Electric Comets

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
allynh
Posts: 919
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Electric Comets

Post by allynh » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:47 pm

I googled the forum to see where to post this; I think this is the right thread. HA!

Rosetta comet chaser set to wake up on Monday after three years' sleep | Science | theguardian.com
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014 ... erasimenko
At 10am GMT on Monday morning an alarm clock will rouse a snoozing spacecraft that is hurtling through the darkest reaches of the solar system. Launched 10 years ago, and in hibernation for the last three, the time for action has come at last.

The European Space Agency's Rosetta probe aims for a spectacular first in space exploration. The billion-euro machine will catch up with a comet, circle it slowly, and throw down a lander to the surface. With gravity too weak to keep it there, the box of electronics and sensors on legs will cling to its ride with an explosive metal harpoon.

Together, the Rosetta probe and its lander, Philae, will scan and poke the comet as it tears towards the sun. As the comet draws near, it will warm and spew huge plumes of gas and dust in a tail more than one million kilometres long. The spectacle has never been captured up close before.

The comet, named 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, formed from cosmic debris 4.6bn years ago, before material had coalesced to form the Earth and our nearest planets, and the sun was a newborn star. Even rocket scientists find the comet's name hard work. Some opt instead for "Chury".

By studying the comet – some of the most pristine and primordial material there is – scientists hope to learn more about the origins of the solar system. The presence of ice, and traces of organics, might hint at answers to other big questions: how Earth got its water and how life began. But first the spacecraft must wake up.

Rosetta was put into hibernation in June 2011 when its trajectory took it so far from the sun – beyond the orbit of Jupiter – that light reaching its solar panels was too feeble to provide power. Mission scientists deliberately built in the dormant stage of its voyage, but the silence is still nerve-wracking. No one has heard from the spacecraft since.

Video: European Space Agency
For mission controllers, Monday will be a day of finger-tapping and watching the clock. If all goes to plan, at 10am on the dot, an electronic circuit will stir into life on the spacecraft, which is more than 700m kilometres from Earth and almost as far out in the solar system as the orbit of Jupiter. First to switch on will be heaters hooked up to Rosetta's star trackers. Once they have warmed up, they will stare into space and, from the positions of the stars, work out which way the probe is facing.

When Rosetta has gained its bearings, thrusters will fire to stop the spacecraft from spinning. Next, they will turn the probe so its antenna points to Earth. Only then, perhaps eight hours after the alarm clock sounds, can Rosetta send a message home. "There's apprehension and excitement. Some people have put their lives into this," said Matt Taylor, project scientist on Rosetta at the European Space Agency in the Netherlands. "But it's a bit like a teenager waking up. It takes some time to get out of bed."

Mission controllers will spend the next three months checking that the systems and scientific instruments onboard Rosetta and its lander are in working order. The spacecraft is bearing down on the comet at more than 3,500km per hour, so in May the spacecraft must pull a major braking manoeuvre to slow its approach to walking speed.

Once Rosetta has moved alongside the comet, it will steer itself into an orbit that takes it within 20km of the surface. From here, its cameras can begin to map the surface and search for a landing spot for Philae. The comet is 4km wide, roughly the size of Mont Blanc, and the surface is unlikely to be smooth.

Placing a lander on a speeding comet has never been achieved for a reason: it is extraordinarily difficult. After scouring the surface for hazards, mission controllers will send details of their chosen landing site and flight instructions to Rosetta, but from then on the process will be automatic. The communications delay makes it impossible to control the spacecraft directly from Earth.

Rosetta will perform a series of manoeuvres in November to bring it within three kilometres of the comet's surface. From here, the spacecraft can lob Philae straight down to its landing site. Rosetta must compensate for movement of the comet, so the lander does not slide or tumble when it makes contact. When Philae touches down, an explosive harpoon will fire into the ground, with luck holding the lander steady.

