Starship Asterisk*

Just as a general comment to the APOD powers that be, if you make a statement which is virtually certain to raise eyebrows (e.g., "Neptune . . . emits more light than it receives from the sun") it would be considerate to provide a link to some generally accepted explanation.

Thank you for this helpful information. I continue to believe that intentionally running the risk of seeding extraterrestrial bodies with life forms from Earth is a very bad idea! I hope those in charge of future missions will reconsider.

Can anyone explain the rationale for attempting intentionally to send tardigrades to Phobos? At first glance, this sounds to me like a very bad idea! Had it succeeded, then if/when we find extraterrestrial life how will we know from whence it came? Maybe there already are (native) tardigrades on Pho...

And what about the amazingly dense and seemingly homogeneous background field of what I assume must be stars and/or galaxies? Is that part of any named star field or other named celestial wonder? Are we looking toward the center of the Milky Way? Not all sky images appear to have this sort of dense ...

So, neufer, I gather that what you're suggesting is that events which occurred on the far side of the pillars (relative to Earth) are visible in infrared wavelengths, which penetrate the pillars, but not in visible light, which does not. Correct? That does make some sense. Also an interesting bit of...

The discussion section of this apod puzzles me; it says: "The pillars of creation were imaged again in 2007 by the orbiting Spitzer Space Telescope in infrared light, leading to the conjecture that the pillars may already have been destroyed by a local supernova, but light from that event has y...

And let's hope that if we ever do need to use this technology somebody double checks to see that the correct conversion between metric and English units has been made. Those awkward "oooops" moments are so embarrassing, not to mention potentially lethal.

Just keep posting any found mistakes here (but please don't call anyone names in the process) and they usually get fixed before the next day. Except in this case it still has not been fixed, more than a day later. It still says "up and to the left" on the main apod website. Not an earthsh...

Realistically (this is supposed to be about reality, right?), how much advance warning would we need to implement such a scheme? Getting the tractor into the vicinity of the asteroid would not happen instantaneously, even assuming we had a supply of such tractors on the shelf and ready to go. Moreov...

P.S. The caption of today's APOD appears to have been corrected now! The caption has not been corrected on my version of today's apod (and I just now reloaded it to be sure). Strangely, the caption is correct on the version which appears at the top of the discussion page. Fully concur, however, wit...

I'm confused! The description at the image of NGC 3628 which appears at the top of this discussion section says (correctly I believe) that the long tail is going down. But the write-up which appears on the main apod website says the tail is going up. What gives? Why the different descriptions?

While I have always been interested in NASA and Space Science, APOD keeps that interest fresh and expanding. Well said. This question is very much like your earlier question which asked whether APOD has increased our interest in science. Frankly, I think it's a poorly worded question . . . somewhat...

An oddly difficult question. I have always had a great interest in Science. APOD hasn't increased that, but rather fed my hunger. Even so, I understand the spirit of the question and that would require a different answer. APOD has been one of my favourites since the earliest days, along with spacew...

Happy Birthday, APOD! Thank you for helping to keep us mentally young, inquisitive, and challenged to understand this amazing universe in which we find ourselves.

I typically find the APOD text quite helpful. Occasionally I wish the text would comment on more of the interesting artifacts visible in a given image; an example is the recent GALEX: The Andromeda Galaxy, in which there were interesting blue and orange "fuzzies" which were not remarked on...

A quick note of thanks to Ann for her helpful comments about some of the artifacts in today's apod. Was surprised not to find comments about some of these artifacts in the main apod comment section, especially about the prominent blue and orange features at 7 and 4 o'clock, respectively. We're accus...

Presumably, the Earth was subjected to the same "heavy bombardment" as the moon. Is is generally believed that (with some notable exceptions) evidence of this bombardment has been mostly washed away by our oceans, or what?

Never mind . . . got it now (the inset). It was just late arriving. Sorry!

I'm not getting the promised inset when I run my cursor over the image; anybody else experiencing this problem? Thanks.

Can anyone say whether the apparently linear "spokes" seen in the movie are real phenomena or simply artifacts of the way in which the images were processed?

If, as some might suggest, "the flow of time" is viewed as being nothing more and nothing less than the evolution of the physical universe (an evolution governed by rules which we strive to understand and which we refer to as the laws of physics), then is it possible for there *not* to be ...

Wow . . . that's a lot of salt!

I'm puzzled by the surface of the jetty. Water, even briny water, typically isn't lumpy. So is the substance on the surface of the jetty snow? In August? If not snow, then what?

An administrative question: why isn't the APOD for 14 November 2010 listed in the APOD archive? It still wasn't listed as of mid-day on 15 November.

I seem to recall reading somewhere in the dim past that low-level nuclear reactions continue to occur in the Earth's core, and that these reactions are part of what keeps the core warm. Is that not correct? The explanation which accompanies today's apod suggests that it is not correct.