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!

Front Row Seats To NASA's Lunar Impact

CmdrTaco posted about 5 years ago | from the wait-that-is-a-moon dept.

Moon 132

itwbennett writes "Tomorrow morning at 7:30 EDT, NASA is going to crash a probe into the moon as part of its LCROSS (Lunar CRater Observing and Sensing Satellite) mission, the main purpose of which is to discover if there's any water on the moon. 'If you happen to have a 10-12" telescope (or larger) then you might be able to see the plume from your backyard,' says blogger Peter Smith. 'For the rest of us, the impact will be streamed live over the web in a few places. NASA will have a feed, beginning at 6:15 EDT. The NASA feed includes live footage from the spacecraft itself as well as expert commentary and other goodies. Astronomy service SLOOH is offering a double-shot of earth-bound feeds, with one feed from New Hampshire and the other from Arizona. The SLOOH feeds start at 6:30 am EDT.'" Update: Matt_dk adds a link to a viewing guide to the impact, writing that "Amateur astronomers need a 10-inch or bigger telescope to make observations."

cancel ×

132 comments

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

LCROSS Observation page (5, Informative)

aembleton (324527) | about 5 years ago | (#29681411)

NASA have set up a webpage for the LCROSS Observation Campaign: http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/observation.htm [nasa.gov]

By the way, it is at 11.30 UTC for those who don't know how far their timezone is from EDT.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (2, Interesting)

Shag (3737) | about 5 years ago | (#29681651)

I'll be at the Mauna Kea Visitor Information Station, either looking through their scopes (14-16") or trying to get some pictures with my cameras. Unfortunately, my shift up on the summit ended Wednesday morning, so I have no excuse (or desire, really) to go up top. I might wander up to the LCROSS comms center at Hale Pohaku at some point, though.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (-1, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 years ago | (#29681993)

This is a good way to conceal the fact that the NASA moon landing was a propaganda piece.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682089)

Must every /. story about Nasa/space/moon result in pointless posts about the moon landing hoax? Seriously? It's wouldn't be so bad if there were at least funny...

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0, Flamebait)

JockTroll (996521) | about 5 years ago | (#29682635)

Of course. This is because slashdot is the home of the loserboy nerd, who must believe the Moon landings were faked because they were enterprises way beyond the mediocre, meager, laughable skills they possess.

In the mind of the loserboy nerd, the Moon missions are the final, undoubtable revelation of the jock's superiority because the astronaut, with his mental and physical prowess, personal bravery and aggressive competitivity is the ultimate jock, the quarterback of the Universe, the athlete of the Cosmos.

The hard-working Mission Control technicians with their unbreakable concentration, their absolute discipline and commitment are another shining example of mental and physical abilities that the loserboy nerd, with his lack of attention due to scarce intelligence, with his laughable skills, with his embarassing social ineptitude can never hope to match.

The loserboy nerd must then fill his feeble mind with ridiculous conspiracy theories because facing the reality of his own ineptitude which is fully revealed by the great endeavours that are the Apollo missions, conquests made by jocks, is anathema. This revelation causes his whole world - built on multiple strata of misplaced self-confidence - to crumble. It makes him realize that all the taunts, the physical abuse, the humiliations were absolutely deserved.

And that's why loserboy nerds believe in ludicrous Moon Hoax theories. To them it's a religious faith.

Of course, we don't care for them. We just beat them up and fire a rocketful of shit on their faces.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 years ago | (#29685893)

You're confused. But that's to be expected... you're a jock, right?

First, the nerds send a monkey. Then they send a jock. Then they send the nerds after the safety checks have been passed.

They don't send the jock first because he's so highly esteemed. They send the jock for the same reason they send the monkey.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

smoker2 (750216) | about 5 years ago | (#29682133)

And that was a good way to demonstrate that you're an ignorant troll.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

jklein (582887) | about 5 years ago | (#29682265)

And that was a good way to demonstrate you have no sense of humor.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 5 years ago | (#29684917)

And that was a good way to demonstrate that your sense of humor isn't funny.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (2, Insightful)

jdev (227251) | about 5 years ago | (#29681847)

There's also a separate NASA mission site with some easier to understand info.

http://www.nasa.gov/lcross [nasa.gov]

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682039)

You assume there are some people who will read your comment that are not smart enought to figure out how far their time zone is from EDT, what makes you think these same people even know what UTC is?

Not trolling, just asking.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682741)

Because us, the europeans, don't really care about what your time zones and time offsets are, but at least we know what the standard hour is.

Remember kids:

USA =/= World

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

Lordy2001 (951056) | about 5 years ago | (#29683427)

Maybe us kids in the US don't give a damn what time it is in Grenwich England and only like to deal with our own timezones.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29683843)

Awesome! That's fucking great! I never thought of that.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

tyldis (712367) | about 5 years ago | (#29682823)

Kudos. /. shouls always use UTC. Always.

Re:LCROSS Observation page (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 5 years ago | (#29683115)

No. TCB [wikipedia.org] .

World Times (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | about 5 years ago | (#29685871)

here [timeanddate.com] .

Lunarian race ... (4, Funny)

Tanks*Guns (587234) | about 5 years ago | (#29681419)

It's a pretty safe bet that the impact of the Centaur module will awaken some ancient lunarian race which will immediately begin waging a campaign to subjugate Earth once and for all, so it would behoove you to watch one of these feeds in order to be prepared for the inevitable.

Flash!!! ... GORDON .....

Re:Lunarian race ... (4, Funny)

alexj33 (968322) | about 5 years ago | (#29681515)

>> Flash!!!! AA-aaaaah......

There, fixed that for you.

Queen of Corrections (1)

BancBoy (578080) | about 5 years ago | (#29682967)

He'll save every one of us!

Re:Lunarian race ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29683221)

What if...that's no moon?

Re:Lunarian race ... (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | about 5 years ago | (#29683487)

some ancient lunarian race

Cecil's on his way to take care of this, right?

Re:Lunarian race ... (1)

Foochee (896249) | about 5 years ago | (#29686033)

I for one welcome our Lunar Overlord, Al Gore - First Emperor of the Moon, Rider of the Great Moon Worm. He shall give me a bag of sapphires after warning the Empire of this preemptive strike

Think of the Mooninites! (1)

Chickan (1070300) | about 5 years ago | (#29681427)

They are going to be pissed! http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/jimmyisgay1/mooninites.jpg [photobucket.com]

Re:Think of the Mooninites! (0)

Bazman (4849) | about 5 years ago | (#29681495)

Never mind them. There's plenty of people who think this is a secret NASA project to turn the moon into an interplanetary bombing range. And various new-agey types urging us not to bomb the moon, and to respect luna, and who will be praying for the moon tomorrow. O Rly? Ya rly. Just google for 'bombing the moon'.

If the probe misses I would bet these types would think it was the doing of their prayers....

How often does a meteor this big hit the moon?

Re:Think of the Mooninites! (3, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | about 5 years ago | (#29681731)

If the probe misses

Prayers would be the least of their worries, it would mean that NASA can't hit the broad side of a planet from 20 paces!

WHO is protesting this??? (0)

Xaedalus (1192463) | about 5 years ago | (#29682047)

Where are these people and what is it exactly they are saying?

Re:Think of the Mooninites! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29681517)

Furthermore, NASA is aiming directly at their frozen water reserves!

Does anyone else have this wish? (2, Funny)

NoYob (1630681) | about 5 years ago | (#29681435)

I wish that the "Mythbusters" guys would fly the probe into the Moon with one of them screaming, "I wanna see something blow up!"

Lets hope (0)

OverlordQ (264228) | about 5 years ago | (#29681455)

that the aliens [examiner.com] wont get too upset at us.

Robots (1)

Viper23 (172755) | about 5 years ago | (#29681463)

Is it really so hard to set up an excavation robot on the moon that we have to keep dropping things on it?!?

Also...

Trying to get rid of mental image of Man on the Moon wearing a blindfold while smoking a cigarette.

Re:Robots (4, Interesting)

courteaudotbiz (1191083) | about 5 years ago | (#29681555)

Maybe it is because of the extremely low temperature at the moon's poles [newscientist.com] and that any robotic being would not survive. I also understand that any water ice exposed to the sun on the moon would almost instantly sublimate, so I guess that an impact lifting tons of moon regolith is the most logical step in seeing water ice for a short moment, right before it sublimates because of the sun's energy it will be exposed to.

Re:Robots (3, Informative)

Viper23 (172755) | about 5 years ago | (#29681659)

The reason it's so cold is that it's in a crater that doesn't let the sun in. As for freezing your robot, there is no atmosphere to leach heat off of your robot, so at the most you'd need to make up for heat lost through your highly insulated tires.

The main advantage of using a robot (other than "you've got a robot on the moon") is that you can study the structure / layout of the minerals in place rather than just their composition...

Re:Robots (2, Insightful)

Ragzouken (943900) | about 5 years ago | (#29681767)

The main problem is probably powering a robot on the moon without solar power.

Re:Robots (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29681771)

Take some science class. Things lose heat in vacuum by emitting radiation (typically infrared at our temperature). You might also learn that crashing is easier than landing (less delta-V), kinetic energy is a bitch at that kind of speed and will create an explosion, and people here on Earth actually use explosions to excavate material, not robotic spoons.

Re:Robots (2, Informative)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 5 years ago | (#29682707)

This probe impact is going to kick up vastly more material than a practical robot could ever dig. If your goal is an existence proof of water, and you don't know how common it is, then you want to go through as much material as possible. Phoenix barely scratched the surface of Mars. If signs of water had been more than a few inches deep, it wouldn't have found them before it died.

Maybe once we've confirmed there's water in those craters, it'll be worth sending a robot of some kind to take a closer look.

Re:Robots (1)

TTURabble (1164837) | about 5 years ago | (#29683213)

So what you're saying is that we need to bomb Mars?

Re:Robots (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 5 years ago | (#29684253)

I'm saying that if we blow up the moon [youtube.com] , we can really see what it's made of!

Re:Robots (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 5 years ago | (#29683231)

> Is it really so hard to set up an excavation robot on the moon that we have
> to keep dropping things on it?!?

Yes, it is. It is particularly hard to soft land things on the moon, especially in awkward places such as polar craters that we cannot see into.

Bad Weather (0)

hardburn (141468) | about 5 years ago | (#29681471)

That'll teach the Lunar People who owns this solar system!

More seriously, I was looking forward to watching this in my telescope, but it looks like it's going to rain for the next 24 hours straight.

Forced innoculation of the Moon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29681481)

And the impactor does contain trace amounts of mercury and other heavy metals.

More NasaTV feeds (5, Informative)

agentgonzo (1026204) | about 5 years ago | (#29681487)

NasaTV Feeds at different resolutions:
100k/s, 320/240 [yahoo.com]
200k/s, 320/240 [yahoo.com]
500k/s, 480x360 [yahoo.com] (I think)
100k/s, 640/480 [yahoo.com]
All Windows Media format

Real media format [nasa.gov]
Quicktime [nasa.gov]
For those of you who need to watch it in absolute realtime, I've found that all the yahoo feeds (windows media) whilst being the best video quality are generally about 1-2 minutes behind realtime. Realmedia is normally about 5-10 seconds behind realtime.

Re:More NasaTV feeds (2, Informative)

agentgonzo (1026204) | about 5 years ago | (#29681511)

Balls. I thought that I'd got it all correct. The 4th Yahoo feed [yahoo.com] should be 1200k/s, not 100k/s. Sorry about that.

Re:More NasaTV feeds (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682187)

The real feed is at

137W 4060 V tp 18 SR 26665 FEC 3/4

119W 12355 L tp 10 SR 20000 FEC 5/6

Re: mod parent up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29686647)

the web feed is going to choke

Re:More NasaTV feeds (1)

SYSS Mouse (694626) | about 5 years ago | (#29682485)

It will never be in "real time". It takes 2 seconds for the image to beam back to earth.

Re:More NasaTV feeds (2, Informative)

agentgonzo (1026204) | about 5 years ago | (#29682937)

Actually, it only takes 1.2 seconds (or very slightly over) to get back to Earth. The two seconds you're thinking about was the communication delay for Apollo, representing the roundtrip there and back. This is only one way.

Re:More NasaTV feeds (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | about 5 years ago | (#29684701)

So by your standards I guess nothing is real time.

Re:More NasaTV feeds (1)

DriedClexler (814907) | about 5 years ago | (#29685917)

Some of my friends and I are planning to drive down to the set in Arizona where they'll be filming it.

Get pictures while you can! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29681591)

When that probe hits deep within the crater, it will finally puncture the Moon's skin and we all know what happens to a water balloon!

Say good-bye to the moon base et. al.

Re:Get pictures while you can! (2, Funny)

rwade (131726) | about 5 years ago | (#29682379)

When that probe hits deep within the crater, it will finally puncture the Moon's skin and we all know what happens to a water balloon!

Come on now, we all know that the moon is filled with cheese [theregister.co.uk] .

3 .. 2 .. 1 .. Cue the loonies (1, Interesting)

OzPeter (195038) | about 5 years ago | (#29681687)

I just saw this video on CNN [cnn.com]

There are also a bunch of videos on you tube

Re:3 .. 2 .. 1 .. Cue the loonies (1)

Follier (901079) | about 5 years ago | (#29685001)

Better hurry up and bomb the moon before the chimp starts asking why [youtube.com] .

(How has this story gone this long without a Mr. Show reference, anyway???)

Re:3 .. 2 .. 1 .. Cue the loonies (1)

Follier (901079) | about 5 years ago | (#29685657)

oops, someone did beat me to it after all... >_

NASA, king of acronyms! (1)

SuperNumberOne (1635789) | about 5 years ago | (#29681705)

But they really missed an opportunity with this one: LCROSS was sent to find RUGBYs (Remote Underground BaYous of course)

Utu-class planetoid (1)

Monkk (551177) | about 5 years ago | (#29681709)

Maybe we should think twice before launching an attack against an Utu-class planetoid?

Mutineer's Moon
http://www.webscription.net/10.1125/Baen/0671720856/0671720856.htm [webscription.net]

Re:Utu-class planetoid (1)

findrails (1272768) | about 5 years ago | (#29682007)

Maybe we should think twice before launching an attack against an Utu-class planetoid? Mutineer's Moon http://www.webscription.net/10.1125/Baen/0671720856/0671720856.htm [webscription.net]

Dahak didn't mind so much being attacked - it kidnapped the person attacking it, gave them a complete body upgrade, and they ended up ruling. Not seeing any negatives :)

It is a conspiracy, (4, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 5 years ago | (#29681787)

It is a deliberate underhanded attempt by NASA to deny the livelihoods of thousands of Americans who survive by peddling the NASA moon landing conspiracy theories. NASA tries to prove beyond doubt, and create thousands of eye witnesses of NASA's ability to actually send a rocket all the way to the moon. This must be stopped. Wait. I am getting a late feed from Conspiracy Central.

...

Looks like NASA has launched a large white glass plate and placed it in near earth orbit. It is sitting exactly in the line of sight from Earth to moon. People normally see through this the real Moon. But at the appointed time, NASA will project an image using lasers and create an illusion of a spacecraft crashing into moon, and then turn off the projection. Ha, haa, NASA, we got you. We got you all figured it out. Your jig is up. We will not be denied our meal ticket no matter what you do.

Re:It is a conspiracy, (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 5 years ago | (#29683271)

> Looks like NASA has launched a large white glass plate and placed it in near
> earth orbit. It is sitting exactly in the line of sight from Earth to moon.

"Earth orbit"? No, no. That's all a fake too. Nothing has ever been more than a few miles above the surface of the Earth.

Re:It is a conspiracy, (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 5 years ago | (#29684155)

What a load. Of course we can get a rocket to the moon now. It is landing men on the moon and getting them back that is impossible. I mean if it was possible would we have stopped doing it for all these years? I mean if we could really land men on the moon forty years ago then we should still be doing it now.

Yes I am kidding but when I actually think about it is start to cry.

Re:It is a conspiracy, (1)

BountyX (1227176) | about 5 years ago | (#29685847)

Ah my friend, you jest but I heard a conspiracy theory today on the radio. It was pretty creative. So here's the scoop. The theory is that NASA is not really probing the moon to check for water. After all, didn't we already do that when we landed (and can't we already do that remotely with Mars?) . NASA has stated that the impact will create a 6 mile high cloud of smoke, in which another rocket will intercept the debris for analysis. They also stated the probe has a warhead at the tip to create the impact. Well, to the radio host, this translated into the government testing a new nuclear warhead that didn't have the consequences of nuclear fallout (hence the second probe to check for radiation). The purpose of this is to get large explosions in pinpointed regions (like the middle east) without hurting areas around it (Israel and other allies) . The radio host suggested that this was in response to Iran and that without solving the fallout issue, we cannot fully implement MAD. I'm not saying I agree with his analysis, but just wanted to point out that the conspiracy theories have already started on this one...I thought this one was creative and did seem to raise a concern over this flaw with MAD response.

Re:It is a conspiracy, (1)

ChefInnocent (667809) | about 5 years ago | (#29686511)

Wait, wouldn't it be more plausible that there are men on the moon (Moonmen or Moonians), and our government is at war with them to hide the fact that there are aliens? I think I heard something sourced from the Coast to Coast AM with George Noory that aliens will be shown to us by the end of the year. It might have been David Wilcock's prophecy. Or it could be Richard Hoagland's premise of a secret base. Either way, we are at war with the Moon!

Are the people at NASA stupid or just bored? (0, Flamebait)

yourassOA (1546173) | about 5 years ago | (#29681863)

Who is paying for this, I thought we were in hard economic times? Can't they send someone to the moon for a visual inspection? On the warn side? Why hasn't anyone been to the moon lately? What happens to the debris? Not enough garbage on earth lets fuck up the moon. Who is going to get in trouble if something goes wrong? This is completely stupid and a waste of tax dollars but I guess those lazy fucks got to do something so they don't have to do any real work.

Re:Are the people at NASA stupid or just bored? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29681983)

Get out of your Mum's basement and get a job. Only then can your angry shouting about wasting time and money bare any credence.

Re:Are the people at NASA stupid or just bored? (1)

fprintf (82740) | about 5 years ago | (#29682549)

Don't feed the trolls, but how about moderating them?

This particular program, like most NASA programs, was funded and largely paid for a long time ago. To put a stop to this project simply because of a problem in our economy today would erase the benefits of these sunk costs, and instead only eliminiate a small portion of costs that remain - the launch and analysis. That'd be like building a car, and then driving it into a lake simply because you couldn't afford the gas. Sure, it makes sense on the surface that you can't drive it, but why throw it away?

BTW, I know that with the car analogy you could leave the car in the driveway. Apparently NASA projects aren't exactly like that, and have huge startup and shutdown costs, plus the issue of getting the timing just right.

Re:Are the people at NASA stupid or just bored? (1)

Nyeerrmm (940927) | about 5 years ago | (#29682869)

Don't forget that if you're laying off everyone working on the project you're increasing unemployment and decreasing the amount those people are spending -- while I don't usually take that as a good argument for maintaining federal programs, maintaining useful programs that happen to maintain peoples employment seems like a decent idea, particularly for an administration that takes a fairly Keynesian view.

Of course, I'm a spacecraft engineer and not an economist so my view may be a little skewed.

NBC Airing on Today (1)

randomnote1 (1273964) | about 5 years ago | (#29682169)

NBC Announced this morning that they will be airing the coverage of the impact live on the Today Show.

Go Long! (1)

smilnrt (1648147) | about 5 years ago | (#29682451)

So NASA found some lunar aliens on the moon in a crater to play catch with? Awesome!

If the water is that difficult to get to... (0)

rwade (131726) | about 5 years ago | (#29682559)

If water on the moon is so difficult to get to that one has to throw a satellite at the surface at 5600 mph [nasa.gov] , how likely is it that man will be able to inhabit the moon?

Never mind the issues of building vacuum-sealed living quarters and getting mining equipment to the moon and the current low-power density of the solar energy generation mechanism most likely to be used on the moon, how would you get water up there if you have to send a satellite the mass of a full-sized SUV to dig a hole as deep as the length of a football field? [nasa.gov]

It raises the question of why we're spending any time at all on the moon. It can't be lived on, it's unlikely to harbor life, its geology has already been explored. Someone tell me what the point is...

Re:If the water is that difficult to get to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682883)

All these excellent questions, and rather than get actual answers, you suggest that it's not worth finding out. Troll? Luddite? What?

Re:If the water is that difficult to get to... (1)

rwade (131726) | about 5 years ago | (#29683045)

you suggest that it's not worth finding out.

Frankly, you're oversimplifying my point. To reiterate, what I'm suggesting is that it's not clear to me what the point is. We know right now that it would be difficult as hell to get water. We know right now that it would be difficult as hell to get equipment up there. What we know right now is that it's going to be expensive.

If it's expensive and its worth it, fine. But I wonder: what is the point? I don't see the point. Tell me.

Give me a a cohesive, comprehensive vision for space exploration and then we can fund it or not instead of framing the argument on a "Gee whiz" footing.

Re:If the water is that difficult to get to... (2, Insightful)

Bakkster (1529253) | about 5 years ago | (#29683599)

It raises the question of why we're spending any time at all on the moon. It can't be lived on, it's unlikely to harbor life, its geology has already been explored. Someone tell me what the point is...

Its surface geology has been explored, but not what's beneath. As for why to explore it, it's the closest heavenly body to the earth, so it's a good place to start. It's cheap and easy to get to, and a good stepping stone to future missions. Do you think the Viking or Mariner missions would have been successful if not for the Surveyor moon missions? If we ignore moon science, we make all future space missions more difficult and expensive.

If you don't think astronomy isn't important, then you must hate science. If you think the moon isn't important, you're just not thinking practically.

Of course, the reason for using a satellite impact is because it's cheaper and easier to determine if there is any water at all (which scientists aren't sure of). If there isn't, we saved ourselves a bunch of money by not sending up an expensive excavator robot. If there is, then we can determine how best to determine the geological significance, and what that means for the history of our solar system and potential future moon missions.

Re:If the water is that difficult to get to... (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 5 years ago | (#29683731)

Mankind is something of an odd creature. Our inquisitive nature allows it explored areas that are too hostile even for us to survive. We do this exploration and observe what happens in order to satisfy our other primary curiosity, knowledge. From this knowledge and experience, we gain valuable insight that helps make out lives a bit easier, safer, and perhaps more challenging at the same time. It's in our nature to push the limits of about anything in order to achieve a goal or satisfy a challenge. This is one thing that distinguishes us from most other life forms we know of.

That being said, we do it because we can and be we can means that we will be able to do other things later which may or may not benefit society. So far, crashing a probe and analyzing the debris is one of the cheapest and easiest ways to satisfy the question of Ice on the moon. If it's there, the next challenge would be to make it accessible and usable to man for whatever out needs are. Now this tech could be really interesting because it could help irrigate deserts or provide emergency water in catastrophe situations. It could also help us in determining much more about the moon and develope technology to make missions possible to other planets which may or may not yield more information or technology that makes human life easier/better.

In short, the point is to simply expand our knowledge. The point is to satisfy some of the very basic human traits.

Re:If the water is that difficult to get to... (1)

volcanopele (537152) | about 5 years ago | (#29686501)

I seem to recall a large world nearby with plentiful water supplies that could be shipped in... It isn't as if lunar settlers would completely cut off from supplies from Earth, the Moon isn't THAT far away. Add that with even a half-decent water recycling system, and water shouldn't be a problem.

uh huh huh...you said probe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682613)

those amazon women are going to be pissed that we penetrated their nether regions with our manly probes!

The Time Machine (1, Interesting)

Xanavi (1197431) | about 5 years ago | (#29682667)

whatcouldpossiblygowrong? This reminds me of the scene in the 2008 whatever version of the Time Machine where the moon was blasted on to make condos or someshit and it went horribly wrong.

Protest Terrorism on the Moon! Oh Noes! (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | about 5 years ago | (#29682803)

Seriously guys, is it our right to bomb the moon? [craigslist.org] and permanently scar her chi forever? Rather than being passive observer's of this horrible Astrological act of Terrorism by the evil U.S. Government we should all be contemplating the beauty of the moon, and focusing compassion towards her to help her through what will surely be a difficult and painful time for her. Join countless others on this date in a movement of group meditation to help mend the scars that our less compassionate brethren will bequeath upon the heavens!

/sarcasm

In all seriousness, I am really excited about this. Hopefully if we do discover large concentrations of water it will be an ass kick in the space industry to get our act together and get onto building a colony =)

Countdown! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682915)

http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/customcounter.html?day=9&month=10&year=2009&hour=11&min=31&sec=30&p0=0

Fu3k a 7rollkore (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29682987)

*BSD is dyiNg It is

Stereo Vision (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29683087)

Wouldn't it be cool if the two feeds from either side of the country could be combined into one of those MagicEye images so we could watch in 3D? Heck yeah...3D r0x0rs!

Moon's Orbit? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 5 years ago | (#29683183)

I know this impact will be very small compared to the total momentum of the Moon in its orbit with the Earth. But it will have some effect. How much more quickly (or slowly) will the Moon and Earth escape each other's pull and travel apart, ahead of (or behind) the original schedule?

Why bother (0)

cld71 (7166) | about 5 years ago | (#29683211)

Why does NASA continue to do BS work?

I am ashamed that after over 40 years after landing on the moon that the BEST thing we can do is shoot multi million dollar satellites at it, and waste tax payers money.

If it was me, I would shutdown NASA completely, and make a more business oriented space program.

Nasa, They are good at crashing things. (1)

Sardonic1 (975279) | about 5 years ago | (#29683237)

Now, let us see if someone made a math error, and they miss the moon entirely.

why must we always blow stuff up, seems foolhardy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29683569)

better hope it doesn't put a wobble in the moons orbit and screw things up here on Earth. The moon may be covered with impact craters but I think most of that happened long before people and we don't know if there was any effect on Earth as a result of large impacts on the moon.

Re:why must we always blow stuff up, seems foolhar (1)

turbidostato (878842) | about 5 years ago | (#29685267)

"we don't know if there was any effect on Earth as a result of large impacts on the moon."

Large impacts? What do you mean, large impacts? The probe is the size of a car, man!

Moon men (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29683845)

"We're sailors on the moon, we carry a harpoon, but there ain't no whales so tell this tale and sing our whaling tune!"

why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29684211)

Why do we need to do this? Seems like a waste of funds to me? So what if we find water on the moon? Cant we use this money for books for school kids or something.

It would really suck... (1)

Degrees (220395) | about 5 years ago | (#29684543)

It would really suck if the lunar substrate turned out to be far more rigid (what with the cold of space) than we thought, and this impact set up a resonant frequency that shook all the surface lunar dust OFF, and the Earth's gravity drew it all in, causing the Ultimate Lunar Winter. It's The End Of The World As We Know It.

Holy crap! I think I just invented the next Michael Bay movie!

I do hereby claim 25% of the movie revenue. If only to make it too unprofitable (to stop the madness).

Linux users only have the telescope option (2, Informative)

maclizard (1029814) | about 5 years ago | (#29684591)

The site linked to in this story doesn't appear to support OS's other than windows and mac for streaming video.
Maybe (hopefully) I'm not looking hard enough but at first glance their is no linux support.
Good thing I have a telescope.

Re:Linux users only have the telescope option (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | about 5 years ago | (#29684813)

If you have cable the NASA channel will also have a live feed.

Re:Linux users only have the telescope option (1)

maclizard (1029814) | about 5 years ago | (#29685023)

If you have cable the NASA channel will also have a live feed.

cable? thats still a thing? ;)
Hurray for the NASA channel.

Notice (1)

rnturn (11092) | about 5 years ago | (#29686027)

As is the norm for 99% of all astronomical events like comets, meteor showers, space station flyovers, etc. this one, too, will be obscured by dense cloud cover for anyone living in the Chicago area. (Argh!)

I have... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29686089)

...a 14 inch one and yes IT'S EVEN TELESCOPIC !

Re:I have... (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 5 years ago | (#29686359)

Yours is 14 inches in diameter?! Wow, that's... something, I guess. I would say "sorry for your inability to have sex, ever", but I doubt that your girth is the primary obstacle.

I object (0, Flamebait)

cmdotter (1274534) | about 5 years ago | (#29686417)

Call me kooky, call me a greenie. I can't see how this can even be regarded as a 'scientific' experiment. I'd put it under the same banner as: "Lets fire a bullet at someone's head to see if there's a brain in there".
Surely a little lunar robot with drilling capabilities is less drastic than "Let's blow this fucker up and see what we can see"?

I invoke the chewbacca defence: It just doesn't make sense...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?