For Hermann Boehnhardt, an astronomer at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Lindau and lead scientist on the Philae lander, this will be the moment of truth. He says so little is known about comets, they cannot be sure what they will land on. "Philae was designed to land on a surface as hard as a table or as soft as powder snow. Our hope is that the comet is somewhere between the two," Boehnhardt told the Guardian.

The lander has a crucial role to play in the Rosetta mission. Once it has latched on to the comet, Philae will take pictures and sense gases and particles that come off as the comet nears the sun. These can then be compared with similar measurements from the orbiting Rosetta mothership. In one experiment, called Consert, Rosetta will send radiowaves to Philae from the other side of the comet, to create an x-ray like image of the comet's interior.

The lander could survive the comet's trip around the sun, but the electronics are expected to pack up sooner, not from the sun's heat, but an inability to cool the circuits. Even when dead, the lander could cling to the comet for several laps around the sun, each taking more than six years. With each lap, more material from the comet will vapourise into space. "Eventually, we will lose our grip. The ground beneath us will just disappear," said Boehnhardt.

Astronomers regard comets as dirty snowballs, huge lumps of ice laced with dust and other substances, including organic material. Through flurries of ancient collisions, they may have helped to shape the early Earth by delivering water for the oceans and atmosphere, and even amino acids needed for life to emerge.

"Comets are time capsules from the origin of the solar system. It is still a big mystery exactly how the planets formed, but when you start looking at comets, you start to get an idea how it all happened," said Taylor. "This is difficult, but I am confident. It is going to be amazing."

mileso
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 2:00 pm

Rosetta Probe

Post by mileso » Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:08 pm

The Rosetta Probe awoke today and will attempt to land on 67P. What will it find?
I'm betting it won't be Bruce Willis. :D

User avatar
CosmicLettuce
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:09 am
Contact:

ARXIV: Outbursting Comet P/2010 V1

Post by CosmicLettuce » Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:35 pm

Outbursting Comet P/2010 V1 (Ikeya-Murakami): A Miniature Comet Holmes

http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.1630

Peace, CL
"Nothing is rich but the inexhaustible wealth of nature. She shows us only surfaces, but she is a million fathoms deep" - Emerson

http://astroandmusic.blogspot.com/

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: ARXIV: Outbursting Comet P/2010 V1

Post by Sparky » Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:33 am

Short-period comet P/2010 V1 (Ikeya-Murakami, hereafter V1) was discovered visually by two amateur astronomers. The appearance of the comet was peculiar, consisting of an envelope, a spherical coma near the nucleus and a tail extending in the anti-solar direction. We investigated the brightness and the morphological development of the comet by taking optical images with ground-based telescopes. Our observations show that V1 experienced a large-scale explosion between UT 2010 October 31 and November 3. The color of the comet was consistent with the Sun (g'-RC=0.61+-0.20, RC-IC=0.20+-0.20, and B-RC=0.93+-0.25), suggesting that dust particles were responsible for the brightening. We used a dynamical model to understand the peculiar morphology, and found that the envelope consisted of small grains (0.3-1 micron) expanding at a maximum speed of 500+-40 m/s, while the tail and coma were composed of a wider range of dust particle sizes (0.4-570 micron) and expansion speeds 7-390 m/s. The total mass of ejecta is ~5x10^8 kg and kinetic energy ~5x10^12 J. These values are much smaller than in the historic outburst of 17P/Holmes in 2007, but the energy per unit mass (1x10^4 J/kg) is comparable. The energy per unit mass is about 10% of the energy released during the crystallization of amorphous water ice suggesting that crystallization of buried amorphous ice can supply the mass and energy of the outburst ejecta.
So, 90% of energy had to have come from the speculated buried ice?

As church lady used to say, "How Convenient"!

So, 90% of the energy observed has to be speculated to be buried
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Rosetta's target is 'double' comet

Post by StefanR » Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:25 am

Europe's Rosetta probe has acquired some sensational new images of the comet it is chasing through space.

