this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
872 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
59607 readers
3411 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just curious: is the data of value for research or is it more like "look at us, we can repair from a distance"?
https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/science/
Yes the data is valuable for research. You and I may not understand any of it, but its useful to someone. As for repairing from a distance, that thing has been traveling for 46 years and gone far. For reference, it passed Neptune back in 1989.
It would take many years for a new probe to reach those distances, so if it can be repaired, it shall.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_2
Hypothetically, lets say it only takes 30 years for a new probe with updated tech to reach where Voyager 2 is now. If V2 died today, thats half of someone's career spent waiting for the new probe to arrive. Multiply that by everyone using the probe for research and you have a ton of wasted potential.
I'm aware that sending something to do the repairs isn't an option, my question was whether it's worth it (and apparently it is) or if it's more an experiment about long distance repairs which by itself is very expressive already.
I'm not sure why I'm downvoted. Maybe I worded my question badly or it's because it was a question I could have googled on my own. I don't know and neither do I care. I don't think you downvoted me, if it sounded that way. Just now saw it and wondered why
Remote software repairs are definatly good, pretty cool and worth bragging about. If you have to do a physical repair, you're probably better off just sending a new probe [citation needed], but as I said the time investment is huge.
It is a legitimate question, however the way it was asked has a negative vibe, intentional or not. You pretty much gave a good option and bad option and said "pick one" - generally when that's asked, we assume the asker assumes the negative is true (it's hard to explain). To me, it could be interpreted as "just curious, I assume this probe is only taking pretty pictures, so why do you bother repairing it?".
Personally, I've been trying to avoid jumping to those types of conclusions, but its not easy. Text has no tone, and phrases sometimes have a secondary tonal meanings that people will insert. "Just curious....was it you that didn't refill the coffee machine this morning?"
Thanks, I'm not good at tone in my native language already and even less in English. I didn't give the comment much thought, I could have found a better phrasing.
About the coffee machine: I refilled it today so it must have been someone else who didn't
So some years ago, the probe went into some area between our solar system and interstellar space. Getting info back about that is quite useful in learning more about that area.
I'm not sure if its through it yet, but if it is, then we're getting data back about what's after that as well. Does that data change over time? What if there's yet another transition area and we learn about it?
Having something actually there helps us know if all these theories are right, and the more data we get, the more sure we can be
How is there space between the solar system and interstellar space? Isn't interstellar just everything between the star systems?
Out past the planets is the heliopause, the final boundary between the solar system and interstellar space. Voyager discovered it, but other probes have confirmed it. The radiation and particles emitted by the sun create a pressurized bubble around it, where plasma (energized particles, mostly hydrogen) is much denser than past the heliopause. Cosmic rays are more prevalent outside it.
I've heard it compared to the empty zone around where a sink faucet first hits, creating a little "wall" of water around it as the splashing water pushes back the standing water.
"Empty" space is anything but. There's tons of particles and energy flying though it, just not as dense.
That sink analogy is great. It's even non uniform like the heliopause
The solar winds interact with interstellar winds and create a threshold between the two
https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/news/details.php?article_id=14
Ya not sure why you would be downvoted either. Maybe people thought you were saying NASA does things just to brag.
I'm in the positive again, maybe it was my other comment or it's just fluctuating
Voyager 2 went with a different trajectory specifically to fly by the outer planets. Voyager 1 went with a more aggressive gravity assist from both Jupiter and Saturn to gain the speed necessary to leave the solar system. So it's not only that it takes decades to get that far, but also the launch window of when different planets are aligned to make the mission feasible.
Considering that's one of the two objects humanity ever have on direct contact with the medium outside the limits of our solar system, and the only tool we'll have there for at least four decades, I'd argue that yes, it is pretty valuable.
The repair from distance part is nothing to be shy about, too.
It's the only instrumentation we have at that distance that can measure things like solar irradiance.
Interesting question though, which sent me down a rabbit hole to see the capabilities of the instrumentation.
I like to follow it through space