As I was reading through Chapter 12 I came across text on the Dawn Mission and my curiosity led me to searching for more! For something I hadn’t heard of before, its profound contributions and interesting factoids are beyond astonishing!
I am a huge – and I mean HUGE – Star Wars fanatic, and to learn that the TIE fighter from the original trilogy is even remotely related to real science is news to me. TIE stands for twin ion engine, a factoid that I’m ashamed to admit is news to me. And what’s cooler is that the Dawn spacecraft uses ion engines and is apparently the only spacecraft to orbit two “deep-space destinations.” The accomplishments of Dawn are just as impressive as they are interesting; from finding organics on Ceres to revamping or reaffirming perspectives on solar system formation, and world diversity and geography! Ceres could be geologically active, dwarfs could have (or have had) oceans, the list goes on!
I encourage anyone to take a look at Nasa’s website on it, which is hyperlinked in the above image’s caption!
Makemake is a reddish-brown dwarf planet in the outer solar system and the fourth body identified as a dwarf planet; it, along with Eris and Haumea, were responsible for Pluto’s drop in status from planet to dwarf planet. It is the second brightest known object in the outer solar system (behind Pluto) and is 870 miles (1,400 kilometers) wide (which is about two-thirds the size of Pluto). It is large enough and bright enough to be studied by a high-end amateur telescope; thus, astronomers took advantage of Makemake’s passage in front of a star — called occultation — to determine that the dwarf planet has no atmosphere. Makemake orbits beyond the range of Pluto in the Kuiper belt (but closer to the sun than Eris), taking approximately 310 Earth-years to circle the Sun. It has one moon, designated S/2015 (136472), which was discovered by astronomers in 2015 using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope. S/2015 is about 100 miles (160 km) in diameter and was seen about 13,000 miles (20,900 km) from the surface of Makemake.
Extrasolar planets is one of the most interesting astronomical research topics. It can help us answer questions such as whether there are aliens, or is it possible for us to find another “Earth” to live on.
Artistic illustration of enormously amount of extrasolar systems in the universe, pic from wikipedia
An extrasolar planet is defined as a planet that is outside of solar system. The history of extrasolar planet can be traced back to 1917, but the first confirmed detection of extrasolar planet happened in 1988. As of April 1st, 2019, we have found 4023 confirmed planets with in 3005 systems.
Because of the bias in detecting extrasolar system due to the mythology of transit photometry and Doppler spectroscopy, most of the planets we found are huge in size and close to the star in the system. By in theory, there should be about 1 Earth-like size planet in the habitable zone in 5 sun-like star’s system. This number is amazing considered that we have 200 billion stars just in Milky Way — that’s about 11 billion Earth-like planets! Are we the only special one?
Exoplanet population distribution by type, pic from wikipedia
One example of a likely Earth twin is Kepler-452b. It’s one of the most Earth-like exoplanet we have found so far. It lies at 1,400 light year away from us, and it’s about 60% larger than Earth, orbiting a sun-like star that is 10% bigger and 20% brighter. Kepler-452b’s orbital period is about 385 days, making it lying in the habitable zone. Kepler-452b is likely to process thick atmosphere, lots of water and volcanos. The planet and its sum have been around for about 6 billion years, and is there any life on Kepler-452b? We expect future researches can reveal us the answer.
Comparison between Kepler-452b and Earth, pic from space
4.6 billion years ago, our solar system was just a big cloud of gas and dust. A lot of it gathered together and formed the sun. Most of the rest gathered together and formed planets. Some of the leftover gas and dust gathered into smaller clusters and became things that we know as asteroids and comets.
Comets hang out in the far reaches of the solar system, in either the kuiper belt or the oort cloud. When we try to explain what the comets are made of, we usually describe them as dirty snowballs. “Dirty” because of the dust and rocky particles infused in them. “Snowball” because they’re composed of frozen gases and water ice. This is the comet’s center and is known as the nucleus.
And what of the tails? These appear as the comet comes near the sun. As it enters the inner solar system, the nucleus thaws slightly enough for small pieces of gas and dust to break off. This is what the tail is made of. It behaves somewhat like a cloud, and obscures our view of the nucleus. Now, the reason it trails away from the nucleus and creates that distinctive comet tail is solar radiation. It pushes the gas and dust so that these tails always face away from the sun. That means that when the comet is moving away from the sun, the tail is actually blowing in front of the nucleus!
It might be a hard mental image to grasp, but it makes a little sense if you think about walking around with a scarf on a windy day. The direction the scarf blows in doesn’t depend on which way you’re walking. It depends on the wind! This is similar to what’s happening between solar radiation and the tail of the comet.
Here’s an interesting consequence of the tail: because the comet’s tail always obscures the nucleus, it’s very hard for us to see what the “true comet” looks like if we wait to observe it from Earth. NASA’s Deep Space 1 mission sent a spacecraft into the tail of Comet Borrelly to get a better glimpse of the nucleus. They saw jets shooting out of weak spots and holes in the nucleus. This happens as the gas and dust heats up and expands from within the nucleus. While we recognize and love comets for their tails, these are the amazing views we miss out on.