The pictures show that 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko appears to be not one but two objects joined together. It is what scientists call a "contact binary".

How the comet came to take this form is unknown.

It is possible that 67P suffered a major fracture at some point in its past; it is also possible the two parts have totally different origins.
Image
What is clear is that the European Space Agency (Esa) mission team now has additional and unexpected considerations as it plans how to land on the comet later this year - not least, which part of the comet should be chosen for a touchdown?

The images in the sequence of nine were acquired last Friday.

They are an interpolation. That is, the "real" pictures are much more pixelated because of the thousands of km that still separate the probe and the comet. The outlines that you see have therefore been "smoothed" to make the scene easier to understand.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-27110882
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... -rock.html
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

Morphix
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Morphix » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:56 pm

I am posting this topic so that we can track the predictive accuracy (and inevitable backtracking) of standard-theory scientists relative to coma and tail production for Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. I begin with a statement from insider Dr. Björn J. R. Davidssonof from his recent post at "The History of the Solar System" website at http://thehistoryofthesolarsystem.wordp ... pproaches/
 I was at the OSIRIS Full Team meeting held at the Max Planck Institut für Sonnensystemforschung in Göttingen, Germany, last week. We had a great meeting, and the good news are piling up – the spacecraft Rosetta performs well, our imaging camera system OSIRIS is fully operational (as are all the other instruments), orbit manoeuvres are successfully executed to enable Rosetta to rendezvous with the comet in early August, and we have already started to do science

First of all, we have detected the nucleus of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko and are tracking its motion. Secondly, the lightcurve is being monitored regularly, which has allowed us to measure a 12.4 hour rotation period of the nucleus. The lightcurve is a periodic variation in the observed brightness of the nucleus. The variations arise since the nucleus is not spherical but irregular, so that the amount of solar light that is reflected by the nucleus towards the spacecraft is changing with time as the nucleus rotates. The third discovery is that the comet nucleus – which was dormant and quiet at our first observations in late March – now has become active.

Comet activity means that the ice in the nucleus surface layers has become heated sufficiently by sunlight to sublimate, i.e., turn directly to vapor without first becoming liquid. At these distances, at the time of writing 4.03 AU from the Sun, the temperature is too low to allow water ice to sublimate. Instead, more volatile substances like carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are responsible for the activity. OSIRIS do not see these gases directly. However, the sublimation also liberates a large amount of micrometer-sized dust grains that are entrained in the gas as it rushed into space. OSIRIS detects the solar light that is reflected by this dusty coma, that currently measures about 2600 kilometers across.
Question: Have they actually detected carbon monoxide and dioxide emissions, are do they just have to be the explanation for standard theory conformation, so no pesky evidence required? Do those gases in fact sublimate at -70C?

How about we track past and future statements in this way, ask reasonable questions, and note any successes, failures and backtracks as Rosetta sends more and more data our way. Sounds like science fun to me!

Morphix
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Morphix » Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:31 pm

I found that solid carbon dioxide (dry ice) will sublimate in a vacuum at -72C, so no problem with that as a possibility, though CO2 still needs to be detected or somehow confirmed.

User avatar
Corona
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:10 am

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Corona » Fri Aug 08, 2014 2:03 am

great idea! As for background information:
Churyumov-Gerasimenko reflects the steplike process of how encounters with Jupiter push a comet further into the inner Solar System. Analysis of its orbital evolution shows that, up to 1840, its perihelion distance – closest approach to the Sun - was 4.0 AU (four Sun-Earth distances or about 600 million km). This was too far from the Sun’s heat for the ice-rich nucleus to vaporise and for tails to develop. This meant that the dormant comet was unobservable from Earth.

That year, a fairly close encounter with Jupiter caused the orbit to move inwards to a perihelion distance of 3.0 AU (450 million km). Over the next century, the perihelion gradually decreased further to 2.77 AU. Then, in 1959, another Jupiter encounter reduced the comet’s perihelion to just 1.29 AU – which has changed little ever since. It currently completes one orbit of the Sun every 6.45 years.
This latest change in orbit was also the reason for its detection 10 years later in 1969 (before it was just too dim). The following quote is what ESA/NASA are expecting for the next year or so:
Observations indicate that, if the activity of 67P is consistent from orbit to orbit, then Rosetta is likely to return images of an active nucleus when it rendezvous with the comet at a solar distance of about 3.5 AU.

Ejection of micron-sized grains starts at about 4.3 AU, but millimetre-sized grains are more likely to appear between 3.4 and 3.2 AU. This leads to the development of a coma (a diffuse cloud of dust and gas surrounding the solid nucleus) and subsequently a tail of dust that trails away from the Sun.

During the 2002/2003 apparition, the tail was up to 10 arc minutes long as seen from Earth, with a bright central condensation in a faint extended coma. Seven months after perihelion the tail continued to be very well developed, although it subsequently faded rapidly.

As is the case with most comets, activity is not evenly distributed on the surface of the nucleus and the coma of 67P is fed by several dust jets - at least three prominent active areas were identified during the 2009 apparition.

Even at its peak of activity about one month after perihelion, the comet is not very bright, with a typical visual magnitude of around 12, meaning that it will require a telescope to see it from Earth.

The Sun is overhead at the comet’s equator about 120 days before perihelion. If the comet behaves as in 2003 and 2009, the main jets should become visible a month before perihelion, i.e. mid-July 2015.
http://sci.esa.int/rosetta/14615-comet-67p/

As the comet has been in a fairly stable orbit for the last decades, I guess there won't be too many divergences from this gerneral outline. Perhaps the biggest surprises are going to come from the lander, once it starts to probe into the comet. That is, if it manages to hold on to the comet (it is supposed to use ice screws, which could of course become a problem if the comet is made up of solid rock).

From a T-pod article:
Something else never flown on a cometary mission before is the Langmuir probe (LAP) on Rosetta. The LAP is made up of two titanium spheres that protrude from Rosetta’s main body. They are separated from the spacecraft and from each other by several meters. The instrument will enable Rosetta to measure electron density, electron temperature, plasma drift velocity, and plasma density variations. The two spheres are separated from each other so that plasma flow velocity and electric fields can be detected.
Why don't I already get the feeling that the results from this instrument are going to be heavily debated.

Image

Morphix
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Morphix » Fri Aug 08, 2014 7:44 pm

Thanks Corona, this is great background.

User avatar
Corona
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:10 am

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Corona » Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:55 am

here are the official predictions from the thunderbolts team (latest newsletter):
Significant things to look for as the Rosetta mission continues:

1) no evidence of subsurface ice at the sources of the jets;

2) virtually no interstellar dust, the second component of the “dirty snowball” theory;

3) discovery of minerals on the nucleus that are typical of planetary surfaces within the habitable zone of the Sun;

4) characteristic concentration of plasma jet activity eating away at the cliffs of elevated terrain and the margins of well-defined depressions;

5) measurable retreat of active cliff regions in the wake of this activity; and

6) the presence of unexpected electric fields within the coma and/or close to the comet nucleus, possibly even disrupting the anticipated landing on the surface. This could occur on or after touch down because the sharp metallic edges of the spacecraft make an ideal focus for a diffuse plasma discharge, which would disrupt communications and possibly interfere with spacecraft electronics. And…

If a strong coronal mass ejection from the Sun strikes the comet, we expect the comet to respond electrically with a surge of activity, confirming that the jets are not due to warming from the Sun but to charged particle distribution in the electric field of the Sun.

Morphix
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Morphix » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:33 am

Here is an article about the dust collection instruments on board Rosetta: http://www.universetoday.com/113777/com ... rasimenko/

User avatar
Corona
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:10 am

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Corona » Tue Aug 12, 2014 11:41 am

Morphix wrote:Here is an article about the dust collection instruments on board Rosetta: http://www.universetoday.com/113777/com ... rasimenko/
I'm looking forward to all of the "surprises" these instruments might discorver

User avatar
dahlenaz
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:58 am
Location: SD Arizona
Contact:

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by dahlenaz » Fri Aug 15, 2014 4:06 pm

With reference to the standard theory predictions,,
have they ever predicted a comet to look like this one?
I would think that its shape would be the first failing.
But more than that,, this object looks to be the combination of two objects,,
beyond even that, i would go so far as to suggest that this comet shows us what
a collision would look like caught in freeze-frame, one object hitting another
rather squarely but never making full detachment on the other side...
If it were possible for it to go through,,, it might leave one side dished with
a rebound dome and an off-angle protuberance in opposition as the two pieces
hang on as one object.

If you look at the animation on the image page you will see this image and
several before as the object rotates. Watch carefully and you will see the
dish-shaped larger portion with a domed center.
http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Missio ... ass)/image

Another scenario that might account for this shape is a glancing collision
that inverted the parent object leaving its core hanging out in the breeze
still attached to the debris of a collision that is now suspended in time...

If i rhed a detail correctly, mentioned above,,
This object is tumbling end over end,,,
Exactly what i would expect from a collision of either type.

This image is not the best of the side views across the dished portion but
it is one which shows the domed center quite well.. d...z
Attachments
bust-thru-2.jpg

User avatar
dahlenaz
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:58 am
Location: SD Arizona
Contact:

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by dahlenaz » Sat Aug 16, 2014 6:12 am

Below is a side by side image made from two of ESA's images from
August 3. It has been aligned and zoomed on an area of striations and
very sharp peaks and edges.. Sort of like you might see as you
throw water out of a pan or while toss-mixing granular material.
In the lower left of the pulled back view a sharp feature rises out
of the side of the comet.. This has a very similar appearance
as the top of the striated wall, as related to the appearance of
motion stoped in time..

The best viewing means is side-by-side.. All you need is a box
viewer,, available on line for a few bucks. d...z

http://para-az.com/comet67p-cg/aug3-sbs-zulx.jpg

http://para-az.com/comet67p-cg/aug3-sbs-zul.jpg

Image

Original Image credits Europeran Space agency, Rosetta project.

...

Morphix
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:19 pm

Re: Standard theory prediction tracking for comet 67P

Post by Morphix » Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:46 pm

Someone out there is asking a couple pesky questions about standard comet theory and predictions:
Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko, named after its discoverers, already presents more questions than answers. As the Rosetta spacecraft approached the comet, it measured gas and dust near the comet for six weeks. "In the same period, first measurements from the Microwave Instrument for the Rosetta Orbiter, MIRO, suggested that the comet was emitting water vapour into space at about 300 millilitres per second," according to the ESA.1

That's over six-thousand gallons per day! At that rate, the whole comet—assuming it's made entirely of water ice—would melt into space after only hundreds of thousands years. The dumbbell-shaped mass spans two and a half miles across its longest axis. If this comet was really a "primitive building block of the Solar System," then it's supposedly 4.5 billion years old. Why is it still around if it keeps getting smaller as it swings around the sun every six and a half years?

Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko's mass shrinks not only from water-vapor loss, but solar wind also blows away material as it orbits nearer the sun—between Earth and Mars when it's closest. If it's really billions of years old, why isn't this comet old, cold, and dead—why does it exist at all? Rosetta's investigation has not yet entered full swing, and already reveals the comet as looking young, warm, and alive.3

No wonder Matt Taylor, ESA's Rosetta project scientist said, "Our first clear views of the comet have given us plenty to think about."1
I'll say. Does one need to send a spacecraft out to a comet to realize there are some problems with the current conception? Let's see if some real CRITICAL thinking eventually takes place as the anomalies pile up.

Read more at http://www.icr.org/article/8330/

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests