There's a flurry on new info. In particular the variance of surface temperature at the lunar south pole, from 60 degree Celsius on the lunar surface, to -10 degree Celsius if you probe just 8cm below the surface
A whole seventy degree temperature difference over such a small height delta. There were a bunch of scientists trying to explain this on Indian news TV & it was quite amazing.
I'm actually very happy in ages! As an immigrant there is this bittersweet relationship with the home country. You want your home country to do well but at the same time you are hyperaware of its numerous deficiencies. I haven't been back to India in a few decades now. But so much science! And presented in such down to earth language. Its really like watching some of the old Apollo footage where you can actually understand the scientist. He's using simple graphs & charts & simple math to make his point, instead of drowning you in technojargon.
Their project scientist is a very ordinary guy with extremely average test scores, for an Indian aspirant. But this chap persisted & pursued his education throughout his adulthood, finally earning his PhD in aeronautics. He comes from a shithole village that is about 50km from my shithole village. I mean, growing up we didn't have fucking electricity until my teens. No proper drinking water. No phone no TV no nothing. Now he gets to put a rover on the moon! I had tears in my eyes at the end of his TV interview.
As a native born American (USA) and long time lover of al things space, I've always been of the opinion that ISRO really punches above their weight. You look at their success and resources vs Roscosmos and it is crazy. India has built a really good native launch capability for overall very affordable prices totally independently. It speaks extremely highly of the engineering and materials scientists in that program.
There's no need for this to be bittersweet. Use this as fuel to show that India can do better in other areas if they focus on it. Take the win :)
Also, every extraordinary or above average person starts out average at some point. The biggest differentiator is perseverance. He kept it up and look what he's doing now! It is amazing and as a fellow space fan I'm so happy to see what they are sharing from the Chandrayaan mission.
Honestly super happy for India for pulling this off. People don't seem to acknowledge the amount of science that's been coming out of India for a long time now and I hope this enlightens people a little on the fact that the country has a lot of strong intellect to share with the world.
The gradient is there for the exact same reason that you your pump won't reach a lot of material and will just create a hot mini-island near you heat exchanger.
> Their project scientist is a very ordinary guy with extremely average test scores, for an Indian aspirant.
Almost like test scores don't tell the whole story and aren't a great measure of a human's potential... (I'm sure you get this, but I wish it wasn't a topic)
Please edit provocations and swipes out of your comments here. The provocation "shithole" led to a bunch of flamewar that I'm certain you didn't intend, and yet your comment is responsible for starting it. (I've detached those subthreads as offtopic and collapsed them, but they can be found at the bottom of the page.)
I felt like it was okay-ish given he immediately qualified his own, nearby hometown with the same descriptor. I think it changed the effect from discriminatory to almost a term of chagrined endearment which lent weight to his subsequent commentary.
Would I have written it myself? Probably not, especially given who recently popularized the term "shithole". But I think as a rhetorical device it did what he wanted it to in his writing.
That's nicely put and of course I agree! but the problem is that such subtleties don't survive the statistics of a large forum. Even if 95% of readers get it, the 5% who don't are enough to derail the thread. Even if 95% of that 5% are willing to move on, that leaves 0.25% of readers triggered—more than enough to turn any thread into a flamewar.
It's similar to this dynamic that comes up fairly often:
User: $group is so $pejorative
Mod: Please don't post slurs to HN
User: But I'm one of $group
It's fine conversation in a cohesive context (e.g. friends over drinks), but that's precisely what a large forum like HN is not. That's why we have to moderate comments by effect, not intent [1], and that's why the burden is on commenters to disambiguate their intent [2]. The cost is a certain blandness [3], but the alternative is the end of HN as an interesting place.
Totally tangential: Did you see the Indian 4x400m relay team made the world finals, but in qualifying, dared to try to pass the US team on the final leg? India has never had a particularly good track and field team, but allegedly they are encouraging running and fitness more there.
For those that don't know, the US 4x400m relay team in track and field is about the most dominant thing ever. If they don't drop the stick, it is assumed they are going to win. Even the qualifier team virtually always wins the heats. So an unknown like India having the temerity to try to take the lead against the US team is a huge shot across the bow.
