Live performance of famous waltz to be beamed into space
VIENNA – A classical masterpiece with deep ties to spaceflight pop culture will finally reach the stars next week when the European Space Agency beams a live performance of "The Blue Danube" waltz by the Vienna Symphony Orchestra into the universe.
Many considered "By the Beautiful Blue Danube" an anthem of space after it was featured in Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, when Nasa's Voyager 1 and 2 probes launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida, in 1977, the waltz was not included among the songs on the two Voyager Golden Records.
The Vienna Tourist Board partnered with ESA to host the interstellar "Waltz Into Space" event to mark the 200th birthday of the late composer Johann Strauss II and the 50th birthday of the European Space Agency.
Nasa Works To Extend Voyager Spacecraft Mission Again: 'Every Day Could Be Our Last'
While it's unclear why the Waltz King's most famous piece wasn't included on the Golden Records, the Vienna Tourist Board made a spoof video suggesting that maybe a mission manager "forgot" to give the record back in time to make the launch because they were too busy enjoying the beautiful music. The European initiative is "using modern technology to correct a historical mistake."
"This demonstrates that our technology can transmit not only scientific data but also human art over long distances," ESA Director General Josef Aschbacher said. "This year also marks the 50th anniversary of our global ground station network. This broadcast will be a special moment that will show that music – just like space – connects all of humanity."
On Saturday, Wiener Symphoniker (the Vienna Symphony) will play Strauss's waltz live as ESA uses its 35-meter-diameter deep-space dish antenna in Spain to transmit the song into the stars, beyond even NASA's interstellar Voyager spacecraft.
Voyager 1 And 2 Continue Offering New Mysteries From Interstellar Space
The concert from the MAK Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna will also be broadcast around the world, and there will be an in-person viewing event at Bryant Park in New York City. The live broadcast and event will happen at 2:30 p.m. ET and 8:30 p.m. local time in Vienna.
According to the Symphony, the signal will be sent into space at the speed of light, passing the Moon in over a second, Mars in 4 minutes and the outer limits of our solar system in 17 hours.
After 24 hours, the final chords of the Danube Waltz will reach the Voyager 1 spacecraft more than 15 billion miles from Earth. Both Voyager 1 and 2 continue operating in interstellar space more than 47 years after launching.Original article source: Live performance of famous waltz to be beamed into space
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
24 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
A Rogue Star Could Hurl Earth Into Deep Space, Study Warns
Mars is not safe either. Billions of years from now, the Sun will swell into a red giant, swallowing Mercury, Venus, and Earth. But that's not the only way our planet could meet its demise. A new simulation points to the menacing threat of a passing field star that could cause the planets in the solar system to collide or fling Earth far from the Sun. When attempting to model the evolution of the solar system, astronomers have often treated our host star and its orbiting planets as an isolated system. In reality, however, the Milky Way is teeming with stars that may get too close and threaten the stability of the solar system. A new study, published in the journal Icarus, suggests that stars passing close to the solar system will likely influence the orbits of the planets, causing another planet to smack into Earth or send our home planet flying. In most cases, passing stars are inconsequential, but one could trigger chaos in the solar system—mainly because of a single planet. The closest planet to the Sun, Mercury, is prone to instability as its orbit can become more elliptical. Astronomers believe that this increasing eccentricity could destabilize Mercury's orbit, potentially leading it to collide with Venus or the Sun. If a star happens to be nearby, it would only make things worse. The researchers ran 2,000 simulations using NASA's Horizons System, a tool from the Solar System Dynamics Group that precisely tracks the positions of objects in our solar system. They then inserted scenarios involving passing stars and found that stellar flybys over the next 5 billion years could make the solar system about 50% less stable. With passing stars, Pluto has a 3.9% chance of being ejected from the solar system, while Mercury and Mars are the two planets most often lost after a stellar flyby. Earth's instability rate is lower, but it has a higher chance of its orbit becoming unstable if another planet crashes into it. 'In addition, we find that the nature of stellar-driven instabilities is more violent than internally driven ones,' the researchers wrote in the paper. 'The loss of multiple planets in stellar-driven instabilities is common and occurs about 50% of the time, whereas it appears quite rare for internally driven instabilities.' The probability of Earth's orbit becoming unstable is hundreds of times larger than prior estimates, according to the study. Well, that just gives us one more thing to worry about.
Scientific American
3 hours ago
- Scientific American
Why Do We Launch Space Telescopes?
On April 24, 1990, NASA and the European Space Agency launched an astronomical revolution. When the Space Shuttle Discovery roared into the sky on that day, it carried the Hubble Space Telescope in its payload bay, and the astronauts aboard deployed it into low-Earth orbit soon thereafter. Hubble is not the largest telescope ever built—in fact, with a 2.4-meter mirror, it's actually considered by astronomers to be small—but it has a huge advantage over its earthbound siblings: it's above essentially all of our planet's atmosphere. That lofty perch makes Hubble's views sharper and deeper—and even broader, by allowing the telescope to gather types of light invisible to human eyes and otherwise blocked by Earth's air. And, after 35 years in orbit, Hubble is still delivering incredible science and cosmic vistas of breathtaking beauty. Launching telescopes into space takes much more effort and money than building them on the ground, though. Space telescopes also tend to be smaller than ground-based ones; they have to fit into the payload housing of a rocket, limiting their size. That restriction can be minimized by designing an observatory to launch in a folded-up form that then unfurls in space, as with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) —but this approach almost inevitably piles on more risk, complexity and cost. Given those considerable obstacles, one might ask whether space telescopes are ever really worth the hassle. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The short answer is: Yes, of course! For astronomical observations, getting above Earth's atmosphere brings three very basic but extremely powerful advantages. The first is that the sky is much darker in space. We tend to think of our atmosphere as being transparent, at least when it's cloudless. But unwanted light still suffuses Earth's air, even on the clearest night at the planet's darkest spot. Light pollution—unneeded illumination cast up into the sky instead of down to the ground—accounts for some of this, but the air also contains sunlight-energized molecules that slowly release this energy as a feeble trickle of visible light. This 'airglow' is dim but, even at night, outshines very faint celestial objects, limiting what ground-based telescopes can see. It's a problem of contrast, like trying to hear a whisper in a crowded restaurant. The quieter the background noise level, the better you can hear faint sounds. It's the same with the sky: a darker sky allows fainter objects to be seen. The second advantage to observing from space is that this escapes the inherent unsteadiness of our air. Turbulence in the atmosphere is the reason stars twinkle. That's anathema to astronomers; the twinkling of a star smears out its light during an observation, blurring small structures together and limiting a ground-based telescope's effective resolution (that is, how well it can distinguish between two closely spaced objects). This also makes faint objects even dimmer and harder to detect because their light isn't concentrated into a single spot and is instead diffused. Above the atmosphere, the stars and nebulas and galaxies appear crisp and unwavering, allowing us to capture far greater detail. The third reason to slip the surly bonds of Earth is that our air is extremely good at shielding us from many wavelengths of light our eyes cannot see. Ultraviolet light has wavelengths shorter than visible light (the kind our eyes detect), and while some of it reaches Earth's surface from space—enough from the sun, at least, to cause sunburns—a lot of it is instead absorbed by the air. In fact, light with a wavelength shorter than about 0.3 micron is absorbed completely. (That's a bit shorter than that of violet light, the shortest we can see, at about 0.38 micron.) So any sufficiently shortwave light—not just ultraviolet, but also even more cell-damaging x-rays and gamma rays—is sopped up by molecules in the air. That's good for human health but not great for observations of astronomical phenomena that emit light in these regimes. This happens with longer wavelengths, too. Carbon dioxide and water are excellent absorbers of infrared light, preventing astronomers on the ground from seeing most of those emissions from cosmic objects, too. As we've learned with JWST, observations in infrared can show us much about the universe that would otherwise lie beyond our own limited visual range. As just one example, the light from extremely distant galaxies is redshifted by the cosmic expansion into infrared wavelengths, where JWST excels. In fact, space telescopes that can see in different wavelengths have been crucial for discovering all sorts of surprising celestial objects and events. X-rays were critical in finding the first black holes, whose accretion disks generate high-energy light as the matter within them falls inward. Gamma-ray bursts, immensely powerful explosions, were initially detected via space-based observations. Brown dwarfs (which are essentially failed stars) emit very little visible light but are bright enough in the infrared that we now count them by the thousands in our catalogs. Observing in these other kinds of light is critical for unveiling important details about the underlying astrophysics