Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Russia blames radiation for space probe failure (AP)

MOSCOW ? The head of Russia's space agency said Tuesday that cosmic radiation was the most likely cause of the failure of a Mars moon probe that crashed to Earth this month, and suggested that a low-quality imported component may have been vulnerable to the radiation.

Vladimir Popovkin also said a manned launch to the International Space Station is being postponed from March 30 because of faults found in the Soyuz capsule.

The statements underline an array of trouble that has afflicted the country's vaunted space program in recent months, including the August crash of a supply ship for the space station and last month's crash of a communications satellite.

Since the end of the U.S. space shuttle program last year, Russian craft are the only means to send crew to and from the ISS.

The unmanned Phobos-Ground probe was to have gone to the Mars moon of Phobos, taken soil samples and brought them back. But it became stuck in Earth orbit soon after its launch on Nov. 9. It fell out of orbit on Jan. 15, reportedly off the coast of Chile, but no fragments have been found.

The failure was a severe embarrassment to Russia, and Popovkin initially suggested it could have been due to foreign sabotage.

But on Tuesday he said in televised remarks that an investigation showed the probable cause was "localized influence of heavily radiated space particles."

Popovkin, speaking in the city of Voronezh where the report was presented to Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, said two units of the Phobos-Ground probe's onboard computer system went into an energy-saving "restart" mode, apparently due to the radiation, while the craft was in its second orbital circuit.

It was not immediately clear why the units could not be brought out of that mode.

Popovkin said that some microchips used on the craft were imported and possibly of inadequate quality to resist radiation. He did not specify where the chips were manufactured.

Yuri Koptev, a former space agency head who led the Phobos-Ground investigation, said 62 percent of the microchips used in the probe were "industrial" class, a less-sophisticated level than should be used in space flight.

Popovkin said the craft's builder, Moscow-based NPO Lavochkin, should have taken into account the possibility of radiation interfering with the operation and said Lavochkin officials would face punishment for the oversight.

Popovkin later announced that a March 30 planned launch of three astronauts to the space station will be postponed "likely until the end of April" because of problems with the capsule. He did not specify, but the state news agency RIA Novosti cited the director of Russia's cosmonaut-training program as saying leaks had been found in the capsule's seals.

It would be the second significant postponement of a manned Russian launch in the past year. The August crash of the supply ship pushed back a manned launch to the ISS because the booster rocket that failed in the crash was similar to the ones used in manned missions.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/science/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120131/ap_on_sc/eu_russia_falling_spacecraft

twas the night before christmas norad santa epic beard man new york jets nfl standings giants vs jets ny jets

No podcasts tonight, see you Wednesday!

Sadly there will be no Apps and Accessories Live or ZEN and TECH tonight as Rene is delayed en route back from Macworld 2012 and Seth is, according to Rene,


Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheIphoneBlog/~3/musuturCnDI/story01.htm

wiccan pumpkin carvings mcrib pumpkin seeds mark herzlich malawi malawi

Newt Gingrich, bizarre space visionary

Newt Gingrich described himself as a visionary when he unveiled plans to create a mammoth new space programme, including a permanent colony on the moon within the next nine years. Within eight years, he pledges a new Mars rocket programme ? specifically, a "continually operating propulsion system capable of getting to Mars within a remarkably short time". He also reiterated his plan to declare at least part of the moon as US territory, with colonists capable of petitioning for statehood status.

There is little doubt that Gingrich believes in big ideas. Unfortunately, however, there is a difference between big ideas and good ideas. After all, being a visionary doesn't mean abandoning practicality altogether but rather harnessing it creatively to make new things happen.

Put aside that Gingrich was speaking in Florida, the state most invested in space exploration and, by happenstance, the next up on the Republican primary schedule. Let's consider cost first. The Apollo missions to the moon cost in excess of $100?billion in current dollars. In 2005, NASA administrator Michael Griffin estimated the cost of a programme to land four astronauts on the moonMovie Camera by 2018 (as was then planned), at $104 billion.

Who will pay?

Now, four astronauts is not a permanent colony on the moon. To have a permanent colony, you would have to manufacture housing, most likely underground, or at least under significant shielding, since there is no atmosphere and no magnetic field to shield against the harmful effects of cosmic rays for an extended period. Not to mention the need to build facilities for waste recycling, plus food storage and preparation. That is, unless we continually provide food and other provisions for pilgrims from Earth, creating a non-self-sustaining colony. But Gingrich has already made it quite clear, in his attacks on President Obama, that he would not like to be remembered for championing any such sort of government-sponsored food programme.

So, to truly embark on such an endeavour within a decade, we would have to spend somewhere between a few hundred billion and a trillion dollars. Whether we could develop the necessary technology for such a task within a decade is an open question, although for a sufficiently large investment, it might not be impossible. However, Gingrich is vying for leadership of a party whose major rallying cry is an end to big government programmes and make-work projects to stimulate the economy.

Gingrich might argue that we need not rely on government for the investment. However, without a clear business plan, it is hard to imagine private money investing $1?trillion in a programme with no clear commercial goal.

Yet he did not explain precisely what he wanted to do with such a colony, or what it might achieve, besides potentially populating a new 51st state. Certainly the goal would not be a scientific one, since there is little scientific gain to be made that would justify the cost, and one could populate the whole solar system with unmanned spacecraft that could explore all the planets and their moons for this cost, as well as send up satellites that could map the heavens on unprecedented scales.

Business inopportunity

So is manufacturing his goal? But what would we manufacture on the moon that we could not do on Earth for a fraction of the cost? It is true that there may be significant amounts of terrestrially rare isotopes like helium-3 in the lunar soil, and some have argued that this would be useful for fusion power here on Earth. But since we don't yet know how to produce fusion power on Earth, it seems a little premature to rush out on a trillion-dollar adventure to gather up potential fuel.

Perhaps we could put mirrors on the moon to beam sunlight to Earth for power. But given that currently 10,000 times the total energy used by humanity on a daily basis falls on the Earth from the sun, it is not clear that we need to go to the moon to harness more of it.

