[Follow me on Twitter (@astroengine)]
[Check out my space blog: Astroengine.com]
[Check out my radio show: Astroengine Live!]
Hello! My name is Ian O'Neill and I've been writing for the Universe Today since December 2007. I am a solar physics doctor, but my space interests are wide-ranging. Since becoming a science writer I have been drawn to the more extreme astrophysics concepts (like black hole dynamics), high energy physics (getting excited about the LHC!) and general space colonization efforts. I am also heavily involved with the Mars Homestead project (run by the Mars Foundation), an international organization to advance our settlement concepts on Mars. I also run my own space physics blog: Astroengine.com, be sure to check it out!
Artist impression of the SpaceX Dragon approaching the space station (SpaceX)
[/caption]A Chicago-based space launch partnership has formally lodged a complaint against NASA’s decision to give space station supply contracts to SpaceX and Orbital Sciences late last year. PlanetSpace, a joint effort by space contractors Lockheed Martin Corp, Boeing Co. and Alliant Techsystems Inc., has formally filed a complaint with the US Government Accountability Office (GAO). PlanetSpace is angry with the US space agency as they believe they presented NASA with a better resupply deal than SpaceX and Orbital.
NASA has been given 30 days to respond to the complaint and the GAO has said it won’t make a ruling until April 29th. Unfortunately this means NASA will have to halt drawing up the ISS supply contracts until the matter has been resolved.
Just when we thought it was going so well…
At a time when the burgeoning commercial space flight industry thought it was beginning to build up some serious momentum, SpaceX and Orbital Sciences have suffered a bump in the road. On December 23rd, 2008 the two companies were celebrating the fact they had secured the largest supply contracts available. NASA agreed to buy 12 flights from SpaceX (for $1.6 billion) and eight flights from Orbital Sciences ($1.9 billion). However, according to PlanetSpace, the partnership offered NASA a better deal than one of the two companies awarded, saying they could do the same job for cheaper.
“The PlanetSpace proposal represented better value to the government. We believe that the GAO will find that flaws in the procurement justify award to PlanetSpace. We look forward to the GAO’s review of this case,” PlanetSpace said in a statement on Thursday.
So far, the GAO has declined to comment on the situation, just stating that NASA had 30 days to respond to the complaint. It won’t be until the end of April that a decision will be made.
NASA decided to use US-based commercial spaceflight companies instead of depending on the Russian Progress vehicle to launch cargo to the International Space Station after the Shuttle is retired in 2010.
Of the two companies, it seems likely that PlanetSpace may be contesting the $1.9 billion contract awarded to Orbital Sciences (in my opinion). Orbital, although a well-established space flight company, is offering less flights for more money than SpaceX (also, the Cygnus space vehicle can carry less cargo than the SpaceX Dragon capsule). However, it is difficult to know where the problem is at this stage.
We’ll just have to wait and see. On a positive note, at least we have several private spaceflight companies wrangling for NASA contracts. Already, business is seeing the advantages (and profitability) of pushing into space, if contracts have to be disputed along the way, so be it.
Falcon 9, plus lightning towers, stand proud, for the first time, over the Cape (SpaceX)
[/caption]
Yesterday (Jan. 10th) was a huge day for SpaceX. For the first time ever, one of their rockets (the mighty Falcon 9) was hoisted vertically in preparation for the Falcon 9 maiden launch (presumably) in the next few weeks. No launch window has been announced as yet, but I am sure SpaceX will be working hard to ignite the nine Merlin-1C engines as soon as possible. Static tests have proven the launch system works, and the successful Falcon 1 flight in September proved SpaceX technology was a reality, so all that is needed is for the largest Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) in the SpaceX fleet to take to the skies, showing the world SpaceX is extending its lead in the commercial space race…
Falcon 9 vertical on the launch pad (SpaceX)It is strange to think back to October when I saw a huge aluminium tube sitting on the SpaceX rocket workshop floor, pre-paint job. Before I realised it, that aluminium first stage shell was painted, branded, and shipped from Hawthorn (CA) to Cape Canaveral (FL) late last year. On December 30th, the Falcon 9 was fully integrated, and yesterday, the whole thing was hoisted upright between four launch pad lightning rods.
Having only just checked out the SpaceX website, I’ve realised the space launch company has released loads of great photos of the progress being made at the new Falcon 9 home, so I thought I’d post a preview of some of these images at the end of this short news update.