It seemed significant for other reasons. First, based on very light googling and looking at names, the team was of mixed religion with two Muslims (two guys with Muhammed first names) and two Hindi-seeming names. They seemed to genuinely like each other and support each other. That might have progressive steps for the long standing religious conflicts in India, that a mixed religion team came together for a historic moment in Indian athletics.
Second, track might be a very interesting sport for "echoes of caste system" India (there was just a Caste news on HN a day ago so it's still obviously somewhat important). Unlike any team sport with selection, in track, if you are faster, well .... you're faster. Doesn't matter the race / religion / caste / connections, if you can run a 50 second 400m and the other guy runs a 53, it is VERY apparent who wins or should be selected for a team. Track and fitness in general is a kind of class-smasher in that regard, and could be a harbinger of big (positive) social change.
But maybe I'm reading a bit too much into a small sample.
Also, an Indian won the Javelin throw, beat a Pakistani who got silver, and there were two other Indians in the top six.
Not a space exploration expert. It seems like the presence of sulfur on the Moon has been known for a long time [1] but perhaps it's newsworthy that sulfur is more abundant in some regions (like the south pole) than previously thought. [1] says that sulfur has broad applications, most importantly the ability to be a substitute for water in mechanical and chemical processes.
It also found a a remarkable temperature gradient on the South Pole's surface. Even if the surface temperature is 60+ degree Celsius just 8 cm below the surface the temperature is -10 degree Celsius. (South Pole) Moon dust is a really good insulator.
That (60 C) is far hotter than I would have guessed. I realize the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, but at the south pole the light should be tangent to the surface. Is the probe not actually at -90 degrees latitude, and was this measurement taken at noon?
> ISRO announced the rover’s LIBS results definitively confirm the presence of sulfur at the landing site. Additionally, preliminary scans detect traces of aluminum, iron, calcium, chromium, titanium, manganese, silicon, and oxygen in the soil. Further hydrogen detection efforts are underway.
What about hydrogen? No hydrogen means no water where they're currently landed, right?
The reason people think there will be water is that when water evaporates on the moon, it won't be instantly lost. Instead, it will bounce around for a while before it is (probabilistically) lost. If/when it hits a surface that's below freezing point in vacuum (~200K), it can instead freeze and stick to that surface.
There are believed to be such surfaces in permanently shadowed craters on the poles of the moon. They won't find any in any place where the rover can charge, but they might do short trips into shadowed spots, I don't know.
Is there? Hottest surface temp recorded on earth was 56.7C, no? And Death Valley isn't known for the presence of water (when it's anywhere close to that hot).
> Hottest surface temp recorded on earth was 56.7C, no?
Hottest air temperature at just above surface level; excluding several localized extremes like measurements around vulcanos or asphalt roads.
Asphalt surfaces can easily reach 60+°C on days with direct sunlight and little to no wind, and vulcanos supply new surface all the time with temperatures far north of 100°C.
Do you think that there might be hot springs on the Moon? Why not... our volcanoes on Earth bring water to the surface. That sounds like the kind of discovery that this mission is all about.
A clearer title of Chandrayaan-3 Rover confirms presence of sulphur on the lunar surface instead of the cryptic LIBS reference would have sufficed. Even the title on the official post there with it's "...unambiguous in-situ measurements" ... is weird.
The Chandrayaan programme is driven by ISRO, India's national space agency. It could thus be argued that, by extension, the Modi government is thoroughly owning the LIBS.
Preliminary analyses, graphically represented, have unveiled the presence of Aluminum (Al), Sulphur (S), Calcium (Ca), Iron (Fe), Chromium (Cr), and Titanium (Ti) on the lunar surface. Further measurements have revealed the presence of manganese (Mn), silicon (Si), and oxygen (O). Thorough investigation regarding the presence of Hydrogen is underway.
It seems to me, we know there is hydrogen because we know there is water. Not to say they shouldn't test it anyway, but that's my layman's understanding of the current science.
The main issue is detection of water, which would show up as hydrogen in the elemental analysis. Failure to detect hydrogen is probably the most significant result at present:
Probably the floors of craters never subjected to direct sunlight at the poles would be the most likely surface indication. The rover had to navigate around a crater, might have been the place to look if they had the capability.
"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."
Objectively speaking if they left years ago there is chance they are describing the actual availability of toilets as this was really low in some states (some states with under 20% having access to toilets) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_states_ranking_by_ava...
