Friday, December 12, 2014

Don’t Miss the Geminids this Weekend, Best Meteor Shower of the Year

Don’t Miss the Geminids this Weekend, Best Meteor Shower of the Year:



Time lapse-photo showing geminids over Pendleton, OR. Credit: Thomas W. Earle


Time lapse-photo showing the Geminids over Pendleton, OR. Credit: Thomas W. Earle
Wouldn’t it be nice if a meteor shower peaked on a weekend instead of 3 a.m. Monday morning? Maybe even showed good activity in the evening hours, so we could get our fill and still get to bed at a decent hour. Wait a minute – this year’s Geminids will do exactly that!(...)
Read the rest of Don’t Miss the Geminids this Weekend, Best Meteor Shower of the Year (824 words)


© Bob King for Universe Today, 2014. |
Permalink |
No comment |


Post tags: , , , , , , ,


Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Fear Not: Quarter-Mile Asteroid Is No Threat To Earth, NASA Says

Fear Not: Quarter-Mile Asteroid Is No Threat To Earth, NASA Says:



Illustration of small asteroids passing near Earth. Credit: ESA / P. Carril


Illustration of small asteroids passing near Earth. Credit: ESA / P. Carril
Before assuming an asteroid is going to kill us all, take a deep breath and open up the NASA’s Near Earth Object (NEO) program website to check your information, the agency suggests in a statement regarding a so-called threatening asteroid making the rounds in media reports.

Data from the Minor Planet Center shows that the quarter-mile-wide asteroid 2014 UR116 won’t pose a threat to Earth or any other planet in the next 150 years or more, the agency said.

“Some recent press reports have suggested that an asteroid designated 2014 UR116, found on October 27, 2014, at the MASTER-II observatory in Kislovodsk, Russia, represents an impact threat to the Earth,” NASA wrote, assumedly referring to publications such as this one in Russia.

“While this approximately 400-meter sized asteroid has a three-year orbital period around the sun and returns to the Earth’s neighborhood periodically, it does not represent a threat because its orbital path does not pass sufficiently close to the Earth’s orbit … Any statements about risk for impact of discovered asteroids and comets should be verified by scientists and the media by accessing NASA’s Near Earth Object (NEO) program web site.”



Three classes of asteroids that pass near Earth or cross its orbit are named for the first member discovered — Apollo, Aten and Amor. Apollo asteroids like 2014 SC324 routinely cross Earth’s orbit, Atens also cross but have different orbital characteristics and Amors cross Mars’ orbit but miss Earth’s. Credit: ESA


Three classes of asteroids that pass near Earth or cross its orbit are named for the first member discovered — Apollo, Aten and Amor. Apollo asteroids like 2014 SC324 routinely cross Earth’s orbit, Atens also cross but have different orbital characteristics and Amors cross Mars’ orbit but miss Earth’s. Credit: ESA
The threat from comets and asteroids hit a fever pitch last year after the Chelyabinsk meteoroid exploded over Russia, injuring thousands and causing property damage (such as blown-out windows). The incident caused NASA, the European Space Agency and others to express a renewed commitment in watching these interluders from Earth.

In the months after the incident, the European Space Agency established an asteroid monitoring center that is intended to be a co-ordination hub for asteroid threats detected in Europe and elsewhere. NASA administrator Charles Bolden also talked about the threat in a Congressional hearing, suggesting measures such as crowdsourcing, co-ordination with other agencies and more telescopic feeds to supplement the monitoring program NASA has right now.

Years ago, Congress directed NASA to find 90% of asteroids 140 meters or larger by 2020, which the agency says is well within reach. Chelyabinsk was only a fraction of that size.



About 

Elizabeth Howell is the senior writer at Universe Today. She also works for Space.com, Space Exploration Network, the NASA Lunar Science Institute, NASA Astrobiology Magazine and LiveScience, among others. Career highlights include watching three shuttle launches, and going on a two-week simulated Mars expedition in rural Utah. You can follow her on Twitter @howellspace or contact her at her website.

Swirly Southern Picture Of Jupiter Makes Us Want To Visit Right Now

Swirly Southern Picture Of Jupiter Makes Us Want To Visit Right Now:



A view the Cassini spacecraft took during its flyby of Jupiter's southern pole in 2000. Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute


A view the Cassini spacecraft took during its flyby of Jupiter’s southern pole in 2000. Credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute
Gimme a rocketship – we want to see what those bands are made of! This is a strange view of Jupiter, a familiar gas giant that humanity has sent several spacecraft to. This particular view, taken in 2000 and highlighted on the European Space Agency website recently, shows the southern hemisphere of the mighty planet.

The underneath glimpse came from the Cassini spacecraft while it was en route to Saturn. Lucky for researchers, at the time the Galileo Jupiter spacecraft was still in operation. But now that machine is long gone, leaving us to pine for a mission to Jupiter until another spacecraft gets there in 2016.

That spacecraft is called Juno and is a NASA spacecraft the agency sent aloft in August 2011. And here’s the cool thing; once it gets there, Juno is supposed to give us some insights into how the Solar System formed by looking at this particular planet.



Juno will repeatedly dive between the planet and its intense belts of charged particle radiation, coming only 5,000 kilometers (about 3,000 miles) from the cloud tops at closest approach. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)


Juno will repeatedly dive between the planet and its intense belts of charged particle radiation, coming only 5,000 kilometers (about 3,000 miles) from the cloud tops at closest approach. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)
“Underneath its dense cloud cover, Jupiter safeguards secrets to the fundamental processes and conditions that governed our Solar System during its formation. As our primary example of a giant planet, Jupiter can also provide critical knowledge for understanding the planetary systems being discovered around other stars,” NASA wrote on the spacecraft’s web page.

The spacecraft is supposed to look at the amount of water in Jupiter’s atmosphere (an ingredient of planet formation), its magnetic and gravitational fields and also its magnetic environment — including auroras.

Much further in the future (if the spacecraft development is approved all the way) will be a European mission called JUICE, for Jupiter Icy Moon Explorer.



Artist's impression of the Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer (JUICE) near Jupiter and one of its moons, Europa. Credit: ESA/AOES


Artist’s impression of the Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer (JUICE) near Jupiter and one of its moons, Europa. Credit: ESA/AOES
The mission will check out the planet and three huge moons, Ganymede, Callisto and Europa, to get a better look at those surfaces. It is strongly believed that these moons could have global oceans that may be suitable for life.

Earlier this month, the European Space Agency approved the implementation phase for JUICE, which means that designers now have approval to come up with plans for the spacecraft. But it’s not going to launch until 2022 and get to Jupiter until 2030, if the schedule holds.

Meanwhile, observations of Jupiter do continue from the ground. One huge finding this year came from the Hubble Space Telescope, which confirmed observations that the Great Red Spot is shrinking for reasons that are yet unknown.



About 

Elizabeth Howell is the senior writer at Universe Today. She also works for Space.com, Space Exploration Network, the NASA Lunar Science Institute, NASA Astrobiology Magazine and LiveScience, among others. Career highlights include watching three shuttle launches, and going on a two-week simulated Mars expedition in rural Utah. You can follow her on Twitter @howellspace or contact her at her website.

How Strong is the Gravity on Mars?

How Strong is the Gravity on Mars?:



NASA's Hubble Space Telescope took this close-up of the red planet Mars


Close-up of the Red Planet, taken by NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope. Credit: NASA
The planet Mars shares numerous characteristics with our own. Both planets have roughly the same amount of land surface area, sustained polar caps, and both have a similar tilt in their rotational axes, affording each of them strong seasonal variability. Additionally, both planets present strong evidence of having undergone climate change in the past.

At the same time, our two planets are really quite different, and in a number of important ways. For instance, atmospheric pressure on Mars is only a fraction of what it is here on Earth – averaging 7.5 millibars on Mars to just over 1000 here on Earth. The average surface temperature is also lower on Mars, ranking in at a frigid -63 °C compared to Earth’s balmy 14 °C. And while the length of a Martian day is roughly the same as it is here on Earth (24 hours 37 minutes), the length of a Martian year is significantly longer (687 days).

But one big difference is that the gravity on Mars’ surface is much lower than it is here on Earth – 62% lower to be precise.  At just 0.38 of the Earth standard, a person who weighs 100 kg on Earth would weigh only 38 kg on Mars.

This difference in surface gravity is due to a number of factors – mass, density, and radius being the foremost. Even though Mars has almost the same land surface area as Earth, it has only half the diameter and less density than Earth – possessing roughly 15% of Earth’s volume and 11% of its mass.



Artist rendition of the formation of rocky bodies in the solar system - how they form and differentiate and evolve into terrestrial planets. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech


Artist rendition of the interior of Mars. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
Scientists have calculated Mars’ gravity based on Newton’s theory of gravity, which states that the gravitational force exerted by an object is proportional to its mass. When applied to a spherical body like a planet with a given mass (in this case, Mars), the surface gravity will be approximately inversely proportional to the square of its radius. When applied to a spherical body with a given average density, it will be approximately proportional to its radius.

These proportionalities can be expressed by the formula g = m/r2, where g is the surface gravity of Mars (expressed as a multiple of the Earth’s, which is 9.8 m/s²), m is its mass – expressed as a multiple of the Earth’s mass (5.976·1024 kg) – and r its radius, expressed as a multiple of the Earth’s (mean) radius (6,371 km).

For instance, Mars has a mass of 6.4185·1023 kg, which is 0.107 Earth masses. It also has a mean radius of 3,390 km, which works out to 0.532 Earth radii. The surface gravity of Mars can therefore be expressed mathematically as: 0.107/0.532², from which we get the value of 0.38. Based on the Earth’s own surface gravity, this works out to an acceleration of 3.724 meters per second².

Understanding Mars’ gravity and its affect on terrestrial beings is an important first step if we want to send astronauts, explorers, and even settlers there someday. Basically, the effects of long-term exposure to gravity that is just over one-third the Earth normal will be a key aspect of any plans for upcoming manned missions or colonization efforts.

For example, crowd-sourced projects like Mars One make allowances for the likelihood of muscle deterioration and osteoporosis for their participants. Citing a recent study of International Space Station (ISS) astronauts, they acknowledge that mission durations ranging from 4-6 months show a maximum loss of 30% muscle performance and maximum loss of 15% muscle mass.



The Mars Society prototype habitat in Utah conducts studies on what it would be like to live on Mars. Image Credit: Mars Society MRDS


The Mars Society prototype habitat in Utah conducts studies on what it would be like to live on Mars.
Image Credit: Mars Society MRDS
Their proposed mission not only calls for many months in space to get to Mars, but for those volunteering to spend the rest of their lives living on the Martian surface. However, they also claim that they intend to lower these numbers and that their astronauts will be “well prepared with a scientifically valid countermeasures program that will keep them healthy, not only for the mission to Mars, but also as they become adjusted to life under gravity on the Mars surface.”  What these measures are remains to be seen.

Learning more about Martian gravity and how terrestrial organisms fare under it could be a boon for space exploration and missions to other planets as well. And as more information is produced by the many robotic lander and orbiter missions on Mars, as well as planned manned missions, we can expect to get a clearer picture of what Martian gravity is like up close. As we get closer to NASA’s proposed manned mission to Mars, which is currently scheduled to take place in 2030, we can expect more research efforts to be attempted.

Here’s an article on Universe Today about how the reduced Martian gravity will be tested on mice in space. And another about how the lower gravity on Mars helps it make huge sand dunes.

Information on the Mars Gravity Biosatellite. And the kids might like this; a project they can build to demonstrate Mars gravity.

Finally, if you’d like to learn more about Mars in general, we have done several podcast episodes about the Red Planet at Astronomy Cast. Episode 52: Mars, and Episode 91: The Search for Water on Mars.

Sources:
http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Mars&Display=Facts
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2004/mars-biosatellite.html
Mars One and how the mission will affect astronauts



About 

Author, freelance writer, educator, Taekwon-Do instructor, and loving hubby, son and Island boy!

A Universe of 10 Dimensions

A Universe of 10 Dimensions:



Superstrings may exist in 11 dimensions at once. Via National Institute of Technology Tiruchirappalli.


Superstring theory posits that the universe exists in 10 dimensions at once. Image Credit: National Institute of Technology Tiruchirappalli.
When someone mentions “different dimensions,” we tend to think of things like parallel universes – alternate realities that exist parallel to our own, but where things work or happened differently. However, the reality of dimensions and how they play a role in the ordering of our Universe is really quite different from this popular characterization.

To break it down, dimensions are simply the different facets of what we perceive to be reality. We are immediately aware of the three dimensions that surround us on a daily basis – those that define the length, width, and depth of all objects in our universes (the x, y, and z axes, respectively).

Beyond these three visible dimensions, scientists believe that there may many more. In fact, the theoretical framework of Superstring Theory posits that the universe exists in ten different dimensions. These different aspects are what govern the universe, the fundamental forces of nature, and all the elementary particles contained within.

The first dimension, as already noted, is that which gives it length (aka. the x-axis). A good description of a one-dimensional object is a straight line, which exists only in terms of length and has no other discernible qualities. Add to it a second dimension, the y-axis (or height), and you get an object that becomes a 2-dimensional shape (like a square).

The third dimension involves depth (the z-axis), and gives all objects a sense of area and a cross-section. The perfect example of this is a cube, which exists in three dimensions and has a length, width, depth, and hence volume. Beyond these three lie the seven dimensions which are not immediately apparent to us, but which can be still be perceived as having a direct effect on the universe and reality as we know it.



The timeline of the universe, beginning with the Big Bang. Credit: NASA


The timeline of the universe, beginning with the Big Bang. According to String Theory, this is just one of many possible worlds. Credit: NASA
Scientists believe that the fourth dimension is time, which governs the properties of all known matter at any given point. Along with the three other dimensions, knowing an objects position in time is essential to plotting its position in the universe. The other dimensions are where the deeper possibilities come into play, and explaining their interaction with the others is where things get particularly tricky for physicists.

According to Superstring Theory, the fifth and sixth dimensions are where the notion of possible worlds arises. If we could see on through to the fifth dimension, we would see a world slightly different from our own that would give us a means of measuring the similarity and differences between our world and other possible ones.

In the sixth, we would see a plane of possible worlds, where we could compare and position all the possible universes that start with the same initial conditions as this one (i.e. the Big Bang). In theory, if you could master the fifth and sixth dimension, you could travel back in time or go to different futures.

In the seventh dimension, you have access to the possible worlds that start with different initial conditions. Whereas in the fifth and sixth, the initial conditions were the same and subsequent actions were different, here, everything is different from the very beginning of time. The eighth dimension again gives us a plane of such possible universe histories, each of which begins with different initial conditions and branches out infinitely (hence why they are called infinities).

In the ninth dimension, we can compare all the possible universe histories, starting with all the different possible laws of physics and initial conditions. In the tenth and final dimension, we arrive at the point in which everything possible and imaginable is covered. Beyond this, nothing can be imagined by us lowly mortals, which makes it the natural limitation of what we can conceive in terms of dimensions.



String space - superstring theory lives in 10 dimensions, which means that six of the dimensions have to be "compactified" in order to explain why we can only perceive four. The best way to do this is to use a complicated 6D geometry called a Calabi-Yau manifold, in which all the intrinsic properties of elementary particles are hidden. Credit: A Hanson. String space - superstring theory lives in 10 dimensions, which means that six of the dimensions have to be "compactified" in order to explain why we can only perceive four. The best way to do this is to use a complicated 6D geometry called a Calabi-Yau manifold, in which all the intrinsic properties of elementary particles are hidden. Credit: A Hanson.


The existence of extra dimensions is explained using the Calabi-Yau manifold, in which all the intrinsic properties of elementary particles are hidden. Credit: A Hanson.
The existence of these additional six dimensions which we cannot perceive is necessary for String Theory in order for their to be consistency in nature. The fact that we can perceive only four dimensions of space can be explained by one of two mechanisms: either the extra dimensions are compactified on a very small scale, or else our world may live on a 3-dimensional submanifold corresponding to a brane, on which all known particles besides gravity would be restricted (aka. brane theory).

If the extra dimensions are compactified, then the extra six dimensions must be in the form of a Calabi–Yau manifold (shown above). While imperceptible as far as our senses are concerned, they would have governed the formation of the universe from the very beginning. Hence why scientists believe that peering back through time, using telescopes to spot light from the early universe (i.e. billions of years ago), they might be able to see how the existence of these additional dimensions could have influenced the evolution of the cosmos.

Much like other candidates for a grand unifying theory – aka the Theory of Everything (TOE) – the belief that the universe is made up of ten dimensions (or more, depending on which model of string theory you use) is an attempt to reconcile the standard model of particle physics with the existence of gravity. In short, it is an attempt to explain how all known forces within our universe interact, and how other possible universes themselves might work.

For additional information, here’s an article on Universe Today about parallel universes, and another on a parallel universe scientists thought they found that doesn’t actually exist.

There are also some other great resources online. There is a great video that explains the ten dimensions in detail. You can also look at the PBS web site for the TV show Elegant universe. It has a great page on the ten dimensions.

You can also listen to Astronomy Cast. You might find episode 137 The Large Scale Structure of the Universe pretty interesting.

Source: PBS



About 

Author, freelance writer, educator, Taekwon-Do instructor, and loving hubby, son and Island boy!

What Causes Day and Night?

What Causes Day and Night?:



Image of the Sunrise Solstice captured over Stonehenge. Image Credit: Max Alexander/STFC/SPL


Image of the Sunrise Solstice captured over Stonehenge. Image Credit: Max Alexander/STFC/SPL
For most of here on planet Earth, sunrise, sunset, and cycle of day and night (aka. the diurnal cycle) is just a simple fact of life. As a result of seasonal changes that happen with every passing year, the length of day and night can vary — and be either longer or shorter — by just a few hours.

But in some regions of the world, this cycle is completely different. In these parts, located around the Earth’s poles, the Sun does not set during certain times of the year. And there are also seasonal periods where a single night can last many days.

Naturally, this gives rise to certain questions. Namely, what causes the cycle of day and night, and why don’t all places on the planet experience the same patterns? As with many other seasonal experiences, the answer lies within the fact that the Earth rotates on its axis, and the fact that this axis is tilted.

Earth’s rotation occurs from west to east, which is why the Sun always appears to be rising on the eastern horizon and setting on the western. If you could view the Earth from above, looking down at the northern polar region, the planet would appear to be rotating counter-clockwise. However, viewed from the southern polar region, it appears to be rotating clockwise.

The Earth rotates once in about 24 hours with respect to the Sun and once every 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds with respect to the stars.  What’s more, its central axis is aligned with two stars. The northern axis points outward to Polaris, hence why it is called “the North Star”, while its southern axis points to Sigma Octantis.



Earth's axial tilt (or obliquity) and its relation to the rotation axis and plane of orbit as viewed from the Sun during the Northward equinox. Credit: NASA


Earth’s axial tilt and its relation to the rotation axis and plane of orbit as viewed from the Sun during the Northward equinox. Credit: NASA
As already noted, due to the Earth’s axial tilt (or obliquity), day and night are not evenly divided. If the Earth’s axis were perpendicular to its orbital plane around the Sun, all places on Earth would experience equal amounts of day and night (i.e. 12 hours of day and night, respectively) every day during the year and there would be no seasonal variability.

Instead, at any given time of the year, one hemisphere is pointed slightly more towards the Sun, leaving the other pointed away. During this time, one hemisphere will be experiencing warmer temperatures and longer days while the other will experience colder temperatures and longer nights.

Of course, since the Earth is rotating around the Sun and not just on its axis, this process is reversed during the course of a year. Every six months, the Sun undergoes a half orbit and changes positions to the other side of the Sun, allowing the other hemisphere to experience longer days and warmer temperatures.

Consequently, in extreme places like the North and South pole, daylight or nighttime can last for days. Those times of the year when the northern and southern hemispheres experience their longest days and nights are called solstices, which occur twice a year for the northern and southern hemispheres.

The Summer Solstice takes place between June 20th and 22nd in the northern hemisphere and between December 20th and 23rd each year in the southern hemisphere. The Winter Solstice occurs at the same time but in reverse – between Dec. 20th and 23rd for the northern hemisphere and June 20th and 22nd for the southern hemisphere.

According to NOAA, around the Winter Solstice at the North Pole there will be no sunlight or even twilight beginning in early October, and the darkness lasts until the beginning of dawn in early March.

Conversely, around the Summer Solstice, the North Pole stays in full sunlight all day long throughout the entire summer (unless there are clouds). After the Summer Solstice, the sun starts to sink towards the horizon.



Astrophoto: Night Sky by Sam Crimmin


“Night Sky”. On a clear night, the stars and the glowing band of the Milky Way Galaxy are generally visible. Credit: Sam Crimmin
Another common feature in the cycle of day and night is the visibility of the Moon, the stars, and other celestial bodies. Technically, we don’t always see the Moon at night. On certain days, when the Moon is well-positioned between the Earth and the Sun, it is visible during the daytime. However, the stars and other planets of our Solar System are only visible at night after the Sun has fully set.

