×

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!

Astronaut to Run the Boston Marathon From Space

CowboyNeal posted about 7 years ago | from the space-racing dept.

NASA 176

BostonBehindTheScenes writes "American astronaut Sunita Williams will run 26.2 miles on a treadmill on Patriot's Day (April 16th for those of you outside of Massachusetts) while runners on the ground will compete in the 111th Boston Marathon, according to this New Scientist article. And yes, she is an actual registered participant who qualified by finishing among the top 100 women in the Houston Marathon in 2006. NASA's press release touts this as yet another space first."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

176 comments

Pork. (5, Funny)

Morky (577776) | about 7 years ago | (#18541423)

I protest! She is wasting precious oxygen paid for by you the taxpayer.

Gay (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541585)

One more modpoint wasted.

Re:Pork. (1, Troll)

arivanov (12034) | about 7 years ago | (#18541609)

And when exactly did the US taxpayers pay for the environmental control module and its shipment to orbit?

Hint - it is one of the non-US components.

Re:Pork. (2, Informative)

Sobrique (543255) | about 7 years ago | (#18541869)

Parent post didn't mention the US at any point. Or does the fact that it might be a european taxpayer make it all ok?

Re:Pork. (3, Interesting)

arivanov (12034) | about 7 years ago | (#18541977)

That should actually be the Russian taxpayer (primary life support is provided by the Zvezda module). And I do not particularly recall any historical period when the rulers of Russia gave a flying fuck about their cittizen's thoughts on governmental spending. In fact, modern Russian state is founded on government diverting taxation money from where it is supposed to go. That what Ivan Kalita (the Wallet) did to start the second Russian state and the tradition has carried on from there onwards.

Re:Pork. (4, Funny)

GreyPoopon (411036) | about 7 years ago | (#18541985)

Or does the fact that it might be a european taxpayer make it all ok?

Speaking as an American, I'm perfectly happy to let the Europeans pay my taxes. *duck*

Re:Pork. (1)

khallow (566160) | about 7 years ago | (#18542403)

Hint it is one of the Russian components paid for (including launch costs) indirectly by NASA through a prime contractor.

She'll finish first, though (5, Funny)

Migraineman (632203) | about 7 years ago | (#18542701)

The ISS is moving at 7.726 km/s (I checked this morning - I'm running Orbitron to track a different satellite [navy.mil].) 26.2 miles converts to 42.165 km, so she should traverse the course length in about 5.5 seconds.

How many steps does it take to complete a marathon from low earth orbit? A one ... a two ... a three. Three.

Is this really fair? (3, Insightful)

F-3582 (996772) | about 7 years ago | (#18541425)

Physiologically speaking, you don't have any gravity for your blood stream, specifically your heart, to handle. In my opinion you can't compare such a run to a real one!

Re:Is this really fair? (4, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | about 7 years ago | (#18541463)

Lighten up. I seriously doubt her numbers will be "official". She is running on a treadmill in zero G. It is publicity for the Boston Marathon, and likely good physiological research for NASA.

Re:Is this really fair? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 7 years ago | (#18541543)

Freefall, not zero-G.

Re:Is this really fair? (4, Informative)

khallow (566160) | about 7 years ago | (#18541683)

It's called zero gee by the people who fly people into space and refers to the acceleration of the astronaut's frame of reference. Freefall without rotation is a zero gee environment. Good enough for me even though technically the astronauts live in a 10^-3 or 10^-4 gee environment due to tidal forces and the mass of the ISS.

Re:Is this really fair? (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 7 years ago | (#18541745)

Well, the fact that the astronaut's frame of reference is *rotating* in orbit around the earth should tell you everything you need to know about whether it's accelerating or not.

Re:Is this really fair? (1)

khallow (566160) | about 7 years ago | (#18541927)

But it's not from the astronaut's point of view. In other words, the astronaut experiences no force. Hence, they are in zero gee. I really don't see a need to continue this pedantic argument. As I understand it, both terms are used routinely to describe activities in orbit.

