1458: Small Moon

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

ricree
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:45 pm UTC

1458: Small Moon

Postby ricree » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:22 am UTC

Image

Title text:GENERAL JAN DODONNA: An analysis of the plans provided by Princess Leia has reinvigorated the arguments of the 'artificial moonlet' and 'rogue planet-station' camps. I fear this question is fracturing the Rebellion.



If it's orbiting another planet, does that make it an exo-artificial moonlet?
Last edited by ricree on Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:41 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Steve the Pocket » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:29 am UTC

By what standards is anything "too big" to be a space station? Especially in a universe that also contains an entire planet covered in city.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 791
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby rhomboidal » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:31 am UTC

I knew the whole planet-destroying super-laser was just a ruse. The Empire's strategy to subtly undermine the Rebel Alliance from within using terminological hairsplitting is insidious, indeed.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Djehutynakht » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:33 am UTC

Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Klear » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:14 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.


Or better yet, it's a thing.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Diadem » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:44 am UTC

Klear wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.


Or better yet, it's a thing.

That's just cruel! They have feelings too you know! Are you denying the Death Star personhood?
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5551
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Eternal Density » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:46 am UTC

Yessss, your arguments, they feeed me!
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
karhell
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:56 pm UTC
Location: Breizh

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby karhell » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:47 am UTC

Diadem wrote:
Klear wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.


Or better yet, it's a thing.

That's just cruel! They have feelings too you know! Are you denying the Death Star personhood?

It's a complex multicultural and ethnically diverse entity. Happy now ? ^^
AluisioASG wrote:191 years ago, the great D. Pedro I drew his sword and said: "Indent thy code or die!"
lmjb1964 wrote:We're weird but it's okay.
ColletArrow, katakissa, iskinner, thunk, GnomeAnne, Quantized, and any other Blitzers, have fun on your journey!

User avatar
eviloatmeal
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am UTC
Location: Upside down in space!
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby eviloatmeal » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:03 am UTC

Completion of the Def. Star is imminent! Soon, those pesky Jedi will plunge the entire world into argument about how to classify our voluminous stationoid!
*** FREE SHIPPING ENABLED ***
Image
Riddles are abound tonightImage

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4970
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Pfhorrest » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:17 am UTC

People are things too.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

ps.02
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 8:02 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby ps.02 » Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:49 am UTC

A Dwarf-moon, is it? So I suppose the Imperial battle cry would be "Moons of the Dwarves! The Dwarves are upon you!"

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2993
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby orthogon » Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:10 am UTC

I guess the Death Star would have noticeable gravity, certainly more than Comet 67P. Based on the diameter of 160km, I make it about 0.01N/kg or 1/1000 of Earth's surface gravity. I assumed that the density was around 0.5kg/m3 based on the mass and pressurised volume of the International Space Station. (Incidentally, NASA gives the measurements in "US Customary units", with the SI units in brackets1 afterwards).

1which they would no doubt call "parentheses".

[Edit: subscript on m3]
Last edited by orthogon on Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

Feldmarshall
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:21 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Feldmarshall » Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:56 am UTC

I'd like to point out, that Death Star can clear orbit, ANY orbit, of other bodies.

User avatar
Plasma Mongoose
Posts: 210
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:09 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Plasma Mongoose » Wed Dec 10, 2014 12:00 pm UTC

The asteroid 243 Ida which has an average diameter of 31.4km, the remarkable thing is that it has a 1.4km diameter moon called Dactyl which orbits around Ida every 20 hours.

If a 1.4km rock can be classed as a moon, then the Death Star can easily be called one too as long as it is orbiting a larger object.
A virus walks into a bar, the bartender says "We don't serve viruses in here".
The virus replaces the bartender and says "Now we do!"

User avatar
Murderbot
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:29 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Murderbot » Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:54 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.

A satellite is an objects that orbits a planet. The Death Star moves from one star system to another at superluminal speeds, making it a starship. Officers aboard it refer to it as a "battle station", if I'm not mistaken, which is close to what Carl Sagan called planned spaceborne anti ballistic missile lasers (The same technology that puts an astronomer and a telescope in Earth orbit can also put up a laser “battle station”.).

wumpus
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:16 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby wumpus » Wed Dec 10, 2014 2:04 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:I guess the Death Star would have noticeable gravity, certainly more than Comet 67P. Based on the diameter of 160km, ]


Since wiki lists Deimos as having a diameter of 12.6km, you would have to reclassify most of the known moons at the time. A better question is "so where is the planet it is orbiting"? I don't recall a planet or more importantly a blazing star nearby.

Even if the Death Star is under 160km, I'm pretty sure it is at least 12.6km based on the trench run.

User avatar
Jackpot777
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:19 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Jackpot777 » Wed Dec 10, 2014 2:12 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Klear wrote:
Djehutynakht wrote:Behold!

It is a Satellite.

There.


Or better yet, it's a thing.

That's just cruel! They have feelings too you know! Are you denying the Death Star personhood?


As DeathStarKin, I agree with this sentiment and will use fear to keep you in line. Fear of me.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2993
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby orthogon » Wed Dec 10, 2014 2:48 pm UTC

It just occurred to me that "small moon" could almost be synonymous with "plumber's bum".

Pseudo-edit: on second thoughts, plumber's bum normally isn't so much a small moon as a large moon in an early "phase".
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Whizbang » Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:18 pm UTC

That's no moon, that's a heavenly body.

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby cellocgw » Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:45 pm UTC

My my my.... looks like Randall's having another bad-Pluto day :mrgreen:

Whizbang wrote:That's no moon, that's a heavenly body.

Whizbang's been looking a magazine covers of Kardashian!
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

AEB
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:56 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby AEB » Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:52 pm UTC

wumpus wrote:A better question is "so where is the planet it is orbiting"? I don't recall a planet or more importantly a blazing star nearby.


You mean Alderaan? They blew it up.


As for the NASA link posted above, I don't get this quote:
The entire 55-foot robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 220,000 pounds, which is the weight of a space shuttle orbiter.


What does it mean to "lift" something outside the ISS? What does "weight" mean in micro-gravity? I assume they meant mass, but even then...

User avatar
Moose Anus
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Moose Anus » Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:59 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:It just occurred to me that "small moon" could almost be synonymous with "plumber's bum".

Pseudo-edit: on second thoughts, plumber's bum normally isn't so much a small moon as a large moon in an early "phase".
It so happens that I'm a plumber and my bum is waxing gibbous.
Lemonade? ...Aww, ok.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 4970
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Pfhorrest » Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:16 pm UTC

We don't need to hear about your waxy monkey-bum.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1009
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby slinches » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:21 pm UTC

AEB wrote:
wumpus wrote:A better question is "so where is the planet it is orbiting"? I don't recall a planet or more importantly a blazing star nearby.


You mean Alderaan? They blew it up.

Wasn't it orbiting (or at least performing a gravitational assist maneuver around) a gas giant in the Alderaan system?

AEB wrote:As for the NASA link posted above, I don't get this quote:

The entire 55-foot robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 220,000 pounds, which is the weight of a space shuttle orbiter.

There's an implied "in normal earth gravity (aka 1g)" appended to these sorts of statements. Although, it would be helpful if they actually included it once in a while to show they know the difference between weight and mass.

If that's still not clear, here's a fixed version: :mrgreen:
The entire 660-inch robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 570 slinches (lbf-s^2/in), which is the mass of a space shuttle orbiter.

RedwoodRhiadra
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 5:22 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby RedwoodRhiadra » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:32 pm UTC

wumpus wrote:Even if the Death Star is under 160km, I'm pretty sure it is at least 12.6km based on the trench run.


IIRC, the first Death Star was 120km in diameter, the second Death Star was 160km. (I can't remember my source offhand - it may have been one of the sourcebooks for the original Star Wars RPG by West End Games.)

Besides Phobos and Deimos, all of the gas giants have quite a number of moons which are less than 120km diameter.

slinches wrote:Wasn't it orbiting (or at least performing a gravitational assist maneuver around) a gas giant in the Alderaan system?


That was Yavin (the gas giant) during the trench run (the Rebel base being on one of Yavin's moons). Orbiting may simply have been the most efficient way to maneuver around the planet to get a clear shot at the moon. (Presumably even the superlaser isn't powerful enough to simply blow up a gas giant!)

They don't seem to orbit anything in the Alderaan system.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2993
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby orthogon » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:38 pm UTC

Speaking of slinches, is anyone else bothered by an inability to imagine a square second? I mean, I get that acceleration is metres per second per second, but it feels like there should be an intuitive meaning to metres per square second too. If our universe had two or more timeline dimensions, a square second would be a thing.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 916
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby da Doctah » Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:56 pm UTC

Death Star's not really a space station, either, not even a really big space station.

Seems the Empire used the same reasoning the auto manufacturers use to get something classed as a "truck" or "utility vehicle" or some other made-up category instead of "car" so it doesn't futz up the figures for average fuel efficiency.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:11 pm UTC

AEB wrote:
wumpus wrote:A better question is "so where is the planet it is orbiting"? I don't recall a planet or more importantly a blazing star nearby.


You mean Alderaan? They blew it up.
Right, blowing up it's planet means it's no longer a moon or satellite since it's not orbiting anything anymore. Even if Han assumes it's orbiting the star, that would make it an asteroid since the obit is predominately unbound Alderaan pieces and it's not in hydrostatic equilibrium.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Coyoty
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:56 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Coyoty » Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:11 pm UTC

cellocgw wrote:My my my.... looks like Randall's having another bad-Pluto day :mrgreen:

Whizbang wrote:That's no moon, that's a heavenly body.

Whizbang's been looking a magazine covers of Kardashian!


The magazine she covers is Paper, so is it a Paper moon?

BTW, she should cover herself. Her moon looks like it's on ass steroids and artificial. Which is what we should be calling the Death Star, an artificial asteroid.

"That's no moon... It's a Kardashian!"

rmsgrey
Posts: 3460
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:10 pm UTC

One thing I hope we can all agree on - despite the grandiose appellation attached to it by Rebel propagandists, one thing it is most definitely not is any sort of star.

AEB
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:56 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby AEB » Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:40 pm UTC

slinches wrote:
AEB wrote:As for the NASA link posted above, I don't get this quote:

The entire 55-foot robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 220,000 pounds, which is the weight of a space shuttle orbiter.

There's an implied "in normal earth gravity (aka 1g)" appended to these sorts of statements. Although, it would be helpful if they actually included it once in a while to show they know the difference between weight and mass.

If that's still not clear, here's a fixed version: :mrgreen:
The entire 660-inch robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 570 slinches (lbf-s^2/in), which is the mass of a space shuttle orbiter.


Okay --- but what does it mean to lift something that is already off the ground (considering that anything the arm is "lifting" is already in space)? Is the lifting directional? Is it still "lifting" if the arm moves an object closer to the earth? Even ignoring the units and the whole "mass" vs "weight" thing, the phrase still doesn't really make much sense... unless what they meant was, if the arm were on earth, it could lift a space shuttle off the tarmac... which is pretty cool.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:16 pm UTC

The original text said "220,000 pounds", which is a unit of force, not mass. The arm can exert 220,000 pounds of force, which is enough to lift the space shuttle orbiter, on Earth.

In space that just means it's capable of moving the orbiter at 9.8 m/s^2.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
slinches
Slinches get Stinches
Posts: 1009
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:23 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby slinches » Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:35 pm UTC

Lifting is possible in space as long as your reference coordinate system has a vector that's chosen to be considered upward. In the case of the shuttle that would be the way the tail is pointing (roughly). But now that I think about it, they probably meant that the arm was designed to accelerate something of equal mass to the shuttle to some minimum speed in a set amount of time while in a microgravity environment. Although, that doesn't sound as impressive.

Ironically, if the arm was used to lift the shuttle on earth the stress on it would be astronomical.

chenille
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:25 pm UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby chenille » Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:39 pm UTC

Coyoty wrote:"That's no moon... It's a Kardashian!"