The reason for this is because the light of these objects is too faint to be seen during daylight hours. The Sun, being the closest star to us and the most radiant object visible from Earth, naturally obscures them when it is overhead. However, with the Earth tilted away from the Sun, we are able to see the Moon radiating the Sun’s light more clearly, and the stars light is detectable.

On an especially clear night, and assuming light pollution is not a major factor, the glowing band of the Milky Way and other clouds of dust and gas may also be visible in the night sky. These objects are more distant than the stars in our vicinity of the Galaxy, and therefore have less luminosity and are more difficult to see.

Another interesting thing about the cycle of day and night is that it is getting slower with time. This is due to the tidal effects the Moon has on Earth’s rotation, which is making days longer (but only marginally). According to atomic clocks around the world, the modern day is about 1.7 milliseconds longer than it was a century ago – a change which may require the addition of more leap seconds in the future.

We have many interesting articles on Earth’s Rotation here at Universe Today. To learn more about solstices here in Universe Today, be sure to check out our articles on the Shortest Day of the Year and the Summer Solstice.

More information can be found at NASA, Seasons of the Year, The Sun at Solstice

Check out this podcast at Astronomy Cast: The Life of the Sun

References: NASA StarChild, NOAA



About 

Author, freelance writer, educator, Taekwon-Do instructor, and loving hubby, son and Island boy!

Gamma Ray Bursts Limit The Habitability of Certain Galaxies, Says Study

Gamma Ray Bursts Limit The Habitability of Certain Galaxies, Says Study:



An artistic image of the explosion of a star leading to a gamma-ray burst. (Source: FUW/Tentaris/Maciej Fro?ow)


An artistic image of the explosion of a star leading to a gamma-ray burst. (Source: FUW/Tentaris/Maciej Frolow)
Gamma ray bursts (GRBs) are some of the brightest, most dramatic events in the Universe. These cosmic tempests are characterized by a spectacular explosion of photons with energies 1,000,000 times greater than the most energetic light our eyes can detect. Due to their explosive power, long-lasting GRBs are predicted to have catastrophic consequences for life on any nearby planet. But could this type of event occur in our own stellar neighborhood? In a new paper published in Physical Review Letters, two astrophysicists examine the probability of a deadly GRB occurring in galaxies like the Milky Way, potentially shedding light on the risk for organisms on Earth, both now and in our distant past and future.

There are two main kinds of GRBs: short, and long. Short GRBs last less than two seconds and are thought to result from the merger of two compact stars, such as neutron stars or black holes. Conversely, long GRBs last more than two seconds and seem to occur in conjunction with certain kinds of Type I supernovae, specifically those that result when a massive star throws off all of its hydrogen and helium during collapse.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, long GRBs are much more threatening to planetary systems than short GRBs. Since dangerous long GRBs appear to be relatively rare in large, metal-rich galaxies like our own, it has long been thought that planets in the Milky Way would be immune to their fallout. But take into account the inconceivably old age of the Universe, and “relatively rare” no longer seems to cut it.

In fact, according to the authors of the new paper, there is a 90% chance that a GRB powerful enough to destroy Earth’s ozone layer occurred in our stellar neighborhood some time in the last 5 billion years, and a 50% chance that such an event occurred within the last half billion years. These odds indicate a possible trigger for the second worst mass extinction in Earth’s history: the Ordovician Extinction. This great decimation occurred 440-450 million years ago and led to the death of more than 80% of all species.

Today, however, Earth appears to be relatively safe. Galaxies that produce GRBs at a far higher rate than our own, such as the Large Magellanic Cloud, are currently too far from Earth to be any cause for alarm. Additionally, our Solar System’s home address in the sleepy outskirts of the Milky Way places us far away from our own galaxy’s more active, star-forming regions, areas that would be more likely to produce GRBs. Interestingly, the fact that such quiet outer regions exist within spiral galaxies like our own is entirely due to the precise value of the cosmological constant – the factor that describes our Universe’s expansion rate – that we observe. If the Universe had expanded any faster, such galaxies would not exist; any slower, and spirals would be far more compact and thus, far more energetically active.

In a future paper, the authors promise to look into the role long GRBs may play in Fermi’s paradox, the open question of why advanced lifeforms appear to be so rare in our Universe. A preprint of their current work can be accessed on the ArXiv.



About 

Vanessa earned her bachelor's degree in Astronomy and Physics in 2009 from Wheaton College in Massachusetts. Her credits in astronomy include observing and analyzing eclipsing binary star systems and taking a walk on the theory side as a NSF REU intern, investigating the impact of type 1a supernovae on the expansion of the Universe. In her spare time she enjoys writing about astrophysics and cosmology, making delicious vegetarian meals, taking adventures with her husband and/or Nikon D50, and saving the world.

Rosetta’s Instruments Direct Scientists to Look Elsewhere for the Source of Earth’s Water

Rosetta’s Instruments Direct Scientists to Look Elsewhere for the Source of Earth’s Water:



Illustration of a rocky planet being bombarded by comets. Earth may have appeared similarly early in its development. WHile indeed such comet impacts did occur, new in situ observations by Rosetta of comet 67P indicate that comets were likely not the primary source of water delivered to the Earth.(Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)


Illustration of a rocky planet’s being bombarded by comets. Earth may have appeared similarly early in its development. While indeed such comet impacts did occur, new in situ observations by Rosetta of comet 67P indicate that comets were likely not the primary source of water delivered to the Earth. (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)
Where did all of our water come from? What might seem like a simple question has challenged and intrigued planetary scientists for decades. So results just released by Rosetta mission scientists have been much anticipated and the observations of the Rosetta spacecraft instruments are telling us to look elsewhere. The water of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko does not resemble Earth’s water.

