Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Astronomers Find the Calmest Place On Earth

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the i-can-see-clearly-now dept.

Space 231

The Narrative Fallacy writes "Live Science reports that astronomers in search of the perfect site to take pictures of the heavens have combined data from satellites, ground stations and climate models in a study to assess the many factors that affect image quality — cloud cover, temperature, sky-brightness, water vapor, wind speeds and atmospheric turbulence. They have pinpointed the coldest, driest, calmest place on earth, known simply as Ridge A, 13,297 feet high on the Antarctic Plateau. 'It's so calm that there's almost no wind or weather there at all,' says study leader Will Saunders, of the Anglo-Australian Observatory. 'The astronomical images taken at Ridge A should be at least three times sharper than at the best sites currently used by astronomers.' Located within the Australian Antarctic Territory, the site is 89 miles from the PLATO (PLATeau Observatory) international robotic observatory. The new site would be superior to the best existing observatories on high mountain tops in Hawaii and Chile, Saunders says. 'Because the sky there is so much darker and drier, it means that a modestly-sized telescope would be as powerful as the largest telescopes anywhere else on earth.'"

cancel ×

231 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A hash bar in Amsterdam... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286379)

...after half a blue xanax.

Re:A hash bar in Amsterdam... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286417)

What are you gibbering on about?

Re:A hash bar in Amsterdam... (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286517)

The calmest place on earth, duh. Unfortunately it won't help you observe the stars and galaxies unless you mix in some psilocybin or LSD or what have you.

For Earthbound, mebbe... (5, Interesting)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286421)

but I still think the best spot for observational astronomy has to be the far side of the Moon. You've got several thousand miles of light and EM shielding, and a good couple weeks' seeing a month when the Sun goes down. Once the 'scopes cool off, there's no warping. What's not to love?

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (-1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286525)

Hint: The dark side of the moon isn't. The moon gets as much sunlight over it's entire surface.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (3, Informative)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286569)

I said Far Side, not Dark Side. Dark Side Of The Moon is a Pink Floyd album.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287371)

And I find your lack of faith disturbing

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (0, Redundant)

mabersold (1171751) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287591)

There is no dark side of the moon, really. As a matter of fact, it's all dark.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286689)

He didn't say the dark side. The "far" side has a couple weeks of dark per month with no earthshine.

Read the post, you stupid fuck (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286731)

stop jumping to conclusions and READ THE FUCKING POST before you correct someone, dipshit.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (3, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286737)

> The moon gets as much sunlight over it's entire surface.

Not at the poles. In fact there is at least one crater near the South pole that is in permanent shadow.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (2, Funny)

SnapShot (171582) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287495)

Oh, so that's where they're hiding...

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286863)

Hint: The moon is phase locked. The opposite-to-earth-facing side of the moon gets less or no sun at night.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (2, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286601)

but I still think the best spot for observational astronomy has to be the far side of the Moon.

But the downside is that it costs like $100 billion to build and man[1] one there. I doubt the Antarctic place would approach one billion.

[1] Not sure our robotic remote repair technology is up to the task.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (5, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286905)

And the antarcitc site comes with its' own problems, Since it isn't windy, any man-made smog will stay there. You're going to need to burn fuel for the generators, heating, transport, etc., and in cold temperatures you're going to get the water vapor in the exhaust crystalizing, forming ground-level fog. Since it's so calm, it'll just accumulate, then condense on the cold optics. Have fun seeing when your mirror's frosted over with an inch of rime.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (5, Informative)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287065)

Fortunately, it's on a mountain ridge. The smog/fog will go....down.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (1)

john83 (923470) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286769)

...Once the 'scopes cool off, there's no warping...

That heating and cooling (which would be substantial) sounds like it might do some warping of its own. Can anyone quantify that? Does Hubble have problems with heating & cooling as it falls in and out of the earth's shadow?

