<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_19_214240</id>
	<title>32 Exoplanets Discovered By Chilean Telescope</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1255943280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>the4thdimension writes <i>"An article on CNN notes that <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/10/19/space.new.planets/index.html">32 exoplanets have been discovered</a> using a new Chilean telescope. The telescope is capable of detecting movements of 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace). These 32 new planets give the telescope a total of 75 planets it has discovered, out of the 400 discovered using all methods employed by astronomers. This places the HARPS system as the world's foremost exoplanet hunter."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>the4thdimension writes " An article on CNN notes that 32 exoplanets have been discovered using a new Chilean telescope .
The telescope is capable of detecting movements of 2.1mph ( comparable to a slow walking pace ) .
These 32 new planets give the telescope a total of 75 planets it has discovered , out of the 400 discovered using all methods employed by astronomers .
This places the HARPS system as the world 's foremost exoplanet hunter .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the4thdimension writes "An article on CNN notes that 32 exoplanets have been discovered using a new Chilean telescope.
The telescope is capable of detecting movements of 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace).
These 32 new planets give the telescope a total of 75 planets it has discovered, out of the 400 discovered using all methods employed by astronomers.
This places the HARPS system as the world's foremost exoplanet hunter.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801105</id>
	<title>Re:Enemy Planets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255951560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It depends on who the president is.  Me, I'm voting for Harrison Ford.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It depends on who the president is .
Me , I 'm voting for Harrison Ford .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It depends on who the president is.
Me, I'm voting for Harrison Ford.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801767</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>Runaway1956</author>
	<datestamp>1255955100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only reason to send an unmanned craft, is to scout out the habitable planets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason to send an unmanned craft , is to scout out the habitable planets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason to send an unmanned craft, is to scout out the habitable planets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800361</id>
	<title>link to ESO Press Release</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the "new Chilenean telescope" the summary is referring to is actually the 3.6m telescope of the European Southern Observatory (ESO) in Chile, which started operation in 1976...</p><p>and here is the link to the <a href="http://www.eso.org/public/outreach/press-rel/pr-2009/pr-39-09.html" title="eso.org" rel="nofollow"> ESO Press Release</a> [eso.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the " new Chilenean telescope " the summary is referring to is actually the 3.6m telescope of the European Southern Observatory ( ESO ) in Chile , which started operation in 1976...and here is the link to the ESO Press Release [ eso.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the "new Chilenean telescope" the summary is referring to is actually the 3.6m telescope of the European Southern Observatory (ESO) in Chile, which started operation in 1976...and here is the link to the  ESO Press Release [eso.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29805137</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1256031120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's all we need. More planets.</p></div><p>Save the planets! Collect them all! Then strip-mine them!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all we need .
More planets.Save the planets !
Collect them all !
Then strip-mine them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all we need.
More planets.Save the planets!
Collect them all!
Then strip-mine them!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801089</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>shadowofwind</author>
	<datestamp>1255951440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The point isn't to visit.  The point is to find interesting planets and study them from afar, and possibly send probes eventually.  Moving information is more fundamental than moving a particular flesh body around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The point is n't to visit .
The point is to find interesting planets and study them from afar , and possibly send probes eventually .
Moving information is more fundamental than moving a particular flesh body around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point isn't to visit.
The point is to find interesting planets and study them from afar, and possibly send probes eventually.
Moving information is more fundamental than moving a particular flesh body around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800601</id>
	<title>In the background</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1255948980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Deep within the structure of the telescope, someone asked "does anyone know if this spider is poisonous?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Deep within the structure of the telescope , someone asked " does anyone know if this spider is poisonous ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Deep within the structure of the telescope, someone asked "does anyone know if this spider is poisonous?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800791</id>
	<title>Re:Stars to Planet Ratio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1.</i></p><p>That's a ridiculous statistic.  By that measure, the ratio between Diet Coke drinkers and humans is 3.5 billion to 1, because my wife and I are the only people in my group of friends who drink the stuff, and there are 7 billion people on the planet.</p><p>And yet somehow the Coca Cola company keeps making it, just for us...</p><p>A better statistic is the ratio of the number of planets discovered and the NUMBER OF STARS SEARCHED FOR PLANETS.  As of 2003, this fraction was at least 10\%, and given observational limits may prove to be as high as 100\% -- it could well be that ALL sunlike stars have planets.</p><p><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0306524" title="arxiv.org">http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0306524</a> [arxiv.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1.That 's a ridiculous statistic .
By that measure , the ratio between Diet Coke drinkers and humans is 3.5 billion to 1 , because my wife and I are the only people in my group of friends who drink the stuff , and there are 7 billion people on the planet.And yet somehow the Coca Cola company keeps making it , just for us...A better statistic is the ratio of the number of planets discovered and the NUMBER OF STARS SEARCHED FOR PLANETS .
As of 2003 , this fraction was at least 10 \ % , and given observational limits may prove to be as high as 100 \ % -- it could well be that ALL sunlike stars have planets.http : //arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0306524 [ arxiv.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1.That's a ridiculous statistic.
By that measure, the ratio between Diet Coke drinkers and humans is 3.5 billion to 1, because my wife and I are the only people in my group of friends who drink the stuff, and there are 7 billion people on the planet.And yet somehow the Coca Cola company keeps making it, just for us...A better statistic is the ratio of the number of planets discovered and the NUMBER OF STARS SEARCHED FOR PLANETS.