Because the Earth was extremely hot early in its formation, scientists believe that Earth’s original water should have boiled away like that from a boiling kettle. Prevailing theories have considered two sources for a later delivery of water to the surface of the Earth once conditions had cooled. One is comets and the other is asteroids. Surely some water arrived from both sources, but the question has been which one is the predominant source.

There are two areas of our Solar System in which comets formed about 4.6 billion years ago. One is the Oort cloud far beyond Pluto. Everything points to Comet 67P’s origins being the other birthplace of comets – the Kuiper Belt in the region of Neptune and Pluto. The Rosetta results are ruling out Kuiper Belt comets as a source of Earth’s water. Previous observations of Oort cloud comets, such as Hyakutake and Hale-Bopp, have shown that they also do not have Earth-like water. So planetary scientists must reconsider their models with weight being given to the other possible source – asteroids.

The question of the source of Earth’s water has been tackled by Earth-based instruments and several probes which rendezvous with comets. In 1986, the first flyby of a comet – Comet 1P/Halley, an Oort cloud comet – revealed that its water was not like the water on Earth. How the water from these comets –Halley’s and now 67P – differs from Earth’s is in the ratio of the two types of hydrogen atoms that make up the water molecule.



Illustration of the Rosetta spacecraft showing the location of the ROSINA mass spectrometer instrument, DFMS. The difference between a Deuterium and Hydrogen atom are also illustrated. A water molecule with Deuterium is known as heavy water due to the additional mass of D vs. H (an extra neutron). (Credit: ESA/Rosetta)


Illustration of the Rosetta spacecraft showing the location of the ROSINA mass spectrometer instrument, DFMS. The difference between a Deuterium and Hydrogen atom is also illustrated. A water molecule with Deuterium is known as heavy water due to the additional mass of Dueterium vs. Hydrogen (i.e., an extra neutron). (Credit: ESA/Rosetta)
Measurements by spectrometers revealed how much Deuterium  – a heavier form of the Hydrogen atom – existed in relation to the most common type of Hydrogen in these comets. This ratio, designated as D/H, is about 1 in 6000 in Earth’s ocean water. For the vast majority of comets, remote or in-situ measurements have found a ratio that is higher which does not support the assertion that comets delivered water to the early Earth surface, at least not much of it.

Most recently, Hershel space telescope observations of comet Hartley 2 (103P/Hartley) caused a stir in the debate of the source of Earth’s water. The spectral measurements of the comet’s light revealed a D/H ratio just like Earth’s water. But now the Hershel observation has become more of an exception because of Rosetta’s latest measurements.



A plot displaying the Deuterium/Hydrogen (D/H) ratio of Solar System objects. Only asteroids have a D/H ratio that matches the Earths and comets with the exception of two so far measured have higher ratios. Objects are grouped by color. Planets & moons (blue), chrondritic meteorites from the asteroid belt (grey), Oort cloud comets(purple), Jupiter family comets(pink). Diamond markers = In Situ measurements, Circles = remote astronomical measurements(Credit: Altwegg et al. 2014)


A plot displaying the Deuterium/Hydrogen (D/H) ratio of Solar System objects. Asteroids have a D/H ratio that matches that of the Earth, while comets – except for two measured to date – have higher ratios. Objects are grouped by color: planets & moons (blue), chrondritic meteorites from the asteroid belt (grey), Oort cloud comets (purple), and Jupiter family comets (pink). Diamond markers = In Situ measurements; circles = remote astronomical measurements. (Credit: Altwegg, et al. 2014)
The new measurements of 67P were made by the ROSINA Double Focusing Mass Spectrometer (DFMS) on board Rosetta. Unlike remote observations using light which are less accurate, Rosetta was able to accurately measure the quantities of Deuterium and common Hydrogen surrounding the comet. Scientists could then simply determine a ratio. The results are reported in the paper “67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, a Jupiter Family Comet with a high D/H ratio” by K. Altwegg, et al., published in the 10 December 2014 issue of Science.



New Rosetta mission findings do not exclude comets as a source of water in and on the Earth's crust but does indicate comets were a minor contribution. A four-image mosaic comprises images taken by Rosetta’s navigation camera on 7 December from a distance of 19.7 km from the centre of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. (Credit: ESA/Rosetta/Navcam Imager)


New Rosetta mission findings do not exclude comets as a source of water in and on the Earth’s crust but does indicate comets were a minor contribution. A four-image mosaic comprises images taken by Rosetta’s navigation camera on 7 December from a distance of 19.7 km from the centre of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. (Credit: ESA/Rosetta/Navcam Imager)
The ROSINA instrument observations determined a ratio of 5.3 ± 0.7 × 10-4, which is approximately 3 times the ratio of D/H for Earth’s water. These results do not exclude comets as a source of terrestrial water but they do redirect scientists to consider asteroids as the predominant source. While asteroids have much lower water content compared with comets, asteroids, and their smaller versions, meteoroids, are more numerous than comets. Every meteor/falling star that we see burning up in our atmosphere delivers a myriad of compounds, including water, to Earth. Early on, the onslaught of meteoroids and asteroids impacting Earth was far greater. Consequently, the small quantities of water added delivered by each could add up to what now lies in the oceans, lakes, streams, and even our bodies.

References:

D/H Ratio of Water on Earth Measured with DFMS

67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, a Jupiter family comet with a high D/H ratio

Rosetta fuels the debate on the Origin of Earth’s Water

The Provenances of Asteroids, and Their Contributions to the Volatile Inventories of the Terrestrial Planets

Recent Universe Today related article:

What Percent of Earth is Water?



About 

Contributing writer Tim Reyes is a former NASA software engineer and analyst who has supported development of orbital and lander missions to the planet Mars since 1992. He has an M.S. in Space Plasma Physics from University of Alabama, Huntsville.

Galactic Get-Together has Impressive Light Display

Galactic Get-Together has Impressive Light Display:



NGC 2207 and IC 2163


At this time of year, there are lots of gatherings often decorated with festive lights. When galaxies get together, there is the chance of a spectacular light show as is the case with NGC 2207 and IC 2163

Located about 130 million light years from Earth, in the constellation of Canis Major, this pair of spiral galaxies has been caught in a grazing encounter. NGC 2207 and IC 2163 have hosted three supernova explosions in the past 15 years and have produced one of the most bountiful collections of super bright X-ray lights known. These special objects - known as "ultraluminous X-ray sources" (ULXs) - have been found using data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory.

As in our Milky Way galaxy, NGC 2207 and IC 2163 are sprinkled with many star systems known as X-ray binaries, which consist of a star in a tight orbit around either a neutron star or a "stellar-mass" black hole. The strong gravity of the neutron star or black hole pulls matter from the companion star. As this matter falls toward the neutron star or black hole, it is heated to millions of degrees and generates X-rays.

ULXs have far brighter X-rays than most "normal" X-ray binaries. The true nature of ULXs is still debated, but they are likely a peculiar type of X-ray binary. The black holes in some ULXs may be heavier than stellar mass black holes and could represent a hypothesized, but as yet unconfirmed, intermediate-mass category of black holes.

This composite image of NGC 2207 and IC 2163 contains Chandra data in pink, optical light data from the Hubble Space Telescope in red, green, and blue (appearing as blue, white, orange, and brown), and infrared data from the Spitzer Space Telescope in red.

More information at http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2014/ngc2207/index.html

-Megan Watzke, CXC

Rosetta Comet Water Different Than Earth Water

Rosetta Comet Water Different Than Earth Water:

This composite is a mosaic comprising four individual NAVCAM images taken from 19 miles This composite is a mosaic comprising four individual NAVCAM images taken from 19 miles (31 kilometers) from the center of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko on Nov. 20, 2014. Image credit: ESA/Rosetta/NAVCAM

› Full image and caption
The European Space Agency's Rosetta spacecraft has found the water vapor from comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko to be significantly different from that found on Earth. The discovery fuels the debate on the origin of our planet's oceans.

The measurements, by the Rosetta Orbiter Spectrometer for Ion and Neutral Analysis (ROSINA) instrument, were made in the month following the arrival of the spacecraft on Aug. 6. It is one of the most anticipated early results of the mission, because the origin of Earth's water is still an open question.

More information can be found on ESA's Rosetta website at:

http://bit.ly/1yzbQEi

Comets are time capsules containing primitive material left over from the epoch when the sun and its planets formed. Rosetta's lander obtained the first images taken from a comet's surface and will provide analysis of the comet's possible primordial composition. Rosetta will be the first spacecraft to witness at close proximity how a comet changes as it is subjected to the increasing intensity of the sun's radiation. Observations will help scientists learn more about the origin and evolution of our solar system and the role comets may have played in seeding Earth with water, and perhaps even life.

Rosetta is an ESA mission with contributions from its member states and NASA. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, manages the U.S. contribution of the Rosetta mission for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. JPL also built the MIRO instrument and hosts its principal investigator, Samuel Gulkis. The Southwest Research Institute (San Antonio and Boulder) developed the Rosetta orbiter's IES and Alice instruments, and hosts their principal investigators, James Burch (IES) and Alan Stern (Alice).

For more information on the U.S. instruments aboard Rosetta, visit:

http://rosetta.jpl.nasa.gov

More information about Rosetta is available at:

http://www.esa.int/rosetta

Media Contact

DC Agle

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.

818-393-9011

agle@jpl.nasa.gov

Markus Bauer

European Space Agency, Noordwijk, Netherlands

011-31-71-565-6799

markus.bauer@esa.int

2014-424

Thursday, December 11, 2014

An "Hour of Code" with Color, Images, and Astronomy

An "Hour of Code" with Color, Images, and Astronomy:

For many, it might be hard to imagine living a life without computers and technology. In fact, it’s become so much a part of our society that we may not realize how dependent we are on technology.

But who does the work that enables these computers to fit into our daily lives? Who gets to learn how to code? A project called “Hour of Code” as well as Computer Science Education Week is seeking to address that question by increasing access to coding opportunities for elementary, middle and high school students, and particularly girls and underrepresented students of color.

Here at the Chandra X-ray Center we strongly believe in this goal as well. We’ve joined forces with other members of the astronomical community, including an astronomer at the American Astronomical Society, others at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, as well as partners at Google's CS First and Pencil Code, to create a project for the “Hour of Code” that combines color, astronomy, and coding: http://event.pencilcode.net/home/hoc2014/





Caption: Students can color the Universe with real astronomy data from NASA telescopes and other observatories.

Working with NASA and other data from exploded stars, to star-forming regions, to the area around black holes, students learn basic coding (for beginners - no experience required) and follow a video tutorial to create a real world application of science, technology and even art.









Caption: Learn basic coding for beginners with a video tutorial to create a real-world application. http://recolor.pencilcode.net/

By enabling students to use real data from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, along with other astronomical data, this project helps show just how integral coding is in the pursuit of learning about our Universe. We hope it’s an example of the exciting ways that computer science – from routine tasks in our every day lives to the extraordinary quest to explore the cosmos – is part of it all.

Many thanks to David Bau, August Muench, Matthew Dawson & Cait Sydney Pickens for letting Chandra help out with the project!

-Megan Watzke & Kim Arcand, Chandra

Monday, December 8, 2014

Meteorite May Contain Proof of Life on Mars, Researchers Say

Meteorite May Contain Proof of Life on Mars, Researchers Say:

The idea that Mars could have supported life at one time is the subject of ongoing debate. Image credit: NASA


The idea that Mars could have supported life at one time is the subject of ongoing debate. Image credit: NASA
Mars is currently home to a small army robotic rovers, satellites and orbiters, all of which are busy at work trying to unravel the deeper mysteries of Earth’s neighbor. These include whether or not the planet ever had liquid water on its surface, what the atmosphere once looked like, and – most importantly of all – if it ever supported life.

And while much has been learned about Martian water and its atmosphere, the all-important question of life remains unanswered. Until such time as organic molecules – considered to be the holy grail for missions like Curiosity – are found, scientists must look elsewhere to find evidence of Martian life.

According to a recent paper submitted by an international team of scientists, that evidence may have arrived on Earth three and a half years ago aboard a meteorite that fell in the Moroccan desert. Believed to have broken away from Mars 700,000 years ago, so-called Tissint meteorite has internal features that researchers say appear to be organic materials.

The paper appeared in the scientific journal Meteoritics and Planetary Sciences. In it, the research team – which includes scientists from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL) – indicate organic carbon is located inside fissures in the rock. All indications are the meteorite is Martian in origin.

“So far, there is no other theory that we find more compelling,” says Philippe Gillet, director of EPFL’s Earth and Planetary Sciences Laboratory. He and his colleagues from China, Japan and Germany performed a detailed analysis of organic carbon traces from a Martian meteorite, and have concluded that they have a very probable biological origin.



Artist's conception of an fragment as it blasts off from Mars. Boulder-sized planetary fragments could be a mechanism that carried life between Mars and Earth, UA planetary scientist Jay Melosh says. (Credit: The Planetary Society)


Artist’s conception of an fragment as it blasts off from Mars as a result of a meteor impact. Credit: The Planetary Society
The scientists argue that carbon could have been deposited into the fissures of the rock when it was still on Mars by the infiltration of fluid that was rich in organic matter.

If this sounds familiar, you may recall a previous Martian meteorite named ALH84001, found in the Allen Hills region in Antarctica. In 1996 NASA researchers announced they had found evidence within ALH84001 that strongly suggested primitive life may have existed on Mars more than 3.6 billion years ago. While subsequent studies of the now famous Allen Hills Meteorite shot down theories that the Mars rock held fossilized alien life, both sides continue to debate the issue.

This new research on the Tissint meteorite will likely be reviewed and rebutted, as well.

The researchers say the meteorite was likely ejected from Mars after an asteroid crashed on its surface, and fell to Earth on July 18, 2011, and fell in Morocco in view of several eyewitnesses.

Upon examination, the alien rock was found to have small fissures that were filled with carbon-containing matter. Several research teams have already shown that this component is organic in nature, but they are still debating where the carbon came from.

Chemical, microscopic and isotope analysis of the carbon material led the researchers to several possible explanations of its origin. They established characteristics that unequivocally excluded a terrestrial origin, and showed that the carbon content were deposited in the Tissint’s fissures before it left Mars.

This research challenges research proposed in 2012 that asserted that the carbon traces originated through the high-temperature crystallization of magma. According to the new study, a more likely explanation is that liquids containing organic compounds of biological origin infiltrated Tissint’s “mother” rock at low temperatures, near the Martian surface.



A piece of the Tissint meteorite that came to Earth via Mars. Credit: EPFL/Alain Herzog


A piece of the Tissint meteorite that landed on Earth on July 18th, 2011. Credit: EPFL/Alain Herzog
These conclusions are supported by several intrinsic properties of the meteorite’s carbon, e.g. its ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12. This was found to be significantly lower than the ratio of carbon-13 in the CO2 of Mars’s atmosphere, previously measured by the Phoenix and Curiosity rovers.

Moreover, the difference between these ratios corresponds perfectly with what is observed on Earth between a piece of coal – which is biological in origin – and the carbon in the atmosphere.

The researchers note that this organic matter could also have been brought to Mars when very primitive meteorites – carbonated chondrites – fell on it. However, they consider this scenario unlikely because such meteorites contain very low concentrations of organic matter.

“Insisting on certainty is unwise, particularly on such a sensitive topic,” warns Gillet. “I’m completely open to the possibility that other studies might contradict our findings. However, our conclusions are such that they will rekindle the debate as to the possible existence of biological activity on Mars – at least in the past.”

Be sure to check out these videos from EPFL News, which include an interview with Philippe Gillet, EPFL and co-author of the study:



And this video explaining the history of the Tissint meteor:



Further Reading: EPFL



About 

Author, freelance writer, educator, Taekwon-Do instructor, and loving hubby, son and Island boy!