The European Solar Orbiter project has taken another step towards launch-readiness, with Australia's CSIRO delivering the last of the optical filters that the orbiter needs to image the sun. The spacecraft is due to launch in 2017, and will adopt an orbital distance similar to that of Mercury, which is closer than other …
Hope they didn't
Send it with DHL
(i'm still missing a xmas prezzy)
Using Iron vapour to read the magentic state *optically*
CSIRO is not to be underestimated.
Re: Using Iron vapour to read the magentic state *optically*
Unless you are arse technica and label them as a clear patent troll since they 'don't produce anything themselves'.
OK, so the satellite's got it's sunglasses. Who's building the hat?
Don't forget teh sunscreen.
They won't need sunscreen if the mission is only conducted at night.
Spaceflight development money is rarely wasted
Electronically tuneable filters. There has to be a applications for that on Earth.
It's just goes to show how space science can drive technology advancement
Re: Spaceflight development money is rarely wasted
I was just thinking, as I read the article, "I wonder how much Carl Ziess will pay for these new techs."
Have an up-vote.
So, not something I'll find down my local Jessops then?
Just give it a couple of years...
helping in turn to predict the behaviour of solar winds and geomagnetic storms, which will feed into climate models
What? I thought only carbon dioxide emissions could affect the climate.
Re: Interesting, but
Er... nope. Solar irradiation is a major factor for several reasons, including generation of atmospheric water vapour, which is a greenhouse gas. So is methane, which is about 20 times more efficient than CO2 as a greenhouse gas.
Mind you, the quote from the article was not about global warming models, but about climate models. I.e., what they use to make long-term weather forecasts, among other things.
Re: Interesting, but
"its nominal centre wavelength of 617.3433 nm (accurate to one thirtieth of a nanometre)"
If the accuracy is 1/30th, why give us the wavelength down to 1/10000th?
Re: Don't understand
"If the accuracy is 1/30th, why give us the wavelength down to 1/10000th?"
Simple. That is the nominal wavelength the filter was designed for. The accuracy is + or - one thirtieth nanometer. So, we have a theoretical value for what we're shooting at, and the accuracy is, as said, plus or minus one thirtieth nm. Meaning that while the design value is accurate down to 1/10000th, the actual value achieved may be anywhere near there within plus or minus those 1/30th nm.
- Batten down the hatches, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS due in TWO DAYS
- FOUR DAYS: That's how long it took to crack Galaxy S5 fingerscanner
- Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?
- Feast your PUNY eyes on highest resolution phone display EVER
- Wall St's DROOLING as Twitter GULPS DOWN analytics firm Gnip