Gingrich also said during this same address that he envisions a vibrant commercial near-Earth space programme for the purposes of science, tourism and manufacturing. Once again, he didn't bother to explore precisely what sort of programme one might envisage here. It took more than $100 billion to manufacture a white elephant in near-Earth orbit called the International Space Station, a large, smelly metal can that to date has produced no science, no manufacturing and tourism that only billionaires could afford. Perhaps Gingrich imagines a vibrant Earth-surveying programme that might help monitor climate change? No, probably not.

Reality suspended

Not content to merely colonise the moon in a decade, Gingrich has also promised to develop a viable Mars programme to begin human space exploration of that planet within the next decade. It is hard to imagine why he didn't also promise an intergalactic starship in this timeframe as well, as long as he was being visionary.

Finally, Gingrich may not be aware that the current US flags on the moon don't mean the US owns it, any more than those on US research stations in Antarctica mean the US owns that continent.

But I suppose if one is willing to suspend reality to imagine creating an imaginary new expensive, and expansive, space programme from nothing in a mere decade, without raising the taxes to do it, anything is possible. It certainly seems easier to imagine populating the moon in this way than actually solving the very real problems we face on Earth today.

This article originally appeared in Slate. Lawrence Krauss is foundation professor and director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University in Tempe. His newest book is A Universe from Nothing: Why there is something rather than nothing

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Source: http://feeds.newscientist.com/c/749/f/10897/s/1c437adb/l/0L0Snewscientist0N0Carticle0Cdn2140A20Enewt0Egingrich0Ebizarre0Espace0Evisionary0Bhtml0DDCMP0FOTC0Erss0Gnsref0Fonline0Enews/story01.htm

nascar bcs standings 2011 rhodes scholarship rhodes scholarship ufc 139 results lee corso lee corso

Monday, January 30, 2012

Triple Town developer files lawsuit against alleged App Store copycat (Appolicious)

When it comes to the video game world, it?s nearly impossible to discuss a game without talking about all the other titles that came before it. Every game on the market, be it store shelves or the iTunes App Store, has built off the foundations of games that have come before, and that creates a tough spot for many game developers. At what point does a game stop building off another title?s ideas or being ?inspired? by another work, and start being theft of an idea?

The developer of Triple Town, Spry Fox, thinks it has some idea. According to a story from Eurogamer, Spry Fox has filed a lawsuit against another App Store developer, 6waves Lolapps, for copyright infringement. Spry Fox alleges that Lolapps? Yeti Town steals the basic idea of Triple Town, selling it with just a different coat of paint.

Both Triple Town and Yeti Town are built on an interesting hybrid of mixing the match-three genre, in which players try to get three objects of the same type together to score points (think Bejeweled) with city-building simulator games. In Triple Town, the game screen is divided into a grid and you score points by matching objects to build structures: match three bushes to make a tree, three trees to make a house, three houses to make a mansion and so on. You play until you fill all the grid squares on the screen and can?t make any more combinations.

Lots of similarities big and small

Yeti Town has all the same mechanics. Like Triple Town, you can earn coins over time which you can use to buy certain objects when you don?t have the time or space to make them, like a spare tree or bush. You also have yetis to contend with, which clog up your squares by moving around the game board and need to be eliminated. In Triple Town, you have bears, rather than yetis, which have to be defeated.

Spry Fox, which has also released Triple Town on Facebook, said in a blog post that it had worked closely with Lolapps during the development of Triple Town and had shared important aspects of the game with the other developer. It announced the lawsuit in the blog post as well. Spry Fox alleges that while Lolapps was working under a nondisclosure agreement to help develop Triple Town, it was also developing the copy of the game. The blog post points out a number of other smaller similarities between the games, like the user interface, language in the tutorials and even the prices of items in the in-game shops.

Venture Beat published a statement from 6waves Lolapps responding to the allegations, stating that the copyright claims are unjustified and ?factually inaccurate.?

Homage or copycat?

Copying can be seen as a rather big problem in the iTunes App Store, where many games seem to hew closer to established formulas of other titles than in other areas of video gaming. Last week, Zynga was bashed publicly by the three-man team that makes up NimbleBit, the developer of Apple?s 2011 iPhone Game of the Year, Tiny Tower. Zynga?s newly released Dream Heights carries pretty much the same concept and art style as Tiny Tower. Gameloft is often accused of making its own versions of popular games, like the Uncharted series, the Legend of Zelda series and the Grand Theft Auto series. And last year, indie developer Twisted Pixel accused Capcom of stealing the concept for its ?Splosion Man title on Xbox LIVE Arcade and turning it into the App Store title, MaXplosion.

Of course, plenty of games in the App Store as well as everywhere else in video games owe their underlying framework to titles like Doom, Quake or Super Mario Bros. But in the case of Triple Town and Yeti Town, it seems Spry Fox sees a lot more going on than just homage or inspiration. It will be interesting to see if the outcome of the Triple Town lawsuit affects the rest of the gaming industry and other possible copyright claims.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/videogames/*http%3A//us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/appolicious_rss/rss_appolicious_tc/http___www_appolicious_com_articles10909_triple_town_developer_files_lawsuit_against_alleged_app_store_copycat/44356079/SIG=13n9aebgs/*http%3A//www.appolicious.com/games/articles/10909-triple-town-developer-files-lawsuit-against-alleged-app-store-copycat

aids walk redskins oyster festival oyster festival hopkins hopkins the big year

For Those Who Can?t Let Go Of The Past: The Techmeme Re-Underliner

HeadlinesFixedRemember the old Techmeme of a week ago, before the new design took effect? Sure, the new design is easy on the eyes. But is it better? Personally, I'm already used to the new look, other than the sponsored posts stuck in your face in the new middle column (push those to the right, please, where ads belong). But some people just can't let go of the past?people like Eric Marcoullier (founder of OneTrueFan, Gnip, and MyBlogLog). Marcoullier hates the new design so much that he created a Chrome extension to revert it back to its old look.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/j_WJwnkLs20/

asexual jim carrey john edwards san francisco chronicle kourtney kardashian pregnant kourtney kardashian pregnant eli manning

Sunday, January 29, 2012

96% The Muppets

All Critics (170) | Top Critics (40) | Fresh (163) | Rotten (6)

It may not entirely work as a movie, but The Muppets shines as a piece of touching pop nostalgia.

The purity of the nostalgia turns this franchise film into a love letter to childhood.

You can rest easy - if you have previously loved the Muppets, you will likely currently love The Muppets.

The chorus of one of the songs declares, 'I've got everything that I need, right in front of me.' For 120 minutes, that's precisely how I felt.

[Filmmakers] hew close to the essential innocence informing the Muppets' silliness.

The Muppets is a triumph of simplicity, innocence and goofy jokes. It's a triumph of felt.

So genial, so joyous, and suffused with such a lip-smacking sweetness, that the occasional pacing issues and subplot hiccups simply don't seem to matter.

It's never cloying or too knowing. Cynicism and wariness are real world concerns that have no place among the foam and felt.

Brushing aside decades of nostalgia, this is a whip-smart postmodern romp with a warm heart to boot, and as such, it should please both life-long fans and new initiates to the Muppet universe.

invites viewers to become a bit like the dreamer Walter and, in (re)discovering and embracing their inner child (not to mention their inner muppet), to join a fantastic, funny family that never grows old, no matter how times may have changed.

The innocence is slightly twisted, the harmonious camaraderie is slightly corrosive and the characters are slightly eccentric

I smiled throughout this madcap joyous adventure in which the Muppets are funny, silly, colourful and totally endearing in what must be the happiest film of the New Year

MY inner child - the one who loved The Muppet Show, The Muppet Movie and The Great Muppet Caper - really wants to give this film five stars.

By focusing on the Muppets of The Muppet Show (1976-1981) rather than the independent Muppets of prior films, the writers open up an unexplored aspect of Muppet lore ripe for revival.

A nice throwback to the good old days of the Muppets.

Under James Bobin's direction, however, the outing feels cheap and strangely small-screen.

An altogether charming, smart and strangely moving little movie.

The Muppets may be one of the best films of the year, not judged as a children's film, or a family film, but instead, simply as a film.

The Muppets is really two movies. And one of those movies is quite good, albeit awfully similar to previous films.

Even balcony critics Waldorf and Statler would have a hard time faulting this Wonkaful delight.

I am a fan of The Muppets and I'm glad to see them making a comeback. Maybe if this movie is a hit, they'll make a sequel where they'll actually get to be the stars of their own film.

A good imitation of the Muppet style.

The Muppets is a celebration of all things Muppets -- filled with fun, laughter and moments of pure joy.

The Muppets heralds the return of Jim Henson's beloved furry creations, resurrected from pop-culture irrelevance and lovingly restored to their former greatness in a vibrant comedy-musical.

More Critic Reviews

Source: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_muppets/

ohare airport etta james songs east west shrine game haywire underworld awakening carlos pena dog the bounty hunter

99% A Separation

All Critics (87) | Top Critics (32) | Fresh (87) | Rotten (1) | DVD (2)

Asghar Farhadi's emotionally epic movie is not just a masterpiece dramatically, it is a movie dramatically of its moment.

It's small. It's real. And it's deeply moving.

This is a trenchant emotional thriller that you watch in dread, awe, and amazing aggravation.

Some films wear their artistry so lightly they appear simply to be happening, the inner workings of the story guided by an unseen hand.

The film involves its audience in an unusually direct way, because although we can see the logic of everyone's position, our emotions often disagree.

This is primarily a human story about a marriage unraveling, the husband torn between love for his daughter and devotion to his father, the daughter torn between one parent and the other.

Sometimes, in an attempt to do the best we can for the people we love, we end up wreaking irreparable damage.

[The film] puts us in the uncomfortable role of the adjudicator.

Culturally specific but universally relatable, this slowly escalating Iranian drama boasts incredibly impressive motivational clarity.

For all the stifled truths of its characters, Farhadi's film feels like a gust of brisk air.

...like being caught in a barbed-wire fence of ethical dilemmas.

Feels like a peek through a neighbor's window.

The progressively tedious atmosphere ultimately prevents the film's final scenes from making any real emotional impact...

Estabelece definitivamente Asghar Farhadi como um dos diretores mais consistentes e fascinantes do Cinema contempor?neo.

More Critic Reviews

Source: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_separation_2011/

harry potter and the half blood prince city of ember city of ember virgin diaries kevin smith kevin smith carlos mencia

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Explaining Modern Finance And Economics Using Booze And Broke ...

Courtesy of reszatonline, who brings us the following allegory by way of Tim Coldwell, we are happy to distill (no pun intended) all of modern economics and finance in a narrative that is 500 words long, and involved booze and broke alcoholics: in other words everyone should be able to understand the underlying message. And while the immediate application of this allegory is to explain events in Europe, it succeeds in capturing all the moving pieces of modern finance.

From reszatonline

Helga is the proprietor of a bar.

She realizes that virtually all of her customers are unemployed alcoholics and, as such, can no longer afford to patronize her bar.

To solve this problem, she comes up with a new marketing plan that allows her customers to drink now, but pay later.

Helga keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers? loans).

Word gets around about Helga?s ?drink now, pay later? marketing strategy and, as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Helga?s bar. Soon she has the largest sales volume for any bar in town.

By providing her customers freedom from immediate payment demands, Helga gets no resistance when, at regular intervals, she substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed beverages. Consequently, Helga?s gross sales volume increases massively.

A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes that these customer debts constitute valuable future assets and increases Helga?s borrowing limit.

He sees no reason for any undue concern, since he has the debts of the unemployed alcoholics as collateral!!!

At the bank?s corporate headquarters, expert traders figure a way to make huge commissions, and transform these customer loans into DRINKBONDS.These ?securities? then are bundled and traded on international securities markets.

Naive investors don?t really understand that the securities being sold to them as ?AA? ?Secured Bonds? really are debts of unemployed alcoholics.

Nevertheless, the bond prices continuously climb!!!, and the securities soon become the hottest-selling items for some of the nation?s leading brokerage houses.

One day, even though the bond prices still are climbing, a risk manager at the original local bank decides that the time has come to demand payment on the debts incurred by the drinkers at Helga?s bar.

He so informs Helga.

Helga then demands payment from her alcoholic patrons, but being unemployed alcoholics they cannot pay back their drinking debts.

Since Helga cannot fulfil her loan obligations she is forced into bankruptcy.

The bar closes and Helga?s 11 employees lose their jobs.

Overnight, DRINKBOND prices drop by 90%. The collapsed bond asset value destroys the bank?s liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans, thus freezing credit and economic activity in the community.

The suppliers of Helga?s bar had granted her generous payment extensions and had invested their firms? pension funds in the BOND securities. They find they are now faced with having to write off her bad debt and with losing over 90% of the presumed value of the bonds.

Her wine supplier also claims bankruptcy, closing the doors on a family business that had endured for three generations, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays off 150 workers. Fortunately though, the bank, the brokerage houses and their respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multibillion dollar no-strings attached cash infusion from the government.

The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new taxes levied on employed, middle-class, non-drinkers who have never been in Helga?s bar.

Your rating: None Average: 4.8 (32 votes)

Source: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/explaining-modern-finance-and-economics-using-booze-and-broke-alcoholics

heidi klum heidi klum red tails trailer joe pa dead seal laura dekker stephen colbert south carolina

Friday, January 27, 2012

Apollo 1: The Fire That Shocked NASA

The Apollo 1 Command Module after the fire that claimed the lives of Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee. Credit: NASA.

NASA?s Apollo program began with one of the worst disasters the organization has ever faced. A routine prelaunch test turned fatal when a fire ripped through the spacecraft?s crew cabin killing all three astronauts. Today marks the 45th anniversary of the Apollo 1 fire, a tragic and preventable accident. There were warning signs, similar accidents that had claimed lives both in the United States and abroad. The Apollo 1 crew could have been saved from a gruesome death.

Plugs Out

L-R: Roger Chaffee, Ed White, and Gus Grissom training for their Apollo 1 flight. Credit: NASA.

The commander for Apollo 1 was Gus Grissom, one of the original Mercury astronauts whose first spaceflight was marred by his capsule?s sinking after splashdown. He flew again in Gemini in a spacecraft he named ?Molly Brown.? Senior pilot on the Apollo 1 crew was Ed White, a Gemini veteran who made America?s first spacewalk in 1965. Rounding out the crew was pilot Roger Chaffee, a talented rookie more than capable of holding his own with his experienced crew mates. He was a notoriously good guy who took pains to thank everyone for their contributions to Apollo right down to the janitors.

By the end of January 1967, the crew was going through their final prelaunch tests; barring some major setback, they would make the first manned Apollo flight on February 21. One routine test NASA had done since Mercury was the ?plugs out? test, a final check of the spacecraft?s systems.

The spacecraft - Command Module 12 - arrives at the Kennedy Spaceflight Centre clearly destined for Apollo 1. Credit: NASA.

The spacecraft was fully assembled and stacked on top of its unfuelled Saturn IB launch vehicle on pad 34. The umbilical power cords that usually supplied power were removed ? the plugs were out ? and the spacecraft switched over to battery power. The cabin was pressurized with 16.7 pounds per square inch (psi) of 100 percent oxygen, a pressure slightly greater than one atmosphere. With everything just as it would be on February 21, the crew went through a full simulation of countdown and launch.

A full launch-day staff of engineers in mission control also went through the simulation. The White Room, the room through which the astronauts entered the spacecraft, remained pressed next to the vehicle. A crew of engineers monitored the spacecraft and were just feet away from the astronauts.

Cosmonaut Bondarenko. Credit: spacefacts.de

Grissom, White, and Chaffee suited up and entered the Apollo 1 command module at 1pm and hooked into the spacecraft?s oxygen and communications systems. For the next five and a half hours, the test proceeded with only minor interruptions. Grissom?s complaint of a smell like sour buttermilk in the oxygen circulating through his suit was resolved after a short hold, and a high oxygen flow through the astronauts suits tripped an alarm. But these were minor problems and didn?t raise any red flags in mission control.

The real problem was communication. Static made it impossible for the crew and mission control to hear one another. An increasingly frustrated Grissom began to question how they were expected to get to the Moon if they couldn?t talk between a few buildings.

The Apollo 1 official crew portrait. L-R: Ed White, Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee. Credit: NASA.

Just after 6:31 that evening, the routine test took a turn. Engineers in mission control saw an increase in oxygen flow and pressure inside the cabin. The telemetry was accompanied by a garbled transmission that sounded like ?fire.? The official record reflects the communications problem. The transmission was unclear, but the panic was obvious as an astronaut yelled something like ?they?re fighting a bad fire ? let?s get out. Open ?er up? or ?we?ve got a bad fire ? let?s get out. We?re burning up.? The static made it impossible to hear the exact words or even distinguish who was speaking.

But flames visible through the command module?s small porthole window left no doubt about what the crew had said. Engineers in the White Room tried to get the hatch open but couldn?t. It was an inward opening design, and neither engineers outside the spacecraft nor the astronauts inside were strong enough to force it open. The men in mission control watched helplessly as the scene played out on the live video feed.

The Apollo 1 crew in a less formal setting. L-R: Gus Grissom, Ed White, Roger Chaffee. Credit: NASA.

Just three seconds after the crew?s garbled report of a fire, the pressure inside the cabin became so great that the hull ruptured. Men wrestling with the hatch were thrown across the room as flames and smoke spilled into the White Room. Many continued to fight their way towards the spacecraft but were forced to retreat as the smoke grew too thick to see through. In mission control, the telemetry and voice communication from Apollo 1 went completely silent.

An hour and a half later, firemen and emergency personnel succeeded in removing the bodies; Ed White was turned around on his couch reaching for the hatch. Over the next two months, the spacecraft was disassembled piece by piece in an attempt to isolate the cause of the fire. The full investigation lasted a year.

The Apollo 1 crew floats around during water egress training. Credit: NASA.

The Apollo 1 accident review board determined that a wire over the piping from the urine collection system had arced. The fire started below the crew?s feet, so from their supine positions on their couches they wouldn?t have seen it in time to react. Everything in the cabin had been soaking in pure oxygen for hours, and flammable material near the wire caught fire immediately. From there, it took ten seconds for spacecraft to fill with flames.

The crew?s official cause of death was asphyxiation from smoke inhalation. Once their oxygen hoses were severed they began breathing in toxic gases. All three astronauts died in less than a minute. Many who had tried to save them were treated for smoke inhalation.

The Chamber of Silence

Astronaut Frank Borman's official Gemini era portrait. Borman was the astronaut's representative on the Apollo 1 accident review board. Credit: NASA.

The fire that claimed the lives of Grissom, White, and Chaffee is eerily similar to one that killed cosmonaut Valentin Bondarenko in 1961. Bondarenko was known to his colleagues as a congenial and giving man with great athletic prowess who worked tirelessly to prove he deserved the honour of flying in space.

Part of the cosmonauts? training was done in an isolation chamber designed to mimic the mental stresses spaceflight. The room, which the men called the Chamber of Silence, was spartan to say the least. It was furnished with a steel bed, a wooden table, a seat identical to what they would have in the Vostok capsule, minimal toilet facilities, an open-coil hot plate for warming meals, and a limited amount of water for washing and cooking. The chamber was pressurized to mimic the capsule?s environment in space. In this case, the oxygen concentration was 68 percent.

Ed White III touches his father's name on the Apollo 1 panel of the Space Mirror Memorial at the Kennedy Space Centre visitor complex. Credit: NASA.

During the test, cosmonauts would exercise mental agility with memory games using a wall chart with coloured squares. They would keep busy by reading or colouring ? subjects were supplied with some leisure material. The silence was frequently interrupted by classical music to see how the subjects reacted to a pleasurable shock. Aside from these distractions, sensory deprivation inside the chamber was absolute. The room was mounted on thick rubber shock absorbers that muffled any vibrations from movement outside, and the 16-inch thick walls absorbed any sound. The cosmonauts communicated with doctors by lights. A light told the subject to apply medical sensors to his body, and a light outside the chamber signaled to doctors that they could begin their tests. A different light would signal the end of the isolation test.

The environment was designed to challenge the cosmonauts? mental stability and adaptability. But the hardest part was that no subject knew beforehand how long his test would last. It could run anywhere from a few hours to weeks.

The Apollo 1 crew walks across the gantry before entering the spacecraft on January 27. Credit: NASA.

Bondarenko was the 17th cosmonaut to go into the Chamber of Silence and on March 23, his ten day test came to an end. A light signaled that technicians outside had started depressurizing the chamber to match the atmosphere outside. It was a routine part of the test, but this time it was interrupted by a fire alarm.

While he waited to leave the chamber, Bondarenko removed his biomedical sensors and wiped the adhesive off with rubbing alcohol on a cotton pad. In his haste to leave, and exhibiting the lack of concentration expected after ten days of mental testing, he didn?t look where he threw the pad. It landed on the hot plate?s coil. Cosmonaut Pavel Popovich theorized that he had been standing next to it at the time. Many subjects left the small heater on all the time to warm up the chilly room.

A dummy rides in a Vostok capsule seat. Credit: Associated Press.

A fire sparked and spread in an instant; everything, including Bondarenko, was saturated with a high concentration of oxygen. Technicians wrenched the door open and exposed the chamber to air, killing the fire instantly, but the damage was done. Doctors pulled a huddled and severely burnt Bondarenko from the room. ?It?s my fault,? he whispered when doctors reached him, ?I?m so sorry? no one else is to blame.? The severity of the fire was immediately obvious. Bondarenko?s wool clothes had melted onto his body and the skin underneath had burned away. His hair had caught fire. His eyes were swollen and melted shut.

In Moscow, surgeon and traumatologist Vladimir Julievich Golyakhovsky got a frantic call at his office; the severely burned patient was on his way. Ten minutes later, a team of men in military uniforms arrived carrying the blanket-wrapped cosmonaut. They were accompanied, Golyakhovsky later recalled, by an overwhelming smell of burnt flesh.

The damage to the Apollo 1 crew cabin, after the bodies were removed and before the disassembly began. Credit: NASA.

Bondarenko pleaded for something ?to kill the pain.? Golyakhovsky obliged and gave the patient a shot of morphine in the soles of his feet. It was the one unscathed part of his body thanks to his heavy boots, and the only place the doctor could find a vein. There was nothing he could do to save the man?s life. Bondarenko died the next morning. The official cause was shock and severe burns.

Lessons at Home

Parallels between the Apollo 1 crew?s and Bondarenko?s deaths are obvious, but how each space agency dealt with the deaths was very different. Grissom, White, and Chaffee were each given very public funerals in accordance with their respective military traditions. Bondarenko?s death was kept secret, his identity covered by a pseudonym. Not until 1986 did the world hear the true story of his death. This has bred speculation that had the Soviet system been more open, NASA would have know about the dangers of training in a pressurized pure oxygen environment and could have saved the Apollo 1 crew. Former cosmonaut Alexei Leonov even suggested that the CIA knew about Bondarenko since the US had pierced the Iron Curtain before the accident.

But this is unlikely. And besides, NASA wouldn?t need to look to the Soviet Union to know the dangers of testing in a pressurized oxygen environment. There were enough incidents in the US to make the danger very clear. Four oxygen fires in the five years before the Apollo 1 accident were proof enough.

