×
Microsoft’s New AI Tool Can Diagnose Patients More Accurately Than Doctors

Microsoft’s New AI Tool Can Diagnose Patients More Accurately Than Doctors

Tech-news , ,

Microsoft researchers unveiled a new artificial intelligence (AI) system on Monday that can diagnose patients more accurately than human doctors. Dubbed the Microsoft AI Diagnostic Orchestrator (MAI-DxO), it includes multiple AI models and a framework that allows it to go through patient symptoms and history to suggest relevant tests. Based on the results, it then suggests possible diagnoses. The Redmond-based tech giant highlighted that apart from the accuracy of the diagnosis, the system is also trained to be cost-effective in terms of tests conducted.

Microsoft Develops Benchmark to Test MAI-DxO’s Performance

In a post on X (formerly known as Twitter), Mustafa Suleyman, the CEO of Microsoft AI, posted about the MAI-DxO system. Calling it a “big step towards medical superintelligence,” he said the AI system can solve some of the world’s toughest medical cases with higher accuracy and lower costs compared to traditional diagnostic measures.

MAI-DxO simulates a virtual panel of physicians with diverse diagnostic approaches who collaborate to solve medical cases, the company said in a blog post. The Orchestrator includes a multi-agentic system where one provides a hypothesis, one picks the tests, two others provide checklists and stewardship, and the last challenges the hypothesis.

MAI-DxO workflow
Photo Credit: Microsoft

 

Once a hypothesis passes this panel, the AI system can either ask a question, request tests, or provide the diagnosis if it feels it has enough information. In case it recommends a test, it performs a cost analysis to ensure that the overall cost remains reasonable. Interestingly, the system is model agnostic, meaning it can perform with any third-party AI models.

Microsoft claims that the system boosts the diagnostic performance of every AI model that was tested. However, OpenAI’s o3 fared the best by correctly solving 85.5 percent of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) benchmark cases. The company said that the same cases were also given to 21 practising physicians from the US and UK, and all of them had between five to 20 years of clinical experience. The human doctors had an accuracy of 20 percent.

MAI-DxO can be configured to operate within defined cost constraints, the company said. Once an input budget has been added, the system explores cost-to-value trade-offs while making diagnostic decisions. This helps in the AI system only ordering the necessary tests, instead of every possible test to rule out all causes of the symptoms.

To assess the AI system, Microsoft also developed a new benchmark dubbed the Sequential Diagnosis Benchmark (SD Bench). Unlike typical medical benchmark tests that ask multiple-choice questions, this test assesses AI systems’ ability to iteratively ask the right questions and order the right tests. Then it evaluates the answers by comparing them to the outcome published in the NEJM.

Notably, the MAI-DxO is not yet approved for clinical use, and is meant as initial research into developing AI capability in diagnostic operations. Microsoft said that its AI system can only be approved for clinical usage after rigorous safety testing, clinical validation, and regulatory reviews.

Source link
#Microsofts #Tool #Diagnose #Patients #Accurately #Doctors

Tag

Related Posts


Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026.

Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence">A16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech History Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026. Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024. Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic. Turns out that Flux 3 is exceptional at generating historical footage… like elementary school students in the ’90s predicting how we’ll use computers. (the last girl is my favorite!) pic.twitter.com/oH6qJy8AQU — Justine Moore (@venturetwins) July 28, 2026 The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films. “I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately. These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical. “I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote. Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity. What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim? This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action. President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video. I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real. In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point. #A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence">A16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech HistoryA16Z Brags That Its AI Is Great for Poisoning the Internet With Fake Tech History Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026. Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024. Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic. Turns out that Flux 3 is exceptional at generating historical footage… like elementary school students in the ’90s predicting how we’ll use computers. (the last girl is my favorite!) pic.twitter.com/oH6qJy8AQU — Justine Moore (@venturetwins) July 28, 2026 The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films. “I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately. These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical. “I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote. Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity. What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim? This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action. President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video. I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real. In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point. #A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

Did you recently see a video of kids from the 1990s predicting how computers would be used in the future? It’s fake. The video was created using Flux 3 and if you didn’t inspect it too closely, it looks pretty authentic as an artifact from 30 years ago. But it serves as a great reminder that we really can’t trust our own eyes here in 2026.

Justine Moore, a partner at venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, tweeted the video last week, writing that Black Forest Labs’ Flux 3 is “exceptional at generating historical footage.” The venture capital firm announced it was investing in Black Forest Labs in 2024.

Moore noted that the last girl in the video was her favorite, perhaps because it has some awkward silences that make it appear much more realistic.

The video has an aesthetic quality that feels like 1990s video and the outfits are decade appropriate. The answers given by the AI kids are also very believable. “They’ll probably do our homework,” one AI-generated kid says. Another responds, “Maybe they’ll make movies for us,” an obvious nod to the agenda of tech boosters who think AI tools will soon replace Hollywood films.

“I think we’ll just tell them what to do,” another fake AI kid says in the video. That one feels like a wink to folks who are worried about AI going rogue. OpenAI and Anthropic have had some experience with that lately.