of these and other phenomena. It's only by combining observations across the electromagnetic spectrum that we can truly understand how the universe works. Still, launching telescopes into space is a lot of trouble and expense. Official work on Hubble started in the 1970s, but delays kept it on the ground for decades. It also cost a lot of money: roughly $19.5 billion total between 1977 and 2021, in today's dollars. (Operational costs have been about $100 million per year in recent years, but Hubble is facing budget cuts.) JWST was $10 billion before it even launched, and running it adds about $170 million annually to the project's total price tag. Compare that with the European Southern Observatory's Extremely Large Telescope, or ELT, a 39-meter behemoth currently under construction that has an estimated budget of under $2 billion. Building on the ground is simpler, requires less testing and is more fault-tolerant, allowing much more bang for the buck. The capabilities of ground-based versus space-based telescopes are different, however. In general, big earthbound telescopes can collect a lot of light and see faint structures, but except for the ELT, they don't have the resolution of their space-based counterparts and can't see light outside the transparency window of our planet's air. Also, not every observation needs to be done from space; many can be done just fine from the ground, freeing up time on the more expensive and tightly scheduled space telescopes. Pitting these two kinds of facilities against each other—why have one when we can have the other?—is the wrong way to think about this. They don't compete; they complement. Together they provide a much clearer view of the cosmos than either can give by itself. Astronomy needs both.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
See a lunar scar darken the crescent moon tonight
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. May 30 presents a perfect opportunity to spot Mare Crisium — a dark Nevada-sized patch — etched into the delicate curve of the crescent moon before it sinks below the horizon around midnight. Skywatchers in the U.S. will find the moon's sickle-like form hanging around 30 degrees above the western horizon after sunset on May 30, with around 16% of its surface illuminated by direct sunlight, according to stargazing website On May 30, the moon is in the constellation Cancer, with the Beehive cluster close to its left and Mars shining just beyond. To the right, the bright stars Castor and Pollux also make an appearance. The moon is among the most popular targets for astronomers, thanks to the ever-shifting play of light and shadow across its surface. As it makes its near month-long journey around Earth, a myriad of different regions and features come into stark relief, changing night by night. And yet, for all this variety, the moon only ever shows a single side to us as it's tidally locked to our planet. One such feature is the dark lunar maria (Latin for 'seas'), formed when molten lava flooded a network of impact basins that scarred the moon's surface billions of years ago. These lava flows swiftly cooled in the frigid environment of space, leaving behind vast basaltic plains that remain easily visible to the naked eye today. Mare Crisium, or the 'Sea of Crises', can be spotted on the night of May 30 as an oval-shaped dark patch on the moon's northeastern limb, close to the terminator — the line that separates day from night on any solar system body. Spanning 345 miles (555 kilometers), this lunar mare is visible to the naked eye, though a pair of 10x50 binoculars will reveal more of the craggy region surrounding the lunar sea. An entry-level 6-inch telescope, meanwhile, will allow you to pick out the 14-mile-wide (23 km) Picard Crater that stands alone near the south-western rim of the Nevada-sized plane, according to NASA. Just above Picard lies the similarly sized Peirce Crater, with the smaller Swift Crater just beyond. Before the moon dips below the western horizon around midnight local time, moongazers may also catch sight of its shadowed expanse faintly glowing — an effect known as earthshine, caused by sunlight reflected off Earth softly illuminating the moon's night side. TOP TELESCOPE PICK: Want to explore the lunar surface for yourself? The Celestron NexStar 4SE is ideal for beginners wanting quality, reliable and quick views of celestial objects. For a more in-depth look at our Celestron NexStar 4SE review. The closest humans have come to Mare Crisium was during the final moon mission of the Apollo era, when Apollo 17 astronauts Eugene Cernan, Ron Evans and Harrison "Jack" Schmitt landed on the eastern edge of Mare Serenitatis. However, Mare Crisium did serve as the landing site of the Soviet Luna 15 and Luna 24 robotic missions, and it made headlines again in March 2025 with the successful touchdown of Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost lander. Anyone interested in exploring the lunar surface for themselves should check out our guides to the best binocular and telescope deals available in 2025. Also, be sure to read up on our guide to photographing and exploring the moon's surface. Editor's Note: If you would like to share your astrophotography with readers, then please send your photo(s), comments, and your name and location to spacephotos@
