Happy Days at NorderNey in Second Life

IMAGO Art Gallery: Happy Days at NorderNey

Currently open at IMAGO Art Gallery, curated by Mareea Farrasco, is an ensemble exhibition celebrating NorderNey (closed to public access at the time of writing), one of Second Life’s more popular photogenic regions (and which I confess to having covered in these pages in 2014, and 2017, although I really should have taken the time to visit it more recently).

Happy Days at NorderNey is a small but enticing exhibition, featuring images by Maxie Daviau, Ninny Dazy, Sorcha Tyles and Mareea herself in a space specially prepared to resemble a part of the region with a sandy beach, the foaming wash of a tide, under an overcast sky.

Each of the artists presents four pieces of art, somewhat split between landscapes of the region and avatar studies that using the region as a backdrop. Together they form – as the title of the exhibition suggests – memories of happy times spent within NorderNey in one of its more recent iterations.

IMAGO Art Gallery: Happy Days at NorderNey – Maxie Daviau

What is particularly interesting in the sixteen images presented is the way that all of the artists have selected more-or-less the same aspects of the region to include in their images: the path to the beach with bicycles leaning on the fence, the sailing boats moored off-shore the scooter sitting at the boundary between tall grass and warm sand for example.

In doing so, each presents unique perspectives on the setting through the use of colour, tone, and post-processing to bring out the clouds, or to offer a feeling of summer warmth or the overcast of an autumn’s day, and so on. Thus, each group of four images may feature some of the same elements as the others, but overall they present different moods and stir different emotional responses.

A small, easy-to view exhibition featuring a group of richly talented Second Life photographers.

IMAGO Art Gallery: Happy Days at NorderNey – Ninna Dazy

SLurl Details

2019 viewer release summaries week #18

Logos representative only and should not be seen as an endorsement / preference / recommendation

Updates for the week ending Sunday, May 5th

This summary is generally published every Monday, and is a list of SL viewer / client releases (official and TPV) made during the previous week. When reading it, please note:

  • It is based on my Current Viewer Releases Page, a list of all Second Life viewers and clients that are in popular use (and of which I am aware), and which are recognised as adhering to the TPV Policy. This page includes comprehensive links to download pages, blog notes, release notes, etc., as well as links to any / all reviews of specific viewers / clients made within this blog.
  • By its nature, this summary presented here will always be in arrears, please refer to the Current Viewer Release Page for more up-to-date information.
  • Note that for purposes of length, TPV test viewers, preview / beta viewers / nightly builds are generally not recorded in these summaries.

Official LL Viewers

  • Current Release version 6.2.0.526190, formerly the Estate Access Management RC viewer, dated April 12, promoted April 17 No change. – see my EAM overview for more information
  • Release channel cohorts:
    • Teranino Maintenance RC viewer updated to version 6.2.1.526845 on May 3rd.
  • Project viewers:
    • No updates.

LL Viewer Resources

Third-party Viewers

V5/V6-style

  • No updates.

V1-style

  • No Updates.

Mobile / Other Clients

  • Lumiya is currently unavailable through Google Play – see my article and update here. However, it remains available to new users (or can be re-purchased if urgent) via SlideMe.
  • MetaChat lists version 1.2.9104 (April 18th) as released; currently only version1.2.9103 is available via iTunes.

Additional TPV Resources

Related Links

Space Sunday: asteroid impacts and private space flights

An artist’s impression of a small (approx 60m) asteroid air burst disintegration over a city. Credit: Igor Zh./Shutterstock

I’ve written about the risk posed by the potential impact of a Near Earth Object on this planet several times within these Space Sunday articles. While they are rare, as we’ve seen with the Tunguska event of 1908, and the more recent  2013 Chelyabinsk air-blast and 2018 LA (ZLAF9B2) in June 2018, objects of a size sufficient enough to survive their initial entry into the Earth’s atmosphere before being ripped apart in a violent explosion can and do exist.

Nor is Earth alone in the threat – as witnessed by those observing the lunar eclipse of January 21st, 2019, the Moon can be hit as well. At 04:41 GMT, during the period of totality during that eclipse, numerous astronomers in North and South America and in Western Europe saw a sudden bright flash lasted less than 1/3 of a second. It was later attributed to an object around 30 to 60 centimetres (1 to 2 ft) across striking the Moon at around 61,000 km/h, producing a new crater somewhere between 10 and 15 metres (32 to 49 ft) across.

While the majority of the 10+ million objects thus far found crossing Earth’s orbit as they go around the Sun pose no real threat to us (in fact, the number of Potentially Hazardous Asteroids, or PHAs, has been put at just 2,000), and the risk of a substantial impact occurring in anyone’s individual lifetime is relatively remote, the fact is that – as Douglas Adams famously noted – space is big really big. Even the solar system is a vast place when compared to the size of Earth, big enough to hide any number of objects that might one day pose a very real threat to all life on Earth or, given humanity’s global distribution the potential to place one of our major cities at risk.

So how might we deal with such an eventuality? Currently, there are really only three practical options available to us – although others have been suggested, and more might be developed in the future. Which of them might be used depends on how much lead time we have in which to take action. To summarise:

  • The gravity tug: if the impact is decades away, a spacecraft with a motor such as an electric ion drive could rendezvous with the asteroid and enter a halo orbit around it. The motor could then be fired along the axis of flight, allowing the gravitational influence of the vehicle to “pull” the asteroid onto a new course. However, this option can really only be used if the inclination of the threatening asteroid is relatively close to that of Earth’s; if the two are very disparate, the time needed to get the spacecraft to the asteroid using gravity assist manoeuvres around the Earth or Venus or even Jupiter, might simply be too long.
The gravity tug explained. Credit: G. Manley / I. Pey
  • The Kinetic intercept: this uses brute force to deflect the asteroid by slamming relatively solid masses into to, their momentum serving to shunt it into a slightly altered orbit around the Sun that is sufficient for it to miss the Earth.
  • Nuclear deflection: similar to the kinetic intercept, but uses the shock waves of nuclear weapons detonated close to the asteroid to again shunt it into an altered orbit so it misses the Earth.

The major problem with the last two is the risk that if the asteroid is too fragile, rather than shunting it aside, they could shatter it, leaving Earth facing not s single object, but a scatter gun of debris, potentially with multiple elements large enough to devastate large areas of the planet’s surface should they enter the atmosphere and explosively disintegrate. This is also the reason why trying to directly blow an asteroid part using a nuclear strike isn’t regarded too favourably. There are other issues with each of these options that could also limit their effectiveness, or raise the need to repeat them, but they provide a general idea of how we might react.

NASA’s planned 2022 DART mission will deliberately smash a vehicle into a small asteroid to test the kinetic impact theory of asteroid deflection. Credit: NASA GSFC

Hence why the International Academy of Astronautics holds a Planetary Defence Conference every two years to discuss the latest findings with NEO and PHAs, and the ways and means to prevent such an impact – or at least the loss of life minimised. Since 2013, the 5-day conference has included a special “war game” type simulation to examine how a threat might be dealt with, and at the 2019 conference, held between April 29th and May 3rd, the simulation with publicly disseminated via social media as it progressed, to encourage grater public understanding about the need to better locate and track NEOs and PHAs (which are currently being discovered at the rate of around 700 a year).

In this simulation, which compressed an 8-year time frame into 5 days, the 200 astronomers, engineers, scientists and politicians at the conference were informed a large (fictional) asteroid around 300 metres across would slam into Colorado in 2027, unless then managed to divert it. Initially, things went well: a joint mission involving the USA, Russia, Europe, China and Japan used kinetic impacts to safely divert the bulk of the asteroid away from Earth. However, a 60m fragment broke away on a course that would see it hit the Earth’s atmosphere at 69,000 km/h (43,000 mph) and explode 15 km (9.3 mi) above Central Park, New York City. The force f the air blast would be sufficient to complete raze Manhattan and parts of New York City for a radius of 15 km (9.4 mi),  with the  effects of the blast felt up to 68 km (42.5 mi) from the epicentre. Plans were drawn up to try to deflect this fragment using a nuclear blast, but these became mired in political wrangling (not for the first time in these simulations)  until it was too late to achieve the desire deflection.

While such exercises might sound like scientists playing games, they do serve a purpose in that they help to underline the massive threat we face if we discover an asteroid is on a collision course with Earth – and the need for us to have better means to detect objects that might pose a threat early enough that we can take action, and also to better understand the processes – technical, scientific and political – that need to followed / overcome in order to prevent a collision.

They also highlight other issues as well. In this case, just how do you handle evacuating a city of 8 million souls? How much time is required (in the simulation, it came down to just 2 months)? What are the logistics required to ensure a (relatively) smooth evacuation? How and when should you tell the public? How do you avoid mass panic? This type of discussion is actually of major import, given current thinking is that if an object due to strike the Earth is 60 metres or less across, the focus should be on evacuating the area directly affected, rather than on trying to deflect it.

Continue reading “Space Sunday: asteroid impacts and private space flights”