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287441)

That heating and cooling (which would be substantial) sounds like it might do some warping of its own. Can anyone quantify that? Does Hubble have problems with heating & cooling as it falls in and out of the earth's shadow?

42

When all else fails... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286845)

start talking like a conservative! From Ook Ook Bama's top crony Axelrod this week:

"His goal is to create the best possible situation for consumers, create competition and choice," Axelrod said. "We want to bring a measure of security to people who have health insurance today. We want to help those who don't have coverage today, because they can't afford it, get insurance they can afford. And we want to do it in a way that reduces the overall cost of the system as a whole."

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (0)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287145)

surely with the increased human activity in the area, the atmospheric turbulence they seek will be compromised.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (2, Informative)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287163)

>>>best spot for observational astronomy has to be the far side of the Moon... What's not to love?

Funny you mention "love" because there's no women on the moon, or on that ridge in Antarctica, which is a major drawback of accepting either of those jobs. Oh wait. It's just like my current job.

Re:For Earthbound, mebbe... (2, Interesting)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287541)

The problem is getting the data back to Earth. I would assume that it would be an un-staffed observatory, in which case, you'd need to do one of the following:
  • send up a courier to swap out SD cards every few weeks.
  • set up a network connecting the station with a transmitter which has line-of-site to the Earth.
  • put a couple of satellites in orbit which are in line-of-sight to the far side of the moon, so that the data could be relayed back to Earth.

The last option is probably the cheapest, but it's still a significant added expense on the set-up and maintenance of such a station.

Umm, right. (5, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286435)

It's also in the Middle of Nowhere. So getting to it is going to be very expensive.

Anyhow, we're on to you, Mr. I'm-extraordinarily-antisocial Astronomer. We are not going to support your social avoidance issues with a multimillion dollar playpen. Just take your meds!

Re:Umm, right. (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286483)

It's also in the Middle of Nowhere.

Sounds like the perfect place to build our Grand Nerd Basement. Well, except maybe for lack of a Pizza Hut.
         

Re:Umm, right. (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286583)

No way am I going that far from Blizzcon.

Re:Umm, right. (2, Funny)

rarel (697734) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287011)

Yeah, plus with the lack of bad weather even Blizzardcon would be out of option. Bummer.

Re:Umm, right. (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286711)

So, no light pollution either. Double bonus.

FYI, a lot (most, perhaps, even.) of the activity in antarctica already is astronomy/aeronomy projects, so there is precedent.

Re:Umm, right. (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286815)

no light pollution either.

Well, except for those several months of the year when you have to contend with 24/7 light pollution emanating from Sol.

Re:Umm, right. (1)

photonic (584757) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287157)

It's also in the Middle of Nowhere. So getting to it is going to be very expensive.

I once saw a presentation at a conference on telescopes, in that case about a similarly quiet location Dome C [wikipedia.org] , also in Antarctica. They had pretty advanced ideas, including cost estimates. The shipping costs of a container by boat and then by some sort of big snowmobile weren't that ridiculously expensive. I forgot the numbers, but it was probably several orders of magnitude cheaper than sending anything to space and probably even cheaper than loading a big telescope in the back of your Boeing 747 [usra.edu] . Expect some big telescopes in Antarctica in ten years or so.

Re:Umm, right. (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287279)

The place to build observatories has always been a compromise of "middle of nowhere" and reachable (e.g. from a city). Eventually, all of these observatories got swallowed by the growing cities.
Now that you can operate observatories automatically (remote control) or semi-automatically (submit your to the local technician or astronomer), building it in the middle of nowhere is a slightly smaller problem than it used to be.

Re:Umm, right. (1)

prograde (1425683) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287325)

Actually, from TFA:

Researchers assert that a telescope at the site could take images nearly as good as those from the space-based Hubble telescope.

At least this location is on the surface of the planet...

