all 30 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 48 points 5 months ago (5 children)

The bulb in my hallway is 3.2w. Still impressive though.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

    The beamwidth of Voyager 1's antenna is about 0.5 degrees. In practical terms, that's very narrow, about an 8 metre wide beam at a kilometre distance.

    At its current distance, by the time the beam reaches Earth it is 224 million kilometres wide, 1.5x the distance from the Earth to the sun.

    Now imagine the light from a car's taillights lighting up the back wall of a garage as it reverses in. Then spread that same amount of light out over that 224 million km wide beamwidth. That's what Voyager is putting out and what the Deep Space Network dishes have to listen for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 19 points 5 months ago (12 children)

    NASA has a neat little video showing the path taken by Voyager 1: https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4139

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (11 children)

    Very interesting. So they both manouvred (slingshot) using planets' gravity wells? Not everything in SciFi is fiction I guess.

    And V1 has traveled further from our solar system than the solar system's diameter. Wow.

    Extremely high bitrate on the video due to starry background, btw. My old lappy got wheezy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Yes, and there was a 175 year window for the planets to be lined up like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    You mean the planets just sat there for 175 years? Wow, I really learned something new today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    In the scientific fiction genre, everything is scientifically possible. That's the entire premise. Time tells us what they get right and what becomes fantasy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Nothing in Star Wars is scientifically possible or ever will be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Star wars is barely science fiction. It's basically fantasy with a bit of tech.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    It's absolutely fantasy. No debate. So is Star Trek.

    Actual science fiction is like the recent Hail Mary. Everything is based on literal real science, with maybe one "what if" kind of stretch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    I don't know that i'd go that far. There is certainly debate on what constutes hard or soft sci-fi, but I'd say as long as the technology is either the focus, or is the main facilitator of the story then it's more sci-fi. In star wars there is not much technology that is necessarily required, all of it could have been replaced with fantasy elements and it's the same. It's not a focus, whereas the expanse for instance relies upon the limitations of the technology to drive the plot.

    I don't know could be talking out my ass, purely vibes based genre definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    22W LED bulb? For suntanning?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    this is the kind of content i come here for! love it.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    So it generates about 18 Watts of power while transmitting.

    Impressive!

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    That was back when bulbs lasted almost forever until they changed them so they'd break earlier so you'd have to spend money to buy more bulbs. Voyager is like the bulbs of old.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    Carrying water for incandescent bulbs on the basis of their reliability is wild. Yeah, several companies have taken advantage of the conception of lightbulbs as a disposable good to cheap out on LED bulb construction until they are also disposable, but they did that so successfully because changing incandescent bulbs was such a common occurrence, it was the template for a proto-meme joke. Not everything in the past was better than things today

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Uh, what. Bulbs last years now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments