Recent comments in /f/space
Alan_Smithee_ t1_jdleqt8 wrote
Reply to comment by nednobbins in NASA prepares for a Sept. 24 delivery — the first time a U.S. mission returns an asteroid sample to Earth by marketrent
Japan has already done this.
GregoryGorbuck t1_jdlem3g wrote
Reply to First crewed Starliner launch slips again by Afrin_Drip
jesus, i'll be fuckin dead the time this thing launches
[deleted] t1_jdlecd3 wrote
[deleted] t1_jdle597 wrote
Reply to comment by tingtong500 in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
[removed]
DudeWithAnAxeToGrind t1_jdldx34 wrote
Reply to We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
Yes, there are several probes that could (and those that are still active can) see that region of space. Plus any spacecraft that left Earth-Moon system, and had capabilities to take photos as it flew to other planets in the Solar system (or to the Sun itself).
No, there isn't anything there. Several reasons. L3 Lagrange point of Sun-Earth system is there. L3 is unstable point, nothing could hide there for very long, it'd fall out of orbit relatively quickly. Earth is a planet, meaning its gravitational influence is strong enough to clear its orbit of other stuff. This includes stuff attempting to orbit on the opposite side of the Sun from us. I.e. anything in Earth's orbit either gets stuck in one of the two stable Lagrange points (L4 and L5; there's some dust and couple of asteroids stuck there), captured into orbit around Earth (becoming a moon, but so far no luck for capturing that 2nd moon), or eventually flung out.
And as several people mentioned already, even without being able to see, we'd be able to detect gravitational influence of anything sufficiently large, like another planet. In case you were asking if there could be something large (e.g. planet sized) hiding there, the answer is resounding no. Even if there could be something large out there (which it can't, orbital mechanics simply doesn't allow it), we'd figure it out back in the 19th century by simply observing trajectories of other stuff that we can see, long before we started launching stuff in space.
the_hornicorn t1_jdlds93 wrote
First you need to ask yourself if you really exist.
MBeebeCIII t1_jdldn8v wrote
I really wish "the consensus to leading scientists" would just stop propagating the deception of "earth is a sphere". Even the most rudimentory research reveals that this place in space we occupy is flat.
Bascna t1_jdldil3 wrote
Reply to We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
This is the Counter-Earth hypothesis. Wikipedia has a nice section on how we would be able to detect any such planet.
And according to Marvel Comics cannon, the High Evolutionary built Counter-Earth, but placed it out of phase in time with the rest of the universe so it would be undetectable. 😄
[deleted] t1_jdldeto wrote
[removed]
MemorianX t1_jdlcoyn wrote
Reply to comment by pm_me_ur_ephemerides in Rocket Lab targets $50 million launch price for Neutron rocket to challenge SpaceX’s Falcon 9 by cnbc_official
Maybe customer will also favor falcon 9 due it's track record what at least until neutron ha proven it's reliability. What is a few million more in launch cost Vs the time and build price of your payload
JackedNStackedd t1_jdlc9pn wrote
u on ball, ball big, u not big, ball so big but u so small so ball look like not ball
[deleted] t1_jdlbshb wrote
Reply to comment by Kansas_Nationalist in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
[removed]
LoremIpsum10101010 t1_jdlaurd wrote
How old are you? Do you know how to use Google? Honestly, is there any moderation on this sub at all?
phalangepatella t1_jdlato8 wrote
Reply to comment by 7heblackwolf in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
Haven’t you ever been tryna sleep and some apparently world changing thought enters your mind?
Teleseismic_Eyes t1_jdlar1h wrote
Draw a circle on your computer. Did you do it? Are you sure?? Zoom in 9n the circle. Still look round? Ok...
7heblackwolf t1_jdlalok wrote
Reply to comment by phalangepatella in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
I understand the question. But how and why?
ufhrzdgug t1_jdlak7c wrote
A 1 kilometer long bridge has to "bend" about 78 millimeters to follow the shape of the earth (simplified). A one meter stick 0.0078 millimeters. Do you think you can see such a small difference?
One could ask why the level of the ocean is not going down after removing a glas of water. It went down, but the change it's too small to see.
You can remove a grain of sand from a beach. There is less sand now but would anybody notice?
[deleted] t1_jdl9zs7 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_jdl9qdw wrote
[removed]
seffej t1_jdl9g2u wrote
Well then why hasn't something grabbed and thrown this spear?
Fleaslayer t1_jdl8x1t wrote
Here's a picture of a billiard ball under a microscope. We see it as really smooth, but magnified it actually has mountains and valleys. If the earth was shrunk to the size of a billiard ball, and you could hold it, it would be much smoother than a billiard ball.
So, okay, at the scale we interact with it, it has mountains and valleys and flat spots. Even so, it's pretty easy to see the curvature of the sphere. When you're at a high cruising altitude on a plane and look out at the horizon, it's curved. When you stand on the shore and watch a boat sail away, it starts looking like it's sinking as it goes over the horizon, over the curve.
It's a sphere, it's just (to us) a really big sphere.
kuro24811 t1_jdl8pil wrote
Reply to comment by nednobbins in NASA prepares for a Sept. 24 delivery — the first time a U.S. mission returns an asteroid sample to Earth by marketrent
Surprisingly it is the first for the US, but NASA has brought comet dust back with the Stardust Spacecraft. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stardust_(spacecraft).
NEAR Shoemaker was a fun mission to read about also since it surprised people at NASA when they tried and successfully soft landed on the asteroid Eros at the end of the mission since it wasn’t designed to do that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEAR_Shoemaker
OnlyAstronomyFans t1_jdl8hm4 wrote
Reply to comment by Dave-C in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
Oh yeah. Something could hide directly on the opposite side of the sun from us, but probably not from a spacecraft in a trailing earth orbit, especially if it trailed further than like one earth radius
OnlyAstronomyFans t1_jdl88od wrote
Reply to comment by Dave-C in We can't see on the other side of the Sun. Have we ever used satellites to see the other side? by Dave-C
I think op means the area of space directly behind the sun. The answer is yes. We rotate around the universe on several axis. The parts that we can’t see are based on the north or the south hemisphere but if you had the ability to go anywhere on our planet, you could see in all directions around the universe, and during certain times of the day and certain times of the year someone able to go to anywhere on our planet would be able to theoretically see in any direction into the universe. I hope that helps. It was hard for me to explain without drawing pictures.
ferrel_hadley t1_jdlevi1 wrote
Reply to comment by HeebieMcJeeberson in If earth was a smooth sphere, which direction would water flow when placed on the surface? by Axial-Precession
>On a smooth dry sphere it would flow toward the equator.
For a start there is no water on a dry sphere. Then there would be a slight centrifugal tug pulling water more towards the equator but Coriolis would be the dominant force.