you are free to create your own as NASA observatories release their imagery free to the public as they were paid for with the public's money from taxes. the problem with creating timelapse videos would be if the platform viewed the same object at least annually to see the changes.
I have often thought about looking through archives but has not been easy for me (don' know how to) search though years of data for multiple views (years apart) of the same objects.
I have been wondering about binary star systems. I think some of them are human scale orbital periods.
I did this for SOHO to create timelapse footage of a specific filter. It was the first time I weaponized the use of cUrl (I guess officaly making me a hacker at the same time). The SOHO archive is very easy to parse as it has a very structured folder layout. I would hope that the other platform archives are similar.
Part of the reason you don't see them more is because commercial satellite mega-constellations (like Starlink) work against long exposure times by literally clouding and brightening our view of space. (1)
Not really sure how this has anything to do with space based platforms like Chandra (which is x-ray) and Hubble which is well above Starlink. Also, Starlink is only a couple of years old to be problematic, but the ground based observatories have had clean skies for decades before.
This just really feels like someone trying to interject a pet peeve. Whether the peeve is valid or not, it's not the problem here.
It's relevant because ground based satellites add observational capacity. If a ground based telescope can't get a good view, that's when you queue up Chandra or James Webb (Hubble is not the same type of telescope, and it's workload is not interchangeable).
Astronomers have thousands of interesting things they would like to point their telescopes at. There are thousands of capable ground stations that could take the easy targets, and only 2 x-ray satellites which should be used only for the highest value targets where absolute clarity and resolution is required. But if you start obstructing those ground stations, the workload must be taken over by just 2 satellites.
Ground stations are valued because they help solve the capacity planning problem. More usable telescopes === more observation time. Having more ground stations frees up the 2 satellite telescopes for truly stunning shots.
Hubble is actually the same altitude as Starlink, 340 mi. There have been proposals to boost Hubble to higher altitude so it doesn't reenter next decade.
But since Hubble doesn't look towards the Earth, it won't see as many as from Earth.
Astronomical objects that visibly change in human timescales are pretty rare. A naked-eye visible supernova remnant was one of the first clues that challenged the idea that the heavens were static, permanently set by God.
One of my favorite examples of astronomical timelapse is the motion of objects around SagA*. That I think might be the first example I saw. I'm not sure if they set out to make multiple observations specifically to map this motion or if it was something saw they could do from existing data. S
I think the "billion dollar single employee plus AI company" is still a ways away, but not actually that far.
It seems to me that if one person can ask a machine to do all the things it takes to make a "billion dollar single employee plus AI company" then many others can just say "make me something like that".
This is the thing people seem to sleep on when it comes to EVs - they simply drive better than other cars. More responsive, better pickup, smoother drivetrains, etc.
This is also a feature of hybrids people overlook. They might have tiny ICE engines, but the additional torque from the electric motor more than makes up for it
I mean, kind of. Series hybrids (where the drivetrain is all electric and fed by a generator) yes, but all the parallel hybrids I've driven are still pretty anemic because you have both a tiny ICE engine and a tiny electric motor. They also don't always engage simultaneously in a way that makes it feel like you're getting the torque on demand.
Ehhhh.... The most prevalent hybrid (at least in the US) is the Toyota Prius. At least until to latest models, they were very slow, with a 0-60 time of ~10 seconds.
Tesla Model 3 Standard is 280HP/210kW. And it's only really limited by the C of the battery pack. Under optimal conditions I've measured 310HP, according to the Canbus app.
EVs are incredibly powerful. Even the humble Nissan Leaf would blow the doors off an 00s performance car.
I have a Leaf. It makes me laugh when people with "muscle cars" try to race me. One time I humored one of them, and completely smoked them off the line. And my car was still in Eco mode.
We have a VW e-Up, with a very meagre 80hp electric motor - I can guarantee that off the lights that car is faster than pretty much any muscle or sports car, because it just instantly accelerates from standstil. I used to own an AMG few years ago, and to match what the e-Up can do I'd have to put it into Sports+ mode then enable launch control, then sit there with revs at 4000rpm just waiting for the light to change so the car would actually launch quickly. But off the standing start from idle? No chance.
The peak torque at 0rpm is a nice feature for city traffic low-key drag racing. I think if you really wanted to have a chance to troll an EV owner you'd have to incite them to race you on a highway with conditions that cause frequent speed changes in the 50-100mph range. But tbh even they you'd have a hard time. Maybe if you kept that up until they ran down the battery?
Never or arrested on a public road basically vs my daily driver is fun even when driving in the real world. It’s not loud is the last real complaint I see.
The new model Y AWD non-performance does 0-60 in 4.6 seconds! The performance version is ~3.3; Ioniq 5 AWD is 4.6 and the N is 2.9 (!!!). For comparison the latest Corvette does 0-60 in 2.9 and the Z06 in 2.6.
These cars are insanely, incredibly fast. My G70 (gasoline, ~370 HP) does the jaunt in 4.5. That used to be considered a fast car, now it's just average (though the warranty is almost over, and I'll be modifying it to ~450HP).
TBH, electric cars 100% broke auto enthusiast circles. When a highly modified, very fast car just gets stomped by an electric car hauling a family of 4 it smashed that world to pieces. Especially in the early days, when EV enthusiasts were mostly Tesla techbro fanboys - who didn't really mix well with the oil, grease, gasoline, and DIY culture that was there before.
To me the torque is more important than the horsepower: one nice thing about Waymo is that they're quite good at gentle, constant acceleration up San Francisco's steep hills. Human Uber drivers have a 50/50 chance of making me carsick when they try this, out of some combination of inexperience and driving a car without enough low-end torque.
This was a really cleaver post to create the most comments of the sentiment mentioned. I am really impressed how well it is working and would like to know more.
I do not doubt the numbers in the article are inflated to get the rosier picture but... The people I know that are riding e-bikes are commuting the few miles to work rather than drive (which they did in the past).
I am going to dispute this as "the Most Important Machine". It is not that IC are not super important to the modern world but that others should be counted as more important. The ploughs, lathes, knives. I admit I did not watch the video so maybe I am missing the point.
reply