The Silent Film Returns — on Social Media – New York Times

Tubular Labs , the online video analytics company that placed LADbible at the top of its rankings, has found that of videos posted to Facebook by media companies, 46 percent of views go to videos that are completely silent or just accompanied by music. All of that has given rise to a particular kind of video spectacle on social media, one that is able to convey its charms without dialogue, narrative or much additional context. To entertain soundlessly, viral video makers are reanimating some of the same techniques that ruled silent film over 100 years ago. ?For coincidental reasons as much as knowing reasons, we?ve seen a rebirth of a very image-forward mode of communication,? said James Leo Cahill , a professor of cinema studies at the University of Toronto. Among its hallmarks: a focus on spectacle, shocking images and tricks; the capture of unexpected moments in instantly recognizable scenarios; an interplay between text and image; and a spotlight on baby and animal stars. Created by early filmmakers like the French brothers Auguste and Louis Lumi�re and the American inventor Thomas Edison, these early movies took cues from the circus and the vaudeville circuit, featuring performers from that world, and were then played at vaudeville shows. If early films were short by necessity ? the earliest reels allowed for just seconds of film ? modern videos are pared down to suit our attention spans and data plans. Some viewing habits of social video also recall Edison?s Kinetoscope , one of the earliest film-watching contraptions, which invited single viewers to view short clips through a peephole, offering a voyeuristic look at everything from Annie Oakley shooting to some guy sneezing . Mobile video has again returned us to a cinematic form that?s screened for an audience of one. Just as early films made stars out of stage magicians and circus performers, we?ve seen a resurgence of popularity of pure visual spectacle on social video, whether it?s in the studied technological tricks of stunt performers like the modern YouTube magician Zach King or the capture of the spontaneous wonders of nature. Shocking images have ruled since the early days of web video, but social media has accelerated the pace at which we consume them, encouraging the clips that provide instant gratification without the need for aural context. In the absence of dialogue and involved narratives, early films focused on ?actualities,? or setups that would appear instantly recognizable to audiences. On a recent afternoon, it served up videos of a guy accidentally hitting himself in the head with a baseball bat; a pizza being made out of French fries; a dog bathing in a Jacuzzi; a woodworker crafting a salad bowl; a tourist riding a slide down the Great Wall of China and a manatee kissing a snorkeler. Often, on both social media and in early film, textual clues are provided to viewers outside of the filmed image ? in film titles presented to early-20th-century audiences, or in Facebook captions that guide modern viewers. Or consider ?What happened on 23rd street in New York City,? which shows a pair of actors, a man and a woman, strolling down the sidewalk when a gust from a grate blows up the woman?s skirt, revealing a tantalizing glimpse of petticoat. You can find modern equivalents of that video everywhere on social media, evidence of actors filming themselves making unexpected moves in crowds of real people. (In both eras, it?s often hard to discern who?s acting and who?s just being.) A recent specimen making the rounds on Facebook, ?When The Splits Are Life,? shows a woman appearing in various everyday settings ? the grocery store, the street corner, the auto repair shop ? and spontaneously breaking into feats of flexibility. And just as some early films would use brief intertitles to serve as setups and punch lines to visual jokes ? the 1900 stunt film, ? How It Feels to be Run Over ,? shows a vehicle riding over the camera?s position, followed by the intertitle: ?oh! Mother will be pleased? ? much of the most popular Facebook videos reimagine the intertitle with big text captions that plug videos into meme formats. One of the most striking parallels of early silent film and modern social video is the foregrounding of animals and babies. The old truism ? don?t work with children or animals ? speaks exactly to why they are the ideal stars of both early actualities and of contemporary Facebook videos. It?s striking that with all of the technological advances that have allowed us to shoot and share video instantly, we?ve returned to some of film?s most original instincts. It wasn?t long after the rise of Kinetoscope, actualities and the cinema of attraction that new technologies upended those early forms, giving way to feature-length narratives, talkies and Technicolor. It?s unclear where social video innovation will take the form next, but if anything, modern video is moving in the opposite direction of cinema?s rise: We keep cramming more spectacle and information into smaller and faster bits of entertainment, even discarding whole experiential possibilities ? like audio tracks ? if they seem to slow it down. As the online media industry continues along its much-discussed ?pivot to video,? we?ll see more and more of our online experiences churned into those hypervisual micro forms, as every inch of screen space gets recast as a flashing billboard. A version of this article appears in print on September 14, 2017, on Page C1 of the New York edition with the headline: The Silent Film Returns. The clips that spread the furthest online are the ones that can be consumed anywhere without disruption: on the subway, the sidewalk or in the doctor?s office; next to a partner in bed, behind the counter at work or under the desk in class.

Read More

Apple’s new Steve Jobs Theater is absolutely gorgeous

You’ve probably already seen the monthly drone flyovers showing the Steve Jobs Theater as it was being constructed. This is the first time the public has been inside of Apple’s new theater and the first impressions from everyone is that of awe. If you think the sunlight beaming in accidentally creates a rainbow ring all around the floor of the theater, it’s not. Check out more of photos of the Steve Jobs Theater below. The 1,000-seat theater embodies all of Steve Jobs’ legacy, and his love for beautiful design and architecture, with the highest attention to detail paid to every corner. Steve Jobs Theater to the left. It is very reminiscent of a temple ? a zen, minimalist sanctum that’s all the more impressive when it’s empty. The acoustics inside thump, while swallowing up all the chatter of all those who gather within its glass walls.

Read More

Disney Is Lone Holdout From Apple’s Plan to Sell 4K Movies for $20

At an event�Tuesday�where he announced the new Apple TV 4K, the tech giant?s head of software and services, Eddy Cue, said the device will offer Hollywood movies in the high-resolution format, called either 4K or UHD, for ultra-high definition. Copyright �2017 Dow Jones & Company , Inc. Save Article Sign In to Save Subscribe to WSJ Link copied?

Read More

26 films Rotten Tomatoes got 100 percent wrong

Rotten Tomatoes has been catching a lot of heat lately . As Hollywood tries to make sense of its current box office slump, producers, actors and directors have been�pointing at the critical aggregator, which quantifies movie reviews and deems Tinseltown?s beloved properties as either ?fresh? or (gasp!) ?rotten.? There is a gritty and fun sensibility to the movie that makes up for the plot holes (of which there are an abundance) and weird editing (you can tell that director David Ayer had planned more extensive backstories for the villains, which were then cut to ribbons by the studio). This is not to say the movie isn?t flawed, but aside from the wretched Joker scenes, the rest of the film itself is actually pretty entertaining. Margot Robbie nails the character of Harley Quinn, Will Smith is both charming and surprisingly vulnerable as Deadshot, and the titular Squad itself has excellent chemistry. When the cast is just allowed to read Ayer?s dialogue and let it sink or swim on its own, the movie usually succeeds. The script pulls no punches and director Daniel Destin Cretton demonstrates that the storytelling skills he showed off in his previous film, ?Short Term 12,? were hardly a fluke. Last year, fans of the movie ?Suicide Squad? circulated a petition attacking Rotten Tomatoes for designating the film as ?rotten? due to its overwhelmingly bad reviews. It?s easy for movies like this to get dragged down in clich�d plot twists or maudlin sentimentality, but ?The Glass Castle? pulls off the deft trick of sympathizing with its monstrous characters while refusing to spare their horrid behavior from the unflinching eye of the camera. No, it?s not a�great�film�and this cinematic adaptation of a well-regarded book offers enough plot holes that only a trip to the bookstore could help work out. These are valid flaws, to be sure, but hardly sufficient reason to pan the film outright. This Oscar-winner for Best Picture isn?t even the best film called ?Crash? ? that honor goes to David Cronenberg?s 1996 thriller. This, however, reeks of simplistic moralizing, is lousy with hackneyed dialogue and filled ludicrously contrived melodrama that only pours out of writers and director who think they understand racism but really, really don?t. The fact that it was directed by a tone-deaf white guy, Paul Haggis, and co-written by both him and another tone-deaf white guy, Bobby Moresco, is hardly surprising. Yes, that?s�absurd ? but it does raise�valid questions about whether the website?s black-or-white, win-or-lose mentality unfairly disadvantages movies that happened to fall on the wrong side of the critical consensus or overly rewards films that just so happened to get a few mildly�positive reviews. What is a bit of a shocker is that it managed to rob a genuinely great and revolutionary film, ?Brokeback Mountain,? of the Academy Award. While the second ?Amazing Spider-Man? film was rightfully panned as over-cluttered and derivative, the first one was inexplicably praised despite possessing those same flaws. It?s a mindless remake of the 2002 ?Spider-Man? with Gwen Stacy replacing Mary-Jane Watson and The Lizard replacing The Green Goblin. Thematically reminiscent of John Carpenter?s ?They Live,? which was released just one year earlier, this should-be horror classic manages to deliver old-fashioned scares and gross-out humor alongside some searingly incisive and relevant social satire. This little-known sequel to ?The Rocky Horror Picture Show? is directed by the original film?s co-writer Richard O?Brien and possesses all of that movie?s madcap inventiveness and charm. The premise of this film is ingenious, but that?s all it really is ? a great premise. The keepers of the fake town that contains unknowing captive Truman Burbank make a ton of dumb decisions, while Jim Carrey himself mugs and overacts so much as Truman that it takes the viewer out of the scenario. It?s easy to imagine how the corporate executives behind ?Sing? thought up the movie?s premise. ?Hey, do you know how the ?Alvin and the Chipmunks? and ?Glee? franchises made a lot of money by covering pop songs? Be honest:� ?Jurassic World? sucked . It?s understandable why it pulled in nearly $1.7 billion at the box office, given that it was a much-hyped sequel to a beloved classic, but the critical acclaim a�little baffling. If there is one good thing about the bland train wreck known as the 2017 ?The Mummy,? it?s that it allows critics to better appreciate the underrated virtues of the 1999 film. This was a campy and fun adventure flick, with Brendan Fraser and Rachel Weisz lending unexpected heft to the leading roles. This is the kind of movie that gives the arthouse genre a bad name. It is brimming with pseudo-philosophy that isn?t half as profound as it believes itself to be and a dearth of humor that turns the proceeding into a dull slog. It?s understandable why critics panned this film ? it was the much-anticipated follow-up to the brilliant, seductive�?The Silence of the Lambs.??Hannibal? is nowhere near as good as that movie. In many ways, the film was a step back from its 1993 predecessor ? the CGI-ified dinosaurs looked much less convincing than those in the original, and the plot�conveniently ignored scientific advancements (such as the discovery that many dinosaurs had feathers). While ?The Phantom Menace? may be the most maligned of the ?Star Wars? prequels (and is rightly designated ?rotten? on the site), it isn?t the worst film in that trilogy by far. That distinction belongs to ?Attack of the Clones,? which is just as boring and witless as its predecessor without any compensating virtues. While ?Saw VI? did better on the Tomatometer than most other ?Saw? films, it deserved to be rated outright fresh. Like ?Society,? this film uses its horror premise as a way to offer brilliant social commentary ? in its case, about the inhumanity of America?s health care system. So dazzled were the critics by the once-innovative 3D technology the James Cameron epic sports that they didn?t seem to notice there was a very, very bad movie sticking out of the screen. There is a great trailer mashup that compares ?Avatar? to ?Fern Gully,? and that really says everything about why this flick is overrated. This seems like a case of critics revering a classic so much that they can?t bring themselves to accept its sequel. ?Bad Santa 2? is very much a fitting followup to the first movie in terms of humor, characterization and the ability to match heart with raunchy, cynical human comedy. There is a lot that?s right about ?Split,? particularly the brilliant way it ties itself into Shyamalan?s underrated 2000 classic ?Unbreakable,? but the problematic premise is too distracting to overcome these issues. This is a movie that hooks you in by depicting a legitimate mental health disorder as something that can turn you into a literal super-powered monster. Swimming against the critical tide, the late Roger Ebert nailed �why this movie works so well in his review: ??Anaconda? is an example of one of the hardest kinds of films to make well: a superior mass-audience entertainment. It has the effects and the thrills, but it also has big laughs, quirky dialogue and a gruesome imagination.? The twist ending here is random instead of well-crafted, neither the aliens nor the premise itself are scary and�the dialogue is worse than hackneyed. Worst of all, it actually believes itself to be profound, but does little to back up that conviction. Although director Michael Cimino is best remembered for the 1980 cinematic disaster ?Heaven?s Gate,? all of the problems with that film appear here as well. In contrast to ?Split,? which indulges audiences by allowing them to see the type of�sensationalized depiction of mental illness that they subconsciously want, ?Julien Donkey-Boy? is the story of mental illness ? as well as the environmental conditions that cultivate it ? that demands you accept it on its own terms. This should have won Oscars, not been relegated to the heap of so-called ?Rotten? fare. Setting the new movie in a functional theme park was a great idea, but instead of focusing on dinosaurs chowing�down on customers in modern facilities, it only includes a brief scene featuring such an attack before reverting to the jungle setting that had been done to death in the previous three films. While Hollywood loves to remake classic films, it should really focus on remaking movies that had a lot of potential but never lived up to it. ?Robots? is a case study in this: The animation, though acceptable, doesn?t do as much with its nifty premise as it could, and the story is so formulaic that it?s almost offensive to the intellect. It would be one thing if the filmmakers flat-out admitted they were trying to remake the classic ?Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,? but instead they tried to pull a fast one on audiences ? paste superficial aspects of that movie (the presence of Khan, the death of a major character) onto their own bland action flick. This could have been okay if they had made a decent cerebral ?Star Trek? movie, but instead they wound up with a sub-par action flick. It has none of the magic, none of the positivity, none of the deliciousness of ?Trek? adventures.

Read More

In a Season of Storms, DOE Invests $50M in High-Tech Resiliency R&D

Distributed energy and grid intelligence won?t be able to stop a hurricane or prevent hackers from trying to disrupt the grid. Another project with a $6 million grant, and the goal of mitigating grid disruptions through DERs, is called Grid Resilience and Intelligence Platform. The other, dubbed CleanStart-DERMS, is focused on a ?DER-driven mitigation, black-start and restoration strategy for distribution feeders? (i.e., how distributed energy assets could help keep isolated feeders running in the moments after a blackout). This could be useful, but also dangerous if the utility isn?t kept informed about it, which means that it will have to include an ?applied robust control, communications and analytics layer, and coordinated hierarchical solution.” The lead technology provider on this project is Smarter Grid Solutions , a Scottish startup with a distributed energy management platform operating across hundreds of megawatts of assets. On the cybersecurity side of the coin , DOE announced more than $20 million in awards �to 20 separate research projects aimed specifically at security-critical pieces of energy infrastructure. Power & Renewables 2017 conference in Austin, Texas this November to meet with top regulators, utility executives and technology leaders dealing with the aftermath of Harvey, and applying its lessons to the nation as a whole. The two-day conference will include the solar expertise of GTM Research, the wind energy analysis of MAKE, and the broader energy and utilities expertise of Wood Mackenzie. At the center of the funding is $33 million for seven projects from the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium . The GMLC launched early last year with $220 million in funding for 88 projects around the country. The goal of this $6 million project is to see if OpenFMB-maintained networks of DERs and microgrids can be run securely and reliably enough to be used as ?boundary conditions? (i.e., as part of the envelope of constantly updated data that tells utilities and grid operators what they can and can?t do).

Read More

Here’s Your First Look at Nike’s New Flyleather Technology

In 2012, Nike?s game-changing Flyknit technology debuted at the London Summer Olympics, on the feet of Nike athletes and medalists Ashton Eaton, Trey Hardee and Mo Farah. Whittling down the carbon footprint to roughly half that of traditional leather, Flyleather still ?mimics athletic, pigmented full-grain leathers in everything from fit to touch,? says Tony Bignell, Nike VP of Footwear Innovation. Along with Flyleather technology, Nike has added this new technology to the Tennis Classic, creating the forthcoming Flyleather Tennis Classic. The Nike Flyleather Tennis Classic will be available September 18 on Nike.com and at the Nike SoHo store, NikeLab 21 Mercer and Dover Street Market in New York City. In addition, made-in-Oregon, Flyleather versions of the Air Force 1, Air Max 90, Cortez, Jordan 1, and Tennis Classic will make their debut in New York during Climate Week NYC.

Read More

Watch This Movie To Debunk The ‘Tech Monopoly’ Hysteria

The frenzy to regulate big technology firms as ?monopolies? is starting to spread like influenza across the political spectrum. Turning Web search and social media into government-regulated utilities is an idea now endorsed by Josh Marshall on the Left and Steve Bannon on the Right. Instead of making the protagonists rival clerks in the same store, it made Ryan?s character the owner of a small independent book shop, while Tom Hanks is CEO of a big discount chain bookstore?a fictionalized Barnes and Noble?that is about to put her out of business. It was about to crush big discount bookstores?does anyone still remember the other big chain, Borders??and nobody had a clue. It?s right there in the title of the movie. ?You?ve Got Mail,? for those who are old enough to remember, was a tagline for America Online, the largest Internet service provider in the dial-up era of the 1990s. For millennials, let me explain: we had to connect our computers to a phone line, and an internal modem would place a phone call to a local data center from which it could download information at impossibly slow speeds. It also got the surprising support of neoconservative intellectual Bill Kristol as part of a ?No Labels? agenda . So now this idea is coming at us from the left, right, and center. When you managed to get to this exciting new thing called the World Wide Web, how did you know what sites to go to or how to access information? Before the Google search, before Facebook, before Twitter, you went to a Web portal, a launching off point that gathered links and directed you to various sources for news, entertainment, shopping, etc. At the same time nobody was paying much attention to Amazon because Barnes and Noble was going to crush all competitors and control the book business, there was widespread panic about the unstoppable monopoly power of AOL. AOL was going to gain a monopoly because of its death grip on instant messaging . The ?computer editor? for The Guardian worried that this was putting AOL ?on its way to world domination.? The AOL-Time Warner deal raised ?concerns that its merger would create a media powerhouse that would level competitors, dominate the Internet, and control consumer choice.? A Wired podcast talked about fears of a Sun-AOL monopoly , but they didn?t call that sort of thing a ?podcast? yet because the iPod hadn?t been invented. The audio clip was an MP3 file, and they suggested you listen to it on a Sonique MP3 player from Lycos. Lycos was a major Web portal, and according to Wikipedia , it was ?the most visited online destination in the world in 1999.? It was bought by a multinational conglomerate for $12.5 billion at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Whatever is left of Lycos was last sold for $36 million in 2010, though that deal seems to have collapsed in acrimony later on. Sic transit gloria mundi. The point of this little plunge into the natural history of the Internet is that in retrospect, the business and technology setting of ?You?ve Got Mail? was already starting to be outdated by the time it reached theaters, including its David and Goliath story of the small bookstore versus the discount chain store. The overall lesson is the folly of judging ?monopoly? power from a static snapshot at one moment in time. Postal Service or AT&T during the middle of the twentieth century?cases where it was (and in the case of the USPS, still is) literally illegal for a new rival to compete with the favored firm. But in the free market, as a matter of overwhelming historical record, technology and business relationships aren?t static, and behind one firm?s dominance are always forces gathering to challenge it.�If you don?t believe me, watch Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks and quake at the fearsome market dominance of AOL and Barnes and Noble. ?You?ve Got Mail? was conceived as an updated remake of the 1940 film ?The Shop Around the Corner.?

Read More

iPhone 8: UK release date, price, specs and best features of Apple’s …

Apple has launched two new smartphones, the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus, at a major event in California,� which also saw the release of the premium iPhone X handset. The iPhone 8 and 8 Plus are upgrades to Apple’s current iPhone 7 and 7 Plus range, updating some of the main features found on Apple’s current products. Like the iPhone X, the two new iPhone 8 and 8 Plus phones will come with wireless charging capabilities. The iPhone 8 Plus will have a 12MP dual-lens camera, similar to the one featured on the iPhone 7 Plus released last year. While the demise of the home button and Touch ID on the iPhone X has been in the news, the iPhone 8 will maintain the button and Touch ID. It won’t, however, have facial recognition. Initially, most pundits thought the iPhone 8 would be Apple’s main new phone – however it instead released three smartphones as part of the 10th anniversary of the original iPhone. The iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus are�similar in appearance to the current iPhone 7 and 7 Plus. There will be glass on the front and the back of the device, “reinforced by a laser welded steel and copper”. The iPhone 8 will cost �699 for the 64GB version, while the iPhone 8 Plus will start from �799 (64GB).

Read More

Here’s why Boost technology makes Adidas the most comfortable sneakers ever

While sneaker innovation across the industry consists of a lot of research and development, there?s also a lot of trial and error involved. As a sneaker collector, I was well aware of Boost technology in its early days, but I was a skeptic. I was first introduced to the technology with the Yeezy Boost 350, a sneaker done in collaboration with Kanye West. While the Yeezys were (and still are) comfortable, my love for Boost came in full swing when I purchased a pair of NMDs, a sneaker Adidas designed for the urban nomad. When I think of a modern-day nomad, I think of someone who?s active, on their feet a lot, and travels ? and the NMD is literally the perfect sneaker for that lifestyle. I have many sneakers that I wouldn?t say are uncomfortable, but it?s very hard to put them on when Boost is an available option, too. If I can anticipate a lot of walking or a long day on my feet, I?ll be taking it on in NMDs. I have the original version released, but since then Adidas has created an updated second version with more Boost cushioning and other styles like Chukkas and City Socks. What initially drew me to this specific pair of Ultra Boost X shoes was the fact that they were made in collaboration with Parley for the Oceans. Parley is an organization that aims to raise awareness and make changes in ocean life sustainability, so some of the yarn incorporates recycled ocean plastic. I?ve actually been keeping my eye out for this pair for awhile, because of that and because I love the look. I trust Adidas, when it comes to great running shoes, so I focused on those features in lieu of trying to hunt for quality. The Primeknit feels like a sock, the body of the shoe is really lightweight, and the supportive cage fits closely to my feet without smothering. All in all, I love them and wear them multiple times a week, on errands and during workouts. My experience with the Adidas Boost sole technology comes in the form of these Iniki Runners I got a couple weeks ago. I’d wanted to try a Boost shoe for a long time, but a lot of them look a little too high tech for my taste, and the Iniki was a great balance of modern technology with a classic upper. They reminded me a lot of the Adidas Samba that a lot of kids wore for indoor soccer growing up. They’re also a more affordable entry point for the Boost, as they only cost $120 instead of $180 or $200. Technology-driven designs might do well on the track, field, or court, but when it?s time to take off the athletic gear and step back into the streets, they look severely out of place. I love that the bounce in the sole is dynamic, meaning it bounces the more you press on it. It feels like I have a literal spring in my step when I wear these shoes. In 2013, The Brand with the Three Stripes introduced Boost as its revolutionary cushioning system, which provided the highest energy return in any running sneaker. When put together to form the distinct Boost midsole, the capsules store and release more energy than any other design on the market.

Read More

Do you have what it takes to live on Mars?

Back when Barack Obama was president , he called for the US to put humans on Mars by 2030, a claim that looks less and less likely the more their new leader flirts with nuclear detonation. Billionaire Elon Musk has made a similar claim, revealing his plan to help set up a colony of one�million people on the planet by the 2050s . But how will this Martian city look? At the beginning of the year, NASA came up for their concept for early dwellings on the planet. Another option would be to get�heavy drilling and digging machines on Mars to create underground shelters ?�a complicated and extravagantly�expensive�concept. Water can be extracted from the Mars soil, by heating the surface until it evaporates ?�so we’ll be covered on the H2O front. However the stored food we bring from Earth�will only serve as emergency rations, which means the astronauts will have to try and�eat as much freshly produced food as possible. Could human life be�supported by the Martian landscape?�Bowie also went on to deliberate over Mickey Mouse growing up a cow, but we’re not here to discuss the particular merits of that fantastical declaration (the answer is no – mice are in no way related to the�lackadaisical bovines and therefore can not grow up to be one). NASA food scientist Vicky Kloeris says there is a very real possibility of inhabitants suffering from menu fatigue. “If people don’t have enough variety or they get really bored with the food system, then they tend to eat enough to survive and not enough to thrive.” If your idea of a perfect Sunday morning is cosying�up under the duvet, then a trip to Mars is probably not for you. Four out of the six endured debilitating sleep problems ? including�one crew member who was living on a 25 hour day, meaning every two weeks there came a point when it was the middle of the day for everyone else, but for him it felt like the middle of the night. Researchers claimed that the ligthing was an issue and any real mission would require lighting that more closely resembles the light on Earth. �The conditions in the dome were designed �to emulate a long period of time spent on the Red Planet. Any mission to Mars�would inevitably result in exposure to cosmic radiation that has been shown to cause cognitive impairments in rodents, and possibly in astronauts engaged in deep space travel. In the book� Space Psychology and Psychiatry , Nick Kanas and�Dietrich Manzey point out a range of mental issues that could arise from this type of homesickness. “It’s really gratifying to know that the knowledge gained here from our mission�will contribute to the future exploration of Mars and the future exploration of Space in general,” said Paylor on Sunday. Indeed, mankind is now closer to exploring Mars in person than ever before, and while that may still be some way away, it’s time to ask: do you have what it takes to be among the first humans to live on the fourth rock from the sun? You’ve just travelled�54.6 million kilometers for an estimated 260 days and now you have to park the car, so to speak. According to Richard McGuire Davis, Jr. , Assistant Director for Science and Exploration and co-leader of the Mars Human Landing Sites Study at NASA, any spacecraft attempting to land on the surface of Mars would, “have to dive deep into the Martian atmosphere and skirt closer to the surface than we have done in the past.” Past ‘landers’ have been far too heavy to lower themselves down to this level, so any space craft�would have to be as light as possible, an incredibly tough issue to comprehend when you have to bring your house on the journey.

Read More
1 2 3 5