Comments on: Time Magazine Top 10 Scientific Discoveries of 2008: Space and Physics Dominate

By: ????

???? — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:17:39 +0000

??????? ?? ??????… ??????? ? ?????

By: ?E?????O?

?E?????O? — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 17:33:38 +0000

?????. ???????? ? ?????????, ? ?????? ???????? ? ??? ????

By: amir

amir — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:49:03 +0000

I am very happy to give a larg number of space discoveries. specialy works of HST

By: Emmanuel Kange

Emmanuel Kange — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:30:05 +0000

Please always send me the latest discoveries

By: discovery blog

discovery blog — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:39:24 +0000

Indeed, the world of science and technology is very amazing.

Nice list. I'm very much impress with the LHC. Can't wait to know its discovery in the near future.

By: Aseem

Aseem — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:22:39 +0000

I think this is rather a partial list.

I think instead of China space walk, Chandrayaan was bigger achievement as it was the first mission to moon by India and it was successful. It is also regarded as the cheapest mission by all standards.

By: alandee

alandee — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:30:26 +0000

I think any list is going to be challenged, especially when we have such a diverse range of achievements, discoveries and failures to chose from. I think a UT list of some type would be brilliant, and then every number would relate to physics and astronomy without pesky bacterium, invisibility cloaks and stone age skeletons getting in the way !!

Cheers,
al.

By: Pavel Smutny

Pavel Smutny — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 10:09:17 +0000

I think that LOS ALAMOS cosmic ray survay, detecting of high accelerated protons, atom's cores with positive result what took more than seven years, finding of exact sources of cosmic rays on both sides of constellation ORION is very important discovery. Especially when that source could be approaching planet X so close to us how Saturn,…and so X coming to perihelia in 2012,…

By: punkish emo

punkish emo — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:34:15 +0000

thXx keeeeeewL!L!!

By: REllis

REllis — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:53:04 +0000

The LHC? For heaven's sake.
We all want to be inspired but the darn thing is still busted.
The only black hole created is where all the funding for it is going.

Proof positive we live in a world where one need achieve nor produce little or nothing and still garner respect and accolade.

The silly season continues.

By: Iskender

Iskender — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:35:24 +0000

If I had known that one could discover exoplanets by looking into the eye of Sauron I would have stopped being good a long time ago!

By: cheld

cheld — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:55:49 +0000

I think #7 should have been mentioned here as well. Especially since Universetoday published an article on this as well. If I can remember correctly it was called Warp Drives and Cloaking Devices

Cheers,

Chris

By: Astrofiend

Astrofiend — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:12:39 +0000

Hell yeah Ian – but do a top 20 for a more comprehensive overview.

Universe Today's Top 20 Astronomical & Related Discoveries/Achievements of 2008 – should become an annual thing… All the UT contributors could have a little get together and voting session, and then do a big article on it. Then you could put them up for a vote on the site to reveal the popular choice awards from UT readers.

That'd be rad, and I reserve the word rad for only the very raddest things.

By: Joe Shobe

Joe Shobe — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:49:47 +0000

Do it, Ian. This site has written about so much cool stuff this year its like the list needs to be a factor of 10. Top Ten lists have always represented something like 10 ideas/facts/ accomplishments out of a 100, or so. Because we're talking about the most impactful of maybe thousands of valuable (and publishable) accomplishments (engineering) and discoveries (science) these recent years, we should be talking about definitions for the top 10 degrees of impactfulness, and list them all where they line up, with a top ten in each category.

By: Ian O'Neill

Ian O'Neill — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:01:14 +0000

@Joe:- I'll check out that Space.com article… sounds intriguing

@Kevin:- To be honest, I'm not certain whether Time Mag got confused about what "discovery" actually means. You're right, the announcement this week about the supermassive black hole was pretty groundbreaking. But then there are other endeavours that certainly warrant a mention. What about SpaceX – the first commercial space vehicle to be launched into orbit, or rovers Spirit and Opportunity (what an astounding mission), or the first ever asteroid to be observed before it hit Earth (the Sudanese impact)…. the list is endless.

Hmmm, I might do an alternative list

By: Kevin M.

Kevin M. — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:36:39 +0000

I think the 16-year "stars orbiting the black hole" project may surpass all of these for stunning quality/quantity of results.

By: Joe Shobe

Joe Shobe — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:16:38 +0000

Ian, I wish you or Nancy would Blog about an articlee I just read on Space.com talking about how near stellar fly-bys to our solar system disrupt the Oort cloud possibly sending commets our way. The authors talked about fly-bys of 100,000 AU, and disruptive fly-bys of just 10,000 AU (about every 100 million years. Give me a break; we have a star passing our solar system between .2 and 1.5 light years? The nearest star is 4.2 light years right now, and its going to pass through the Oort Cloud? No.

By: Ian O'Neill

Ian O'Neill — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:53:21 +0000

OK, read "achievements" instead of "discoveries" and then we'll be groovy

I was uncertain about the Time article too, but I was just pleased to see #1: Physics, #2 Mars, #4 Space and #6 Astronomy. This is key here – look at what we've achieved in only 12 months!

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:48:47 +0000

Why are these called discoveries?? Instead of achievements??
Did we not know that Mars had a pole?
the LHC? Did we happen upon china in space??

what

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:36:17 +0000

I'm just going nuts here. I have a saved picture from a few years ago of what "might be" the first picture of an exoplanet. It's an infared image, so maybe that's why they're not counting it. But I never heard a refute on that. Does anybody remember the photo I'm talking about?