We are pretty used to things falling from the sky unexpectedly, as this often results in humans falling victim to injury. So it is pretty natural to ask, has anyone been hit by a meteorite: a piece of rock and metal that has survived passage from space through Earth’s atmosphere and ultimately fallen to Earth’s surface?
The answer: actually yes! This has happened (as far as what has been reported) one time in history, and it was actually in the United States. On November 30, 1954 in Sylacauga, Alabama a woman named Ann Hodges was asleep inside her home when a meteorite (weighing in at 9 pounds) fell through her ceiling, hit a radio, and then hit her in the thigh. Luckily, this woman was only left with a large bruise and no other major injuries. Sadly, this meteorite remained a problem for her as her landlord fought her for rightful ownership of said rock. This legal battle resulted in Hodges separating from her husband and her mental and physical health deteriorating until she died of kidney failure at the age of only 52. And according to Wikipedia, the Hodges had to pay $500 to gain ownership, but then were unable to find a buyer because so much time had passed while the court case played out. Hodge’s meteorite brought her fame, but it also seems like a lot of hardship. A neighbor of Hodge fared much better as a result of the meteorite. The man, named Julius Kempis McKinney, found a smaller piece of the meteorite and actually sold it for a very large sum, which allowed him to purchase a car and a house. Not a bad day for him!
Ann Hodges photographed for Time Magazine after being hit by a 9 lb meteorite. Image courtesy of All That’s Interesting
This is not the only instance of a meteorite causing humans issues. There have been many reported cases of damage to property, toxic fumes being released, and a dangerous explosion in Russia that injured over 1,000 people. But as far as being directly hit by a meteorite, the chances are extremely low. According to an article by the Smithsonian, the chances are 1 in 1.6 million, which is significantly lower than your chances of being hit by lightning, which is 1 in 135,000. But apparently our odds of dying as a result of a meteorite are 1 in 175,000. So we might die from space debris, it just probably won’t be because it directly hit us.
Halley’s Comet is one of the most famous comets known to humanity. While there’s no real reason for its popularity, it’s still an interesting space object to be observed. It was first observed in 239 B.C. in China and notably found by Edmond Halley who examined three sightings in 1531,1607, and 1682. He stated that these sightings were all the same comet and that it would come again in 1758. ( Source)
The comets orbit is highly elliptical with an eccentricity of .967 and a period of 75 years. At the perihelion, or closest distance to the sun, its distance is .6 AU which is between the orbits of Mercury and Venus. The aphelion, or farthest distance from the sun, is 35 AU, around the orbit of Pluto. Halley’s orbit it also in retrograde, so it orbits the opposite direction that the Earth is spinning. This orbit suggests that the comet was originally a long-period comet which originated in the Oort Cloud. The gravity of the giant planets acted on the comet which guided it into the inner solar system. (Source)
As we’ve seen in our study of the Jovian planets, the actual planets themselves aren’t the only important space-related object that provides useful and insightful information. Every Jovian planet has some sort of celestial object orbiting or surrounding it, especially the moons surrounding Jupiter. Discovered by Galileo Galilei way back in 1610 (on January 10th), the four different Galilean moons (which include Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto) exhibit different tectonic, spatial, and compositional characteristics that make each world unique and interesting to study!
Starting with the innermost-orbiting moon, we discuss Io, the most volcanically active world in our Solar System. Sizing up at around the dimensions of a dwarf planet, Io contains large volcanoes littered throughout the entire moon’s surface. Seldom does the moon have impact craters, as the super-frequent eruptions remove them from the surface almost immediately. Similar to Earth, the volcanoes on Io follow a similar outgassing pattern (however, for Io, it’s with Sulfur Dioxide). And lastly, Io’s constantly active volcanoes indicate to scientists that it experiences tidal heating (tidal forces causing constant flexes and stretches of the moon’s core), allowing it to be so active!
Onto the second innermost-orbiting moon, we discuss Europa, one of the most intriguing celestial bodies in our Solar System. It sits as a stark contrast to Io — not only is its surface covered by water ice, but it additionally seems like liquid water is flowing throughout its interior (since there are a lack of impact craters, some type of geographical movement is occurring). Scientists believe that there’s internal heat hot enough to melt some of the surface ice for the internal flowing as a result of photographical evidence, gravitational measurements, and magnetic fields. All in all, Europa could be the first place we find liquid water outside our own Earth (which would be pretty cool!).
For the third and fourth moons, we discuss both Ganymede and Callisto. As the largest moon in the Solar System, Ganymede’s surface of relatively young ice suggests a constant upwelling of water / slush to the surface (which would mean there’s an ocean there too, like Europa’s). However, because Ganymede is so large, it makes sense that it’s still active (at least, much more so than Europa). Additionally, we can’t forget to mention Callisto, a heavily cratered ball of ice that represents the stereotypical Jovian moon. It has old-looking surface littered with craters and ice-like material. However, as it lacks any sort of tectonic or volcanic activity, it isn’t seemingly as significant as the other three moons (though it may have a subsurface ocean, like the other moons).
All in all, the four different Galilean moons represent an eclectic collection of different quirks and characteristics that make them unique! If you’d like to further research the different moons of Jupiter, more information can be found at the linked website! And finally, a picture of the different moons can be found below.
Visual representations of the different moons of Jupiter. The original source can be found at the attached hyperlink.
Ok, this image may be a little deceiving. If you haven’t guessed already, I’m going to write a little about tidal heating. Tidal heating has nothing to do with making the tides on Earth catch on fire, I just thought that was a beautiful image and it made for a good pun.
Tidal heating is best seen in Jupiter’s moon Io. Scientists wondered how the moon could have such active volcanic activity given its size, and tidal heating is the explanation. Much like Earth and our moon, The Moon, interact with tidal forces, Io and Jupiter do as well. However, Jupiter is much larger than Earth, and Io’s orbit is also highly elliptical due to gravitation force interactions from Jupiter’s other moons and Io. These factors together mean that Io experiences an extremely large amount of varying tidal squeezes from Jupiter as it goes through its orbit around Jupiter.
“The Cosmic Perspective” by Jeffrey O. Bennett, Megan O. Donahue, Nicholas Schneider, and Mark Voit uses a great analogy of Silly Putty being squeezed, the more it is squeezed into different shapes it heats up and becomes more malleable. The same goes for Io, except the added heat leads to volcanism. (Good thing that doesn’t happen with Silly Putty!) The forces acting on Io cause friction in the world leading to over 200 times as much heat generated as from the radioactive heat on Earth.
In class, we’ve discussed how the method we use to discover planets may bias the types of planets we find. For example, larger, more massive planets are easier to find with almost any method of discovering planets. Likely because of this, we have found far more Jupiter-sized exoplanets than Earth-sized planets. I wanted to investigate this further, and examine two planetary properties: the size of the orbit, and the mass of the planet.
To do this, I went to NASA’s exoplanet archive. I downloaded only the columns with the names, method of discovery, orbital distance, and planet’s mass for every discovered exoplanet. Then, I filtered out planets without a listed value for any of these properties. After this, I turned it into a scatter plot with each planet’s orbital distance and mass, all colored based on how it was discovered. The result is below:
A few things are notable right off the bat. First, almost every planet is relatively massive. The absolute smallest planets are only a few times less massive than Earth, and almost every planet is more than .01 – 3x more massive than Earth. But once you pass this threshold, there aren’t huge differences in sensitivity by discovery method. The average mass of planets found by transit is , vs. for exoplanets discovered by radial velocity.
The same isn’t true for distance, though. There is a clear difference even on the plot. The average distance for exoplanets found by transit is only vs. for radial velocity – more than an order of magnitude difference. But both of those are far, far closer than exoplanets found by direct imaging, with an average distance of from their star. In comparison, microlensing – detecting planets by observing their gravity’s influence on photons of light – yields relatively modest numbers. The average distance from planets for microlensing is only .
This shows an important lesson. The planets we see probably aren’t representative of the planets that are actually out there. There are massive variations in the kinds of planets we find just based on the method we use to discover them. And there’s very good reason to think that all of them are biased in favor of finding large planets, meaning our data is likely extremely unrepresentative of the true distribution.
Posted inExoplanets|Taggedblog5|Comments Off on Exoplanet Properties by Discovery Method
Contrary to popular belief, Saturn is not the only planet in our Solar System with rings. In fact, all four jovian planets have rings, but Saturn’s are just the most noticeable because of their reflective properties. Jupiter’s rings are made of small, dark particles, which is why it is hard to detect them in photographs. Similarly, Uranus’ rings are made of dark particles which are speculated to be ice, and Neptune’s rings are dark and dusty because they thought to have formed from chipped off moons. It is interesting to note that Saturn’s rings are also made of rock and ice, but frequent collisions effectively ‘shine’ these particles, giving Saturn’s rings their reflective appearance.
Now, you might begin to wonder exactly why jovian planets have rings. As it turns out, in the Roche tidal zone of a jovian planet, the tidal forces pulling apart an object become comparable to the gravitational forces holding it together. Only relatively small objects, such as rocky particles, can avoid being ripped apart by the strong tidal forces that are found in this region. As tidal forces prevent small moonlet particles from accretting into larger moons, jovian planet’s rings are formed from continuous impacts of these small moonlet particles orbiting the equatorial plane of the planet. We know that rings were not formed from the leftovers of planetary formation because these particles are far too small to have survived for billions of years, so new particles must be continually supplied to the rings in order to replace those that are destroyed. These small moons contribute to ring particles in multiple ways. First, small, dust-sized particles are released from each tiny impact of moonlet particles. These ongoing impacts ensures that some ring particles are always present. Second, the occasional larger impact can shatter the moolet completely, creating a large supply of boulder-sized ring particles. The frequent tiny impacts then begin to slowly grind these bolder particles into tiny dust particles, and some of these particles are recycled by forming into small clumps only to be torn apart again by other tiny impacts. In short, jovian planet’s rings are formed from the gradual dismantling of the small moonlets that formed during the formation of our Solar System.