A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"live coverage"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 04, 03:31 PM
bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "live coverage"

There is a discussion going on in a space oriented web log group about the
"live" coverage of the mars landing.

The point was, that unlike all previous missions we could remember, the
people at JPL/NASA were acting as if the landing confirmation signals they
were watching represented a live right now event, never mentioning, as
everyone seemed to on pathfinder/viking et al that in fact the event had
actually happened 10 minutes before, and this was just the first news we had
of what had happened.

We all agree it was more exciting this way, and even went to the
metaphysical that in relativistic terms, "now" is defined by the speed of
light, and this caveat is nothing more than a de-energizing footnote.

however: the fact that it was not mentioned on any of the coverage we saw
suggested that the decision was made as policy to view incoming signals as
live for the sake of the public event.

Does anyone here know if this is in fact true, or did anyone here hear
NASA/JPL mention the 10 minute lag

Bob


  #2  
Old January 26th 04, 11:25 PM
Mick Hyde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I don't quite know what you line of thought is here, in an exact sense of
the word, is anything 'live'?
Even seeing someone walking across the other side of the road, the time that
it takes for the light to meet your eye has a time lag ... although very
small.
There is no way that you can compensate for the speed of light, therefore
the events on Mars are 'unfolding' in a form of real time.

How else can it be presented?

Mick.

"bob" wrote in message
om...
There is a discussion going on in a space oriented web log group about the
"live" coverage of the mars landing.

The point was, that unlike all previous missions we could remember, the
people at JPL/NASA were acting as if the landing confirmation signals they
were watching represented a live right now event, never mentioning, as
everyone seemed to on pathfinder/viking et al that in fact the event had
actually happened 10 minutes before, and this was just the first news we

had
of what had happened.

We all agree it was more exciting this way, and even went to the
metaphysical that in relativistic terms, "now" is defined by the speed of
light, and this caveat is nothing more than a de-energizing footnote.

however: the fact that it was not mentioned on any of the coverage we saw
suggested that the decision was made as policy to view incoming signals as
live for the sake of the public event.

Does anyone here know if this is in fact true, or did anyone here hear
NASA/JPL mention the 10 minute lag

Bob




  #3  
Old January 27th 04, 01:45 AM
bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

when the delay is long enough to allow comment on the fact that the event
has already happened, is the limit we came up with. This only happens in
space travel.

in 97, and in the 70's the story was framed by "the probe has already
reached mars, we are now just waiting to see what happened". While one other
in this thread said he heard it mentioned this year, clearly it was not
emphasized in the same way it was previously (at least 4 of us who watched
both landings missed any mention of it), and mission control reported it ("t
minus 10 to atmosphere entry" when in fact what was ten seconds away were
the signals indicating atmospheric entry, opportunity was already on the
ground by that point.)

you are preaching to the choir on the relativistic realities. our interest
was in what seemed like a conscious organizational decision, and what it
indicated about public relations.
bob


"Mick Hyde ntlworld.com" [email protected] wrote in message
...
I don't quite know what you line of thought is here, in an exact sense of
the word, is anything 'live'?
Even seeing someone walking across the other side of the road, the time

that
it takes for the light to meet your eye has a time lag ... although very
small.
There is no way that you can compensate for the speed of light, therefore
the events on Mars are 'unfolding' in a form of real time.

How else can it be presented?

Mick.

"bob" wrote in message
om...
There is a discussion going on in a space oriented web log group about

the
"live" coverage of the mars landing.

The point was, that unlike all previous missions we could remember, the
people at JPL/NASA were acting as if the landing confirmation signals

they
were watching represented a live right now event, never mentioning, as
everyone seemed to on pathfinder/viking et al that in fact the event had


actually happened 10 minutes before, and this was just the first news we

had
of what had happened.

We all agree it was more exciting this way, and even went to the
metaphysical that in relativistic terms, "now" is defined by the speed

of
light, and this caveat is nothing more than a de-energizing footnote.

however: the fact that it was not mentioned on any of the coverage we

saw
suggested that the decision was made as policy to view incoming signals

as
live for the sake of the public event.

