backtop


Print 23 comment(s) - last by Moishe.. on Jul 25 at 1:46 PM

They were taken July 19, 2013

Two NASA spacecrafts managed to get a special glimpse of the Earth and its moon from the both the inner and outer solar system.
 
The Cassini spacecraft, which launched back in 1997 and was sent to the Saturn system, took color images of Earth and its moon on July 19, 2013. This is pretty significant, considering it's the first time the Cassini's highest-resolution camera was able to capture Earth and its moon as two separate and recognizable objects. The photos were taken from almost 900 million miles away. 

Earth (left) and its moon (right) in one of Cassini's photos

Cassini took the photos from the outer solar system in Saturn orbit. This isn't an easy task, considering the Earth appears very close to the sun from that distance, and the light can damage the camera's detectors. But on July 19, the sun moved behind Saturn and out of the way of the camera for a short period of time, allowing Cassini to take some rare shots. 

In the photos, Earth has a blue shade while its moon is a bright white. NASA invited people to join in by finding Saturn in the sky and sharing pictures over the Internet that day. About 200,000 people took part. 

"We can't see individual continents or people in this portrait of Earth, but this pale blue dot is a succinct summary of who we were on July 19," said Linda Spilker, Cassini project scientist, at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "Cassini's picture reminds us how tiny our home planet is in the vastness of space, and also testifies to the ingenuity of the citizens of this tiny planet to send a robotic spacecraft so far away from home to study Saturn and take a look-back photo of Earth." 

NASA's MESSENGER, a robotic spacecraft that launched to Mercury's orbit in 2004, also took a black-and-white photo of Earth and its moon from 61 million miles away within the inner solar system. 

         Photos taken of the Earth and its moon from Cassini (left) and MESSENGER (right)

"That images of our planet have been acquired on a single day from two distant solar system outposts reminds us of this nation's stunning technical accomplishments in planetary exploration," said Sean Solomon, MESSENGER Principal Investigator from Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y. "And because Mercury and Saturn are such different outcomes of planetary formation and evolution, these two images also highlight what is special about Earth. There's no place like home." 

Source: NASA



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Ouch!
By Dorkyman on 7/23/2013 12:10:03 PM , Rating: -1
"Two NASA Spacecrafts?" Really???!!!

"Spacecraft" can be either singular or plural. "Spacecrafts" is not a word.




RE: Ouch!
By venym76 on 7/23/2013 12:31:05 PM , Rating: 5
"Spacecrafts" is an acceptable plural term, so is "Spacecraft", perhaps do some research before you spout your superiority.


RE: Ouch!
By Dorkyman on 7/23/2013 1:49:34 PM , Rating: 1
Gosh, I must be looking at the wrong dictionaries (or is it dictionarys?).

Googled three dictionary sites just now, all said "...Plural of 'spacecraft' is 'spacecraft'."

But perhaps somewhere it's not the case.


RE: Ouch!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/23/2013 3:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
Good job chucklechops! I'm so glad every comment so far is on grammar and not the topic, which I think is a little more interesting...

PS, I know chucklechops isn't a word, but I decided to pluralize it, just because.

PSS, I know "chucklechop" isn't a word either.


RE: Ouch!
By rountad on 7/23/2013 4:00:54 PM , Rating: 3
PS is post script.
So it would be PPS, for post post script. LOL!


RE: Ouch!
By freedom4556 on 7/23/2013 4:41:15 PM , Rating: 3
That is correct usage. "After the postscript" as it were.

quote:
Sometimes, when additional points are made after the first postscript, abbreviations such as PPS (post-post-scriptum, or postquam-post-scriptum) and PPPS (post-post-post-scriptum, and so on, ad infinitum) are used, though only PPS has somewhat common usage.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postscript


RE: Ouch!
By amanojaku on 7/23/2013 12:39:13 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
"Spacecrafts" is not a word.
Yes it is. Space artisans use spacecrafts to make things like space papier-mâché and space embroidery. Saturn looks really nice when decorated with space doilies.


RE: Ouch!
By ipay on 7/23/2013 1:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
it is. Fishes and mouses are correct as well, if more that one type is being identified.


RE: Ouch!
By Flunk on 7/23/2013 1:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
Your examples really muddy the water on this, even dictionary.com (which is very liberal in its definitions) doesn't recognize "mouses" as a word and "fishes" refers to groupings of multiple species of fish.

Also, the plural of spacecraft is spacecraft but I wouldn't have bothered pointing that out without this negative and incorrect backlash.

Remember, languages are wierd and things change. It's possible that if enough people think "mouses" is a word they'll add it to the dictionaries and then it will be. Just not right now.


RE: Ouch!
By Yojimbo on 7/23/2013 2:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
"Remember, languages are wierd and things change. It's possible that if enough people think "mouses" is a word they'll add it to the dictionaries and then it will be. Just not right now. "

Sure, but change through ignorance is nothing to be proud of. For instance, "octopi" being considered an acceptable plural because it is in some dictionaries because some people actually use it because they are ignorant.


RE: Ouch!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/23/2013 4:47:35 PM , Rating: 3
The English language wasn't handed down to us from some deity, to forever remain unchanged.

What is and isn't correct is always in flux. "Ain't" wasn't a word years back. Now it's in every dictionary today.

And goddamn it, now you people have me debating this instead of these awesome images! A curse upon who started this. :)


RE: Ouch!
By ipay on 7/23/2013 2:29:58 PM , Rating: 2
Poor phrasing my my part. Mouses is indeed correct in computer science usage. Merriam-Webster will confirm.


RE: Ouch!
By Labotomizer on 7/23/2013 3:55:31 PM , Rating: 2
ipay is correct, mouses is the plural of a computer mouse. Mice is the plural of the rodent mouse.


RE: Ouch!
By drycrust3 on 7/23/2013 4:28:07 PM , Rating: 2
It normally depends on whether it is a countable noun or an uncountable noun. Since the word is a 20th Century word, we'd expect it to follow the norms of the English language and not some "Olde English" form.
Thus, if it is a countable noun, like car, hat, hammer, etc, then the plural, obviously, has an "s" added to it. If it is uncountable, like flour, water, air, etc, then it doesn't have an "s" added to it.
The problem here is traditionally "craft", meaning a type of artistic expression, is an uncountable noun.
Therefore, while "two NASA spacecraft" sounds more right than "two NASA spacecrafts", one could argue that by using the former you imply a type of artistic genre that can only be done in space (i.e. it is an uncountable noun), which is technically incorrect, but sounds better than the latter, where "craft" means a vehicle (i.e. it is a countable noun), and is technically more correct, but sounds worse.
I suppose, if we follow this countable and uncountable noun stuff through, then if we are going to say "two NASA spacecraft", we should also make sure we omit either "the" or "a" in front of their names, so "Cassini spacecraft", and "Messenger spacecraft" is correct.


RE: Ouch!
By 3minence on 7/23/2013 8:14:37 PM , Rating: 2
Space and Craft are "Old English" words that have simply been merged together. If you look at early 20th century writing you will find them frequently written with a space between them rather than together as it is nowadays. "Craft", when talking about vessels, certainly refers to one or many.

While I generally dislike grammar Nazi's criticizing commentators like you and I, I must admit I expect the actual article to be in proper English. You and I are shooting off our mouth's for free, and you get what you pay for, but they're getting paid for their work so so it should damn well be done right.


RE: Ouch!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/23/2013 10:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but they're getting paid for their work so so it should damn well be done right.


Oh yeah, I'm sure these guys are just about ready to buy that tropical island and retire lmao...


RE: Ouch!
By 3minence on 7/24/2013 11:18:54 AM , Rating: 2
I’m sorry, but I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. It looks as if you’re saying that the people who write these articles are not being paid very much and therefore we shouldn’t expect too much from them.

So, that kid working at McDonald's doesn’t get paid much either. Does that mean he doesn’t really have to wash his hands after going to the bathroom? It’s OK if he forgets to add the pickles and lettuce to your burger? The girl at the window doesn’t have to remember to put the fries in the bag? New cops in my city don’t get paid much. Does that make it OK to arrest the wrong person or shoot an innocent bystander by mistake?

I disagree. If you’re paid to do something, you need to meet a minimum performance level. For a journalist that means using correct grammar and spelling.

Next time you have food poisoning just remember how little all the people who touched your food were getting paid. That should make you feel better.


RE: Ouch!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/24/2013 1:44:15 PM , Rating: 2
What's missing in your dumbass rant is the fact that most of your examples involve payment. DT is free.

So go on your stupid crusade about how a free blog should uphold the highest standards. It's cute.


RE: Ouch!
By 3minence on 7/24/2013 4:01:53 PM , Rating: 2
So Tiffany and Jason the others who post articles on here don't get paid? I thought for sure I remember Jason saying they get paid per article, or something.

If I'm mistaken then I apologize. But I suspect I'm not which makes you the dumbass.


RE: Ouch!
By Reclaimer77 on 7/24/2013 4:31:27 PM , Rating: 1
They get paid yes, just not directly by YOU.

This whole thing is silly. Just stop being a dick and wasting everyone's time. If the entire article was a trainwreck, fine. But we're talking about the pluralizing of ONE word, and it's debatable if that's even incorrect at this point because there's plenty of prior-use to be found.

ps, don't worry, you're still the dumbass.


RE: Ouch!
By 3minence on 7/24/2013 6:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
Dude, really, looking at your past history of posts, the only one wasting peoples time is you.

Dailytech makes its money through advertising. People need to visit the site for the advertisers to pay. People like me come to read quality articles. People like you come to troll and be a jackass. If Dailytech wants to keep people coming then it needs to provide quality articles. Poor spelling and grammar do not demonstrate quality. Neither does continuing to allow trolls like you, for that matter.

So if Dailytech wants to attract more people, then it really needs to improve its quality. Of course, maybe it's decided to attract people who like reading trolls and have a good laugh, in which case you've earned them quite a bit of cash.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki