Showing posts with label Despite. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Despite. Show all posts

Sunday, 15 January 2012

No Shoot-Down Despite Incoming Satellite's Toxic Fuel

Russia’s failed Mars probe is due to fall to Earth on Sunday or Monday. The spacecraft, stranded after a botched launch on Nov. 8, has more than 10 tons of toxic rocket fuel aboard. The fuel is expected to incinerate during the plunge through the atmosphere, eliminating the need for a missile intercept.

When a botched launch stranded a U.S. spy satellite close to Earth four years ago, the military took action.

Concerned that the satellite's rocket fuel could pose a contamination risk if the uncontrollable spacecraft re-entered the atmosphere over populated areas, the Pentagon ordered the Navy to shoot down the crippled bird so any debris would land harmlessly in the ocean.

The operation was successful and the threat from 100 pounds of rocket fuel averted.

NEWS: Shooting Down a Satellite: All in the Timing

On Sunday, Russia's failed Phobos-Grunt Mars probe, which carries more than 10 tons of propellant, is expected to plunge back to Earth, though experts say this time the fuel, despite its great mass, isn't as much of a concern.

Russia says the spacecraft, which was designed to return soil samples from the Martian moon Phobos, has fuel tanks made of aluminum, which will not survive the fiery plunge through the atmosphere. Phobos-Grunt ("grunt" is Russian for "soil") was left uselessly orbiting Earth after an upper-stage engine failed to fire following launch Nov. 8.

The military won't comment about its hardware, but experts believe the spy satellite's tank was made of stronger, more heat-resistant metals.

"Some say it was titanium, though I think that's a heck of an investment in a tank," Michael Simpson, director of the Secure World Foundation in Colorado, told Discovery News.

"Anyway, there was the belief that the tank was less vulnerable (to heat)," he said. "It wouldn't be surprising to me at all if it was more robust than simply aluminum -- the military does tend to over-engineer."

The United States' decision to shoot down its satellite raised questions about whether the real motive was to test an anti-satellite weapons system. A year earlier, China fired a ballistic missile to destroy one of its defunct weather satellites, generating a gigantic field of orbiting debris and earning widespread condemnation for its act.

NEWS: Satellite Battleground in Space?

"Right now, the Russian Federation and the U.S. are at loggerheads over the United States' deployment of a ballistic missile shield in Europe. And back when the U.S. intercepted its crippled spy satellite, it used a sea-based component of that ballistic missile system to actually perform the intercept. It did so very nicely on the first try," Michael Listner, a New Hampshire-based attorney specializing in international space law and policy, told Discovery News.

"I think it would put the Russian Federation in a very uncomfortable position in terms of the negotiations of our missile defense system in Europe, by asking us to use it to help intercept one of their satellites," he said.

"The United States can't just unilaterally say 'We're going to shoot it down.' That would violate international law, big time. Then the Russian Federation would have a very legitimate gripe if we did that," Listner said.

As of Friday, the 14-ton Phobos-Grunt was projected to re-enter the atmosphere over the Atlantic Ocean, east of South America, on Sunday or Monday. Some fragments are expected to survive re-entry, though with 73 percent of the planet covered by water and vast regions of land uninhabited, the chance any debris will fall on populated areas is very slim.

"The odds that this is going to be a threat to anyone is extremely remote, but when things fall out of the sky it makes people nervous," Simpson said.


View the original article here

Wednesday, 7 December 2011

Despite the Gray Hair, Presidents Live Longer

Obamablog
(President Barack Obama with his daughter Sasha at the 2011 National Christmas Tree lighting; Credit: Getty Images)

Speculation has long existed that U.S. presidents age at twice the normal rate, with many tabloid stories fixating on President Obama's every new wrinkle, gray hair and weight change. But a new study finds just the opposite: Most U.S. presidents live longer than predicted for men of their same age and era.

The study, published in JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to fruition when University of Illinois at Chicago demographer S. Jay Olshansky, noticed a flurry of news reports in the summer of 2011, when President Obama celebrated the big 5-0 birthday. The president still looks in shape to me, but a lot of reporters then commented that he was aging quickly. Some have even done then-and-now photo comparisons to prove their point.

PHOTOS: LESSER-KNOWN PRESIDENTIAL KEEPSAKES

"In the world of biology we know that you can't actually measure the aging of an individual," Olshansky, a professor of epidemiology at the UIC School of Public Health, was quoted as saying in a press release. "There isn't any single test to actually measure how long you've aged from point A to point B, nor is it possible to predict specifically how long an individual will live."

Using the assumption that presidents age at twice the normal rate, Olshansky calculated how long U.S. presidents would have been expected to live based on their age and the year they were inaugurated, and compared it to how long they actually lived.

Aging at twice the normal rate was estimated by removing two days of life for every day in office. For example, a 4-year term led to a reduction in estimated remaining lifespan of 8 years.

Olshansky determined that 23 of the 34 U.S. presidents who died from natural causes lived longer, and in many instances significantly longer, than predicted. Their average age at inauguration was 55.1 years.

Four presidents who were assassinated were removed from the analysis.

PHOTOS: UNPRESIDENTIAL MOMENTS IN HISTORY

Consider that the average lifespan of the first eight presidents was 79.8 years, during a time when life expectancy at birth for men was less than 40.

"This is about how long females born in the U.S. today live," Olshansky said.

The study also found that living ex-presidents have either already exceeded their predicted longevity at the time of their inauguration, or are likely to do so.

"We know that socioeconomic status has an extremely powerful effect on longevity now," Olshansky said, "and it was likely to have been a factor in the past." All but 10 U.S. presidents were college educated. All were wealthy, and all had access to health care.

"We don’t die from gray hair and wrinkled skin," concluded Olshansky. "What we're seeing in President Obama is really not inconsistent with what we see for any other man his age in the U.S. or elsewhere."





View the original article here