Does anyone here know if this is in fact true, or did anyone here hear
NASA/JPL mention the 10 minute lag

Bob






  #4  
Old January 27th 04, 04:41 PM
Rick DeNatale
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What struck me several times in watching the MER EDL coverage was when
they said something like: "We're go for cruise stage separation." As if
mission control had a decision to make at that point.
  #5  
Old January 27th 04, 11:10 PM
TVDad Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Rick DeNatale wrote in message ...
What struck me several times in watching the MER EDL coverage was when
they said something like: "We're go for cruise stage separation." As if
mission control had a decision to make at that point.


I'm amazed that they call out the events - - don't you think it would
be easier to have the telemetry as a dashboard display, and just watch
*that*?
  #6  
Old February 1st 04, 09:53 AM
Kent Betts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"bob" you are preaching to the choir on the relativistic realities. our
interest
was in what seemed like a conscious organizational decision, and what it
indicated about public relations.
bob


"Ten minutes ago the chute opened and here is the tone. Then minutes ago
the rockets fired, and here is the tone"

You an hallerb can discuss the public relations aspects.


  #7  
Old February 2nd 04, 05:57 AM
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Kent Betts wrote:

"Ten minutes ago the chute opened and here is the tone. Then minutes ago
the rockets fired, and here is the tone"

You an hallerb can discuss the public relations aspects.


I think the question is interesting from an almost philosophical
viewpoint; we don't often run into things where the speed of light
enters into the equation of what "now" and "live" are.

Pat

  #8  
Old February 3rd 04, 11:30 PM
Andrew Gray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Pat Flannery wrote:


Kent Betts wrote:

"Ten minutes ago the chute opened and here is the tone. Then minutes ago
the rockets fired, and here is the tone"

You an hallerb can discuss the public relations aspects.


I think the question is interesting from an almost philosophical
viewpoint; we don't often run into things where the speed of light
enters into the equation of what "now" and "live" are.


It's the first indication we ever had that light had a finite speed,
incidentally - complex calculations had been done to say when Jupiter's
moons should transit or be occulted, - and it was found that they worked
fine at conjunction but were reliably minutes off at opposition, or
similar...

The phenomenon is worth more than a footnote of interest :-)

--
-Andrew Gray

  #9  
Old January 27th 04, 01:29 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"bob" wrote:

The point was, that unlike all previous missions we could remember, the
people at JPL/NASA were acting as if the landing confirmation signals they
were watching represented a live right now event, never mentioning, as
everyone seemed to on pathfinder/viking et al that in fact the event had
actually happened 10 minutes before, and this was just the first news we had
of what had happened.


The previous landing were not the media spectacles that such events
are today.

We all agree it was more exciting this way, and even went to the
metaphysical that in relativistic terms, "now" is defined by the speed of
light, and this caveat is nothing more than a de-energizing footnote.


Welcome to the Brave New World of space exploration, where excitement,
hype, and headlines are the primary products of the mission.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.
  #10  
Old January 27th 04, 01:38 AM
Herb Schaltegger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Derek Lyons wrote:

"bob" wrote:

The point was, that unlike all previous missions we could remember, the
people at JPL/NASA were acting as if the landing confirmation signals they
were watching represented a live right now event, never mentioning, as
everyone seemed to on pathfinder/viking et al that in fact the event had
actually happened 10 minutes before, and this was just the first news we
had of what had happened.


The previous landing were not the media spectacles that such events
are today.

We all agree it was more exciting this way, and even went to the
metaphysical that in relativistic terms, "now" is defined by the speed of
light, and this caveat is nothing more than a de-energizing footnote.


Welcome to the Brave New World of space exploration, where excitement,
hype, and headlines are the primary products of the mission.


If they want hype and TV ratings, they ought to let Pat write all the press
releases and conduct mission briefings . . . ;-)

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Remove invalid nonsense for email.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Station spacewalk briefing Feb. 24; live TV coverage Feb. 26 Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 February 20th 04 06:33 PM
Any interest in more live MER Mission Control Coverage? David Fred Space Science Misc 4 February 13th 04 06:53 AM
KSC Web To Provide Live Coverage Of SIRTF Launch Ron Baalke Misc 0 August 20th 03 06:34 AM
Live coverage - webcast info for Echostar IX / Telstar 13 SeaLaunch on Aug 7 Rusty B Policy 0 August 5th 03 09:43 PM
Live coverage - webcast info for Echostar IX / Telstar 13 SeaLaunch on Aug 7 Rusty B History 0 August 5th 03 09:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.