As of 2003, this fraction was at least 10\%, and given observational limits may prove to be as high as 100\% -- it could well be that ALL sunlike stars have planets.http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0306524 [arxiv.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29806051</id>
	<title>Not a chance</title>
	<author>aepervius</author>
	<datestamp>1256043420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"While that's out of the question, an unmanned nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded". <br> <br>Nope. To reach the nearest solar system within a lifetime (80 years) and brake to it, you would have to have an acceleration, deceleration and speed such as it make the 4 light year distance within 80 years. Let us imagine this is a 1 kg probe, accelerating at a reasonable  1g constantly, go toward the system, then decelerate at 1g constantly. To make those 4 LY in less than 80 years, you will need to have at least a speed of 5\% light speed (5\% light speed, so 1 LY take 20 years, 4 LY take 80 years). 5\% light speed is 1,5e7 meter.second-1. So you will need to accelerate at 1g over : 1,5e7seconds or over 1/2 year and decelerate over 1/2 years. I will spare you the number of megajoule needed for this, and the fact the reactor will add weight, and so the calculation is far more complex, I am pretty sure we haven't anything technology wise to reach such acceleration over such time. <br> <br> From the above you can see that before your probe can survey such a system, it will take much much more than a life time to even REACH the nearest system. And that was a very small probe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" While that 's out of the question , an unmanned nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded " .
Nope. To reach the nearest solar system within a lifetime ( 80 years ) and brake to it , you would have to have an acceleration , deceleration and speed such as it make the 4 light year distance within 80 years .
Let us imagine this is a 1 kg probe , accelerating at a reasonable 1g constantly , go toward the system , then decelerate at 1g constantly .
To make those 4 LY in less than 80 years , you will need to have at least a speed of 5 \ % light speed ( 5 \ % light speed , so 1 LY take 20 years , 4 LY take 80 years ) .
5 \ % light speed is 1,5e7 meter.second-1 .
So you will need to accelerate at 1g over : 1,5e7seconds or over 1/2 year and decelerate over 1/2 years .
I will spare you the number of megajoule needed for this , and the fact the reactor will add weight , and so the calculation is far more complex , I am pretty sure we have n't anything technology wise to reach such acceleration over such time .
From the above you can see that before your probe can survey such a system , it will take much much more than a life time to even REACH the nearest system .
And that was a very small probe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"While that's out of the question, an unmanned nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded".
Nope. To reach the nearest solar system within a lifetime (80 years) and brake to it, you would have to have an acceleration, deceleration and speed such as it make the 4 light year distance within 80 years.
Let us imagine this is a 1 kg probe, accelerating at a reasonable  1g constantly, go toward the system, then decelerate at 1g constantly.
To make those 4 LY in less than 80 years, you will need to have at least a speed of 5\% light speed (5\% light speed, so 1 LY take 20 years, 4 LY take 80 years).
5\% light speed is 1,5e7 meter.second-1.
So you will need to accelerate at 1g over : 1,5e7seconds or over 1/2 year and decelerate over 1/2 years.
I will spare you the number of megajoule needed for this, and the fact the reactor will add weight, and so the calculation is far more complex, I am pretty sure we haven't anything technology wise to reach such acceleration over such time.
From the above you can see that before your probe can survey such a system, it will take much much more than a life time to even REACH the nearest system.
And that was a very small probe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801625</id>
	<title>Re:!Chilean</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1255954320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean they have to divy up the planets? "Four for you, three for you, three plus two moons for you; oh, and you small donors and magazine subscribers get the asteroids to split amongst yourselves..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean they have to divy up the planets ?
" Four for you , three for you , three plus two moons for you ; oh , and you small donors and magazine subscribers get the asteroids to split amongst yourselves... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean they have to divy up the planets?
"Four for you, three for you, three plus two moons for you; oh, and you small donors and magazine subscribers get the asteroids to split amongst yourselves..."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800511</id>
	<title>ESO Press Release</title>
	<author>mene</author>
	<datestamp>1255948560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>More details can be found in the <a href="http://www.eso.org/public/outreach/press-rel/pr-2009/pr-39-09.html" title="eso.org" rel="nofollow"> Press Release</a> [eso.org] of the European Southern Observatory.

They have been using a new instrument called HARPS on the "old" ESO 3.6m telescope, which has ben around since 1976.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More details can be found in the Press Release [ eso.org ] of the European Southern Observatory .
They have been using a new instrument called HARPS on the " old " ESO 3.6m telescope , which has ben around since 1976 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More details can be found in the  Press Release [eso.org] of the European Southern Observatory.
They have been using a new instrument called HARPS on the "old" ESO 3.6m telescope, which has ben around since 1976.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557</id>
	<title>!Chilean</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255948860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a telescope operating in Chile, it is only partially funded by the Chileans.</p><p>Funded by
</p><ul> <li>Swiss National Science Foundation</li><li>Federal Office for Education and Research</li><li>La R&#233;gion Provence, Alpes et C&#244;te d'Azur</li><li>Institut National des Sciences de l'Univers INSU</li><li>European Space Organization</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a telescope operating in Chile , it is only partially funded by the Chileans.Funded by Swiss National Science FoundationFederal Office for Education and ResearchLa R   gion Provence , Alpes et C   te d'AzurInstitut National des Sciences de l'Univers INSUEuropean Space Organization</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a telescope operating in Chile, it is only partially funded by the Chileans.Funded by
 Swiss National Science FoundationFederal Office for Education and ResearchLa Région Provence, Alpes et Côte d'AzurInstitut National des Sciences de l'Univers INSUEuropean Space Organization</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29818803</id>
	<title>Re:!Chilean</title>
	<author>iamangry</author>
	<datestamp>1256055240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And the Europeans call us Americans imperialist.... give the Chileans some credit and quit your whining.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the Europeans call us Americans imperialist.... give the Chileans some credit and quit your whining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the Europeans call us Americans imperialist.... give the Chileans some credit and quit your whining.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804353</id>
	<title>Re:3.5km/h</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255976400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And with that comment, a hundred thousand nerds started to collaborate on their new scientific mission:  to build the biggest telescope of all time...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And with that comment , a hundred thousand nerds started to collaborate on their new scientific mission : to build the biggest telescope of all time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And with that comment, a hundred thousand nerds started to collaborate on their new scientific mission:  to build the biggest telescope of all time...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801321</id>
	<title>Re:Walking pace... at what range?</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1255952760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mod parent up. The impressive figure in the article is completely meaningless. And I seriously am curious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mod parent up .
The impressive figure in the article is completely meaningless .
And I seriously am curious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mod parent up.
The impressive figure in the article is completely meaningless.
And I seriously am curious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800507</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802759</id>
	<title>Re:!Chilean</title>
	<author>jalvarez13</author>
	<datestamp>1255961160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LOL!!

I'm chilean and I couldn't stop laughing... good one</htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL ! !
I 'm chilean and I could n't stop laughing... good one</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL!!
I'm chilean and I couldn't stop laughing... good one</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801135</id>
	<title>PLUTO</title>
	<author>DoninIN</author>
	<datestamp>1255951680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did it find pluto back? I heard we lost Pluto a while back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did it find pluto back ?
I heard we lost Pluto a while back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did it find pluto back?
I heard we lost Pluto a while back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829</id>
	<title>Enemy Planets</title>
	<author>Conchobair</author>
	<datestamp>1255950000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The larger question is, how many of these are enemy planets?  I'm going to say at least half, if not more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The larger question is , how many of these are enemy planets ?
I 'm going to say at least half , if not more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The larger question is, how many of these are enemy planets?
I'm going to say at least half, if not more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229</id>
	<title>Great</title>
	<author>Threni</author>
	<datestamp>1255947300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all we need. More planets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all we need .
More planets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all we need.
More planets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800417</id>
	<title>Ridiculous claim</title>
	<author>Brian Gordon</author>
	<datestamp>1255948080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The device can detect slight wobbles of stars as they respond to tugs from exoplanets' gravity.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... The instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr (2.1 mph)</p></div></blockquote><p>I guess it could be possible to isolate certain frequencies in the oscillation to filter out solar storms and such which would easily affect its diameter at a rate faster than walking speed. But you'd have to watch it for centuries to gather enough data. At least. Geez, doing the trig (like 10^-22 radians per second) my intuition tells me you'd have to be watching that star for billions of years..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The device can detect slight wobbles of stars as they respond to tugs from exoplanets ' gravity .
... The instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr ( 2.1 mph ) I guess it could be possible to isolate certain frequencies in the oscillation to filter out solar storms and such which would easily affect its diameter at a rate faster than walking speed .
But you 'd have to watch it for centuries to gather enough data .
At least .
Geez , doing the trig ( like 10 ^ -22 radians per second ) my intuition tells me you 'd have to be watching that star for billions of years. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The device can detect slight wobbles of stars as they respond to tugs from exoplanets' gravity.
... The instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr (2.1 mph)I guess it could be possible to isolate certain frequencies in the oscillation to filter out solar storms and such which would easily affect its diameter at a rate faster than walking speed.
But you'd have to watch it for centuries to gather enough data.
At least.
Geez, doing the trig (like 10^-22 radians per second) my intuition tells me you'd have to be watching that star for billions of years..
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800893</id>
	<title>Re:Ridiculous claim</title>
	<author>goodmanj</author>
	<datestamp>1255950300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're not measuring the side-to-side motion of the stars, that's impossible^H^H^H^Hvery difficult to measure, as your trig suggests.</p><p>They're measuring the Doppler shift of features in the star's optical spectrum, as it moves toward us and away.  It's the world's most impressive police radar gun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not measuring the side-to-side motion of the stars , that 's impossible ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ Hvery difficult to measure , as your trig suggests.They 're measuring the Doppler shift of features in the star 's optical spectrum , as it moves toward us and away .
It 's the world 's most impressive police radar gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not measuring the side-to-side motion of the stars, that's impossible^H^H^H^Hvery difficult to measure, as your trig suggests.They're measuring the Doppler shift of features in the star's optical spectrum, as it moves toward us and away.
It's the world's most impressive police radar gun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800417</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801731</id>
	<title>Re:Enemy Planets</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1255954860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why gaming addicts shouldn't be astronomers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why gaming addicts should n't be astronomers : - )    </tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why gaming addicts shouldn't be astronomers :-)
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137</id>
	<title>Re:3.5km/h</title>
	<author>Kingrames</author>
	<datestamp>1255951680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sadly, most slashdotters won't be impressed until it can detect the jiggle of the breast of an Orion slave girl.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , most slashdotters wo n't be impressed until it can detect the jiggle of the breast of an Orion slave girl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, most slashdotters won't be impressed until it can detect the jiggle of the breast of an Orion slave girl.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802103</id>
	<title>How many potential planets?</title>
	<author>MSesow</author>
	<datestamp>1255957140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Has anyone seen anything about what percentage of the total stars in the galaxy could have planets, or even of those how many would have rocky planets?  I have seen estimates that anywhere between 20\% and maybe as high as 60\% of sun-like stars could have rocky planets, but then I cannot find an estimate for what kind proportion of stars are sun-like (although Wikipedia indicated that 7.6\% of main sequence stars fall into the same spectral category as the sun, but then how many stars are in their man sequence?).
I have also read things about how many stars have been found with planets, and how many have been looked at, but I would assume that they are using some bias about what stars to look at in order to save time and work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone seen anything about what percentage of the total stars in the galaxy could have planets , or even of those how many would have rocky planets ?
I have seen estimates that anywhere between 20 \ % and maybe as high as 60 \ % of sun-like stars could have rocky planets , but then I can not find an estimate for what kind proportion of stars are sun-like ( although Wikipedia indicated that 7.6 \ % of main sequence stars fall into the same spectral category as the sun , but then how many stars are in their man sequence ? ) .
I have also read things about how many stars have been found with planets , and how many have been looked at , but I would assume that they are using some bias about what stars to look at in order to save time and work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone seen anything about what percentage of the total stars in the galaxy could have planets, or even of those how many would have rocky planets?
I have seen estimates that anywhere between 20\% and maybe as high as 60\% of sun-like stars could have rocky planets, but then I cannot find an estimate for what kind proportion of stars are sun-like (although Wikipedia indicated that 7.6\% of main sequence stars fall into the same spectral category as the sun, but then how many stars are in their man sequence?).
I have also read things about how many stars have been found with planets, and how many have been looked at, but I would assume that they are using some bias about what stars to look at in order to save time and work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800911</id>
	<title>Errata</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255950360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"An article on CNN describes that 32 exoplanets have been discovered using a new Chilean telescope. The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace)."</p></div><ul> <li>HARPS is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High\_Accuracy\_Radial\_Velocity\_Planet\_Searcher" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow"> <i>spectrograph</i> </a> [wikipedia.org], not a telescope.</li><li>It's not Chilean, it's a <i>European</i> instrument mounted on a <i>European</i> telescope that are currently installed in a Chilean observatory.</li><li>The HARPS can detect Doppler shifts as small as 1 m/s.  That's 3.6 km/hr.  Why CNN would round that to 3.5 km/hr beats me--but then to convert that value to 2.1mph instead of 2.2mph, is beyond me.</li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" An article on CNN describes that 32 exoplanets have been discovered using a new Chilean telescope .
The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph ( comparable to a slow walking pace ) .
" HARPS is a spectrograph [ wikipedia.org ] , not a telescope.It 's not Chilean , it 's a European instrument mounted on a European telescope that are currently installed in a Chilean observatory.The HARPS can detect Doppler shifts as small as 1 m/s .
That 's 3.6 km/hr .
Why CNN would round that to 3.5 km/hr beats me--but then to convert that value to 2.1mph instead of 2.2mph , is beyond me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"An article on CNN describes that 32 exoplanets have been discovered using a new Chilean telescope.
The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace).
" HARPS is a  spectrograph  [wikipedia.org], not a telescope.It's not Chilean, it's a European instrument mounted on a European telescope that are currently installed in a Chilean observatory.The HARPS can detect Doppler shifts as small as 1 m/s.
That's 3.6 km/hr.
Why CNN would round that to 3.5 km/hr beats me--but then to convert that value to 2.1mph instead of 2.2mph, is beyond me.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802471</id>
	<title>Re:3.5km/h</title>
	<author>ThePsion5</author>
	<datestamp>1255959300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, depending on the distance to the exoplanet, the local gravity, and the voluptuousness of said Orion slave girl, 3.5km/hour may well be within the capacity of the young woman's mammaries.</p><p>Sadly, by the time those wonderful images reach humanity the young slave girl will be far past her prime, so it would serve as nothing more than a cruel tease to those who know that the funbags in question will no longer be so young and perky.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , depending on the distance to the exoplanet , the local gravity , and the voluptuousness of said Orion slave girl , 3.5km/hour may well be within the capacity of the young woman 's mammaries.Sadly , by the time those wonderful images reach humanity the young slave girl will be far past her prime , so it would serve as nothing more than a cruel tease to those who know that the funbags in question will no longer be so young and perky .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, depending on the distance to the exoplanet, the local gravity, and the voluptuousness of said Orion slave girl, 3.5km/hour may well be within the capacity of the young woman's mammaries.Sadly, by the time those wonderful images reach humanity the young slave girl will be far past her prime, so it would serve as nothing more than a cruel tease to those who know that the funbags in question will no longer be so young and perky.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801039</id>
	<title>Sounded like a LOT at first</title>
	<author>eball</author>
	<datestamp>1255951200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I initially read that headline as "32 exaplanets" and thought "Holy Jesus, how on earth did they find that many planets?!?" It makes a lot more sense now...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I initially read that headline as " 32 exaplanets " and thought " Holy Jesus , how on earth did they find that many planets ? ! ?
" It makes a lot more sense now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I initially read that headline as "32 exaplanets" and thought "Holy Jesus, how on earth did they find that many planets?!?
" It makes a lot more sense now...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804537</id>
	<title>Re:3.5km/h</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255979820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, with this equipment, it has to be hell of a jiggle then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , with this equipment , it has to be hell of a jiggle then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, with this equipment, it has to be hell of a jiggle then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29803801</id>
	<title>Re:3.5km/h</title>
	<author>RightwingNutjob</author>
	<datestamp>1255969860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Detecting speed over distance is different from detecting distance over distance. The distance involved doesn't really matter if you're looking for wavelength shift and comparing it at different times to detect wobble.
<br>
Still very neat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Detecting speed over distance is different from detecting distance over distance .
The distance involved does n't really matter if you 're looking for wavelength shift and comparing it at different times to detect wobble .
Still very neat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Detecting speed over distance is different from detecting distance over distance.
The distance involved doesn't really matter if you're looking for wavelength shift and comparing it at different times to detect wobble.
Still very neat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800751</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would take like 50,000 years just to reach Proxima Centauri with our most advanced technology. There is no way in hell we could reach another star in a single human lifetime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would take like 50,000 years just to reach Proxima Centauri with our most advanced technology .
There is no way in hell we could reach another star in a single human lifetime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would take like 50,000 years just to reach Proxima Centauri with our most advanced technology.
There is no way in hell we could reach another star in a single human lifetime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800177</id>
	<title>Many more to come</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA: They have "tons" more planet they haven't reported yet. Incredible finds</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : They have " tons " more planet they have n't reported yet .
Incredible finds</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: They have "tons" more planet they haven't reported yet.
Incredible finds</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800377</id>
	<title>HARPS</title>
	<author>bidule</author>
	<datestamp>1255947900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/lasilla/instruments/harps/overview.html" title="eso.org">http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/lasilla/instruments/harps/overview.html</a> [eso.org]</p><p>The speed is the radial velocity, aka how fast it comes closer and goes further. And it's of the order of 1 m/s, which got converted to car speed. Analogy anyone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.eso.org/sci/facilities/lasilla/instruments/harps/overview.html [ eso.org ] The speed is the radial velocity , aka how fast it comes closer and goes further .
And it 's of the order of 1 m/s , which got converted to car speed .
Analogy anyone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/lasilla/instruments/harps/overview.html [eso.org]The speed is the radial velocity, aka how fast it comes closer and goes further.
And it's of the order of 1 m/s, which got converted to car speed.
Analogy anyone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804813</id>
	<title>Re:Enemy Planets</title>
	<author>Per Wigren</author>
	<datestamp>1256069880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On a more serious note, I'm more interested in which planets are Class M.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On a more serious note , I 'm more interested in which planets are Class M .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a more serious note, I'm more interested in which planets are Class M.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804977</id>
	<title>Re:link to ESO Press Release</title>
	<author>Random Walk</author>
	<datestamp>1256072340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's the instrumentation that really counts. There are lots of old telescopes which just gather dust, because they have no competitive instruments attached to their focal plane. On the other hand, the success of the HARPS spectrograph clearly shows that even with old telescopes one can do great science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the instrumentation that really counts .
There are lots of old telescopes which just gather dust , because they have no competitive instruments attached to their focal plane .
On the other hand , the success of the HARPS spectrograph clearly shows that even with old telescopes one can do great science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the instrumentation that really counts.
There are lots of old telescopes which just gather dust, because they have no competitive instruments attached to their focal plane.
On the other hand, the success of the HARPS spectrograph clearly shows that even with old telescopes one can do great science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800361</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800643</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well hopefully they're large enough to not suffer Pluto's fate of being demoted to a "dwarf planet".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well hopefully they 're large enough to not suffer Pluto 's fate of being demoted to a " dwarf planet " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well hopefully they're large enough to not suffer Pluto's fate of being demoted to a "dwarf planet".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800689</id>
	<title>Also news from</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1255949340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can also find the story on <a href="http://www.physorg.com/news175166214.html" title="physorg.com">Physorg News</a> [physorg.com]
and Space.com. The discoveries where not all at once BTW, the HARPS telescopes been
running since 2004, and found the 32 planets over that period, using just 100 nights observing time per year.

<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Extra\%20Solar\%20Planets/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Extra Solar Planets</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can also find the story on Physorg News [ physorg.com ] and Space.com .
The discoveries where not all at once BTW , the HARPS telescopes been running since 2004 , and found the 32 planets over that period , using just 100 nights observing time per year .
--- Extra Solar Planets [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can also find the story on Physorg News [physorg.com]
and Space.com.
The discoveries where not all at once BTW, the HARPS telescopes been
running since 2004, and found the 32 planets over that period, using just 100 nights observing time per year.
---

Extra Solar Planets [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802639</id>
	<title>Re:!Chilean</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1255960320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yea, the suckers are sufficiently stupid to fund our telescopes. We are getting some very nice hardware for nothing.</p><p>It was holding one of the the clearest and most unpolluted skies over their head that made them cry uncle and beg to built it, and they just keep on coming.  Not our problem they f***ed up their environment to the point that no one in the northern hemisphere can see the stars anymore.</p><p>Just wait, in 50 years Chile is going repo those telescopes and charge by the star. It is all an elaborate plot by Chile to take over the Universe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea , the suckers are sufficiently stupid to fund our telescopes .
We are getting some very nice hardware for nothing.It was holding one of the the clearest and most unpolluted skies over their head that made them cry uncle and beg to built it , and they just keep on coming .
Not our problem they f * * * ed up their environment to the point that no one in the northern hemisphere can see the stars anymore.Just wait , in 50 years Chile is going repo those telescopes and charge by the star .
It is all an elaborate plot by Chile to take over the Universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea, the suckers are sufficiently stupid to fund our telescopes.
We are getting some very nice hardware for nothing.It was holding one of the the clearest and most unpolluted skies over their head that made them cry uncle and beg to built it, and they just keep on coming.
Not our problem they f***ed up their environment to the point that no one in the northern hemisphere can see the stars anymore.Just wait, in 50 years Chile is going repo those telescopes and charge by the star.
It is all an elaborate plot by Chile to take over the Universe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802055</id>
	<title>32 new names</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255956840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>let the flamewars begin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>let the flamewars begin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>let the flamewars begin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801981</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>im\_thatoneguy</author>
	<datestamp>1255956420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Define 'lifetime'.   If we can fix the largest impediment to human space travel: human bodies, we might be able to send you on the slow train to every planet in the galaxy, given a sufficiently advanced system suspend function on your quantum brain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Define 'lifetime' .
If we can fix the largest impediment to human space travel : human bodies , we might be able to send you on the slow train to every planet in the galaxy , given a sufficiently advanced system suspend function on your quantum brain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Define 'lifetime'.
If we can fix the largest impediment to human space travel: human bodies, we might be able to send you on the slow train to every planet in the galaxy, given a sufficiently advanced system suspend function on your quantum brain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800507</id>
	<title>Walking pace... at what range?</title>
	<author>jhfry</author>
	<datestamp>1255948560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That "walking pace" stat could be very impressive if it were given with the proper qualification information.</p><p>For example, if it could detect an object moving at that pace over the course of a year at 1 light year away... I would probably not be as impressed if it could do it from 50 light years in a matter of minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That " walking pace " stat could be very impressive if it were given with the proper qualification information.For example , if it could detect an object moving at that pace over the course of a year at 1 light year away... I would probably not be as impressed if it could do it from 50 light years in a matter of minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That "walking pace" stat could be very impressive if it were given with the proper qualification information.For example, if it could detect an object moving at that pace over the course of a year at 1 light year away... I would probably not be as impressed if it could do it from 50 light years in a matter of minutes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800589</id>
	<title>OMG, there's lot of planets out there</title>
	<author>jfdawes</author>
	<datestamp>1255948920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slow News Day.</p><p>Seriously, are any of these 32 new planets at all interesting?  It was great that we've figured out how to detect the existence of these planets, but even the chilean team doesn't bother to single out any of them as being out of the ordinary.</p><p>Now that <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/10/19/1324222/VASIMR-Ion-Engine-Could-Cut-Mars-Trip-To-39-Days" title="slashdot.org">VASIMR</a> [slashdot.org] technology seems to be coming of age, isn't it time to do a survey of everything within say, 20 light years to find stuff that may be potentially habitable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slow News Day.Seriously , are any of these 32 new planets at all interesting ?
It was great that we 've figured out how to detect the existence of these planets , but even the chilean team does n't bother to single out any of them as being out of the ordinary.Now that VASIMR [ slashdot.org ] technology seems to be coming of age , is n't it time to do a survey of everything within say , 20 light years to find stuff that may be potentially habitable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slow News Day.Seriously, are any of these 32 new planets at all interesting?
It was great that we've figured out how to detect the existence of these planets, but even the chilean team doesn't bother to single out any of them as being out of the ordinary.Now that VASIMR [slashdot.org] technology seems to be coming of age, isn't it time to do a survey of everything within say, 20 light years to find stuff that may be potentially habitable?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802437</id>
	<title>Re:OMG, there's lot of planets out there</title>
	<author>Opyros</author>
	<datestamp>1255959120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>OMG, there's lot of planets out there</p></div></blockquote><p>

No, no &mdash; the line is "Oh my god, it's full of planets!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OMG , there 's lot of planets out there No , no    the line is " Oh my god , it 's full of planets !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMG, there's lot of planets out there

No, no — the line is "Oh my god, it's full of planets!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800589</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331</id>
	<title>Stars to Planet Ratio</title>
	<author>INeededALogin</author>
	<datestamp>1255947720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Planets seem to be everywhere we look.  Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1(if we use the 400 billion star estimate on the wikipedia page and the 400 stars in the article).<br> <br>
While the ratio will certainly continue to come down as we find more planets, I have to wonder if we are going to end up at the other end of the ratio before too long with a billion planets to a star.  It just seems like ever star has multiple planets if we stare at them long enough.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Planets seem to be everywhere we look .
Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1 ( if we use the 400 billion star estimate on the wikipedia page and the 400 stars in the article ) .
While the ratio will certainly continue to come down as we find more planets , I have to wonder if we are going to end up at the other end of the ratio before too long with a billion planets to a star .
It just seems like ever star has multiple planets if we stare at them long enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Planets seem to be everywhere we look.
Right now the ratio between stars to planets in the milky way is about 1 billion to 1(if we use the 400 billion star estimate on the wikipedia page and the 400 stars in the article).
While the ratio will certainly continue to come down as we find more planets, I have to wonder if we are going to end up at the other end of the ratio before too long with a billion planets to a star.
It just seems like ever star has multiple planets if we stare at them long enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800345</id>
	<title>teeny weeny shift</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1255947780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace).</p></div></blockquote><p>It's amazing that such a small shift in spectrum line displacement can be detected. It doesn't make intuitive sense that a mere walking pace will produce a detectable shift. That's precision stuff. It's amazing what astronomy technology has been able to do with indirect information.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph ( comparable to a slow walking pace ) .It 's amazing that such a small shift in spectrum line displacement can be detected .
It does n't make intuitive sense that a mere walking pace will produce a detectable shift .
That 's precision stuff .
It 's amazing what astronomy technology has been able to do with indirect information .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>The telescope is capable of detecting movement 2.1mph (comparable to a slow walking pace).It's amazing that such a small shift in spectrum line displacement can be detected.
It doesn't make intuitive sense that a mere walking pace will produce a detectable shift.
That's precision stuff.
It's amazing what astronomy technology has been able to do with indirect information.
   
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29813345</id>
	<title>Re:Not a chance</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1256072280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's cool is that, due to relativity, if you put some humans on board this ship, they could make the journey in much less than a lifetime, and travel back too.  Unfortunately, hundreds of years will have passed on Earth by the time they get back, aged only perhaps a decade, and all their friends and relatives will be dead.</p><p>I read a book a while ago that detailed this exact journey, to the Alpha Centauri system.  The travelers used a hollowed-out asteroid with a mass driver for propulsion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's cool is that , due to relativity , if you put some humans on board this ship , they could make the journey in much less than a lifetime , and travel back too .
Unfortunately , hundreds of years will have passed on Earth by the time they get back , aged only perhaps a decade , and all their friends and relatives will be dead.I read a book a while ago that detailed this exact journey , to the Alpha Centauri system .
The travelers used a hollowed-out asteroid with a mass driver for propulsion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's cool is that, due to relativity, if you put some humans on board this ship, they could make the journey in much less than a lifetime, and travel back too.
Unfortunately, hundreds of years will have passed on Earth by the time they get back, aged only perhaps a decade, and all their friends and relatives will be dead.I read a book a while ago that detailed this exact journey, to the Alpha Centauri system.
The travelers used a hollowed-out asteroid with a mass driver for propulsion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29806051</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800795</id>
	<title>we've been here for millions of years</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255949820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&amp; somehow managed to frig up our perfect environment to a likely beyond salvage state, in less than 300. remarkable, no? the lights are coming up all over now.</p><p>this same post was deleted by robbIE's patentdead corepirate nazi hostage censorship devise earlier today. what a pathetic bot he's become.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&amp; somehow managed to frig up our perfect environment to a likely beyond salvage state , in less than 300. remarkable , no ?
the lights are coming up all over now.this same post was deleted by robbIE 's patentdead corepirate nazi hostage censorship devise earlier today .
what a pathetic bot he 's become .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&amp; somehow managed to frig up our perfect environment to a likely beyond salvage state, in less than 300. remarkable, no?
the lights are coming up all over now.this same post was deleted by robbIE's patentdead corepirate nazi hostage censorship devise earlier today.
what a pathetic bot he's become.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197</id>
	<title>39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1255947180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again?</p><p>If it's less than my remaining life expectancy, get me a ticket.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again ? If it 's less than my remaining life expectancy , get me a ticket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again?If it's less than my remaining life expectancy, get me a ticket.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29807207</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256050200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're an astrologer? I feel sorry for you...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're an astrologer ?
I feel sorry for you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're an astrologer?
I feel sorry for you...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801273</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255952460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>scientists already discovered 13 inhabitable planets outside of our solar system. It's just that we can't reach them due to them being billions of lightyears away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>scientists already discovered 13 inhabitable planets outside of our solar system .
It 's just that we ca n't reach them due to them being billions of lightyears away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>scientists already discovered 13 inhabitable planets outside of our solar system.
It's just that we can't reach them due to them being billions of lightyears away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800433</id>
	<title>Re:Great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255948200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if those planets knew what's good for them, they'd hide</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if those planets knew what 's good for them , they 'd hide</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if those planets knew what's good for them, they'd hide</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800285</id>
	<title>A telescope made out of Chile?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255947540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what's the refractive index of kidney beans, tomato sauce, and meat?<br>I was told that I had to have a passport to go Hungary, but that's fine, so I ate Turkey... yup, the whole country</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what 's the refractive index of kidney beans , tomato sauce , and meat ? I was told that I had to have a passport to go Hungary , but that 's fine , so I ate Turkey... yup , the whole country</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what's the refractive index of kidney beans, tomato sauce, and meat?I was told that I had to have a passport to go Hungary, but that's fine, so I ate Turkey... yup, the whole country</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800627</id>
	<title>Re:Stars to Planet Ratio</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1255949100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Naah. Sure they may begin to discover more and more planets, but at a certain point the number of planets around each star begins to <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060824-pluto-planet.html" title="nationalgeographic.com" rel="nofollow">decrease</a> [nationalgeographic.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Naah .
Sure they may begin to discover more and more planets , but at a certain point the number of planets around each star begins to decrease [ nationalgeographic.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Naah.
Sure they may begin to discover more and more planets, but at a certain point the number of planets around each star begins to decrease [nationalgeographic.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317</id>
	<title>3.5km/h</title>
	<author>oldspewey</author>
	<datestamp>1255947660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr (2.1 mph), a slow walking pace</p></div><p>So let me get this straight: If this thing were observing a star system 50 light years away, that's 4.7x10^14 kilometres<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and this thing can detect relative movements as small as 3.5km/hr?</p><p>Consider me impressed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr ( 2.1 mph ) , a slow walking paceSo let me get this straight : If this thing were observing a star system 50 light years away , that 's 4.7x10 ^ 14 kilometres ... and this thing can detect relative movements as small as 3.5km/hr ? Consider me impressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the instrument detects movements as small as 3.5 km/hr (2.1 mph), a slow walking paceSo let me get this straight: If this thing were observing a star system 50 light years away, that's 4.7x10^14 kilometres ... and this thing can detect relative movements as small as 3.5km/hr?Consider me impressed.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1255948020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Um, just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again? If it's less than my remaining life expectancy, get me a ticket.</p></div></blockquote><p>While that's out of the question, an <b>unmanned</b> nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again ?
If it 's less than my remaining life expectancy , get me a ticket.While that 's out of the question , an unmanned nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded .
     </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, just how long is the trip to the nearest habitable exoplanet again?
If it's less than my remaining life expectancy, get me a ticket.While that's out of the question, an unmanned nuke-powered probe could possibly survey such a system in one life-time if sufficiently funded.
     
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29803279</id>
	<title>Do they have stargates on them?</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1255965300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do they have stargates on them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do they have stargates on them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do they have stargates on them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804927</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>dontmakemethink</author>
	<datestamp>1256071320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps its providence that we're faced with sustainable energy productions and conservation here on Earth.  Our efforts might reveal a means of space propulsion using energy captured during flight.  Otherwise, a portable power source capable of inter-stellar travel could be a hot piece of technology to the other civilization.  If such a probe were to "darken our doorstep", it could easily start a war, or worse, i.e. Voyager episode Friendship One.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps its providence that we 're faced with sustainable energy productions and conservation here on Earth .
Our efforts might reveal a means of space propulsion using energy captured during flight .
Otherwise , a portable power source capable of inter-stellar travel could be a hot piece of technology to the other civilization .
If such a probe were to " darken our doorstep " , it could easily start a war , or worse , i.e .
Voyager episode Friendship One .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps its providence that we're faced with sustainable energy productions and conservation here on Earth.
Our efforts might reveal a means of space propulsion using energy captured during flight.
Otherwise, a portable power source capable of inter-stellar travel could be a hot piece of technology to the other civilization.
If such a probe were to "darken our doorstep", it could easily start a war, or worse, i.e.
Voyager episode Friendship One.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29810167</id>
	<title>Re:39 days to Mars...</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1256060520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why limit ourselves to human bodies ? <br> <br>If we can perfect AI, then the things we have created will BE us anyway. If you had a perfect robot brain, then you could treat it exactly like a human child, it would have the same emotions, impulses, thoughts<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... So why not ? We (as a species) can go and stay awake the whole time. Why would anybody NOT want to be almost invulnerable ? The only real objection most of the time is you don't feel it would be right. Remember the Matrix, what you feel is the result of your own mind, and if you had grown up in a robot mind, how would you know or care ? Of course we would have to be sure that we had the perfect AI before we took the plunge, but after v2 and a couple of service packs, it should be fine. Having infinite capability to progress further using only the robot mind would indicate success I think.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why limit ourselves to human bodies ?
If we can perfect AI , then the things we have created will BE us anyway .
If you had a perfect robot brain , then you could treat it exactly like a human child , it would have the same emotions , impulses , thoughts ... So why not ?
We ( as a species ) can go and stay awake the whole time .
Why would anybody NOT want to be almost invulnerable ?
The only real objection most of the time is you do n't feel it would be right .
Remember the Matrix , what you feel is the result of your own mind , and if you had grown up in a robot mind , how would you know or care ?
Of course we would have to be sure that we had the perfect AI before we took the plunge , but after v2 and a couple of service packs , it should be fine .
Having infinite capability to progress further using only the robot mind would indicate success I think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why limit ourselves to human bodies ?
If we can perfect AI, then the things we have created will BE us anyway.
If you had a perfect robot brain, then you could treat it exactly like a human child, it would have the same emotions, impulses, thoughts ... So why not ?
We (as a species) can go and stay awake the whole time.
Why would anybody NOT want to be almost invulnerable ?
The only real objection most of the time is you don't feel it would be right.
Remember the Matrix, what you feel is the result of your own mind, and if you had grown up in a robot mind, how would you know or care ?
Of course we would have to be sure that we had the perfect AI before we took the plunge, but after v2 and a couple of service packs, it should be fine.
Having infinite capability to progress further using only the robot mind would indicate success I think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801981</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800417
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801321
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800507
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801767
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29805137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800361
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29807207
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804813
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804927
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29810167
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801981
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29803801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801731
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804537
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800627
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802437
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800589
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29813345
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29806051
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800791
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29818803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_19_214240_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801105
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801731
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800197
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800407
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804927
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29806051
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29813345
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800751
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801767
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801981
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29810167
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29807207
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29805137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800643
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800361
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804977
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801135
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800331
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800627
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800791
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800911
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800589
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802437
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800795
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802055
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800177
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29818803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802639
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801625
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800507
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801321
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800417
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800893
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800317
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29801137
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29802471
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804353
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29804537
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29803801
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_19_214240.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_19_214240.29800511
</commentlist>
</conversation>
