...I think? On one hand, galactic pileups are, well galactic, but on the other hand they're so flippin' huge and slow (compared to our puny lives) that they become pretty much incomprehensible. A sauropod pileup is much easier to grasp, especially if it happens on top of you.
Yes, I am all about the space porn. What else is space even for?
SCIENCE!
this picture came up at our research meeting on Thursday. Mostly as a segue into complaining about NASA bureaucracy, but also because it showed something neat that Jen, our undergrad, was working on. (She was also pleased that when she saw this picture she knew what part of the rings it was. Probably because she's been staring at the Cassini Division for a better part of the year.)
It's okay. A joke in my group is that we do what we do 'because it's awesome'. (This is the answer we don't give to non-scientists/appreciative laypeople -- if asked by them, we mumble something about the rings of Saturn being analogous to the formation of the solar system and hope they leave soon to go bug the biologists.)
Yes, it's an interesting dichotomy for me. While I love science because it asks "why" something is the way it is, when you ask scientists why they're studying it I believe the correct answer is "What the hell do you MEAN, 'why'?"
Most of us are so inherently curious that we can't fathom why someone would ask us why we do what we do -- even if it's boring to us*, it's probably interesting to them, and helps fit things together.
* A friend of mine used to do high-energy physics. She described it as fascinating to read about, but awful to do. Now she looks at Mars rocks.
(Our colloquium speaker did remind us to always remember the big picture of our projects, but it's not quite the same thing. I mean, the big picture of the project I'm doing right now is it helps determine the interior of Hyperion (maybe) and helps the geologists figure out what part of the moon they see.)
I generally get my desktop pics from Astronomy Pix of the Day. I've had the same one for ages (partial eclipse at sunset) but hadn't found one I really wanted until this one! Yay!
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 10:54 am (UTC)...I think? On one hand, galactic pileups are, well galactic, but on the other hand they're so flippin' huge and slow (compared to our puny lives) that they become pretty much incomprehensible. A sauropod pileup is much easier to grasp, especially if it happens on top of you.
*the one in King Kong.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 02:55 pm (UTC)SCIENCE!
this picture came up at our research meeting on Thursday. Mostly as a segue into complaining about NASA bureaucracy, but also because it showed something neat that Jen, our undergrad, was working on. (She was also pleased that when she saw this picture she knew what part of the rings it was. Probably because she's been staring at the Cassini Division for a better part of the year.)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:36 pm (UTC)* A friend of mine used to do high-energy physics. She described it as fascinating to read about, but awful to do. Now she looks at Mars rocks.
(Our colloquium speaker did remind us to always remember the big picture of our projects, but it's not quite the same thing. I mean, the big picture of the project I'm doing right now is it helps determine the interior of Hyperion (maybe) and helps the geologists figure out what part of the moon they see.)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:24 pm (UTC)I generally get my desktop pics from Astronomy Pix of the Day. I've had the same one for ages (partial eclipse at sunset) but hadn't found one I really wanted until this one! Yay!
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 05:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 08:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-05-01 09:12 pm (UTC)