Only two letters away from a Star Wars and Star Trek crossover.

User avatar
Sir Lunch-a-lot
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:43 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Sir Lunch-a-lot » Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:59 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:The original text said "220,000 pounds", which is a unit of force, not mass. The arm can exert 220,000 pounds of force, which is enough to lift the space shuttle orbiter, on Earth.

In space that just means it's capable of moving the orbiter at 9.8 m/s^2.


I am pretty sure that the Canada Arm 2 could not lift a space-shuttle on earth. I seem to recall around the time that it was launched there was a segment on Daily Planet (or its precursor - a show on the Canadian version of Discovery Channel) discussing the Arm, and I believe they were saying that the arm itself was so massive that it couldn't even lift itself under earth Gravity - severely limiting the testing they could do on it prior to sending it to the ISS.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby HES » Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:12 am UTC

Murderbot wrote:A satellite is an objects that orbits a planet. The Death Star moves from one star system to another at superluminal speeds, making it a starship. Officers aboard it refer to it as a "battle station", if I'm not mistaken, which is close to what Carl Sagan called planned spaceborne anti ballistic missile lasers (The same technology that puts an astronomer and a telescope in Earth orbit can also put up a laser “battle station”.).

Of course, the battle stations you're describing would be satellites.
He/Him/His Image

dtilque
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:53 am UTC
Location: Nogero

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby dtilque » Thu Dec 11, 2014 4:18 am UTC

eviloatmeal wrote:Completion of the Def. Star is imminent! Soon, those pesky Jedi will plunge the entire world into argument about how to classify our voluminous stationoid!

And it's going to turn a deaf ear to those arguments.


In space, no one can hear them anyway.
Whenever visually representing the universe, it's important to include a picture of Saturn!
-- Tom the Dancing Bug

User avatar
Neil_Boekend
Posts: 3220
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:35 am UTC
Location: Yes.

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby Neil_Boekend » Thu Dec 11, 2014 8:46 am UTC

slinches wrote:
AEB wrote:
wumpus wrote:A better question is "so where is the planet it is orbiting"? I don't recall a planet or more importantly a blazing star nearby.


You mean Alderaan? They blew it up.

Wasn't it orbiting (or at least performing a gravitational assist maneuver around) a gas giant in the Alderaan system?

AEB wrote:As for the NASA link posted above, I don't get this quote:

The entire 55-foot robot arm assembly is capable of lifting 220,000 pounds, which is the weight of a space shuttle orbiter.

There's an implied "in normal earth gravity (aka 1g)" appended to these sorts of statements. Although, it would be helpful if they actually included it once in a while to show they know the difference between weight and mass.

What bugs me about the statement is that mass doesn't matter in that way. In friction-less environments you can move anything given an adequate anchoring point. Heavy things just take more time with the same force than light things.
Thus a 220,000 kg object could be moved too, It just takes approximately twice the time (and some additional programming to prevent jerk forces by allowing for approx. twice the time)
Mikeski wrote:A "What If" update is never late. Nor is it early. It is posted precisely when it should be.

patzer's signature wrote:
flicky1991 wrote:I'm being quoted too much!

he/him/his

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2993
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby orthogon » Thu Dec 11, 2014 9:23 am UTC

Yeah, I was always impressed that I, a weedy* 17 year-old at the time, could move a 18 tonne narrowboat around by pulling on a rope with my bare hands. The issue isn't so much getting it going as stopping it once it's moving, on account of how ropes aren't very good in compression. I imagine making sure you start pushing at the right time is a big problem when hauling stuff around in space.

*I'm being modest here. Actually I was pretty ripped by the end of that summer.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

niky
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:34 am UTC

Re: 1458: Small Moon

Postby niky » Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:33 pm UTC

wumpus wrote:
orthogon wrote:Even if the Death Star is under 160km, I'm pretty sure it is at least 12.6km based on the trench run.


Abnormally long run sequences on film: Ref: Fast and Furious 6. /Ref.

Of course, Luke didn't have to downshift twenty or thirty times...


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests