high resolution image of a gnat’s testicles on the surface of Pluto, wouldn’t it be relatively simple to take a piccy of the junk we’ve left behind on the surface of the moon and shut the conspiracy theorists up once and for all……..then again, they probably would think the photos were part of a new conspiracy!

Taffy Bach

(PS. As a former part-time – weekends only – member of the Secret Assassination Department – Government Intelligence Taskforce, I know that Princess Diana was murdered by evil reptiles working for MFI under orders from David Icke)

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26905 The Bad Astronomer Mon, 01 Jan 2007 17:35:15 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26905 Wow, thanks! Wow, thanks!

]]> By: Sandra Mardigian http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26904 Sandra Mardigian Mon, 01 Jan 2007 16:39:28 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26904 Just wanted to wish you a happy New Year and thank you for brightening my morning every day of the year with your entertaining wit and educational content. Just wanted to wish you a happy New Year and thank you for brightening my morning every day of the year with your entertaining wit and educational content.

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26903 The Bad Astronomer Mon, 01 Jan 2007 16:03:20 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26903 Test again. Test again.

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26902 The Bad Astronomer Mon, 01 Jan 2007 01:17:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26902 No, Lashdot and Digg are not to blame. Something else happened that generated Slrunaway processes on the server. Things have been running smoothly for about 24 hours now, so I'm hoping it's over. No, Lashdot and Digg are not to blame. Something else happened that generated Slrunaway processes on the server. Things have been running smoothly for about 24 hours now, so I’m hoping it’s over.

]]> By: ZB http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26901 ZB Sun, 31 Dec 2006 19:06:32 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26901 All hail our /. overlords! (At least that's my guess as to the server problems.) http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/28/2254226 All hail our /. overlords!

(At least that’s my guess as to the server problems.)

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/28/2254226

]]> By: spacewriter http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26900 spacewriter Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:27:01 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26900 ah, that would explain why a comment I tried to post wouldn't show up, yet when I tried to post again, it told me that I'd already posted the same comment? ah, that would explain why a comment I tried to post wouldn’t show up, yet when I tried to post again, it told me that I’d already posted the same comment?

]]> By: amstrad http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26899 amstrad Sun, 31 Dec 2006 16:27:08 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26899 You mean that getting linked to from slashdot didn't leave your server a smoldering pile of ashes? You mean that getting linked to from slashdot didn’t leave your server a smoldering pile of ashes?

]]> By: Navneeth http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26898 Navneeth Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:52:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26898 Test Test

]]> By: Ian Regan http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26897 Ian Regan Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:48:17 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26897 .here fine just working be to seems page comments The .here fine just working be to seems page comments The

]]> By: Cramberry http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26896 Cramberry Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:24:48 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26896 Works fine here! ('cept for the cowboy comment.) Works fine here! (‘cept for the cowboy comment.)

]]> By: Cramberry http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26895 Cramberry Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:23:50 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26895 Don't get testy, y'all! Don’t get testy, y’all!

]]> By: Grand Lunar http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26894 Grand Lunar Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:10:52 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26894 Suppose BA and BAUT had a Cray-2 for a server? Suppose BA and BAUT had a Cray-2 for a server?

]]> By: skeptigirl http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26893 skeptigirl Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:00:56 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26893 worked fine except the server thinks I'm a too fast cow<b>boy</b> worked fine except the server thinks I’m a too fast cowboy

]]> By: skeptigirl http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26892 skeptigirl Sun, 31 Dec 2006 08:59:45 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26892 test comment only test comment only

]]> By: Delance http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26891 Delance Sun, 31 Dec 2006 08:23:46 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26891 That is bizarre on so many levels. That is bizarre on so many levels.

]]> By: Eric http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26890 Eric Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:56:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26890 I know what's going on. Hal Turner (an extremist racist with his own radio show) has been offending people everywhere so people are trying to DDoS (Distributed Denial of service) attack on his site. When Hal Turner found out, he make a redirect from his site to his blog and used his blog as his site so DDoS attacks would go to the blogging server. The blogging server hosts many blogs (possiblly the BA Blog too) and so the DDoS attacks went to the Blog server and caused the server to be slow (blog servers have immense bandwidth so it doesn't crash but when there is a heavy traffic load, it slows down) In order to prevent the blogging company from suing Hal turner, he stopped the redirect and programmed his server to shut off when there was a spike in bandwidth. I know what’s going on. Hal Turner (an extremist racist with his own radio show) has been offending people everywhere so people are trying to DDoS (Distributed Denial of service) attack on his site. When Hal Turner found out, he make a redirect from his site to his blog and used his blog as his site so DDoS attacks would go to the blogging server. The blogging server hosts many blogs (possiblly the BA Blog too) and so the DDoS attacks went to the Blog server and caused the server to be slow (blog servers have immense bandwidth so it doesn’t crash but when there is a heavy traffic load, it slows down)

In order to prevent the blogging company from suing Hal turner, he stopped the redirect and programmed his server to shut off when there was a spike in bandwidth.

]]> By: Delance http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26889 Delance Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:36:57 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26889 It gave a strange response that made me think I just lost a very long comment, but it worked. :) It gave a strange response that made me think I just lost a very long comment, but it worked. :)

]]> By: thaumaturge http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26888 thaumaturge Sun, 31 Dec 2006 07:02:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26888 Test! Test!

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26887 The Bad Astronomer Sun, 31 Dec 2006 05:54:45 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26887 Apparently, it's fixed. Apparently, it’s fixed.

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/comment-page-1/#comment-26886 The Bad Astronomer Sun, 31 Dec 2006 05:53:06 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/30/server-woes/#comment-26886 Test. Test.

]]>