Comments on: What a falling star looks like… from space!

By: Perseids « weirdism

Perseids « weirdism — Thu, 16 Aug 2012 21:09:11 +0000

[...] by Ron Garan via Bad Astronomy Share this:FacebookTwitterTumblrLike this:LikeBe the first to like [...]

By: randy

randy — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 21:26:25 +0000

You have some extremely flawed assumptions here. First you are assuming that a meteor shower hits the earth in equal portions throughout the earths atmosphere which is never the case… when is the last time that you saw a meteor shower take up more than a portion of the visible sky. Using your logic that would mean that there are then even less meteors to possibly hit the ISS which is absolutely wrong there are more. Why? Because we only see the meteors that hit our atmosphere. There may be many more meteors passing at say 350km

By: Astronaut Photographs Perseid Meteor… From Space – Discovery News « devspave

Sun, 18 Sep 2011 02:02:18 +0000

[...] meteor shower as seen from space: Nasa astronaut shares photo on TwitterDaily MailWhat a falling star looks like… from space!Discover Magazine (blog)International Business Times -SlashGear -NewsLiteall 29 news [...]

By: Jonny

Jonny — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 21:54:31 +0000

Anyone who can do math can reasonably say that UFOs are pure fantasy. The universe is not teaming with life. Even if it was teaming with life, even IF it was, the vast distances between even neighboring star systems make regular visitations virtually impossible let alone even remotely practical.

Those who cling to UFO superstition ought to join their televangelist Christian brothers and sisters who sell miracle healing hanker-chiefs. Just pray the right words and you will be healed of anything! even senseless superstitions!

Pareidolia is a powerful and deceptive mental faculty and everyone would do well to understand what it is and the tricks their own brains play on them. The government isn’t making cover-ups and telling you what to think, your brain does an excellent job of that without any help from the government.

By: Ventiao | El mundo cambia, todo cambia, entérate » Imperdible: Imagen de una estrella fugaz desde la ISS

Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:04:19 +0000

[...] trozos de detrito cósmico aleatorio”. La definición no es mía, sino de Phil Plait, de Discover Magazine, para quien la fotografía si representa a una de las estrellas fugaces de las Perseidas. Pedid un [...]

By: Minnie

Minnie — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 18:14:07 +0000

Maybe this will soften those that that totally don’t think there might be UFO’s. I offer you Gordon Cooper, astronaut. Not proof, but…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvPR8T1o3Dc

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:42:48 +0000

Shari K (41) said:

Re: BOLIDENATE… I second the comment from JSchu. I checked several dictionaries but apparently “bolidenate” is NOT a word. Taking it in context here, it obviously means to make larger, since when I clicked the pic, I got a larger version of it.

Can this columnist, or perhaps Discover’s editors, please address this? I work as a professional copy editor & proofreader, and consider myself a huge “word nerd,” so I have to say my curiosity is VERY piqued as to whether this is actually a new word, or if it’s just a typo. Either way, hope to hear from someone soon.

Cheers,
Shari K. in California

Phil is a great proponent of neologisms. They’re all perfcectly cromulent.

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:38:36 +0000

Chris J (27) said:

nunya @11:
i uncapitalized your name for you. you is welcome.

Wow, until I read this I never realised how amazing I am, being able to hold down the “shift” key while typing a letter. . .

Seriously, is it so difficult for you to use good English?

By: Nigel Depledge

Nigel Depledge — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 01:29:53 +0000

Michael Fjetland (4) said:

NASA’s policy is NOT to talk about UFO’s or acknowledge same. I have friends there (I live 5 minutes from JSC in Houston). They have photos of UFO’s but you won’t be seeing them…

Yeah, right, as if NASA could prevent employees from publishing photographs online.

By: Ben H.

Ben H. — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:26:47 +0000

@67 Ralph
Your thought process is correct, and very insightful. You are pondering orbital mechanics without the math. The piece you are missing is that the speed and energy of your spacecraft is proportional to your orbital altitude. At the altitude of a space shuttle, orbital speed is on the order of 18,000 mph or more. Therefore, the vehicle must decelerate by 18,000 mph to come to rest on a runway in Florida. Now, you COULD theoretically use the space shuttle engines to do all of the decelleration down to terminal velocity, so that you essentially fall straight down into the atmosphere as you speculated. However this would require an amount of energy equivalent to that used to get the space shuttle UP TO that speed in the first place. IE, two solid rocket boosters and a full external tank of fuel for the space shuttle main engines. This is logistically improbable, if not impossible. therefore, mission designers only slow down the spacecraft enough for the orbit to intersect the atmosphere, and let the friction do the rest.

Hope that helps!
- Ben H.
JSC, Houston, TX