Thursday, July 16, 2009

Apollo 11 at 40...!!

July 16, 1969: The world watched in anticipation as three men were hurtled skyward in a rocket bound for the moon.

The Apollo 11 launch date had arrived with just months to spare: Nine years earlier, U.S. President John F. Kennedy had said that by the end of the decade the country would put a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth.

The successful Apollo 11 moon landing on July 20, 1969, ushered in an era of moon exploration that has so far gone unrivaled.

(Read about the Apollo 11 moon-landing mission in a 1969 National Geographic magazine article.)

Moon Race

President Kennedy's moon mandate came at the height of the space race—a kind of subplot to the Cold War between the United States and what was then the Soviet Union.

The U.S.S.R. had made the opening gambit, sending the first artificial satellites into orbit, starting with the 184-pound (83.5-kilogram) Sputnik I in October 1957.

The Soviets followed that success a month later with the first animal in space, Laika the dog, which did not survive the experience. (See pictures of monkeys and other primates sent into space.)

Things came to a head in April 1961, when the Soviets sent the first human to space. Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin made a 108-minute suborbital flight in a Vostok 1 spacecraft and returned safely to Earth.

A month later Alan Shepherd became the first American in space with his suborbital flight aboard the Freedom 7 spacecraft.

From there the two countries started upping the ante by increasing the number of orbits per flight. Meanwhile Kennedy's moon directive had signaled a change in tactics for the U.S.

Swallowed by Moondust?

At first a moon-landing mission probably raised a lot of eyebrows at NASA—particularly among the astronaut candidates.

"Atlas rockets [which launched spacecraft] were blowing up every day at Cape Canaveral" in Florida, recalled Apollo 13 astronaut Jim Lovell in the 2007 documentary In the Shadow of the Moon.

"It looked like a … quick way to have a short career."

But Kennedy's idea "didn't just come out of the blue," Apollo 11 astronaut Edwin Eugene "Buzz" Aldrin told National Geographic News.

"People had been studying what could be done—the Air Force in particular—in a far-reaching manner, like sending cargo to the moon."

At that point, though, scientists still had a lot to learn about what humans and their gear might contend with on the lunar surface.

Geologists didn't know, for example, whether volcanism or meteor impacts were responsible for the moon's pockmarked surface. (Current wisdom says meteors.)

Many scientists also feared that the moon was covered with a thick blanket of featherweight dust that would engulf any landing spacecraft.

(Explore a moon time line.)

Moon Landing Practice

Shortly after Kennedy's speech, an intensive effort got under way to prepare humans for a moon landing.

In January 1963 Neil Armstrong and four other Apollo astronauts took a field trip to Arizona's Meteor Crater and Sunset Crater, a dormant volcano. Geologists then briefed the astronauts on how those Earthly landscapes were similar to what they might encounter on the moon.

In the years that followed, Apollo crew also toured the Grand Canyon and spent time testing lunar rovers at Bonito Crater northeast of Flagstaff, where the rough, rocky surface mimicked what some geologists thought would exist on the moon.

Geologists flew over Sunset Crater and other landforms in Cessna 182s, taking aerial photos so the astronauts might better understand the lunar geology they were likely to see.

(See milestones in space photography.)

Apollo Moon Program: Tragedy and Triumph

The Apollo moon-landing program carried an optimistic moniker: It was named for the son of Zeus in Greek mythology, often known as the god of light and the sun.

But the first mission almost brought U.S. moon-landing efforts to an abrupt end.

On January 27, 1967, a flash fire occurred in the Apollo 1 command module during a launch simulation, killing the three astronauts meant to pilot the mission.

"I wasn't sure if we were burying the entire Apollo program or three of our buddies," Apollo astronaut Gene Cernan said in In the Shadow of the Moon.

Following an exhaustive investigation into the accident, NASA issued a report in April 1967 that called for major overhauls of the Apollo hardware, launch procedures, and quality control.

The program swung back into gear, and by early 1969, Apollo 10 astronauts Alan Shepard and Donald "Deke" Slayton were cruising over the lunar surface—and grudgingly holding back from diving down for a landing—as they scoped out the Sea of Tranquility, the chosen landing spot for Apollo 11.

(Explore an interactive moon map, and read about the first person to map the moon using a telescope. Hint: It wasn't Galileo.)

A few months later, Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins set off toward the moon.

Moonwalkers

Launched from Florida's Kennedy Space Center at 9:32 a.m. ET aboard a Saturn V rocket, Apollo 11 included a command module dubbed Columbia and a lunar lander called the Eagle.

The lander was named after the bald eagle in the mission insignia.

Apollo 11's journey to the moon took three and a half days.

During that time the astronauts "just kind of gazed out the window at the Earth getting smaller and smaller, did housekeeping things, checking the spacecraft," Aldrin recalled.

As the craft passed through the shadow of the moon and started its approach, Aldrin and Armstrong got into the spider-like lunar module and began their descent.

The landing process didn't go flawlessly. Alarms sounded when the computer couldn't keep up with the data stream: "Nothing serious—it was distracting," Aldrin said.

"Neil didn't like what we were heading toward, and we selected a safer spot alongside a crater with boulders in it. We landed with a little less fuel than we would have liked to have had, maybe 20 seconds of fuel left."

Aldrin insists that he felt no real fear about landing on the moon.

Nevertheless, he said, "we kind of practiced liftoff [for] the first two hours. … We both felt that was the most prudent thing to do after touching down, was to prepare to depart if we had to."

Finally, with half a billion people watching on televisions across the world, the astronauts emerged from the Eagle to spend another two hours exploring the lunar surface.

The pair planted an American flag and placed mementos for fallen peers.

Armstrong uttered his famous first words, reportedly unscripted: "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."

Armstrong and Aldrin logged 21 hours on the moon—spending the last and longest portion of it trying to sleep in the frigid lander. Then they lifted off to rendezvous with Collins and Columbia for the return voyage.

The crew splashed down in the Pacific Ocean on July 24, 1969—and they were immediately put into a three-week quarantine.

As for their craft, the ascent stage of the Eagle was jettisoned into lunar orbit. Within a couple of years the lander smashed unseen into the moon. Columbia now sits on display at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C.

To Infinity, and Beyond

After 40 years, Aldrin's impressions of the moon are as fresh today as the day he landed.

"What fascinated me was the lifelessness off it," he said. "That had not changed in hundreds of thousands of years. Generations of humanity had emerged from the trees, and the moon had looked the same way."

Aldrin also remains passionate about what the Apollo 11 mission meant for the world, and what it can still teach humanity.

Today he advocates the U.S. setting its sights higher than it did 40 years ago, "accepting the role of leading other nations to achieve what we did."

"We do have this wonderful opportunity to emerge from whatever troubles us now," he said, "with a very optimistic pathway for the future."

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Android google voice-ur new google phone company..!!

Can Google be your phone company? The answer is yes. I came to that conclusion after I met with Vincent Paquet, co-founder of GrandCentral (a company acquired by Google) and now a member of the Google Voice team. Earlier today he stopped by our office to show the mobile app versions of its Google Voice service for Blackberry and Android. Google recently announced that it was going to make the Voice service widely available to users in the U.S. soon.

These mobile versions of the Google Voice service will allow folks to not only manage their Google Voice connections –- to access and playback voice mails, send and receives SMS messages and read message transcripts — but also make local and long distance calls from mobile phones. The apps are fully integrated with each phone’s contacts, so you can call via Google Voice straight from your address book. This is how it works:

androidgooglevoiceThe mobile app for Google Voice uses the regular PSTN connection to place a call to Google Voice, which then places a call out to the person you need to reach. Since these calls (and SMS messages) originate from your Google Voice, they display your Google Voice number for the recipients. The service needs a data connection but it isn’t necessary to have a Wi-Fi connection to place and receive calls. The wireless number you buy from the cell phone company becomes less relevant.

The Google Voice app essentially reduces the cell phone carrier to a dumb pipe. While the BlackBerry application is interesting, it’s the Android application that shows that Google has bigger designs. I have been playing around with the Android App for about an hour or so and I can see the broader implications. When I was setting up the app, one of the options I was given: to make all calls through Google Voice. And that’s when I thought to myself: Oh! OH!

The app is so tightly enmeshed with Android OS and the address book and other apps, you hardly think that you’re using Google Voice. If Google bundles the Google Voice app with Android and sells it to makers of cheaper feature phones, it can start to insert itself between the consumers and wireless companies.

This “man in the middle” position is Google’s strength. The company has inserted itself between consumers and information via its search offering and profited handsomely from it. Why can’t it do the same with this voice offering? There is anecdotal evidence that some consumers might actually be happy paying for their mobile service by listening to advertisements.

To be sure, Google Voice isn’t the first such service. Truphone and a handful of other startups offer similar services, but Google’s sheer size is what makes this a pretty interesting move. They also have a mobile OS and connections with handset makers such as HTC to get serious traction. In this summer of a lot of hot air from Google — Google Wave and Google Chrome OS, for example — this is the first interesting product with larger implications. Suddenly the idea of Google as my phone company doesn’t sound so preposterous.

about Microsoft Azure..

Microsoft today unveiled pricing details for its Azure services platform — possibly because customers were reluctant to build an application on the beta platform without knowing what it may one day cost them. The platform is Microsoft’s leap into the clouds, and it’s an impressive first step, at least on paper, complete with competitive pricing and lots of concessions designed to get enterprise customers to shift over their IT operations. It also has the potential to become a platform as a service, which would enable far greater levels of control than current platforms, such as those offered by Google; or those tied to applications like Force.com, which allow programmers to build more apps that connect with Salesforce.com; or Quickbase, which does the same for users of Intuit’s software.

What It Is:

  • Windows Azure is a cloud operating system on which developers can build using .NET, Java, Ruby on Rails, Python and other languages. Doug Hauger, Windows Azure GM, said that in the future Microsoft will offer an admin model that will allow developers access to the virtual machine, although they will not have to manually allocate hardware resources as they might with a traditional infrastructure-as-a-service offering such as Amazon’s EC2.
  • SQL Azure is Microsoft’s relational database in the cloud.
  • .NET Services is Microsoft’s platform as a service built on the Azure OS.

What It Costs:

  • There are three pricing models: consumption-based, whereby a customer pays for what they use; subscription-based, with discounts for those committing to six months of use; and as of next July, volume licensing for enterprise customers that want to take existing Microsoft licenses into the cloud.
  • Azure compute is 12 cents per service hour (half a cent less than Amazon’s Windows-based cloud).
  • Azure’s storage service costs 15 cents per GB of data per month, with an additional penny for every 10,000 transactions, which are the movements of data within the stored material.
  • .NET Services platform costs 15 cents for every 100,000 times the applications built on .Net Services accesses a tool or chunk of code.
  • Moving data costs 10 cents per GB of inbound data and 15 cents per GB of outbound data.
  • SQL Azure is $9.99 for up to a 1 GB relational database, and $99.99 for up to a 10 GB relational database.

What It Means for Microsoft and Cloud Computing:

Much of the analysis so far has accused Microsoft Azure as being a late entrant to the cloud computing and platform-as-a-service party. They’re right, but Microsoft is still ahead of many enterprises that it hopes to attract as customers, which have done little more than eye the cloud with suspicion. So it may be late, but don’t discount Redmond’s efforts just yet. Microsoft seems to be willing to play with other programming languages and embrace heterogeneous environments in Azure, likely because no enterprise data center runs solely on Microsoft software. The Azure platform also has a service-level agreement that offers 99.9 percent uptime on the storage side, and 99.95 percent uptime on the compute side.

In addition to validating cloud computing in the enterprise and offering enterprises a familiar face in the clouds, Microsoft Azure has a dark side (maybe it’s navy?) in that it will reduce the software company’s profits (though it may, at the same time, generate additional revenue. However, Microsoft knows this, and so far has warned investors about what the cloud stands to do to Microsoft’s earnings. It will mitigate some of the margin loss if it can operate its cloud as efficiently as possible. It’s already researching ways to do so, including using low-power chips that Intel designs for netbooks in its servers to save on electricity costs.

The nature of corporate computing is changing thanks to virtualization, faster networking and performance boosts from multicore processors. Microsoft cannot afford to ignore these shifts, especially as its customers start to realize the power of cloud computing. It may be behind Amazon and other players, but there’s plenty of room for an open platform that’s aimed at enterprises. But Microsoft will have to try to improve its reliability, and I’m still unclear as to how nicely it will play with companies that want to build management platforms and other tools for customers who want a view inside the Azure cloud. But so far, the details around Azure make it a contender.

4 way galaxy collision...!!


A blue ridge of glowing gas seems to cut through the heart of the galaxy group known as Stephan's Quintet in a newly released picture from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory.

Discovered in 1877, Stephan's Quintet is really a quartet: Only four of the galaxies (above in a visual-light image by the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope) lie close together about 280 million light-years away.

Astronomers now know that the large spiral galaxy seen at bottom left is actually a foreground object a mere 35 million light-years from Earth.

The blue ridge, revealed by Chandra's x-ray vision, is likely the result of a shockwave created as one galaxy—the centermost object in the above picture—plows past the other three at nearly 2 million miles (3.2 million kilometers) an hour.

Further studies of this group, including more detailed images like the new Chandra picture, can provide astronomers with a better understanding of galaxy evolution.

That's because galactic smashups result in alterations such as explosions of star birth, galaxy growth via mergers, and changes in shape. (Related: "Earth Likely to Relocate in Galactic Collision.")

Gravity's pull in the colliding quartet, for example, is stripping the galaxies of their cool star-forming gases, so that astronomers think in a few billion years the group's spiral-armed galaxies will become ellipses.

new cosmic object in the universe..!!..

Merging galaxies that forcefully eject supermassive black holes have theoretically created a whole new class of astronomical object—and now scientists think they know how to find them. Black holes that get kicked out should carry with them clusters of nearby stars, a new study says.

These stars can act as signposts and can reveal details about the now galaxy-less black hole's past life.

In theory, hundreds of massive black holes left over from the age of galaxy formation could be lurking in the nearby universe.

"Every such black hole that's ever been kicked out is still potentially observable, and that's very encouraging," said lead study author David Merritt of the Rochester Institute of Technology.

"It's not quite what anybody has seen so far," he said. "We're just talking about what they would look like if you were to find them."

Observations made with the Hubble Space Telescope and re-examined with ground telescopes have come close, Merritt said.

"People are now just starting to make the kind of observations to see these kinds of things, if they are there."

Powerful Kick

Most galaxies are thought to harbor black holes at their centers that are millions to billions of times the mass of our sun.

When galaxies merge, their respective supermassive black holes start to coalesce in a process that creates a spurt of gravitational waves.

If the waves are strong enough, the kick they provide should drive the newly merged black hole outside the host galaxy, simulations from the past few years suggest


That kick would also leave the "rogue" black hole surrounded by any orbiting stars that got taken along for the ride, Merritt and colleagues report in the July 10 issue of the Astrophysical Journal.

And knowing the speed of the stars that accompanied the black hole can reveal the speed of ejection, Merritt said.

That's because stars that were orbiting slower than the force of the kick would stay in the host galaxy.

"[It's] like the sun in our solar system: If you gave it a kick, it would take along some of the inner planets, like Mercury, but it would leave behind the outer planets because they're just too weakly bound to the sun to move with it," Merritt said.

Milky Way's Mergers

Scientists earlier this year came to similar conclusions in a study that focused on our home galaxy, the Milky Way.

"The Milky Way is thought to have been a collection of small galaxies early on that later merged together," said Avi Loeb of Harvard University, a co-author of the paper, published in the April issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

"If this [merger] process took place at each stage of evolution, then black holes would have escaped from the merger remnant but would have still been [surrounded by nearby stars]," he said.

Both new theories are reasonable, based on estimates made in the last few years of how strong a merging black hole's kick might be, said Christopher Reynolds, of the University of Maryland in College Park.

"The question is if that actually does happen in nature," said Reynolds, who was not involved in either study.

Merritt's work is "good science in the sense that it lays out a very clear path by which we can actually use observations to address these questions," Reynolds added.

"If we don't find [the black holes with star clusters], that could tell us that the estimates of how many of these black holes get ejected with very high velocity are off."



not to be afraid of swine flu-its just a normal seasonal flu..nothin else..

In Washington, D.C., a record number of patients inundated area hospitals this week worried they had swine flu, the disease outbreak that first jumped from pigs to people in Mexico. On the social-networking site Twitter, "swine flu" was mentioned once a second on April 27, according to a report by the media analysis group Nielsen Online.

And blog chatter on the respiratory disease—which has expanded to eight countries—has already surpassed by ten to one the number of discussions about the salmonella in peanut butter scare from earlier this year.

Of course, the U.S. swine flu outbreak is nothing to sneeze at: As of April 29, 91 people in the country had confirmed cases, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The first U.S. death occurred on April 27, when a two-year-old child succumbed to swine flu after travelling from Mexico to Houston for treatment.

About 36,000 people in the U.S. die annually from seasonal influenza, and more than 200,000 are hospitalized, according to the CDC. (Read swine flu facts and myths.)

But in the U.S., where most swine flu cases are mild, "it's a situation where we should be cautious but not panicky," said Susan Rehm, medical director for the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases.

"From what we understand so far, the severity doesn't seem to be much different than what it is in regular seasonal influenza," Rehm said.

Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, added that "we're in a phase of hopeful waiting."

"The lesson of prior disasters in the U.S. and emergencies—[though] it's not a disaster yet—[is to] get on top of this very quickly."

Not a Pandemic

In pigs, swine flu is a respiratory disease caused by type A influenza. Though cases of pigs infecting humans are rare, human-to-human transmission can subsequently occur.


The swine flu strain, called H1N1, is passed on just like seasonal flu—mainly through coughing or sneezing of infected people. The symptoms also mirror those of seasonal flu, including fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills, and fatigue.


Though H1N1 isn't a pandemic—the World Health Organization has given it a threat level of five, its second highest rating—it's much too early to tell how severe the outbreak will be, said Ruth Karron, director of the Center for Immunization Research at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"There probably will be additional deaths reported. We do [also] have deaths from seasonal influenza, and I think it's important to bear that in mind," Karron said.

As is possibly the case with H1N1, the elderly and young are most at risk for dangerous flu complications.

(Test your infectious disease IQ.)

Novel Virus

Experts are most concerned about swine flu for three reasons, the public health association's Benjamin said.

For one, it's genetically novel from other viruses, meaning that people aren't resistant to it. The virus is also easily spread and has been very lethal in Mexico, where 159 people have died so far.

Even so, there are strategies to slow its progression, Benjamin said: Telling people to stay home if they develop flu-like symptoms, closing schools selectively, and practicing basic hygiene are all effective.

Johns Hopkins's Karron added that improved vaccine production capacity and antiviral drugs are available, unlike in previous pandemics.

"What's really important for people to understand is we have methods of mitigation," she said.

There are also better tools than ever before to diagnose and track the illness, the infectious disease foundation's Rehm added. For instance, local physicians are now armed with up-to-date information from government agencies.

"If it had to happen, we are as prepared as we can be," she said.



energizers..not good for health-says experts

From supermarkets to the office supply store, it’s hard to miss those tiny bottles of 5-hour Energy.

“It would be easier for me to tell you where we didn’t sell them in the U.S. than list all the places we do,” said Carl Sperber, spokesman for Living Essentials, the Detroit, Michigan-based manufacturer of 5-hour Energy shot.

The small, shot-glass size bottles promise to provide energy and alertness without jitters to fatigued Americans. Unlike other popular energy drinks that market to college students, 5-Hour Energy’s audience is multitasking, working professionals. The market demand has skyrocketed since the product hit store shelves in 2004. The company expects to move more than 350 million shots this year, Sperber said, up from 174 million in 2008.

“This is a no-nonsense drink,” Sperber said. “It is not a fashion statement. It doesn’t have a cool name; it is just a simple grab-and-go product to help busy adults when they can’t afford a letdown.”

Each 2-ounce bottle contains zero grams of sugar, 4 calories and about the same amount of caffeine as a small coffee. It also contains about a dozen ingredients that are broken down into B vitamins (B3, B6, B9, B12) and what the manufacturer lists as an “energy blend.”

how perfect is astrology..!!..

Good morning. Looks like a busy few days ahead. I am speaking in Edinburgh on Thursday, Dublin on Friday and Leicester on Tuesday. If you are around, please come and say hello.

So, I thought it might be fun to test astrology. I have just been to a very popular astrology site and looked up the horoscope of a particular star sign for yesterday (14th July). Here it is….

“Your heart may be fully engaged in something sweet and romantic, but you know you’ve got more going on than that. It’s a good day for you to check in with your people all over the map.”

So, think about yesterday and then…

1) Rate how accurate it was between 1 (not at all accurate) and 10 (very accurate)

and

2) State your star sign. To help out, here is the list

ARIES

MARCH 21 – APRIL 20

TAURUS

APRIL 21 – MAY 21

GEMINI

MAY 22 – JUNE 21

CANCER

JUNE 22 – JULY 23

LEO

JULY 24 – AUG 23

VIRGO

AUG 24 – SEPT 23

LIBRA

SEPT 24 – OCT 23

SCORPIO

OCT 24 – NOV 22

SAGITTARIUS

NOV 23 – DEC 22

CAPRICORN

DEC 23 – JAN 20

AQUARIUS

JAN 21 – FEB 19

PISCES

FEB 20 – MAR 20

If astrology is true, then those with the ‘right’ star sign should give higher ratings than others. But will that be the case?