The Apollo 1 spacecraft nearing the end of the disassembly. Sometime towards the end of March, 1967. Credit: NASA.

On September 9, 1962, a fire broke out in a simulated spacecraft cabin at Brooks Air Force Base. The cabin was pressurized to 5psi with pure oxygen. Both subjects were protected by pressure suits. Neither sustained burns, but both were treated for smoke inhalation.

Two months later on November 16, four men had been inside the US Navy?s Air Crew Equipment Laboratory for 17 days in an environment pressurized to 5psi of 100 percent oxygen when an exposed wire arced and started a fire. It spread rapidly over the men?s clothing and hands for 40 seconds before they were rescued. All were treated for severe burns, and this was the only instance in which the source of the fire was identified.

Two Navy divers were killed on February 16, 1965 in a test of the Navy?s Experimental Diving Unit, which was pressurized to 55.6psi to mimic conditions at a depth of 92 feet. It was a multi-gas environment: 28 percent oxygen, 36 percent nitrogen, and 36 percent helium. Somehow, the carbon dioxide scrubbers that were designed to remove the toxic gas from the air caught fire. Pressure inside the chamber rose making it impossible for technicians outside to open the door and remove the men.

Gus Grissom's funeral procession. Credit: NASA.

A 1966 oxygen environment fire came frighteningly close to anticipating the Apollo 1 accident. A fire broke out during an unmanned qualification test of the Apollo Environmental Control System on April 28. The cabin was pressurized to 5psi of 100 percent oxygen, just like the spacecraft would be in flight. The fire was blamed on a commercial grade strip heater inside the cabin and the incident was consequently dismissed. The commercial material would not be onboard any manned flights. The board that investigated the accident made no mention of the hazardous environment.

A Lack of Imagination

The Apollo 1 mission patch. Credit: NASA.

These accidents weren?t secret. NASA knew the dangers of a pressurized oxygen environment, which has prompted conspiracy theorists to suggest that the space agency intentionally put the Apollo 1 crew in danger. But this was hardly the case. In truth, no one at NASA gave much thought to a fire in the spacecraft.

In the early 1960s when Apollo was in its preliminary stages, a dual gas system (likely oxygen and nitrogen) was proposed for the crew cabin. This would have been safer in the event of fire, but more difficult overall. A mixed gas environment requires more piping and wiring, which in turn adds weight. Pure oxygen was simpler, lighter, and was already familiar to NASA. The dual-gas idea was scratched.

NASA did address the possibility of a fire in the spacecraft, but only developed procedures for an event in space when the nearest fire station was 180 miles away. Apollo, like Mercury and Gemini, had no specific fire fighting system on board. The 5psi of oxygen in space was considered too thin to feed a significant fire. Anything that could spark in that environment could be taken care of with a few well aimed blasts from the astronauts? water pistol.

Grissom's, White's, and Chaffee's death are the cover story of Life Magazine's February 10 issue. Credit: Life.

There was no procedure for a fire on the ground. With so many engineers on hand for every test, it was assumed that the astronauts would safe so long as fire extinguishers were nearby. But more importantly in the case of Apollo 1 is the plugs out test?s status: it wasn?t classified as dangerous.

Frank Borman, a Gemini veteran who would go to the Moon on Apollo 8, served as the astronaut?s representative to the Apollo 1 accident investigation board. He made this point about the plugs out test?s status abundantly clear. ?I don?t believe that any of us recognized that the test conditions for this test were hazardous,? he said on record. Without fuel in the launch vehicle and all the pyrotechnic bolts unarmed, no one imagined a fire could start let alone thrive. Borman himself hadn?t thought twice when he went through the plugs out test before his Gemini 7 mission. He was confident in NASA and its engineers and stated on record that he would have gone through the Apollo 1 test had he been on the crew.

The Apollo 1 crew expressed their concerns over the Apollo spacecraft in a joke crew portrait. They said a little prayer, and gave the picture to the manager of the Apollo Spacecraft Program Office Joe Shea in 1966. Credit: NASA.

Borman alluded to the Apollo 1 crew?s shared confidence. There had been problems with Apollo?w development, and every astronaut had the right to refuse to enter a spacecraft. ?Although there are sometimes romantic silk-scarf attitudes attributed to this type of business, in the final analysis we are professionals and will accept risk but not undue risks,? explained Borman. The Apollo 1 crew felt the dangers were minimal.

With that statement, Borman identified what he considered the crux of the problem and the real reason, however indirect, behind the death of the crew. ?We did not think,? he said, ?and this is a failing on my part and on everyone associated with us; we did not recognize the fact that we had the three essentials, an ignition source, extensive fuel and, of course, we knew we had oxygen.?

A plaque commemorating the Apollo 1 crew on what's left of launch pad 34. Credit: Christopher K. Davis (via Wikipedia).

Gus Grissom serendipitously wrote his memoirs during the Gemini program. He addresses the inherent risk of spaceflight in the book?s final passage. ?There will be risks, as there are in any experimental program, and sooner or later, inevitably, we?re going to run head-on into the law of averages and lose somebody. I hope this never happens? but if it does, I hope the American people won?t feel it?s too high a price to pay for our space program. None of us was ordered into manned spaceflight. We flew with the knowledge that if something really went wrong up there, there wasn?t the slightest hope of rescue. We could do it because we had complete confidence in the scientists and engineers who designed and built our spacecraft and operated our Mission Control Centre? Now for the moon.?

Though tragic, their deaths were not in vain. The substantial redesigns made to the Apollo command module after the fire yielded a safer and more capable spacecraft that played no small role in NASA reaching the moon before the end of the decade. It is a fitting tribute to the crew that the plaque on the pad where they perished reads ?ad astra per aspera? ? a rough road to the stars.

Suggested Reading:

- Official Apollo 1 site:?http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollo204/

- Colin Burgess and Rex Hall. The First Soviet Cosmonaut Team. 2009.

- Gus Grissom. Gemini. 1968.

