What is Digg?174 Comments
- Scagli3tti, on 07/04/2008, -7/+366Clearly Sauron just took out the Discovery shuttle mid-launch.
- nothin2g, on 07/04/2008, -18/+184I, for one, welcome our new drunken space pilots.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -32/+165This is one of my favorite digg posts in the history of digg. I tried so hard to figure out what was going on in the picture, and got surprised by every "fact" they gave about it. Biggest problem I had with it was the shadow. Hadn't even though about shadows at a full moon being cast directly towards it.
GREAT post. thank you - nothin2g, on 07/04/2008, -13/+85Don't drink and launch.
- DYNAMICENTRYYY, on 07/04/2008, -0/+64One does not simply launch into Mordor.
- m0neybags, on 07/04/2008, -15/+65That was like an enigma wrapped in a knock knock joke, wrapped in a paradox.
- BNSF9647, on 07/04/2008, -5/+50Holy Terror, Batman! The space shuttle has hidden our Bat-Signal!
- Icklehamsta, on 07/04/2008, -21/+59That really wasn't as difficult as I expected. Have we never seen a picture of a shuttle launching before?
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -7/+21 To me the only real question was why did the shadow point right at the moon? My brain wanted to believe the moon was lit from behind and the shadow was coming from it, even though I knew that wasn't true. I wonder if they waited for the sun and moon to be in alignment for the launch?
- bravo1995, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10My first guess was that it was a Delta II launch. The Delta II has up to nine solid rocket motors attached to it, and not all of them light at T-0. Some ignite a few minutes after launch, which I thought could have explained the brightening of the plume.
If you want to see a cool rocket explosion, a Delta II blew up back in the 90's and trashed a few dozen cars with solid rocket propellant (basically flaming rubber).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDnkEOKR1BE - warlax27, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8Dugg for somehow spelling Reagan with an additional "S"
- cvxdes1, on 07/04/2008, -6/+12To whomever it may concern:
Dear sir,
On behalf of the internet, I'd like to request you shut the ***** up.
Thank you, and have a good day.
- The Internet - poopdigger, on 07/04/2008, -4/+10Wtf? Are you a jerk?
- digitalhair, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5yes, that was why I thought the photo was diggworthy. It was the narrow shadow terminating at the bright spot (apparently, it's the moon) and the claim of coincidental alignment of heavenly bodies that caused me to maintain my skepticism. it would seem to me that the atmosphere between the camera and the moon would bend the light reflecting off of the moon and magnify it so it would appear much larger at that angle, but it may be high enough to have escaped the zone of diffraction.
I can now see that the beaming shadow does, in fact, go beyond the bright spot and if you look closely at the sun-lit part of the rocket wash you can see a "jacob's ladder" effect as you follow the smoke plume up.
It's still a hell of a coincidence that the photographer was situated in in such a way that the cross-section of the shadow from the smoke trail was minimized, creating the appearance of a dark beam eminating from the moon due to the convergence of so many different dimensional variables. Shuttle launches are always cool to me anyways - I guess I fall into that demographic - but the unique timing and angle of this photograph is a big plus...
What would really make this interesting is for an expert astronomer to look back at the date on the photograph and check up on whether or not the Sun, Earth and Moon truly were in alinement, just to appease curiosity... - inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6I knew that much, but after reading the first paragraph of the article I realized there was a lot more stuff that I didn't know about the picture (that I didn't even notice because I just said "it's the space shuttle, duh")
- tofur, on 07/04/2008, -3/+8At sunset (or sunrise)?
In 2001?
You are smoking crack. Challenger was in the middle of the day with much bluer skies in 1986. This is obviously taken either at sunset or sunrise. It is also obvious you did not read the article. - Justice101, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6Is there walking involved?
- engunneer, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Ad that is why there is a couple mile radius zone where people aren't allowed for every launch.
- Rammy912, on 07/04/2008, -1/+5Do you know what a lens flare looks like?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/110/309318492_2ee90 ... - cwgannon, on 07/04/2008, -3/+7Err ... the point of the photo is that it's not just a shuttle launch. This is a photo of a shuttle launch: http://chamorrobible.org/images/photos/gpw-2005012 ... See the difference, smugass?
- bravo1995, on 07/04/2008, -1/+5Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
- axox, on 07/04/2008, -3/+7RTFA:
Why does the shadow point at the moon?