Afaik dealing with the shit was left to dalits, leading to their outcast status. So if one was a dalit in low-toilet-availability areas then ’shithole’ is actually a really accurate depiction of their objective experience and not a derigatory expression.
I do not think that is what the author intended - "You want your home country to do well but at the same time you are hyperaware of its numerous deficiencies."
I am aware of the deficiencies, but also very aware of the progress being made. There is no magic wand to wave to make people not be like people and change a vast, diverse population into something they are not.
So what you are saying is that the numerous deficiencies are *intrinsic* to India (and Indians) by extension and will never go away? Is is about their DNA (nature) or their culture (nurture)?
What is about "a vast, diverse population into something they are not"? Are you saying India can not be a middle-ish income country like China/Thailand/Malyasia etc. I would like to believe that wise choices by the electorate and good leaders and some luck can transform the country (or any country). Japan/South Korea/Thailand/Malaysia all did it. Some of those countries are vast, some diverse and some had less advantages than India.
If you believe in the opposite that then are you not giving into the ideas in the "Clash of Civilizations" or worse "Genetics as IQ" crowd?
No.. I am saying deficiencies are intrinsic to humans. India has made some choices between being a socialist, democratic country and it comes with its own pros and cons.
India has a very vibrant local economy which does not show up in nominal GDP. By GDP by PPP, India is the third largest economy in the world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)). I consider India to be a solid middle income country, not any less that other countries you are talking about.
I am actually fairly proud of the changes I see in India in the last 20 years. I Some of the key changes I have seen (by no means complete):
1. Improvement in road transport with a nationwide single toll provider.
2. Indian railways has always been there as an affordable means of transport.
3. Getting a passport is now a couple of days and less than 24 hours with tatkal.
4. Healthcare is free for all. Yes, it varies from state to state, but government hospitals are available for everyone. Even otherwise, it is affordable.
5. Air travel went from just for the rich to middle class.
6. Government and publicly funded schools are reasonably good (The project director for Chandrayaan 3 came from a government school).
And yes, I am also very aware of the issues - political class abuses the power to enrich themselves. Different states have different development indices. But perfection is not needed for improvements.
I'd like to look at some data on people movements before making up hypotheses and theories. What we have seen is that more people are moving out of India than into the country (other than some poor migrants from places like Bangladesh). What do you think that this data is telling - not about the people (it is easy to blame them for not being patriotic etc). but about the judgements these people have made of the situation? In my opinion, people prefer comfort and lesser competition over grinding it out and this is a universal preference. Denying this basic fact will not help you come up with solutions to the problem - just wishing "if all the people would choose to stay and grind it out, then the country will have more progress" is not a viable solution.
People migrate. Especially when they are better opportunities. The founder of FB "migrated" to Singapore from the US. So did the Dyson guy from the UK and he then moved back.
Using net migration as a statistic for the health of a country is no more (or less) valid than the TFR or longevity or anything else equally plausible.
Q: Say that Sundar Pichai or Vinod Khosla had not left India? Would their impact on India larger or smaller?
I would say India is better off that they left, maybe you differ?
> Is is about their DNA (nature) or their culture (nurture)?
It's always about culture.
The British Empire employed a strategy of divide-and-rule: it encouraged and amplified the caste system, and also encouraged the partitioning of society along religious lines. On top of that, it layered the English class system, and a horribly-botched partition.
I don't mean to imply that Indians don't have agency; they've had 80 years to fix the mess the Empire left them with, but things are getting worse (IMO).
I don't like empires. I look forward to the breakup of Great Britain. I think the USA is struggling to hold itself together. Most complaints about China are about the imperial domination of ethnically-distinct regions by the Han. The current war in Europe is a war of imperial conquest. I wonder whether India might be too big and diverse to manage, too?
Please don't take HN threads into political, nationalistic, or ideological flamewar, or any other flamewar. We ban accounts that keep doing this, and we've had to ask you more than once before, so please stop.
I don't care if it has support of 80% Indians. And even you know that's objectively not true. Any party which does not care about democratic principles is a shithole party.
It would be a whole lot better if people on HN spend their time reading news and garnering information rather than vomiting their half-baked knowledge and immaturely formed opinions on issues they have no idea about.
Ok, Not 80%, but 79% percent! You actually think a party that doesn't care about democratic principles can gain so much popularity, that too in the largest democracy in the world?
