this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
32 points (100.0% liked)

Space

10050 readers
398 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula

Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
32
The 1960s Tech Keeping NASA’s Voyager Probes Alive for Nearly 50 Years (gizmodo.com)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Powering spacecraft with solar energy may not seem like a challenge, given how intense the Sun’s light can feel on Earth. Spacecraft near the Earth use large solar panels to harness the Sun for the electricity needed to run their communications systems and science instruments.

However, the farther into space you go, the weaker the Sun’s light becomes and the less useful it is for powering systems with solar panels. Even in the inner solar system, spacecraft such as lunar or Mars rovers need alternative power sources.

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The solution is technology developed in the 1960s based on scientific principles discovered two centuries ago: radioisotope thermoelectric generators, or RTGs.

Wow, a discovery from the 1700s!

Radioisotope thermoelectric generators can turn heat into electricity using a principle called the Seebeck effect, discovered by German scientist Thomas Seebeck in 1821.

Ugh, the 1820s is now what two centuries ago is

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ugh, the 1820s is now what two centuries ago is

Uh, it is?

1 Century = 100 years

2025 - 200 = 1825

When referencing time by century, it's acceptable to round a little, and I'm not complaining about rounding up 4 years.

Are you by chance thinking of it like 18th century = 1700s where it's one off from what you'd expect?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

It’s just that in my mind 200 years ago is still the 1700s, sort of like how 30 years ago is still the 1970s, not the 1990s