Because the launch took place on the evening of a full moon, any shadow cast would have to appear to end at the moon since the Earth, moon, and sun were naturally in alignment. Remember, you are looking eastward at the moon and the sun is above and behind you in this perspective. - RansomHoldiay, on 07/04/2008, -1/+5nestled in a box of tsunamis.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -2/+5you are an idiot
- CoolBluReason, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Thank you for telling me what I just read in the article. I was unable to comprehend it until I read your comment. You are a true life-saver.
- michellemarion, on 07/04/2008, -1/+4So what? This was so boring.
- Gnar04, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Luckily Digg has paradox absorbing crumple zones
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+4that's insane! cool video
- bravo1995, on 07/04/2008, -2/+5No, it was a coincidence. They have more important things to worry about (e.g., the location of the ISS in orbit) when deciding on launch times.
- justok, on 07/04/2008, -2/+5the lack of such accusations means there must be a conspiracy
- Hudon689, on 06/13/2009, -1/+4I was also right in all of them.
I knew the gray stuff was smoke, the bright lower right object was a sphere, the background is what many people call "sky", and I kind of figured out that the brighter dot at the top left of the gray stuff (smoke, btw) was probably something that exhausts smoke.
easy IMHO. - digitalhair, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3your dwight avatar makes your explanation hilarious
- Crazymaniacc, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3it's going straight forward but because the world is round it looks like it's going to the other side
- peppino, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2I wondered why the shadow, from the plume, seemed to disappear as it gets closer to the shuttle. I'm not a scientist but one idea I had is that the shadow shows more concentrated aerosol particles sitting in the atmosphere. The other idea I had is that the plume is less dense closer to the shuttle so, it doesn't cast as dark of a shadow.
- einstevo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2automated internet toughguy macro?
- jpaolini, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Most dugg-down comments for a story on Digg ever.
- supaklaw, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2The only confusing thing is how a wildly swirling cloud of smoke makes a narrow-beam shadow like that. From a distance the smoke cloud would not seem so arbitrary, it would be fairly narrow width but it's throws the viewer off seeing that the smoke is so close.
- Arcesius, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Yes, it was a very astrologically auspicious time to launch a space shuttle.
- NuclearDruid, on 07/04/2008, -0/+21) Because some people aren't jackasses.
2) No, but I can bury you. - pdbailey, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2good post, but the article claims the moon was full when it obviously wasn't--the moon rises at sunset when the moon is full, but it is about one hour into the sky. This is the day before a full moon. a fact NASA confirms
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/phase/phase2001gmt.ht ...
(article claims launch was on Feb 7th, at 6 PM, almost exactly one day before a full moon. - RoflCoptah, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2yummy
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2 I thought that too but when you look at the hi res version real close you can see it's not really as perfect a beam as it looks at first.
- OverthrowTheNWO, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3If I need to refine the statement, I was referring to space footage.
Comment on the videos? - PhoenixAvatar2, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2The sun, you atheist.
- freqk, on 07/04/2008, -4/+5Hey, I got it right.
Shuttle.
Sunlight.
Moon Shadow.
Was it really that hard? - Dr00pieS, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2Rough, just the way your mother likes it.
Huhuhuhuh. - peppino, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1I wondered why the shadow, from the plume, seemed to disappear as it gets closer to the shuttle. I'm not a scientist but one idea I had is that the shadow shows more concentrated aerosol particles sitting in the atmosphere. The other idea I had is that the plume is less dense closer to the shuttle so, it doesn't cast as dark of a shadow.
- 9portal, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2It is odd. because you can't actually 'see' shadows until they hit something. The air must have been full of humidity, or dust, and what you see is the shadow of the miles-high vapour trail of the shadow passing thru the atmosphere. You don't see it lower down because it is too faint, but by a lucky angle, the vapiour trails; shadow is all concentrated from the cameras perspective. As it gets higher and higher, the shadow combines to form a more visible object, like water that becomes more opaque the deeper it is. The fact that it seems to be pointing at the moon is also just a luck shot.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2shadow at sunset caused by the rocket exhaust condensing in the atm. thats my guess.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1 The space station makes an orbit every 90 minutes or so, I'm sure syncing up with it is fairly trivial.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 176 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