Re:Is this really fair? (1, Troll)

pairo (519657) | about 7 years ago | (#18542045)

Wrong. http://www.spaceflight.esa.int/users/downloads/use rguides/physenv.pdf [esa.int]
For the difference between the two (zero gravity and free fall): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlessness#Zero_g ravity [wikipedia.org]

Re:Is this really fair? (1)

khallow (566160) | about 7 years ago | (#18542319)

I'm not refering to the phrase "zero gravity" otherwise I'd have said that. I guess this is a common misunderstanding that might have been shared by the original poster. A common unit of acceleration is the "G" or "gee". 1 G is very close to (if not exactly) the average gravitational acceleration on the surface of the Earth. 0 G would of course describe the acceleration experienced in freefall.

Re:Is this really fair? (1)

pairo (519657) | about 7 years ago | (#18542437)

Duh. I think I was the only one that thought you said zero gravity. :-) Soweee.

Re:Is this really fair? (4, Informative)

mdwh2 (535323) | about 7 years ago | (#18542385)

I think it's pretty clear that the OP is well aware that the spacecraft is not beyond the range of influence of the Earth's gravity (which is infinite, after all).

At the same time though, in General Relativity a gravitational field is equivalent to an accelerating frame of reference (or something like that...), so the sum total gravitational effects experienced in the spacecraft's frame of reference is near zero.

It could be argued that "zero gravity" is misleading as it will help perpetuate the common myth that weightlessness is due to being beyond the Earth's gravity, rather than it being cancelled out due to the acceleration, but nonetheless, that's a term used to refer to it, and I think it's clear that the OP wasn't misunderstanding the differences.

I'd question that labelling it as "scientifically inaccurate" constitutes POV, especially when it is backed up only by one person, who is described as a journalist and historian, not a scientist.

Re:Is this really fair? (2, Informative)

tverbeek (457094) | about 7 years ago | (#18542145)

In this context, the unit "G" refers to the amount of force applied to the body by the craft it's in (jet, rocket, centrifuge, roller coaster, etc), not a measure of gravitational attraction or acceleration. (Save the pendantry for topics in which you are better informed than your peers.)

Re:Is this really fair? (3, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 7 years ago | (#18541717)

Sometimes great publicity ideas can backfire. I hope they thought about attaching a dynamo and lightbulb combo to the threadmill, it's pretty dark up there in space and the worst thing would be if she tripped up and started falling continuously towards the earth....

Re:Is this really fair? (2, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 years ago | (#18542617)

and likely good physiological research for NASA.
Sure the astronauts have to do SOMETHING to kill time on the ISS, but I hope Nasa doesn't launch into some sappy ploy about how this is advancing science - unless it is actually true.

Jokes about taxpayer-funded oxygen aside, the US is paying about $4BN per year [wikipedia.org] for the ISS (including its share of the Shuttle). Assume (generously) that of the 3 people aboard, 2 are Americans. That works out to $3,800 per person per minute, or just slightly under $1 million to run a 4 hour marathon. So you tell me, what will we get for our million dollars?

MOM! (4, Funny)

bigattichouse (527527) | about 7 years ago | (#18541427)

Moooooommm, Sunie's hogging all the oxygen again!

Sunie, Cut it out. Don't antaonize your sister.

But, I gotta win the maaarathonn.

Well, do it quietly, dear. Your sister has experiments to conduct.

Treadmill vs road (5, Interesting)

Liquid Len (739188) | about 7 years ago | (#18541431)

Yes, I know this is Slashdot. But I'm a geek and a passionate marathon runner as well...
There's a big difference between running on a treadmill and on a road (besides the boring factor): the relative wind resistance you experience when you move has a very significant impact on your speed. A rule of thumb is that you have to subtract about 1 km/h to your treadmill speed in order to have an idea on how fast you can go on the road.

Re:Not to mention... (3, Interesting)

Lord Bitman (95493) | about 7 years ago | (#18541473)

moving all your mass forward/uphill vs basically just bouncing up and down. And of course, in space, you don't even have the resistance of bouncing up and down.

Re:Not to mention... (5, Interesting)

rly2000 (779141) | about 7 years ago | (#18541751)

She's going to have tethers to keep her down. As a runner, I think it would be an interesting approximation of running.

While the impact against the treadmill could well be compared to gravity, I wonder whether the zero-gravity will make it harder for her heart to pump blood to her legs. I couldn't imagine running upside down.

Also, having run on the treadmill, I think a good approximation of running outside would be to set the incline to about 1.5%. Of course, that starts to disproportionately work out your quads as opposed to your hamstrings.

Re:Not to mention... (3, Insightful)

oni (41625) | about 7 years ago | (#18542017)

in space, you don't even have the resistance of bouncing up and down.

I don't think that resistance is quite the right word, but I agree with you in general - what she's doing shouldn't qualify as running the marathon. The biggest problem with long-term space travel is bone loss, and NASA has already proven that just tethering a person to a treadmil and letting them exercise doesn't fix the problem. They still lose bone mass. That's all the proof I need that what she's doing isn't the same as running on earth.

Still, there is a bright side to this. This might just be the longest run on a treadmill in zero-g. And since she has run marathons on the ground, she will be in a good position to report what the differences are and maybe this will lead to better zero-g exercise equipment.

Re:Treadmill vs road (2, Interesting)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 7 years ago | (#18541489)

Yes, I know this is Slashdot. But I'm a geek and a passionate marathon runner as well... There's a big difference between running on a treadmill and on a road (besides the boring factor): the relative wind resistance you experience when you move has a very significant impact on your speed. A rule of thumb is that you have to subtract about 1 km/h to your treadmill speed in order to have an idea on how fast you can go on the road.

I run as well (and cycle), and there's just no comparison. Treadmill surfaces are a little bouncy and provide some restorative force. There's no hills (those little inclining treadmills at 4 degrees aren't like a real nasty hill. And there's the wind resistance as well.

Although after yesterday - biking at 15-25mph into another 25mph of headwind - I'd have settled for a 1km/h hit. I was getting about a 12 kph hit. Ugh.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 7 years ago | (#18542227)

4 Degrees? haven't you been to the gym, or watched Rocky IV? They go a bit more than 4 degrees. While I admit that actual running on actual hills it a lot harder on you, if you happen to live where there only is flat land, then the treadmill may be the best hill you have.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | about 7 years ago | (#18542295)

4 Degrees? haven't you been to the gym, or watched Rocky IV? They go a bit more than 4 degrees. While I admit that actual running on actual hills it a lot harder on you, if you happen to live where there only is flat land, then the treadmill may be the best hill you have.

I don't run indoors. Too damned depressing. Also, all the Rocky movies after the first sucked. And I do live in a fairly hilly area, with some 20-30 degree hills, and I haven't seen the treadmill yet that can do that.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

Dolohov (114209) | about 7 years ago | (#18541491)

On the other hand, running on a road lets the air current pull away the cloud of hot air and humidity that surrounds a runner. On a treadmill she'll have her own little bit of hell, with the air warmed up to body temperature and a little raincloud of sweat droplets. So it may not be harder, but I'm betting it's a lot less pleasant. (I pity the other astronauts who want to use that room...)

Re:Treadmill vs road (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541823)

It's called a FAN, moron.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 7 years ago | (#18541557)

Yeah. Clearly this is different (the lack of gravity will probably affect things too), but she wanted to take part, and since that's not possible, this is the closest possible match to the ground conditions.

Re:Treadmill vs road (4, Interesting)

Don_dumb (927108) | about 7 years ago | (#18541587)

Also being a runner and gymrat I have to disagree, I can run long distance fine, but simply cant stay on a treadmill for more than a few miles. There are really two reasons for this -

The first is that I (and many I know) find my actual running style is different on a treadmill than 'self-propelled'.
Second is the physcological factors - the fact that when out running, my mind has to do a certain amount of work paying attention to where I am going, the surface, other road/pavement users etc this means consiously I can 'turn-off', whereas on a treadmill I need to think about something, and even though the treadmills at my gym have TVs and they might even be showing something I am interested in, I still spend a great deal of time looking around, still in 'vigilant mode'; The fact that I *can* step off at any time, ultimately means that after 4 or 5 miles I *will* just do that, when you are 5 miles from home, you just keep going, you can stop but you still have to at least walk home -so I keep running.

