Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tiruin]

There's also basically nothing there. So if there is something there, it's really fucking easy to see.

* Tiruin nudges Pufferfish.

What about light. o_o

[Arx]

I think that's partly to do with size and distance. If the ship isn't very close (astronomical scales) or very large (astronomical scales) you won't really be able to notice it.

[Mech#4]

It's just... on Earth camouflage works for distances of, what, about 3 miles, 8 maybe (for vehicles)? In space, while there is nothing, you could be trying to see something 100/1000/10,000 miles away with a single light source (the closest sun. Possibly also a nearby planet as they'd reflect light).

[Gentlefish]

It's just... on Earth camouflage works for distances of, what, about 3 miles, 8 maybe (for vehicles)? In space, while there is nothing, you could be trying to see something 100/1000/10,000 miles away with a single light source (the closest sun. Possibly also a nearby planet as they'd reflect light).

We're actually talking outside our solar system.

We can still detect voyager because of the emissions it's giving off.

[Mech#4]

It's just... on Earth camouflage works for distances of, what, about 3 miles, 8 maybe (for vehicles)? In space, while there is nothing, you could be trying to see something 100/1000/10,000 miles away with a single light source (the closest sun. Possibly also a nearby planet as they'd reflect light).

We're actually talking outside our solar system.

We can still detect voyager because of the emissions it's giving off.

Right, right.

Hmm, I wonder how long it would take to find voyager if it was knocked off course by something.

[Putnam]

Finding things in space is way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way easier than finding things on Earth.

Unless they're a black body object with outer hull temperature equalized with outer space, in which case, finding them becomes almost impossible.

It's really hard to find a black dot on the background of black space.

Wouldn't it also be difficult because the chances that two objects are close enough together would be rather small? I mean; space is big, really big.

There's also basically nothing there. So if there is something there, it's really fucking easy to see.

Again, how will you notice a black dot on the black background?

Callisto is one such object, discovered 1910 by Galileo. Ganymede as well. Pluto is darker than Ganymede, but was discovered nonetheless. Ceres is as dark as fresh asphalt and was discovered in 1801. The Moon is as bright as old asphalt, but it's bright as hell compared to space.

[Gentlefish]

It's just... on Earth camouflage works for distances of, what, about 3 miles, 8 maybe (for vehicles)? In space, while there is nothing, you could be trying to see something 100/1000/10,000 miles away with a single light source (the closest sun. Possibly also a nearby planet as they'd reflect light).

We're actually talking outside our solar system.

We can still detect voyager because of the emissions it's giving off.

Right, right.

Hmm, I wonder how long it would take to find voyager if it was knocked off course by something.

As long as it'd take the next reading of voyager to reach us, really. It's really, really REALLY easy to find things in space that emit/reflect stuff.

[miauw62]

Well, the internet's gone done internetted again.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

* Tawarochir's eyes nipples explode

WHAT.

Junior Scientist Power Hour. Also was on Strip Search.

Spoiler: Here's one (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: And another (click to show/hide)

That's just silly. Sherlock Holmes didn't even really like women except for one single woman, and that was because she outsmarted him.

He would not just stick it in any lady. He was probably heteroromantic anyway, or biromantic. I don't think he was into sex.

it's a joke comic

[Gentlefish]

Well, the internet's gone done internetted again.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

* Tawarochir's eyes nipples explode

WHAT.

Junior Scientist Power Hour. Also was on Strip Search.

Spoiler: Here's one (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: And another (click to show/hide)

That's just silly. Sherlock Holmes didn't even really like women except for one single woman, and that was because she outsmarted him.

He would not just stick it in any lady. He was probably heteroromantic anyway, or biromantic. I don't think he was into sex.

it's a joke comic

...Also isn't the comic iterating that point anyway?

[Sergarr]

Finding things in space is way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way easier than finding things on Earth.

Unless they're a black body object with outer hull temperature equalized with outer space, in which case, finding them becomes almost impossible.

It's really hard to find a black dot on the background of black space.

Wouldn't it also be difficult because the chances that two objects are close enough together would be rather small? I mean; space is big, really big.

There's also basically nothing there. So if there is something there, it's really fucking easy to see.

Again, how will you notice a black dot on the black background?

Callisto is one such object, discovered 1910 by Galileo. Ganymede as well. Pluto is darker than Ganymede, but was discovered nonetheless. Ceres is as dark as fresh asphalt and was discovered in 1801. The Moon is as bright as old asphalt, but it's bright as hell compared to space.

As far as I know, they were discovered due to their gravitational effects on orbits of other objects in Solar system. Also, because they're all rotating in the same plane, the search space is immensely reduced.

Also, I looked up wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_%28dwarf_planet%29#Discovery

"One of the astronomers selected for the search was Giuseppe Piazzi at the Academy of Palermo, Sicily. Before receiving his invitation to join the group, Piazzi discovered Ceres on 1 January 1801.[21] He was searching for "the 87th [star] of the Catalogue of the Zodiacal stars of Mr la Caille", but found that "it was preceded by another".[19] Instead of a star, Piazzi had found a moving star-like object, which he first thought was a comet.[22]"

It's also 1000 km long in diameter. Makes it pretty fucking unstealthy, don't you think?

[Putnam]

Pluto is not in the same plane and its gravitational effects are almost entirely negligible and not related to its discovery. The gravitational issues that they assumed required a ninth planet required a ninth planet of at least the mass of Neptune (which was discovered in this way and was, in fact, the only object discovered this way, excepting AFAIK moons of smaller objects like Pluto). This gravitational issue was a math error. Similarly, Ceres is goddamn tiny gravity-wise and the Galilean moons were discovered before people even knew gravity was a thing that affected anything but earth.

[Sergarr]

Okay, IIRC was wrong, it was Neptune that was discovered due to gravity.

However, the point about them celestial body objects being 1000+ km in diameter in a single celestial plane still stands.

Stealth ships of potential future are not likely to be 1000+ km in diameter, and not likely to approach along the Solar system plane.

[Gentlefish]

As far as I know, they were discovered due to their gravitational effects on orbits of other objects in Solar system. Also, because they're all rotating in the same plane, the search space is immensely reduced.

Also, I looked up wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_%28dwarf_planet%29#Discovery

"One of the astronomers selected for the search was Giuseppe Piazzi at the Academy of Palermo, Sicily. Before receiving his invitation to join the group, Piazzi discovered Ceres on 1 January 1801.[21] He was searching for "the 87th [star] of the Catalogue of the Zodiacal stars of Mr la Caille", but found that "it was preceded by another".[19] Instead of a star, Piazzi had found a moving star-like object, which he first thought was a comet.[22]"

It's also 1000 km long in diameter. Makes it pretty fucking unstealthy, don't you think?

Also it was discovered in 1801.

Need I point out voyager again, which weighs less than a ton? We've still got track of it outside the sun's sphere of influence.

Also we're keeping track of an asteroid with dimensions of less than a kilometer.

[Putnam]

And here's an asteroid discovered in 1872 that is less than 50 kilometers wide.

And we landed on a freaking comet that is less than 2 kilometers wide, which also happens to be 1% as bright as Pluto.

[Sergarr]

Keeping track of an object is much easier because you can predict it's trajectory. And sometimes even with such predictions the celestial object get lost occasionally (a la http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/113P/Spitaler)

And if you read (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/67P/Churyumov%E2%80%93Gerasimenko#Discovery) this, you see that the discovery of that comet was very accidental.

And all these objects are still orbiting the Sun in a circle, which makes them much easier to find.