- Apollo 204 Accident. Report of the Committee on Aeronautical and Space Science, United States. 1968. Available online:?http://klabs.org/richcontent/Reports/Failure_Reports/as-204/senate_956/index.htm

- Report of the Apollo 204 Review Board to the Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 1968. Available online:?http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollo204/content.html

- Hearings Before the Subcommittee on NASA Oversight of the Committee on Science and Astronautics. 1967.

Source: http://rss.sciam.com/click.phdo?i=0eace55ab634dec7f49ebc5b7e406a36

martin scorsese houston astros google music 2013 ford escape stop online piracy act spear of destiny rock hill sc

Parent of Obama-backed battery maker goes bankrupt (AP)

WASHINGTON ? The parent company of an electric car battery maker that received a $118 million grant from the Obama administration filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Thursday.

New York-based Ener1 said it has been affected by competition from China and other countries.

Ener1 subsidiary EnerDel received a $118 million stimulus grant from the Energy Department in 2009, and Vice President Joe Biden visited the company's new battery plant in Indiana last year.

Ener1 is the third company to seek bankruptcy protection after receiving assistance from the Energy Department under the economic stimulus law. California solar panel maker Solyndra Inc. and Beacon Power, a Massachusetts energy-storage firm, declared bankruptcy last year. Solyndra received a $528 million federal loan, while Beacon Power got a $43 million loan guarantee.

Solyndra, of Fremont, Calif., was the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan guarantee under the 2009 stimulus law, and the Obama administration frequently touted it as a model for its clean energy program.

Since then, the company's implosion and revelations that the administration hurried a review of the loan in time for a 2009 groundbreaking has become an embarrassment for President Barack Obama and a rallying cry for GOP critics of the administration's green energy program.

The chairman of a House subcommittee that is investigating Solyndra said the latest bankruptcy showed that the administration's clean energy program has failed.

"Unfortunately, you can now add Ener1 to the growing list of failed companies that went belly up after hundreds of millions of dollars in administration backing," said Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla.

"One bankruptcy may be a fluke, two could be coincidence, but three is a trend," Stearns said. "Our investigation continues, and we are working to ensure taxpayers are never again stuck paying hundreds of millions of dollars because of the administration's risky bets."

An Energy Department spokeswoman said EnerDel had received $55 million so far under a program in which EnerDel matches federal investment dollar-for-dollar. Ener1 said in a statement that the restructuring would not affect EnerDel's operations. The company makes lithium-ion batteries for electric cars such as the Chevrolet Volt.

"While it's unfortunate that Ener1, the parent company, has entered a restructuring process," a recent infusion of $80 million in private investment "demonstrates that the technology has merit," said Jen Stutsman, a spokeswoman for the Energy Department.

"The restructuring is not expected to impact EnerDel's operations and they do not expect to reduce employment at the site" near Indianapolis, Stutsman said.

___

Follow Matthew Daly on Twitter: (at)MatthewDalyWDC

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/obama/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120127/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_battery_maker

miami hurricanes football miami hurricanes football emmy winners emmy winners sportsbook sportsbook directions driving

OMG! Alaska Airlines discontinues controversial prayer cards

A collection of Alaska Airlines prayer cards, which will be discontinued on Feb. 1, 2012.

By Harriet Baskas, msnbc.com contributor

In a memo sent to its frequent fliers Wednesday, Alaska Airlines announced that the prayer cards it has been providing to passengers on meal trays for the past 30 years will be discontinued as of Feb. 1.

?A former marketing executive borrowed the idea from another airline and introduced the cards to our passengers in the late 1970s to differentiate our service,? the memo written by the company's chairman and president explained.

But airline spokesperson Bobbie Egan told msnbc.com that over the years the airline has received letters and e-mails from customers for and against the card. Last fall the company decided to stop distributing the cards because, Egan said, ?We believe it's the right thing to do in order to respect the diverse religious beliefs and cultural attitudes of all our customers and employees.?

Meal tray service in the coach class ended six years ago, so the prayer cards have been provided only to passengers in the first class cabin. MVP Gold flier Roz Schatman gets the cards on her meal tray quite often. ?In the spirit of diversity, I find them offensive,? she said.

Live Poll

Would you be offended by a prayer card?

The Alaska Airline statement said that while some passengers enjoyed the cards, reactions like Schatman?s were not unusual.

??[W]e've heard from many of you who believe religion is inappropriate on an airplane, and some are offended when we hand out the cards. Religious beliefs are deeply personal and sharing them with others is an individual choice.?

?It always seemed odd to me,? said George Hobica of the consumer travel website Airfarewatchdog.com. ?Flying on a wing and prayer? I don?t think those two go together.?

More stories:

Find more by Harriet Baskas on StuckatTheAirport.com and follow her on Twitter.

Source: http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/25/10236415-omg-alaska-airlines-discontinues-controversial-prayer-cards

current events current events nick lowe nazca lines boston marathon rogue trader rogue trader

Thursday, January 26, 2012

EU still sees chance for Israel-Palestinian talks (AP)

AMMAN, Jordan ? A low-level dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians is not at a dead end, the European Union's foreign policy chief said Thursday, hoping that contacts to get "real negotiations under way" will continue.

"I don't think there's an impasse," Ashton told reporters following talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the Jordanian capital.

Her remarks come a day after Abbas said informal talks between Israelis and Palestinians about the border of a future Palestinian state ended without any breakthrough.

"President Abbas is thinking carefully about how to move forward," Ashton said. Abbas has said he will consult on his next moves with the Arab League in a meeting planned for Feb. 4 in Cairo.

While frustrated with the lack of progress, Abbas is under pressure to extend the Jordan-hosted exploratory talks, which the international community hopes will lead to a resumption of long-stalled formal negotiations on establishing an independent Palestinian state.

The Arab League consultation stage could leave the door open to continue the low-level meetings.

A Palestinian walkout could cost Abbas international sympathy at a time when he seeks global recognition of a state of Palestine in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, territories Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war.

