search results matching tag: J Ro
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (161) | Sift Talk (4) | Blogs (7) | Comments (223) |
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (161) | Sift Talk (4) | Blogs (7) | Comments (223) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Avatar on our planet -- The Plant Light
siftbotTags for this video have been changed from 'aura, victor kolbig, bioluminescense, plant light' to 'aura, victor kolbig, bioluminescense, plant light, Sigur Ros' - edited by ctrlaltbleach
Skyrim: 300 (Battle of Thermopylae)
PaybackKept waiting for Leonidas to yell "Madness??? THIS. IS. FUS-RO-DAHHHHHH!!!!"
Challenges of Getting to Mars
dagComment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)
Yep, that's what I'm suggesting. Though I guess by the way you've framed your questions you think I'm insane. The success rate of the balloon method is not bad. And getting two rovers down from a single launch is also something that's been successful. I don't think it's that unreasonable to consider that two rovers like Spirit and Opportunity could carry complementary gear, meet up and connect.
You're right that we don't send landers to Mars very often - that's why it's important to build on successful technologies with a proven track record of success to maximise our chances.
Thanks for the link - I've reviewed a lot of this stuff too though I appreciate more information even if it is delivered with a heavy dose of condescension.
Egos and personalities involved in science? Why would I ever think that - everything we do or say or write comes from a completely rational base right?
>> ^Fletch:
@dag
Are humans supposed to bounce across the surface in a balloon when/if we ever send a manned mission? Do you think that success or failure of this landing precludes learning anything from it? We don't get to send landers to Mars very often, so the opportunity for testing new procedures and techniques has to be taken when it can. Every little thing is done for a reason. If you think it's the result of "personalities and nerd egos", there are hundreds of books, TV specials, and documentaries out there that detail just about everything NASA has ever done, from inception to success or failure, as well as the people and personalities involved, that I think will change your mind. Here's a good place to start. Great book.
Assuming you are serious...
The success rate of Mars missions is not good. On top of that are budget and launch window considerations. Are you really suggesting that TWO separate pieces be launched, have them both fly 150 million miles to Mars, enter orbit, BOTH successfully land (and land close enough they can find each other), find each other, and then connect somehow to make one rover just so they can use ballons? Really? Talk about complicated... It would take an incredibly huge nerd ego to even ATTEMPT to sell that idea. Even a single launch with two pieces on board would rely on the success of two completely separate and complicated landings and a meet-up before the rover mission could even begin. This also means the weight of each half of the rover would have to be reduced so two separate landing systems can be included. Less room for instruments. Less science. Anyhoo, this system is not so different from the previous rovers. They weren't just dropped from a parachute. The atmosphere is too thin for a parachute alone. RAD (rocket assisted descent) motors brought the rovers to a near dead stop about 50 feet above the surface and they were released. This landing also calls for more precision, as the landing zone is much more specific.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson - A New Perspective
siftbotTags for this video have been changed from 'Neil DeGrasse Tyson, we stopped dreaming, NASA, space, earth, Penny4NASA' to 'Neil DeGrasse Tyson, we stopped dreaming, NASA, space, earth, Penny4NASA, sigur ros' - edited by hpqp
Skyrim Theme (A cappella with one voice) - This is SO good!!
legacy0100No "Fus-Ro-Dah!"? Aww c'mon!
Gaming Meme 101: FUS RO DAH
xxovercastxxI think "Historical Document" might be a bit lofty for Fus Ro Dah.
*nochannel *videogames *comedy *geek *animation *meme
Fus Ro Dah Accident!
oritteropohttp://www.tubechop.com/watch/289149
>> ^taranimator:
Oh, to be able to snip this sucker down to just 0:38 - 1:30 -- awesome!!
Shit Gamers Say To Their Girlfriends
conan says...Fus Ro Da!
This Will Destroy You - Burial on the Presidio Banks (live)
ctrlaltbleachreminds me a lot of Sigur Ros
Skyrim Girl Practices her Dragon Shout
Jinx says...I thought this was gonna be another Fus Ro Dah dub. It was better than that.
Blowing Out A Candle Can Be Adorable
Asmo says...FUS RO DAH...
FUS RO DAH..?
FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH! FUS RO DAH!
FUS RO DAH!!!! (LA LA LAAAAAAAAH LA LA LAAAAAH, LALALALAAAAAAH!)
What sound does a new-born deer make? (You're Wrong!)
PaybackFUS-RO-D'aaawww.
Johnny Headband's video for Over There
siftbotThe thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by geo321.
calvados
(Member Profile)
oritteropoThanks for the
*promotefus ro *DAHI'll check out your recommendation after work (it's blocked here, and I think it would look bad if I exempted myself from that
).In reply to this comment by calvados:
fus ro *DAH
Fus Ro Dah! Cat
sadiciousI found the slow time shout to be too useful when I was focusing on Destruction spells. Fun to kill a dragon mid-flight
Unrelenting Force (Fus-Ro-Dah) seems pointless once you get a few better shouts. It is still fun to punch a few guys off a ledge. I'm glad the fall-damage gets deadly quickly. Something about being thrown 30ft + 10ft fall and landing on your skull seems like it should be deadly.