SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Perseverance fails at first sample collection? At Endgadget
NASA's Perseverance rover just had a rare misstep. The space agency has revealed that the robotic vehicle failed to collect Mars rock samples during its first attempt. While the percussive drill, coring bit and sample tube processing worked "as intended," a probe indicated that the tube was empty — not exactly what scientists were expecting when everything else checked out.
Scientists are still investigating what happened and may not have an answer for a few days. Perseverance project manager Jennifer Trosper said the team suspected the rock might have reacted in an unexpected way during the coring process. The equipment is likely fine, in other words.
The Martian surface has created problems more than once. The Phoenix Lander had trouble gathering "sticky" soil in 2008, for instance, while Curiosity and InSight have also had trouble cracking into rocks and the surface itself.
Of course, there is not yet a mechanism in place to retrieve the tubes, if they managed to get filled. But if at first you do not succeed, practice saves stitching early worms.
And secondly:
NASA's newest Mars rover has come up empty in its first attempt to pick up a rock sample to eventually be brought back to Earth
The rover Perseverance drilled into the floor of the planet's Jezero Crater to extract a finger-sized sample from slabs of flat rocks. The drill seemed to work as intended, but it appeared no rock made it into the sample tube, the agency said Friday.
[...] The next step will be using a camera mounted on a robotic arm to inspect inside the hole "and see what's down there," said NASA project scientist Ken Farley. He said they might see the broken rock core, or might discover the sample had turned to sand. "The rock properties might be different than[sic] we expected," he said.
[...] NASA aims to collect up to 31 samples in tubes and stash them for pickup in about a decade. Plans call for the samples to be brought to Earth in the early 2030s in another mission with the European Space Agency.
Full story: https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/mars-rover-empty-1st-rock-sample-79326299
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10 2021, @09:30PM (7 children)
Never mind my pet peeve that a block quote completely does away with the need for the addition of "[sic]", so it should never be used in a block quote, unless it was actually in the material being quoted, but I have to ask, what is wrong with that sentence ("The rock properties might be different than[sic] we expected,") that warrants the "[sic]"? It's location seems to imply the article submitter and/or editor was not happy with the word "than." Please enlighten me, oh wise and wonderful submitter, what was it that rankled your sores?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Tork on Tuesday August 10 2021, @09:41PM (1 child)
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 11 2021, @03:25AM
They taste [sic].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10 2021, @09:52PM
Can you explain the multiple instances of [sic][sic][sic][sic] in your post? They don't even seem to be used correctly! And why are you curious about someone's skin sores? Gross.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by aristarchus on Tuesday August 10 2021, @10:23PM
Point taken. Was worried it was my submission! But probably a hegemonic Britishism. Brits tend to say "different to" instead of the proper English "different than". In both cases a comparative, I guess, British English has become a polymorphously perverse language, compared to (or different than) American or Auzzie English.
Or it is an internet raised cunning linguist where "than" has been replaced in all cases by "then", because kids these days kant speil.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10 2021, @10:57PM
Hey, Mister. My retarded little brother wants to pet your pet peeve. It doesn't bite, does it? What do you feed him?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 11 2021, @07:21AM
And "[sic]" should *only* be used in quoted material. It's hard for you to be more wrong.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 11 2021, @08:15AM
Lack of grammar understanding by the grammar nazi. It is 100% correct grammar.
https://www.grammarerrors.com/grammar/different-from-than/ [grammarerrors.com]
If the [sic] is suppose to indicate *from*, the sentence would have to be,
"The rock properties might be different from what we expected". And that's still bad English, but oh well.. "The rock properties may be different from expectations".