Home on Ridge A (5, Funny)

pavon (30274) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287555)

Oh, give me a home where the penguins roam
And the frigid astronomers play
Where seldom is heard a single word
And the skies are not cloudy all day

How often at night when the heavens are bright
With the light from the glittering stars
Have I stood there amazed and asked as I gazed
If their glory exceeds that of ours

Home, home on Ridge A
And the frigid astronomers play
Where seldom is heard a single word
And the skies are not cloudy all day

Where the air is so pure, the zephyrs so free
The breezes so calm and light
That I would not exchange my home on Ridge A
For all of the cities so bright

Antarctica... (5, Funny)

TheBilgeRat (1629569) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286443)

Isn't that where the second Stargate resides?

Re:Antarctica... (1)

sarlos (903082) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286939)

No, that Stargate was destroyed by Anubis, duh! We now have the original one from Giza back in Cheyanne Mountain, under NORAD... Such a noob!

Re:Antarctica... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287187)

Actually wasn't it the Giza one that was destroyed when they launched it from the X-302 during the attack? Then the alternate stargate from the Russians was returned which was the one originally in Antarctica.

Re:Antarctica... (4, Informative)

DarthBart (640519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287299)

The Antarctic gate was in storage after being retreived from McMurdo.
The original Giza gate was in use at SGC until it was beamed up into Thor's ship before it crashed into the pacific.

Then the A-Gate became the primary because the G-Gate was thought lost in the Pacific, but it was infact retrieved by the Russians and they ran their own gate program.

It was the A-Gate that was destroyed by Anubis. The G-gate was then purchased back from the Russians after they figured out that Anubis's gate-blower-upper-thingy was destroyed.

Yes, I'm a Gate Geek.

Re:Antarctica... (2, Informative)

sarlos (903082) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287353)

Nope, the one in Giza was used to escape a crashing Asgard ship, after which the Antarctica Stargate was moved to Stargate Command. The Russians recovered the Giza Stargate from the ocean floor and started their own Stargate program. Later, a new weapon developed by Anubis led to the destruction of the Antarctica Stargate. Stargate Command arranged a deal to lease the Giza Stargate from the Russians, and 'purchased' it outright by giving the Russians a Daedalus-class ship (the Korolev).

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_(device)#Secondary_gates/ [wikipedia.org]

obligatory ... (2, Funny)

pablo_max (626328) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286455)

Hey..I can see my house from here.

Perfect place to finish my dissertation. (1)

parallel_prankster (1455313) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286467)

This is where I should go to write my thesis then Do we get slashdot there ? or is that considered not calm ?

Re:Perfect place to finish my dissertation. (1)

drwho (4190) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286611)

If you spot reading slashdot, you might find the time and focus to finish your dissertation. Seriously, reading Slashdot too much serves to create an Attention Defecit Disorder. Now if....whoo what's that! I found another open wifi network!...now where was I? Yea...Slashdot is like a bazaar of ideas, but you just went out for milk and bread.

Calmest place on earth = Calmest resort on earth! (4, Funny)

billlava (1270394) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286497)

Quick, before anyone else can, let's raise some venture capital and build a few resorts there.

The commercial practically writes itself!
Ridge A villas, your ticket to paradise on earth!*


*Ridge A Villas is not responsible for hypothermia, loss of limbs due to gangrene, or Abominable Snowman attacks. Any lawsuit filed against Ridge A Villas must be filed in Antarctica county district court jurisdiction within 90 hours of the incident.

Re:Calmest place on earth = Calmest resort on eart (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286539)

*Ridge A Villas is not responsible for hypothermia, loss of limbs due to gangrene, or Abominable Snowman attacks. Any lawsuit filed against Ridge A Villas must be filed in Antarctica county district court jurisdiction within 90 hours of the incident.

Pfft, you can disclaim whatever you want. In court, it'll be easy to show that Ridge A Villas are responsible for the Abominable Snowman attacks, due to cutting him out of the mascot deal and resulting merchandising royalties.

ice hotel (1)

macbeth66 (204889) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286837)

How long before someone does something like this; http://www.icehotel-canada.com [icehotel-canada.com] ?

Re:Calmest place on earth = Calmest resort on eart (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287309)

Calmest place on earth

Yeah, lets all go there and make a huge PAARTY!

Re:Calmest place on earth = Calmest resort on eart (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287501)

BYOTT

Bring Your Own Tauntaun.

Chill out, man (1)

drwho (4190) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286529)

Yea I think that I need some calm spot too. It's too hectic in Boston.

Miles? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286553)

89 miles

Could someone convert that into a number the rest of the world understands?

Re:Miles? (5, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286771)

It's 712 furlongs

Re:Miles? (1)

Legrow (1023457) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287451)

It's 712 furlongs

Who uses furlongs? It's 313,280 cubits.

Re:Miles? (1)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286839)

9.57443388 Ã-- 10^-7 astronomical units.

Re:Miles? (1)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286861)

Which works out at around 9.57443388 x 10^-7 AU when you actually check the preview.

Re:Miles? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286965)

>> 89 miles

>Could someone convert that into a number the rest of the world understands?

About the same as the average American penis. Give or take.

Re:Miles? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286979)

89 miles

Could someone convert that into a number the rest of the world understands?

It's 0x59 miles.

Re:Miles? (0)

macbeth66 (204889) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287001)

89 miles = 143.231616 kilometers

Google is your friend.

er.. well, sometimes. It used to be? Whatever...

Re:Miles? (4, Funny)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287149)

89 miles

Could someone convert that into a number the rest of the world understands?

89 metric miles.

Re:Miles? (1)

The Wooden Badger (540258) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287151)

Wolfram Alpha much?

Australian Antarctic Territory ? (5, Informative)

mbone (558574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286607)

Located within the Australian Antarctic Territory

Note that the USA, Russia, China, and many other countries do not recognize this territory as being in any way Australian.

Re:Australian Antarctic Territory ? (1)

drwho (4190) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286853)

Neither does then Penguinista Republic, and the other nations of the far southern hemisphere. But talk is cheap and land is available so these countries let the Northerners make a lot of noise and build their huts because it's too much bother to throw snowballs at them. There are limits to the tolerance that the Southern Nations has shown, so don't press your luck. In fact, the amount of fish the North is taking from Southern waters is a bit high and needs to be reduced. But go ahead, build your telescope.

Re:Australian Antarctic Territory ? (2, Interesting)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286883)

But France, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom do.

Re:Australian Antarctic Territory ? (2, Funny)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287223)

But what about Vatican City and Liechtenstein?

Note to USA, Russia and China. (0)

microbox (704317) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287181)

Note to USA, Russia and China. Leave us the @#% alone. I heard antipsychotic medication can help with both megalomania and delusions of grandeur.

Re:Note to USA, Russia and China. (2, Informative)

ShadowRangerRIT (1301549) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287595)

To be fair, the reasons for not recognizing the territory are ostensibly noble; they theoretically believe that the continent should be treated as a shared resource with limited exploitation (primarily for scientific purposes). Granted, both Russia and the US "reserve the right" to make territorial claims in the future, but to do so they'd have to withdraw from the Antarctic Treaty (which explicitly forbids new territorial claims, and explicitly fails to either recognize or dispute pre-existing claims). I can't find any evidence that China has made similar statements (they are also a signatory on the treaty, and therefore can't make claims), but I'm sure if the treaty were broken they would try and get in on the action.

Re:Australian Antarctic Territory ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287435)

USA, Russia, China, and many other countries do not recognize this territory as being in any way Australian

Don't you mean the governments of those countries? As an individual, the only thing of concern or value to me is that nobody is harmed in the never-ending disputes between governments.

Wow, that sounds like paradise. Wait.. (4, Funny)

xant (99438) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286609)

> The new site would be superior to the best existing observatories on high mountain tops

Except for the fact that it's in fucking Antarctica? I think the researchers currently in Hawaii would be pretty annoyed to have to move. :-)

Re:Wow, that sounds like paradise. Wait.. (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286981)

Though I'm assuming it's nothing like Antartica, it looks like it still might get a little nippy at some of those observatories in Hawaii.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=19.825294,-155.472518&spn=0.005834,0.007521&t=h&z=17 [google.com]

Of course, I'm living in Minnesota now, so it's still probably shorts and t-shirts weather.

Re:Wow, that sounds like paradise. Wait.. (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287247)

Nighttime lows only get down to -4C (25F) so yeah basically t-shirt weather to a midwesterner.

It has at least one thing going for it... (5, Funny)

Zantac69 (1331461) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286617)

...the danger of fire is very low - take note, Mount Wilson Observatory!

It's right next to the place where... (1)

LitelySalted (1348425) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286673)

The sun don't shine.

Sign me up! (1)

pen (7191) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286699)

Calmest place on Earth? Wow! Sounds like the perfect vacation spot for me to get away from the stressful city life!

What about the Katabatic winds? (4, Interesting)

d474 (695126) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286735)

I wonder why the Katabatic winds [wikipedia.org] don't blow there. I thought the entire continent was pretty much consumed by these winds. Learn something new everyday.

Re:What about the Katabatic winds? (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287023)

Probably because this ridge is at or near the top of the antarctic dome, it isn't subject to katabatic winds.

Re:What about the Katabatic winds? (4, Informative)

Shatrat (855151) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287045)

Katabatic winds are caused by cooling air moving downhill, so it seems to me that they would be the greatest around the shoreline and non-existent at the center.

Re:What about the Katabatic winds? (3, Informative)

mbone (558574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287049)

I would guess that it's at one of the high locations where the Katabatic winds start from. They're like avalanches, they aren't bad at the top, just at the bottom.

As good as ex-Earth? Or merely cheaper? (1)

drwho (4190) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286767)

I wonder about the utility of this telescope. It is claimed that the images obtained will be 'almost as good as' those from Hubble. Perhaps during most of the year, but during Antarctic summer, the sun shines the whole day, so the telescope will be useless a great portion of the time. Or, maybe it's not simply an optical telescope? In either case, the cost of building and maintaining such an observatory are high. If it is to be manned, higher still. If it is build on the ice pack, it had better generate very little heat, or it will sink just like so many Antarctic bases.

How, I realize that it is difficult to get time on the really good telescopes around the world, and in space. So, perhaps this 'less than Hubble' is still practical. I just wish we had the money to build more space telescopes. particularly deep space ones, away from the solar wind.

Re:As good as ex-Earth? Or merely cheaper? (1)

whitehatnetizen (997645) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286935)

you do realise of course, that unlike the north pole, the south is actually made up of land covered in ice and not just a pile of floating water?

Re:As good as ex-Earth? Or merely cheaper? (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287087)

Also you realize every spot on earth has an average of 12 hours of sunlight a year. Just distributed differently depending on your latitude.

So you may get 3 months where it is to sunny to do real work. (time to write you papers) but you also get 3 months of 24 hours of operation during the winter. Between that you can ramp up and down. Yea it is bit crazy for HR but still you get the same amount of functionally as any other earth telescope.

perfect site for next dan brown novel (1)

IAmKidding (1623797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286817)

Robert Langdon: [reading off papyrus scroll] The holy observatory 'neath RIDGE waits. The blade and chalice guarding o'er her gates. Adorned in masters' loving art, she lies. She rests at last beneath the SHARPER & CALMER & COLDER starry skys.

source - IM'dB

One drawback (1, Redundant)

cunniff (264218) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286819)

It can only see half the sky due to being very close to the South Pole. Near-equatorial telescopes can see 80% or more of the sky over the course of the year. A polar telescope would be useful for statistical surveys, etc. but would miss, on average, 50% of observations unique to one point in the sky.

Re:One drawback (1)

spaceyhackerlady (462530) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287281)

The sky coverage is a compromise, but a good one, since it includes the very interesting southern Milky Way. They should be able to do some amazing science with this thing!

How much of the year can they use this thing? Midnight sun and all that? The South Pole is astronomically dark for 6 weeks, then it's twilight or daylight the entire rest of the year.

...laura

Coordinates, please (1)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286925)

So ... where is it?

Re:Coordinates, please (2, Informative)

mbone (558574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287213)

It's 89 km from Plato [slashdot.org] - a Chinese-Australian robotic observatory at "Dome A".

That's at 80 deg 22' S 77 deg 21' E [unsw.edu.au] and 4093 meters above sea level.

I have to wonder if it's that much better than PLATO that there is a need for 2 observatories 89 km apart.

Re:Coordinates, please (1)

mbone (558574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287343)

Sorry - it's 144 km from Plato. Blasted English units.

Re:Coordinates, please (1)

laejoh (648921) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287283)

Latitude 76DEG 15', Longitude 113DEG 10' E :)

But *why* this unnatural, eldritch calm? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29286929)

Once they get to ridge A, they'll find the city of the Elder Things. It's calm because even the *weather* is afraid to go there . . . Tekeli-li!

Re:But *why* this unnatural, eldritch calm? (1)

jeffb (2.718) (1189693) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287251)

Yeah, it's perfectly calm, as long as you ignore the triangular striated prints in the snow. And the disappearing sled dogs.

Yea but.... (0, Redundant)

FriendlyPrimate (461389) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286931)

Sounds ideal....but how are you gonna keep the telescope lenses from frosting up?

But what about the monsters? (1)

nih (411096) | more than 4 years ago | (#29286999)

You must let me back in... I won't harm anyone... I promise...

Ozone free clarity (1)

gsgriffin (1195771) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287091)

See! We'd have much better pictures of stars all over the planet if we just got rid of the ozone like is happening over Antarctica.

long/lat? view in Google Earth, route to A. (1)

shrimppoboy (853235) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287113)

I was curious to try and see Ridge A in Google Earth. GE didn't seem to know it. The images of Antarctica are for the most part really low rez. But, there are some interesting anomalies in GE. Firstly, there is a big white "frying pan" over the south pole, secondly, if I go to 90,90 (north pole) GE seems to have floating point problems. -90,90 seems to work. I get a kaleidoscope of blue vectors when I scroll in or out. Thirdly, if I try to go "to here", (Antarctica) from Cupertino, CA it says "We could not understand your search." Bummer.

This would be a great place to relax! (1)

LeinadSpoon (1602063) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287159)

Let's build a big science lab there and fill it with people!

Even better... (1)

JAK (6169) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287349)

... no pesky ozone layer to hinder the telescope!!

'Because the sky there is so much darker and drier, it means that a modestly-sized telescope would be as powerful as the largest telescopes anywhere else on earth.'

can't see me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287381)

Good luck seeing the north star.

Meh- (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287419)

No Seven Eleven. No Mickey D's. Sounds like a sucky place to work.

Dandelions! (1)

sabt-pestnu (967671) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287471)

I thought the calmest place on earth was in the Dandelion Patch. Time for a break!

Hairy Ball Theorem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287477)

Cool. The Hairy Ball Theorem in mathematics predicts that such a place exists.

and the second calmest place on earth (1)

JeanBaptiste (537955) | more than 4 years ago | (#29287557)

my bedroom =(

3x as sharp, 1/2 as much to see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287573)

Doesn't anyone consider the massive drawback of putting a telescope near the south pole? If anything interesting ever happens in the northern sky, you're SOL.

Only Southern Sky (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29287609)

Unfortunately the Northern Sky isn't covered by
that view from the Antarctic.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?