The border issue is at the heart of the current standoff. The Palestinians want Israel to halt construction in settlements in the territories they claim, along with an Israeli commitment to make the pre-1967 war lines the basis of a future agreement.

In Jerusalem, Israeli officials said they hoped Abbas would not end the talks. An official familiar with the negotiations said that during Wednesday night's meeting, the Israelis gave their "principles" for setting a border.

"We presented the Palestinian side the central points that determine our policy on dealing with the territorial issue," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was discussing sensitive negotiations.

He refused to elaborate on what was presented, or even to term it a proposal. He said the Palestinians had requested "clarifications on a number of issues," and Israel had also asked for clarifications on some Palestinian proposals presented so far.

The official said the Israelis believe it's "very important" to continue the newly resumed talks, with the goal of forging a comprehensive peace this year.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rules out a return to the pre-1967 war lines. He opposes any withdrawal from east Jerusalem and has signaled that he wants to retain an Israeli presence in key parts of the West Bank. Palestinians reject those positions.

Israel withdrew from Gaza, the other part of the state the Palestinians seek, in 2005.

After meeting with Abbas and Israelis in the past few days, Ashton said, "I still remain hopeful that with goodwill, they can continue to talk."

Under Jordanian mediation, Israeli and Palestinian envoys have met several times over the past month. The Quartet of international mediators ? the U.S., the U.N., the EU and Russia ? said last fall that it expected both sides to submit detailed proposals on borders and security arrangements in these meetings.

The Palestinians say that Thursday is a deadline for the proposals, while Israel says it is only in April. Ashton said the deadline was not "written in stone, but was there to give a sense of dynamic or momentum."

___

Josef Federman in Jerusalem contributed to this report.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/europe/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20120126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

arkham city conjugated linoleic acid world series schedule pat buchanan susan sarandon susan sarandon tampa weather

Location-Based Shopping App Shopkick Now 3 Million Users Strong; 1B Deals Viewed

shopkickShopkick, an innovative geo-coupon system that is backed by Kleiner Perkins, Greylock, SV Angel and others, is debuting a number of momentum numbers today. The startup's service now has 3 million active users, up from 2.3 million active users in September. Here's how Shopkicks works. Instead of checking in, as you would with a geo app like Foursquare, Shopkick automatically recognizes when someone with the free Android or iPhone app on their phone walks into a store. Once a Shopkick Signal is detected, the app delivers reward points called ?kickbucks? to the user for walking into a retail store, trying on clothes, scanning a barcode and other actions.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/iSGBczEFQxI/

fast times at ridgemont high andrea bocelli john hughes panasonic lumix dmc lx5 ucla football taylor momsen deliverance

Google's 4Q lobbying bill triples to $3.76 million

(AP) ? Google's U.S. lobbying bill more than tripled to $3.76 million in the fourth quarter as the Internet search leader fought proposed changes to online piracy laws and sought to influence a wide range of other issues that could affect its fortunes.

The amount that Google Inc. spent making its political points from October through December is by far the company's highest lobbying tab for any three-month period since Google's Washington office opened in 2005. The total compared with a lobbying budget of $1.24 million during the final three months of 2010 and $2.38 million in the third quarter of 2011.

For all of 2011, Google spent $9.7 million on political persuasion, nearly doubling from $5.2 million in 2010.

The company disclosed its fourth-quarter lobbying figures in documents filed late Friday with the U.S. House clerk's office.

Google's lobbying expenses have been rising steadily against a backdrop of intensified U.S. government scrutiny of the company's acquisitions and business practices. The focus has been prompted by complaints alleging that Google is abusing its dominance of the lucrative Internet search market to stifle competition and muscle its way into other markets.

As a foil, Google last summer hired a dozen lobbing firms to supplement the team that it already employed in its Washington office. The bills coming in from those firms contributed to the sharp rise in Google's fourth-quarter lobbying expenses, according to the company.

Google's emphasis on lobbying mirrors what Microsoft Corp. did during the late 1990s while the U.S. Justice Department pursued an antitrust case asserting the software marker had unfairly bundled its dominant Windows operating system with key personal-computer applications. Microsoft eventually thwarted the government's attempt to break up the company, but not before years of legal wrangling that included a high-profile trial.

With that case behind it, Microsoft now spends far less on lobbying than Google. In the fourth quarter, Google's lobbying expenses doubled Microsoft's $1.88 million bill. For all of 2011, Microsoft's lobbying tab totaled $7.3 million.

Google's fourth-quarter lobbying agenda included a proposed antipiracy law, which inspired an Internet protest last week. While some popular websites such as Wikipedia went dark for 24 hours, Google stamped out its colorful logo to signal its objection to proposed changes to online piracy laws. The company says the changes would result in censorship and discourage Internet innovation. More than 7 million people signed a protest petition posted by Google.

Movie and music studio backed the changes ? dubbed the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA ? as a more effective way to prevent rampant theft of their copyrighted material. Lawmakers postponed the legislation following the online protests.

Google's fourth-quarter lobbying push addressed online advertising, which accounts for most of the company's $38 billion in annual revenue.

Other topics covered by Google's lobbyists included: online security; personal privacy on the Internet; renewable energy; international tax reform; the treatment of corporate earnings outside the U.S.; the availability of wireless Internet access; free speech; and free-trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama.

Besides Congress, agencies that Google lobbied in the fourth quarter included: the Federal Trade Commission, the White House; the Federal Communications Commission, the Commerce Department and the U.S. Trade Representative.

The outside firms working for Google are: Akin, Gump; Bingham; Capitol Legislative Strategies; Chesapeake Group; Crossroads Strategies; Gephardt Group; Holland & Knight; Normandy Group; Prime Policy; The First Group; The Madison Group; and the Raben Group.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/495d344a0d10421e9baa8ee77029cfbd/Article_2012-01-23-Google%20Lobbying/id-8f2f0367bd1b4f1d994b4d4dfc28604d

giants game norman borlaug rick santorum santorum atlanta falcons new hampshire debate brandon jacobs

Monday, January 23, 2012