These kinds of predictions were extremely common in the 20th century. Kids frequently predicted that computers (or robots) would do their homework for them. A few years back I looked at some predictions for robots in the future from kids in the 1980s and they sounded identical.

“I want my robot to do things for my mom and me. I want my robot to do my homework,” one Kentucky first grader in 1988 wrote.

Kids were predicting the same kind of stuff as far back as the 1950s. So it’s clear where the creators of this video were pulling this idea from. But the video presents a unique challenge for the future of humanity.

What happens when people make realistic AI videos that change how we understand history? Obviously this one is fairly innocuous, even if the goal is to normalize AI use through subtle propaganda. But what about people who create new versions of events in history and treat them like newly uncovered video? Perhaps we get an AI-generated wide angle view of the airplane that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Or maybe we get a new angle on the assassination of John F. Kennedy that reveals the president was actually killed by Tiny Tim?

This is just the world we live in now. And we have to navigate it with proper skepticism. Unfortunately, people can be so skeptical that they discount very real photos and videos. Have you heard that some pro baseball players have started to insist Babe Ruth didn’t actually exist? The evidence for this claim is that apparently there isn’t enough video footage of the late baseball great. But it’s a ridiculous idea for so many reasons, not least of which is that we actually have a fair amount of motion picture film showing Babe Ruth in action.

President Donald Trump benefits from the same kind of skepticism in a perverse way. It’s known as the liar’s dividend, where someone can claim that real footage is fake because there’s enough doubt based on the available technology to create a plausible fake video.

I’m not saying that Tiny Tim actually killed Kennedy. I’m just saying that if he really did and there was video proving it, nobody would believe it’s real. And if someone made a fake AI video showing Tiny Tim killing Kennedy there would be people who absolutely think it’s real.

In short, we’re just cooked as a species at this point.

#A16Z #Brags #Great #Poisoning #Internet #Fake #Tech #Historya16z,AI,Artificial intelligence

A SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex">The SpaceX Falcon Lunar Crash Is a Warning for Moon BasesA SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex

crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex">The SpaceX Falcon Lunar Crash Is a Warning for Moon Bases

A SpaceX rocket that has been drifting in space for a year and a half is set to crash into the moon on Wednesday, stirring up a debris cloud that could be visible from Earth. The impact raises questions on the future of lunar exploration, including how to protect any future moon bases from space junk.

The rocket set for moon impact is the upper stage of a Falcon 9 that transported a pair of lunar landers. While the landers successfully reached the surface, the rocket was left adrift since it did not have enough fuel to return to Earth or enter a stable orbit.

Weighing 4 metric tons, the rocket is expected to strike the lunar surface at a speed of approximately 5,400 mph—about seven times the speed of sound. Without an atmosphere to slow the projectile down, the impact will cause an explosion equivalent to 3 metric tons of TNT, leaving a crater that’s projected to be up to 27 meters in diameter and 5 meters deep.

The upper stage is expected to hit the surface around 6:34 am UTC on Wednesday, likely making impact near Einstein Crater on the western edge of the moon’s near side. The Americas will have the best view of this impact. While it won’t be visible to the naked eye, viewers should be able to spot the debris plume through a good telescope for a few minutes.

A lunar crash landing visible from Earth will be a spectacle, one that raises concerns about the future of the moon. Multiple countries are planning uncrewed lunar missions, which could clutter the area around the moon. This SpaceX rocket won’t be the first to accidentally crash into the moon. In March 2022, a Chinese Long March 3C rocket also struck the lunar surface and left a crater that’s 29 meters wide.

China and the US are also pushing to build bases on the surface in the coming decades.

Bill Gray, the creator of the Project Pluto initiative to develop software and tools to track the orbits of asteroids, comets, and artificial satellites, was the first to calculate the trajectory of the impending Falcon 9 crash. He was also part of a team that worked on a preprint study released last month detailing the collision.

The crash landing is ”an opportunity to test pipelines for measuring flash properties to locate impact events seismically, and to better understand the multi-modal hazards posed to future lunar infrastructure and astronauts from space debris impacting the Moon,” the study states.

Although building a moon research center capable of supporting a sustained human presence will take at least a decade, NASA’s missions to construct the first facilities are expected to launch in the coming years as part of the Artemis program.

“These sorts of things are going to happen more and more often. And as we have more astronauts on the lunar surface, more lunar infrastructure habitats, for example, we need to understand how much of a risk these impact events actually pose,” Benjamin Fernando, a researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and coauthor of the preprint study, tells ABC News.

The risk posed by space debris is part of a growing list of hazards that cast doubt on the safety of any long-term project on the moon. In addition to the potential for space junk to wreak havoc on the lunar surface, natural events such as meteorite strikes also threaten any future activities. But with any potential lunar bases still a decade or more away, there’s ample time for researchers to look at the hazards and plan for them.

“This is an ideal way of studying both the direct risks, the risk of being hit by debris or being blinded by a flash of light, but also the indirect risk, the risk of being hit by a cloud of ejected material and having that disrupt or interfere with spacecraft functions in lunar orbit as well,” Fernando says.

#SpaceX #Falcon #Lunar #Crash #Warning #Moon #Basesspace,spacecraft,moon,spacex

Microsoft’s remote meeting software will lose major functionality on mobile soon if you don’t update your app.

In a support note on its website (via TechRadar), Microsoft said that people who use the iOS or Android apps for Microsoft Teams need to update to the latest version of the app by the beginning of October. Users who fail to do that will lose access to the app’s Calendar functionality, which would obviously be a big hindrance to anyone trying to keep track of when their meetings are supposed to happen.

We asked you to predict what Apple will do next. See the results and find out how to get a shot at winning an Apple Watch!

It should be stated that nothing is changing in the browser or desktop versions of Teams. This only applies to the mobile app.

“This change helps maintain a reliable calendar experience on iOS and Android devices and ensures compatibility with ongoing Teams service updates,” the note said.

SEE ALSO: Microsoft will straight up give you a free pair of Sony XM6 headphones right now

No reason was given for why this feature would be shut off for those who fail to update, but TechRadar speculated that it had to do with the upcoming end-of-life for Microsoft’s Exchange Web Services system. Updating the mobile Teams app will presumably get around that, allowing for continued use of the Calendar feature.

Don’t miss any meetings, folks.

Topics Apps & Software Microsoft

#Microsoft #Teams #users #lose #Calendar #access #weeks #update">Microsoft Teams users will lose Calendar access in weeks unless they update Microsoft’s remote meeting software will lose major functionality on mobile soon if you don’t update your app.In a support note on its website (via TechRadar), Microsoft said that people who use the iOS or Android apps for Microsoft Teams need to update to the latest version of the app by the beginning of October. Users who fail to do that will lose access to the app’s Calendar functionality, which would obviously be a big hindrance to anyone trying to keep track of when their meetings are supposed to happen. We asked you to predict what Apple will do next. See the results and find out how to get a shot at winning an Apple Watch! Mashable Light Speed It should be stated that nothing is changing in the browser or desktop versions of Teams. This only applies to the mobile app.“This change helps maintain a reliable calendar experience on iOS and Android devices and ensures compatibility with ongoing Teams service updates,” the note said. SEE ALSO: Microsoft will straight up give you a free pair of Sony XM6 headphones right now No reason was given for why this feature would be shut off for those who fail to update, but TechRadar speculated that it had to do with the upcoming end-of-life for Microsoft’s Exchange Web Services system. Updating the mobile Teams app will presumably get around that, allowing for continued use of the Calendar feature. Don’t miss any meetings, folks. Topics Apps & Software Microsoft #Microsoft #Teams #users #lose #Calendar #access #weeks #update

Microsoft’s remote meeting software will lose major functionality on mobile soon if you don’t update your app.

In a support note on its website (via TechRadar), Microsoft said that people who use the iOS or Android apps for Microsoft Teams need to update to the latest version of the app by the beginning of October. Users who fail to do that will lose access to the app’s Calendar functionality, which would obviously be a big hindrance to anyone trying to keep track of when their meetings are supposed to happen.

We asked you to predict what Apple will do next. See the results and find out how to get a shot at winning an Apple Watch!

It should be stated that nothing is changing in the browser or desktop versions of Teams. This only applies to the mobile app.

“This change helps maintain a reliable calendar experience on iOS and Android devices and ensures compatibility with ongoing Teams service updates,” the note said.

SEE ALSO: Microsoft will straight up give you a free pair of Sony XM6 headphones right now

No reason was given for why this feature would be shut off for those who fail to update, but TechRadar speculated that it had to do with the upcoming end-of-life for Microsoft’s Exchange Web Services system. Updating the mobile Teams app will presumably get around that, allowing for continued use of the Calendar feature.

Don’t miss any meetings, folks.

Topics Apps & Software Microsoft

#Microsoft #Teams #users #lose #Calendar #access #weeks #update">Microsoft Teams users will lose Calendar access in weeks unless they update

Microsoft’s remote meeting software will lose major functionality on mobile soon if you don’t update your app.

In a support note on its website (via TechRadar), Microsoft said that people who use the iOS or Android apps for Microsoft Teams need to update to the latest version of the app by the beginning of October. Users who fail to do that will lose access to the app’s Calendar functionality, which would obviously be a big hindrance to anyone trying to keep track of when their meetings are supposed to happen.

We asked you to predict what Apple will do next. See the results and find out how to get a shot at winning an Apple Watch!

It should be stated that nothing is changing in the browser or desktop versions of Teams. This only applies to the mobile app.

“This change helps maintain a reliable calendar experience on iOS and Android devices and ensures compatibility with ongoing Teams service updates,” the note said.

SEE ALSO: Microsoft will straight up give you a free pair of Sony XM6 headphones right now

No reason was given for why this feature would be shut off for those who fail to update, but TechRadar speculated that it had to do with the upcoming end-of-life for Microsoft’s Exchange Web Services system. Updating the mobile Teams app will presumably get around that, allowing for continued use of the Calendar feature.

Don’t miss any meetings, folks.

Topics Apps & Software Microsoft

#Microsoft #Teams #users #lose #Calendar #access #weeks #update

Post Comment