All media outlets are biased. The point is to extract the facts and not get swayed by biases. No matter which news outlet you go to, you'll still see the same facts, but the opinions may differ.
HN's moderation does tend to kick in, though not immediately. And on topics in which there is specific expertise comments can be gold.
I'm not suggesting that happens all the time, or even most of it. But relative to other online discussions it does quite well.
The next step up would probably require limited access and verified qualifications. Or something along the lines of StackExchange (which does, yes, have its own problems).
> The next step up would probably require limited access and verified qualifications.
I am half expecting someone to come up and say it goes against their freedom of speech. No, but I like StackExchange, it provides helpful information many a times. How many times have I visited HN if I wanted to know something versus how many times [...] StackExchange. There's definitely value there even for those not participating, but it takes away the back-and-forth of a discussion.
Even people who don't have the qualifications on paper but who have done sufficient research can add good content.
The problem is people disparage and speak in a condescending way under the pretext of facts, which makes it look legitimate, but there's racism and bigotry hiding underneath. I think people need to be more selective and careful with their usage of words if they want to maintain a scientific decorum, and not politicize matters.
One trope I've been mulling over for a while is that of the "marketplace of ideas", which is literally baked into US jurisprudence.
So far as I've been able to trace the origins, it's actually an adaptation of free-market ideology and promotion, and was likely suggested to Oliver Wendell Holmes by Francis Wrigley Hirst, former editor of The Economist, a publication literally founded to promote free-market ideals.[1][2]
But ... is a marketplace really the forum in which ideas are best formed and developed? Or even transmitted? Because ... my understanding is that this takes place far more often in studies, libraries, workshops, laboratories, and academies. Usually amongst a small set of people qualified in the task they are undertaking. Yes, there's often correspondence amongst that group, and there may be distributed work or teams. But one thing it distinctly is not is the absolute hubbub and all-comers-invited nature of the marketplace.
I've yet to see a full critique of the notion, though Jill Gordon's "John Stuart Mill and 'The Marketplace of Ideas'" comes quite close. Among other points, she makes clear that Mill never actually used the phrase, and had some sharp concerns with what are now key elements of it.
Ultimately, markets reward characteristics which are strongly at odds with information in various ways. This appears both in how markets for information goods are tremendously skewed and have enormous deadweight losses (actively impeding access to information to virtually all), but also in what types of information are promoted and advantaged by marketplaces --- rarely that which has a strong truth valance, or which stands against orthodoxies.
(Markets aren't the only structures which stand against information, but given that they're often portrayed as the essence of informational genesis, the conflict is highly notable.)
________________________________
Notes:
1. Holmes didn't quite coin the modern form, but came quite close and strongly influenced the ultimate formulation. The Hirst connection is revealed in Thomas Healy's book The Great Dissent: <https://www.alumni.columbia.edu/content/great-dissent-how-ol...>
2. See The Economist's Prospectus: "[A] weekly paper, to be published every Saturday, and to be called THE ECONOMIST, which will contain— First.—ORIGINAL LEADING ARTICLES, in which free-trade principles will be most rigidly applied to all the important questions of the day" <https://www.economist.com/unknown/1843/08/05/prospectus>
https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FF4hsyEQaEAAB-AS.png
A whole seventy degree temperature difference over such a small height delta. There were a bunch of scientists trying to explain this on Indian news TV & it was quite amazing.
I'm actually very happy in ages! As an immigrant there is this bittersweet relationship with the home country. You want your home country to do well but at the same time you are hyperaware of its numerous deficiencies. I haven't been back to India in a few decades now. But so much science! And presented in such down to earth language. Its really like watching some of the old Apollo footage where you can actually understand the scientist. He's using simple graphs & charts & simple math to make his point, instead of drowning you in technojargon.
Their project scientist is a very ordinary guy with extremely average test scores, for an Indian aspirant. But this chap persisted & pursued his education throughout his adulthood, finally earning his PhD in aeronautics. He comes from a shithole village that is about 50km from my shithole village. I mean, growing up we didn't have fucking electricity until my teens. No proper drinking water. No phone no TV no nothing. Now he gets to put a rover on the moon! I had tears in my eyes at the end of his TV interview.
https://urlis.net/npi7rk3q