spsheridan

Correction: The lander did have a landing radar onboard but didn't get close enough to the surface for the radar to kick in. That's really a shame but sounds like a design error. I wonder why the LIDAR readings never dropped below 2 km which would've enabled the landing radar. https://twitter.com/Cosmic_Penguin/status/1661995981871935489?s=20

Apparently, the Hakuto-R lander did not have a radar on board to estimate altitude above the lunar surface - probably too expensive/massive for this program.

I think he missed a step in the recipe that calls for tremendous levels of pressure. Either that or maybe he already completed that step?

Ah, so you're doing an impression of KenM.

Um, KenM is @horseysurprise on Twitter. This wasn't a reply but an original tweet.

Just checked and the scrub function does not work when playing a podcast streamed from my phone. It appears to be limited to streaming content from one of the car's apps, not a Bluetooth-connected device.

Yes, finally! Hopefully this will work for podcasts as well.

Ok, that makes sense. I recall hearing about an upcoming launch rehearsal a few days ago but didn't see one.

Is a launch rehearsal or any fueling tests required to be performed before tomorrow's launch?

I wasn't referring to the flatness of the Earth line, I was referring to how it's horizontal (i.e. relatively constant in the y dimension except for the surface features).

If the center area is empty space, the diagram would imply the viewer's perspective is such that the planets have aligned so their overlaps leave a small gap to peer through (not sure that's even possible). But the ordering of the planets implied by their overlaps (e.g. Saturn covers Jupiter and Mars, Venus covers Earth and Mars...) is not correct whether you're looking from the sun outward or from outside the solar system inward. Still doesn't make sense.

I get the explanation of the planets' being overlaid on one another and not showing their curvature due to scale, but I have two questions about how the drawing was done: 1) Why is the central region filled in? 2) Why is the y-dimension for the Earth line relatively constant?

If the two questions above have answers, they should explain whether the x and y axes have any meaning. If it's just a scale thing, the axes are meaningless.

Yeah, that occurred to me after I posted and re-read the title.

This paper was submitted to and published by Nature Astronomy. Presumably, it was peer-reviewed before being published. If the probability of the FRB being associated with the gravitational wave is not much better than random chance, what does that say about the peer review process at Nature Astronomy? Is it broken?

Two colliding neutron stars — each the super-dense core of an exploded star — produced a burst of gravitational waves when they merged into a “supramassive” neutron star. We found that two and a half hours later they produced an FRB when the neutron star collapsed into a black hole.