The other factor that would make a treadmill marathon more difficult is the lack of crowd, people cheering on and other runners really do spur you on when things get tough.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about 7 years ago | (#18542347)

Don't forget she is doing this in MicroGravity as well. I think it is more of a symbolic thing then actual. If she does win I am sure she will get mention but the person who ran the race for real would get the tophy and such.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 7 years ago | (#18542419)

YOUr an exception.

treadmills take less energy to use then running. That, no gravity, and have vry clean air will make a marathon on the treadmill much easier.

I would wager if your goal was marathon distance on a treadmill, and you were being watched, you could probably give it a damn good try.

Re:Treadmill vs road (5, Funny)

Quarters (18322) | about 7 years ago | (#18541649)

She'll already be moving close to 17500 mph. How much more of a headwind do you want her to have?

Re:Treadmill vs road (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541931)

Best. Post. EVER.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

envelope (317893) | about 7 years ago | (#18541909)

I tend to run a lot faster on the treadmill than I do on the road, mostly because I'm sofa king bored that I try to hurry up as much as possible to reach my mileage goal.

Re:Treadmill vs road (2, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | about 7 years ago | (#18542007)

you think that's a difference. try it in zero G.

I dare you to run on a real road in Zero G. I bet you cant make it past the first step!

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

gregRowe (173838) | about 7 years ago | (#18542247)

I run significantly faster on the road than on treadmills. I run about 30 seconds to 1 minute per mile faster on the road than on the treadmill. This is true of my TRAINING runs, not only race events where adrenaline plays a role. The longest I've run on a treadmill is 20 miles.

I don't like running on a treadmill compared to the road and the boringness is only part of it.

Re:Treadmill vs road (0, Troll)

RationalRoot (746945) | about 7 years ago | (#18542291)

I've never made the marathon, but I've done 18+ mile runs. (Knee went pop) Her claim to have run a marathon holds about this much (holding finger and thumb together) weight, primarily cause she's effectively got this much (holding finger and thumb together) weight. And no hills, no wind, no blazing sun, no patchs of ice on the road to contend with. As if being an AssThrowNot she doesn't have enough to brag about.

Re:Treadmill vs road (1)

Zenaku (821866) | about 7 years ago | (#18542857)

Her claim to have run a marathon holds about this much (holding finger and thumb together) weight, primarily cause she's effectively got this much (holding finger and thumb together) weight.

What are you saying? That there is no gravity in Houston? Her "claim" to have run a marathon refers to having run one last year -- on Earth.

Patriot Day? (1)

dekkerdreyer (1007957) | about 7 years ago | (#18541445)

Patriot Day? Was this some stipulation of the Patriot Act?

Re:Patriot Day? (1)

Dr. Eggman (932300) | about 7 years ago | (#18541663)

It celebrates the battles of Lexington and Concord of a certain war which you are not a patriot if you cannot name.

Re:Patriot Day? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541877)

It celebrates the battles of Lexington and Concord of a certain war which you are not a patriot if you cannot name.

I'm a patriot, and I can name it. It was the war of the treasonous, ungrateful colonists ;-)

Re:Patriot Day? (1)

tverbeek (457094) | about 7 years ago | (#18542011)

It celebrates the battles of Lexington and Concord of a certain war which you are not a patriot if you cannot name.
That would be the American Insurgency.

Re:Patriot Day? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541701)

Hmm... my calendar shows that date as Sept. 11th. I had no idea it was rolled back so early this year. Must be a daylight savings glitch. :)

Re:Patriot Day? (1)

BadMrMojo (767184) | about 7 years ago | (#18542335)

It's a Mass. state holiday that gives natives an excuse not to go downtown during the madness that is the Boston Marathon.

I heard she really trained for this (1)

raddan (519638) | about 7 years ago | (#18541455)

In fact, she weighs next to nothing.

HAND.

Re:I heard she really trained for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541499)

The diapers she wears will slow her down though.

That place is gonna smell... (4, Funny)

sycodon (149926) | about 7 years ago | (#18541459)

...like a locker room.

Re:That place is gonna smell... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 7 years ago | (#18541487)

I am sure it already does

Re:That place is gonna smell... (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 7 years ago | (#18542383)

Actually it doesn't. It's filtering system is excellent.

According to some astronauts, anyways.

In fact, a Russian smuggled a ciderette on board and lit it up. While it did take 2 weeks to get it cmpletly filtered, the smell is gone.

Patriots' Day (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541467)

For the unaware, Patriots' Day commemorates the Battles of Lexington and Concord which are considered to be the first skirmishes of the American Revolution, a conflict that was actually fought be people generally considered to be patriots.

We in Massachusetts have been observing this day long before a certain President co-opted the name to add a bit of jingo to the commemoration of a certain day in September.

Re:Patriots' Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18542019)

Patriots day is celebrated here in Wisconsin, too, although it isn't a state holiday.

Re:Patriots' Day (1)

OutSourcingIsTreason (734571) | about 7 years ago | (#18542307)

It's easy to remember the date of the battle of Lexington and Concord because it occurred the morning after Paul Revere's ride, and there's this nifty Longfellow poem which starts:

Listen my children and you shall hear
Of the midnight ride of Paul Revere
On the eighteenth of April in seventy-five
Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous date and year.

So the battle anniversary is April 19th, and is celebrated as Patriots' Day the preceding Monday, which this year is April 16th, and that's when the Boston marathon will be run.

Re:Patriots' Day (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | about 7 years ago | (#18542635)

We in Massachusetts have been observing this day long before a certain President co-opted the name to add a bit of jingo to the commemoration of a certain day in September.
It's also a state holiday in Maine, which was part of Massachusetts until 1820. That should be another good hint about how long ago the holiday was created.

Tell us what we REALLY want to know! (5, Funny)

erroneus (253617) | about 7 years ago | (#18541469)

Will she be wearing diapers?!

Re:Tell us what we REALLY want to know! (3, Funny)

Corporate Troll (537873) | about 7 years ago | (#18541641)

Of course, how else do you think she's going to last several hours without going to the bathroom?

Have you never driven a long trip with a women in your car? *sigh*

In related news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541479)

Makers of treadmills expect increased profits as people realise they don't have to go to the expense of actually travelling to a event to take part.

Do I hear a rumbling at Arlington Cemetery? (2, Funny)

Bazman (4849) | about 7 years ago | (#18541493)


Can you imagine if JFK was president now? "We choose to run on the space treadmill and do the other things not because they are easy but because they are publicity stunts!".

Oh no! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541501)

Yet another astronaut wearing diapers and striving hard to close a large distance...

NASA beware, it's spreading!

What next? Unix hacker to run the marathan from .. (4, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 7 years ago | (#18541507)

... the C shell?

I've got the plans for him (1)

yoyhed (651244) | about 7 years ago | (#18541657)

main.c:

#include <marathon.h>

int main() {
person *unix_hacker = &SOME_FUCKING_GUY;
run_marathon(unix_hacker);
re turn 1; //error: probably ran out of breath at mile 0.9
}

marathon.h:

void run_marathon(&runner) {
&runner = &runner + 26.2;
return;
}
Oh, the C shell. Nevermind.

Re:What next? Unix hacker to run the marathan from (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541811)

is that near the C shore?

Taking part in the marathon (1, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 7 years ago | (#18541553)

In the same way that with a webcam, you don't need to be on-hand (or on anything else) to contribute to a bukkake.

Re:Taking part in the marathon (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541577)

Yes, but a space bukkake? On a treadmill? My credit card is ready

think of the aliens! (5, Funny)

symes (835608) | about 7 years ago | (#18541563)

Seriously, what would our outer-space neighbours think if they picked that moment to swing by and pay us a visit? They're just going to scratch their heads and think we're some backwards species that powers space flight by putting funny sweaty little creatures on treadmills!

What would be cool (0, Flamebait)

UberHoser (868520) | about 7 years ago | (#18541581)

If as she runs the treadmill raises and lowers itself to simulate the actual course elevation changes. And then to really simulate the conditions, she breaths in smog and crap, and gets a bright light in her eyes to simulate the sun, and wear a pink thong and nipple rings, and shouts out gay pride slogans... Whoopse wrong Boston event !

another contestant (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541593)

Ms. Rosie Ruiz, will be competing in the race from the gym on a cruise ship in the north Atlantic... her mile times will be posted to the race organizers via IM.

And elsewhere... (2, Funny)

ciaohound (118419) | about 7 years ago | (#18541859)

an anonymous slashdotter will be competing in the wheelchair category from his cubicle using an Aeron chair and a piezoelectric sensor to detect lateral fidgeting while slinging Java for a large consulting outfit.

I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541617)

ones in software the 8ost. LLok at Exemplified by fanatic known fact came into a relatively charnel house. The another cunting

Ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541697)

All you people who were saying the International Space Station was a huge waste of money that was only ever used for pointless publicity stunts - you've all gone quiet now, haven't you..?

Another publicity stunt (-1, Troll)

merikari (205531) | about 7 years ago | (#18541723)

Budget cuts in science budget and stunts like this. This really doesn't look good for NASA as a professional organisation and nobody seems to care. Does anyone believe Bush administration's talk about going back to the Moon? This is just another sad reminder of the ongoing assault on science.

Re:Another publicity stunt (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 7 years ago | (#18542457)

Bush can talk about going back to the moon all he wants. By putting the date out around 2018, he leaves it up to somebody else to actually accomplish it.

In other news... (2, Funny)

dour power (764750) | about 7 years ago | (#18541731)

NASA confirms that Rosie Ruiz [wikipedia.org] has stowed away on a Soyuz supply ship scheduled to dock with the ISS just before the end of the marathon.

Not the same marathon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541737)

Each marathon is different because of the gradients, the times for the London marathon could not be compared to the New York comparison, so yeah, she'll be running 26.2miles, and she'll be doing it at the same time, but that's where the similarity ends. She's by no means runningt he same marathon. Not to mention gravity and oxygen differences.

mo3 0p (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18541865)

already dead. it is engin3ering project To place a paper

Will she overheat? (3, Insightful)

giafly (926567) | about 7 years ago | (#18542053)

No gravity means no convection. No headwind means little conduction.
Will they generate an artificial headwind using a fan, or does the International Space Station have powerful air conditioning already?

Sweat (1)

Barleymashers (643146) | about 7 years ago | (#18542095)

I hope she is not a sweater or else you are going to have a lot of water flying around the space station. Something tells me that can't be good for all the electronics.

Re:Sweat (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about 7 years ago | (#18542219)

I hope she is not a sweater or else you are going to have a lot of water flying around the space station.

I think they already have that figured out.
"Williams runs at least four times a week in space, including two longer runs and two shorter ones, according to NASA. "

Heart Break Hill (1)

gh (68417) | about 7 years ago | (#18542305)

Having done the Boston Marathon, I'm curious how she plans on emulating the experience of Heart Break Hill [boston.com].

Re:Heart Break Hill (1)

IamWhoIam (998642) | about 7 years ago | (#18542707)

Hmmmmmm why not run it on a Wii. I would choose the easy option, just sit in my easy chair and wiggle my toes for 20 some odd miles.

Submitter's Site (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#18542557)

I just wanted to say that the submitter's site [bostonbehi...scenes.com] is pretty interesting, with audio features on stuff all around Boston. It's definitely worth a listen if you are familiar with the city, and will probably be a fun distraction even if you're not.

Being a Boston thing, this is actually somewhat related, I guess. Funny there's no show on the marathon.

Robot proxy (1)

j00r0m4nc3r (959816) | about 7 years ago | (#18542943)

What would be cool is if they had her treadmill linked to a robotic proxy on earth that would follow the marathon route with the real runners.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...