Falcon 9 is now vertical at the Cape!
After a very smooth vehicle mating operation yesterday, we began the process of raising Falcon 9 at 12:45pm EST and approximately 30 minutes later, Falcon 9 was vertical at the Cape. The process of taking Falcon 9 vertical was a critical step in preparation for our first Falcon 9 launch later this year. This accomplishment culminates several months of rapid progress, made possible only through the hard work and dedication of the entire SpaceX team. –SpaceX Updates (Jan. 10th, 2009)
Musk standing next to the nine Merlin-1C engines of the Falcon 9 on Jan. 7th (SpaceX)Shortly after the fairing was attached to the booster stages on Dec. 30th 2008 (SpaceX)Before and after: The first stage of the Falcon 9 back in Oct. 2008 at the SpaceX Hawthorn HQ (left) and the same first stage arriving in Cape Canaveral in Dec. 2008 (right). Credit: Ian O'Neill/SpaceX
Accretion can cause neutron stars to flare violently
[/caption]So how do you take the temperature of one of the most exotic objects in the Universe? A neutron star (~1.35 to 2.1 solar masses, measuring only 24 km across) is the remnant of a supernova after a large star has died. Although they are not massive enough become a black hole, neutron stars still accrete matter, pulling gas from a binary partner, often undergoing prolonged periods of flaring.
Fortunately, we can observe X-ray flares (using instrumentation such as Chandra), but it isn’t the flare itself that can reveal the temperature or structure of a neutron star.
At the AAS conference last week, details about the results from an X-ray observing campaign of MXB 1659-29, a quasi-persistent X-ray transient source (i.e. a neutron star that flares for long periods), revealed some fascinating insights to the physics of neutron stars, showing that as the crust of a neutron star cools, the crustal composition is revealed and the temperature of these exotic supernova remnants can be measured…
During a flare outburst, neutron stars generate X-rays. These X-ray sources can be measured and their evolution tracked. In the case of MXB 1659-29, Ed Cackett (Univ. of Michigan) used data from NASA’s Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) to monitor the cooling of the neutron star crust after an extended period of X-ray flaring. MXB 1659-29 flared for 2.5 years until it “turned off” in September 2001. Since then, the source was periodically observed to measure the exponential decrease in X-ray emissions.
So why is this important? After a long period of X-ray flaring, the crust of a neutron star will heat up. However, it is thought that the core of the neutron star will remain comparatively cool. When the neutron star stops flaring (as the accretion of gas, feeding the flare, shuts off), the heating source for the crust is lost. During this period of “quiescence” (no flaring), the diminishing X-ray flux from the cooling neutron star crust reveals a huge wealth of information about the characteristics of the neutron star.
The cross section of a neutron starDuring quiescence, astronomers will observe X-rays emitted from the surface of the neutron star (as opposed to the flares), so direct measurements can be made of the neutron star. In his presentation, Cackett examined how the X-ray flux from MXB 1659-29 reduced exponentially and then levelled off at a constant flux. This means the crust cooled rapidly after the flaring, eventually reaching thermal equilibrium with the neutron star core. Therefore, by using this method, the neutron star core temperature can be inferred.
Including the data from another neutron star X-ray transient KS 1731-260, the cooling rates observed during the onset of quiescence suggests these objects have well-ordered crustal lattices with very few impurities. The rapid temperature decrease (from flare to quiescence) took approximately 1.5 years to reach thermal equilibrium with the neutron star core. Further work will now be carried out using Chandra data so more information about these rapidly spinning exotic objects can be uncovered.
Suddenly, neutron stars became a little less mysterious to me in the 10 minute talk last Tuesday, I love conferences…
Exoplanet collision in BD+20 301. Possibly an Earth-like rocky exoplanet was involved? (Lynette Cook)
[/caption]
In September, it was announced the Chandra X-ray Observatory had spotted something very odd about BD+20 307. The binary system appeared to have a dusty disk surrounding it, indicative of a young, planet-forming system a fraction of the age of the Solar System. However, it was well known that the binary was actually several billion years old. It turns out that this disk was created by a rare planetary event; a cataclysmic planetary collision.
On Wednesday, at the AAS conference in Long Beach, I attended the “Extrasolar Planets” session to listen in on more results from Hubble about the exciting exoplanet discoveries in November… however, for me, the most captivating talk was about the strange, dusty old binary and the future detective work to be carried out to track down a planet killer…
The talks by astrophysicists working with the optical Hubble data were superb, showing off some of the science behind last years spate of direct observations of exoplanets, particularly the massive planet orbiting the star Fomalhaut, shaping a scattered disk of dust. However, there was no further news to report, apart from some cool numerical models the scientists will be using to characterize Fomalhaut b and a very interesting talk about the predicted lifetimes of exoplanets undergoing tidal stresses (which, unfortunately, I missed the first five minutes of as I got lost in the Long Beach Convention Center).
The one presentation that did pique my interest was Ben Zuckerman’s review of the progress being made in the study of BD+20 307. A few months ago, this piece of research caused a huge amount of interest as it provided the first piece of evidence of a huge, rocky planetary collision in the star system 300 light years away. Naturally, many news sources ran with article titles like: Is this what the Solar System would look like after Earth was hit by another planetary body? As Zuckerman pointed out, the fact that the group used an artist impression of a colliding Earth-like body (plus land masses and oceans, as pictured top) was no accident. BD+20 307 is certainly at an age when oceans might have formed and life–as Zuckerman morbidly conjectured–may have thrived. Not for any longer…
Usually when we observe dust around a star, we can assume that it is a planet-forming star system that is fairly young. Conversely, as I found out to great depth in the conference, very old white dwarf systems can reveal a lot about their past planetary population when their dusty contaminants are studied. However, the dust contained in the BD+20 307 system is a puzzle. Astronomers had discovered a system, of comparable age to ours with a large amount of warm dust (T~500K). A system of that age will have long since expelled (via stellar wind pressure) or accreted any left-over dust from the planet-forming stages. Therefore, the only remaining explanation is that a rocky body collided with another, ejecting a huge amount of micron-sized warm dust particles.
So is this what the Solar System would look like after Earth is shattered by another planet? Possibly.
Zuckerman then pushed into some work being done to understand how the planetary collision could have happened in the first place. After all, the planets in our Solar System have settled into long-term stable orbits, any planet in BD+20 307 will have the same qualities. There were some questions as to whether the binary stars may have contributed to destabilizing the system, but Zuckerman quickly argued against this idea as the binary has such a tight orbit (with an orbital period of only 3.5 days), the destroyed planet will have found a stable orbit far from any gravitational variations.
So what could have caused the carnage in BD+20 307? We know that massive planetary bodies exert a huge gravitational pull on their host star and other planets in a system (i.e. Jupiter in the case of our Solar System), occasionally bullying (and sometimes capturing) them along the way. A small nudge in the wrong direction and planets could be knocked from their orbits, set on a collision course. So, much effort is now being put into a search for a third, faint star in BD+20 307. Perhaps it could be orbiting far away from the dancing binary, occasionally swinging past the planetary bodies, setting up the huge collision event.
This certainly seems reasonable, as 70% of binary star systems are found to have a third star. However, Zuckerman’s team have yet to find the “killer” third star and he appears confident that after careful analysis that there is no other stellar body within a 20 AU radius of the binary pair. Next, he intends to study the “wobble” of the centre of mass of the BD+20 307 binary to see if there is any gravitational anomaly as the mysterious “third star” tugs at the pair.
[/caption]Early last year, concern was growing for a Wolf-Rayet star named WR 104 that appeared to be aiming right at Earth (see Looking Down the Barrel of A Gamma Ray Burst). A Wolf-Rayet star is a highly unstable star coming to the end of its life, possibly culminating in a powerful, planet-killing gamma-ray burst (GRB). GRBs are collimated beams of high energy gamma-rays, projected from the poles of a collapsing Wolf-Rayet star. It was little wonder that we were concerned when a dying Wolf-Rayet star was found to be pointing right at us! Today, at the AAS in Long Beach, one scientist working at the Keck Telescope has taken a keen interest in WR 104 and shared new findings that show our Solar System may not be bathed in deadly gamma-rays after all…
Wolf-Rayet stars are evolved massive stars undergoing a suicidal and violent death. They are very hot (up to 50,000K) and losing mass very quickly, generating powerful stellar winds (at velocities of 2000 km/s). WR 104 was imaged using the Keck Telescope in Hawaii last March, and images of the pinwheel spiral star system appeared to show that we were “looking down a rifle barrel”.
So what is causing this spiral structure around WR 104? The star has a binary O-type star partner, so as WD 104 sheds its mass, the stellar winds spiral outward. As we are seeing the full spiral from Earth, it was therefore reasonable to assume the binary system was facing right toward us. As WR 104 probably has its pole pointing 90° from the ecliptic plane, any future GRB could be directed straight at us.
“WR 104 is a fascinating object that got a lot of press last spring,” Dr Grant Hill said during the AAS meeting today (Jan 7th). “Since the object is in our galaxy, it could be devastating [for Earth]”
Hill therefore decided to confirm previous Keck observations with spectroscopic data to find out if there could be the possibility of an Earth-directed GRB. His work confirms the system is a binary pair, orbiting each other at an 8 month period. Hill also confirmed the presence of a shock front between the stellar winds of WD 104 and O-type partner. And there is some very good news for Earth. It would appear the original Keck imagry may not have been as straight-forward as it seemed. Spectroscopic emission lines from the binary pair strongly suggest the system is in fact inclined 30°-40° (possibly as much as 45°) away from us.
So, Earth doesn’t appear to be in the firing line of WR 104 after all…
The magnetic field surrounding the mysterious magnetar (NASA)
[/caption]Magnetars are the violent, exotic cousins of the well known neutron star. They emit excessive amounts of gamma-rays, X-rays and possess a powerful magnetic field. Neutron stars also have very strong magnetic fields (although weak when compared with magnetars), conserving the magnetic field of the parent star before it exploded as a supernova. However, the huge magnetic field strength predicted from observations of magnetars is a mystery. Where do magnetars get their strong magnetic fields? According to new research, the answer could lie in the even more mysterious quark star…
It is well known that neutron stars have very strong magnetic fields. Neutron stars, born from supernovae, preserve the angular momentum and magnetism of the parent star. Therefore, neutron stars are extremely magnetic, often rapidly spinning bodies, ejecting powerful streams of radiation from their poles (seen from Earth as a pulsar should the collimated radiation sweep through our field of view). Sometimes, neutron stars don’t behave as they should, ejecting copious amounts of X-rays and gamma-rays, exhibiting a very powerful magnetic field. These strange, violent entities are known as magnetars. As they are a fairly recent discovery, scientists are working hard to understand what magnetars are and how they acquired their strong magnetic field.
Denis Leahy, from the University of Calgary, Canada, presented a study on magnetars at a January 6th session at this week’s AAS meeting in Long Beach, revealing the hypothetical “quark star” could explain what we are seeing. Quark stars are thought to be the next stage up from neutron stars; as gravitational forces overwhelm the structure of the neutron degenerate matter, quark matter (or strange matter) is the result. However, the formation of a quark star may have an important side effect. Colour ferromagnetism in color-flavour locking quark matter (the most dense form of quark matter) could be a viable mechanism for generating immensely powerful magnetic flux as observed in magnetars. Therefore, magnetars may be the consequence of very compressed quark matter.
These results were arrived at by computer simulation, how can we observe the effect of a quark star — or the “quark star phase” of a magnetar — in a supernova remnant? According to Leahy, the transition from neutron star to quark star could occur from days to thousands of years after the supernova event, depending on the conditions of the neutron star. And what would we see when this transition occurs? There should be a secondary flash of radiation from the neutron star after the supernova due to liberation of energy as the neutron structure collapses, possibly providing astronomers with an opportunity to “see” a magnetar being “switched on”. Leahy also calculates that 1-in-10 supernovae should produce a magnetar remnant, so we have a pretty good chance at spotting the mechanism in action.
The debate of whether or not a supermassive black hole (SMBH) was kicked out of the centre of a galaxy continues in the Black Holes I session at the A A S. According to Stefanie Komossa and her team at the Max Plank Institute for extraterrestrial Physics (MPE) back in May 2008, spectroscopic data of a galactic core appeared to show a collision event between two SMBHs. In this case, the smaller SMBH was propelled out of its host galaxy by an intense and focused “superkick” by gravitational waves.
However, the delegates attending Session 328 have other ideas…
Tamara Bogdanovic, University of Maryland, kicked off the Black Hole I Session with an investigation into the spectroscopic data derived by Komossa et al. Bogdanovic presented her research on the possibility that rather than showing a superkick, the data could be showing the motion of binary SMBHs around the galactic core after a galactic merger. She made the rather sobering statement that there were, “more publications than data,” highlighting the fact that far from being conclusive evidence of a superkick, that more subtle mechanisms may be at work. Model data of orbiting binaries appear to fit the same spectroscopic analysis just as well as the superkick situation. As binary SMBHs would be long-lived objects, there’s a good (statistical) chance of observing them. Further work is required, however, possibly using the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA).
Dipanker Maitra, of the University of Amsterdam, then presented his results of time-dependent modelling of Sagittarius A* (the SBH at the centre of our galaxy). It turns out that there are more high energy flare events detected from Sag A* than expected from the predicted accretion rate. Maitra models the time lag observed in radio data between the first high-energy flares and the following low energy flares.
Jen Blum, from the University of Maryland, then took on the emissions from a stellar black hole in the X-ray binary GRS 1915+105. Key to Blum’s research is to investigate the strange asymmetric iron emission line. It looks like this asymmetry can be explained by a combination of special relativity and general relativity effects near the space-time warping black hole.
David Garofalo, who works at JPL/Caltech, then followed quickly with his research of the “central engine” inside galactic nuclei, investigating how strong a SMBH’s magnetic field can be. In his models, he finds the spin of the black hole is key to magnetic field strength. Counter-intuitively, Garofalo’s work suggests that the fastest spinning black holes may have the weakest magnetic field. Also, slowly spinning SMBHs appear to have a larger gap region. He is quick to point out that his model only shows us what configurations are possible, but concludes with the suggestion that you don’t need a fast-spinning SMBH for powerful jets to be generated. “[It’s a] tug-o-war between gravity and the Lorentz forces,” he said when referring to his model, “but other [unaccounted for] physics may significantly modify the model.”
Avery Broderick, from the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, examines jets produced by the Milky Way’s SMBH and M87. Both are fantastic objects to study as they are relatively close. However, the angular resolution of instrumentation needs to be boosted, or new techniques are needed to understand jet mechanisms.
Massimo Dotti, from the University of Michigan, re-explored Komossa’s research, also supporting Tamara Bogdanovic’s work that a superkick may not have caused the emissions studied by Komossa. He also shows that a galactic merger and then SMBH binary can generate similar red-shifted and blue-shifted components of emission profiles. Dotti then showed details of his model and proposed some observational constrains.
Bonus speaker and NASA scientist Teddy Cheung then discussed his search for “offset galactic nuclei” that may be evidence for SMBH collisions in the centre of galaxies. According to Cheung, the calculations to find the black hole masses can be “done on the back of an envelope… the flap of the envelope!” He then showed some results of the observation campaign, pointing to a few candidates that might reveal a SMBH binary partner may have achieved escape velocity (i.e. been kicked out of the galaxy), but he emphasised that this number was small. Radio data of pre-merger and post-merger lobes were also presented, helping future studies characterize collision and merger events.
All in all, Session 328 was a superb start to the conference for me, really opening my eyes to the cutting edge supermassive black hole research going on around the world. There’s a lot more where that came from…
The nominations are in, the votes have been counted and the Universe Today writers have been consulted; the Top 10 Scientific Endeavours of 2008 are decided! After much consideration by the readers of the Universe Today, it became quickly apparent what the popular choice would be, and some of the Top 10 may not come as a surprise. However, there are some nominations we weren’t expecting, and certainly cannot be found on any other “Top 10” list. Therefore, I believe the Universe Today’s Top 10 Scientific Endeavours of 2008 is the most comprehensive list out there, combining the votes of our readers, nominating a huge variety of articles available through one of the biggest space news websites on the Web.
Without further ado, here is the Universe Today’s definitive Top 10 Scientific Endeavours of 2008…
10. Chandra X-ray Observatory
Chandra X-ray image of M84 (NASA/CXC/MPE/A.Finoguenov et al.); Radio (NSF/NRAO/VLA/ESO/R.A.Laing et al); Optical (SDSS)Launched on July 23rd 1999, NASA’s Chandra X-Ray observatory has opened our eyes to the X-ray Universe. Chandra was named in honour of the late Indian-American Nobel laureate, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. Subrahmanyan was known to the world as Chandra (which also means “moon” or “luminous” in Sanskrit) and he was regarded as one of the most influential astrophysicists of the 20th Century. It is fitting that one of the most influential X-ray observatories of the start of the 21st Century should bear his name.
In short, Chandra is an astounding mission, continuing to shape our understanding of known X-ray phenomena, providing us with a glimpse at the answers to some of the most puzzling questions of our time. Certainly one of the “Great Observatories”.
9. Epsilon Eridani This artist's conception shows the closest known planetary system to our own, called Epsilon Eridani. Credit: NASA/JPL/CaltechThe star system of Epsilon Eridani has provided astronomers with a tantalizing look into past of our very own Solar System since 2000. Being the ninth closest star to our Sun, it is also fairly easy to observe. At approximately 850 million years old, it is effectively what our system will have looked like when it was young; scattered disks of asteroids and dust, with exoplanets orbiting the star. Astronomers have even half-jokingly formed the link between Star Trek‘s fictional world of “Vulcan” with one of the large exoplanets known to be shaping one of the asteroid belts.
In 2008, further work has been done analysing the structure of the Epsilon Eridani system and there is even more evidence to suggest the star system is the Solar System’s “twin”. Although the star itself is slightly smaller and cooler than the Sun, it does possess several unseen planets, creating an asteroid belt much like ours, plus an outer belt (analogous to our Kuiper Belt, but 20-times bigger). Regardless of the similarities between the Solar System and Epsilon Eridani, it is a phenomenal achievement to probe an alien star system, over 10 light years away, with such precision.
8. Galaxy Zoo’s discovery of Hanny’s Voorwerp A highly scientific illustration of the Voorwerp (Galaxy Zoo)In Dutch, “Voorwerp” means “object” and this “object” was discovered by Dutch schoolteacher Hanny van Arkel last year using the Galaxy Zoo project. Since then, this strange astronomical entity has captivated enthusiasts and professionals alike. In May, astronomers came a step closer to understanding what this object was, as Bill Keel explains:
“Our working hypothesis is that Hanny’s Voorwerp consists of dust and gas (maybe from a tidally disrupted dwarf galaxy) which is illuminated by a quasar outburst within IC 2497, an outburst which has faded dramatically within the last 100,000 years.”
Galaxy Zoo is a superb example on how enthusiasts can use an Internet-based system to observe and identify objects in the cosmos. I am sure Hanny’s Voorwerp will continue to captivate professionals and amateurs, ensuring Galaxy Zoo’s popularity through 2009 and beyond…
7. MESSENGER The MESSENGER spacecraft at Mercury (NASA)The MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry and Ranging (MESSENGER) spacecraft was launched by NASA in 2004 to begin an epic journey deep into the Solar System. Its eventual target would take it on a speedy roller-coaster ride via a series of Earth, Venus and Mercury flybys to slow its descent into the Sun’s extreme gravitational well. It won’t achieve orbital insertion until March 2011.
In January 2008, MESSENGER performed its first Mercury flyby. This is the first time for 30 years that the smallest planet* in the Solar System has been visited by a space mission (since the 1975 Mariner 10 mission flyby). There will be one more Mercury flyby until MESSENGER’s delta-v (change in velocity) has been slowed significantly to allow the spacecraft to be captured by the planet’s gravitational pull. During the January flyby, MESSENGER managed to capture some stunning images of the planet from an altitude of 200km. Then, in October the spacecraft made its second pass over Mercury’s surface from the same distance, revealing even more detail of the cratered, rocky surface.
After 3 decades, the mysterious planet, famous for being the closest planet to the Sun, is gradually revealing its secrets.
*Of course, when MESSENGER was launched, it was travelling to the second smallest planet in the Solar System. As Pluto was demoted in 2006, Mercury is now the smallest planet, whereas Pluto is a “dwarf planet” or a “Plutoid”.
6. First exploding supernova observed First supernova caught in the act (Alicia Soderberg, Princeton University)In January, something very special happened to a group of astronomers using NASA’s Swift X-ray satellite to study data from a month-old supernova remnant in a distant galaxy. In a case of “extreme serendipity”, the same galaxy produced another supernova the astronomers were able study right as it happened. This was the first time ever that astronomers caught a supernova in the act, we usually have to make do with studying the debris (or “remnant”) after a supernova has occurred.
“It’s a really lucky chain of events — a surprise,” said Alicia Soderberg, who is leading the group studying data from the explosion. “It was all over in a matter of minutes.”
This discovery is critical to understanding the science behind the final moments of a massive stars life, improving and advancing stellar models.
The complexity of the Large Hadron Collider (CERN/LHC/GridPP)
2008 has been the year for particle accelerator physics. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the biggest physics experiment ever built, primarily to search for the elusive Higgs boson (the “force carrier” of the Higgs field that is theorized to permeate through the entire Universe, giving matter its mass), is as famous as it is infamous.
Early in the year, months before the 27km-long particle accelerator ring went online to circulate its first protons, the world’s media was abuzz with the possible science that could revolutionize physics as we knew it. However, there’s a flip-side to that coin. There was an increasing opposition to the LHC, culminating in attempted legal action (that ultimately failed), based on the flawed thinking that the LHC could generate dangerous micro black holes, strangelets and a host of other hypothetical particles. This only served to stir up international interest in what the LHC was actually going to do, and by October 10th, a mix of concern and excitement built up to the grand “switch on”.
Although many would argue the LHC shouldn’t be included in a “Top Ten Scientific Discoveries” (like Time Magazine’s Top Ten), as it hasn’t actually discovered anything yet, the LHC is a huge science and engineering endeavour, where its construction is as ground-breaking as the potential science it will be producing later this year.
Having recently completed its initial four-year tour of duty around the ringed planet, Cassini had its mission extended through September 2010. In August 2009, the Sun will shine directly on Saturn’s equator, illuminating the northern hemisphere. It is for this reason, the new phase of Cassini’s operations has been called the “Cassini Equinox Mission”.
The principal reason for extension is to find answers to some of the most perplexing questions raised during the spacecraft’s flybys of the Saturnian moons, principally Enceladus, the small 500km-diameter natural satellite. Enceladus may only be a tenth of the size of Titan (Saturn’s biggest moon) but it is one of the most intriguing.
“Of all the geologic provinces in the Saturn system that Cassini has explored, none has been more thrilling or carries greater implications than the region at the southernmost portion of Enceladus,” said Carolyn Porco, Cassini imaging team leader.
The SpaceX Falcon 9 being assembled at Cape Canaveral on Dec. 30th (SpaceX)
In August, the world watched in anticipation as SpaceX made its third attempt at becoming the world’s first commercial space flight company to launch a payload into orbit. Unfortunately, Flight 3 of the SpaceX Falcon 1 rocket became the third Falcon to fail, exploding high in the atmosphere after a stage separation (transient thrust) anomaly. It was a sad day not only for Elon Musk’s dream of providing affordable launch capabilities, but also for the promise of commercial space flight.
But in the true entrepreneurial spirit Musk has become synonymous with, his company turned Flight 3’s loss into a motivation to get it right the fourth time around. Only one month later, the Falcon 1 was readied for Flight 4 from the Kwajalein Atoll launch pad. On September 28th, SpaceX was propelled into the history books as the first ever private space company to design, build and launch a payload (albeit a “dummy” payload) into orbit.
Now SpaceX has proven itself to the world, the future has become very bright for commercial spaceflight. SpaceX not only got into orbit, they did it cheaply and quickly, setting the bar very high for its competitors. They also have a bold vision for the future; building bigger and more powerful rockets (the Falcon 9 for example), launching not only from the South Pacific, but also from the home of rocket launches: Cape Canaveral.
To top it all off, NASA has signed contracts worth $2.5 billion for private launch capabilities over the next decade, with SpaceX receiving a $1.6 billion share. All in all, it has been an outstanding year for SpaceX, and it looks like they might even be ready to supply the International Space Station in 2009, so watch this space.
Hubbles view of the exoplanet Fomalhaut b (NASA/HST)
We’ve known for many years that exoplanets orbit other stars and have observed them indirectly by looking at star “wobble” (due to gravitational effects of a massive exoplanet as it orbits) and exoplanet transits (as the planetary body passes in front of the star, reducing the amount of light received on Earth). This year astronomers went one better, they observed exoplanets directly, imaging the little dots as they orbit their host stars.
As if that wasn’t enough, on November 21st, astronomers using the ESO Very Large Telescope detected an exoplanet in a very compact orbit around Beta Pictoris, 70 light years from Earth.
These stunning glimpses of exoplanets have been made possible by the huge technological advancement in both ground-based and space-based observatory optics. Astronomers are now confident that they can go one step further as telescopes and techniques improve… how about looking for exomoons orbiting these exoplanets? Wow…
In May, the Phoenix Mars Lander captured the world’s attention as it entered the Martian upper atmosphere to begin its “7 minutes of terror“, including a fiery re-entry, fast decent and rocket-powered controlled landing. The robotic lander touched down in the frozen arctic region of the planet to begin its three month campaign with panache. The mission was extended to five months as Phoenix wrestled with the dwindling winter sunlight powering its solar panels and battled against troublesome dust storms.
This mission was also remarkable for the efforts carried out here on Earth by the Phoenix team at NASA and the University of Arizona communicating cutting-edge and up-to-the-minute science via a variety of social platforms. Scientists blogged and Twittered from the moment the mission was launched to the moment Phoenix finally succumbed to a frozen coma in early November (and MarsPhoenix continues to tweet regular data analysis updates).
However, this short mission joined the two rugged Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity soldiering through the elements for the last five years, after repeatedly having their missions extended over four years past their warranty. Add these incredible surface missions to the armada of satellites (NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, Mars Odyssey and the European Space Agency’s Mars Express), and it becomes obvious that international efforts to study Mars have turned the once mysterious, dusty red globe into one of the most studied planetary bodies of the last decade.
*****
So, Phoenix and the continuing Mars program overwhelmed the popular vote in the Top 10 Science Endeavours of 2008, winning the number one spot convincingly. This was a very tough “Top 10” to compile, but with the help of Universe Today readers, the list became more varied than we could have possibly hoped.
Naturally, many worthy science endeavours didn’t make the cut and here’s the runners up:
The Universe Today’s Top 10 Scientific Endeavours of 2008 highlights some of the huge scientific advances we have made in the last 12 months. 2009 promises to be even bigger, and with the help of the organizers of the International Year of Astronomy, global efforts in space won’t only be recognised, they will be celebrated.
[/caption]According to 2012 doomsday proponents, something big is out to get us. By “something big” I mean some uncontrollable cosmic entity (i.e. Planet X, Nibiru or a “killer” solar flare), and by “us” I mean the whole of planet Earth. Pinning 2012 doomsday scenarios on the end of the ancient Mayan “Long Count” calendar appears to be growing momentum amongst authors, websites, documentaries and (my personal favourite) YouTube videos. According to them, something bad is going to happen on or around December 21st 2012. Probably the most interesting difference between the 2012 doomsday scenario and the doomsday prophecies of the past is that almost every possible (and impossible… or implausible) harbinger of doom is being suggested as a planet killer.
So, in this sixth article addressing another astronomical doomsday scenario, I will look at the theory that there is a comet currently out there in deep space, slowly making its final approach on its parabolic orbit toward Earth. But before you get worried, you’ll be glad to hear that the 2012 cometary impact theory is as watertight as a teabag; there is no object observed out there and there is certainly no evidence to suggest there could be a comet impact in 2012… and here’s why…
Marketing Doomsday
In four years today (2012 21-December), the world will be coming to an end according to a few misguided individuals. Doomsayers always begin their arguments using an ancient calendar (plus a heavy dose of Bible Codes, I Ching and ancient Sumerian cuneiform scriptures) to support their new and inventive way the world may end. Alas, most doomsday theories are based on over-hyped scientific misinterpretation and outright lies. Usually there is a book to sell or website to promote. After all, there is nothing more profitable than fear.
Interestingly, I started writing for the Universe Today a year ago today, exactly five years before the end of the Mayan Long Count calendar. Don’t go reading too much into this little fact, pure coincidence, but I think it would be fitting to write the sixth in my series of 2012 articles exposing the myths surrounding this date.
You’ve probably seen the prolific ads for the “2012 Comet” across a range of websites, so I decided to delve into this particular theory to see if there is any truth behind the claims that a comet (or “comet planet”) is approaching Earth on a collision course. To cut a long story short, I can categorically say that no cometary impact is imminent. Any accusations of government cover-ups are to hide the poor science doomsayers are citing (much like the Planet X/Nibiru connection). If you want the long story, read on…
The Comet Threat NASA's Deep Impact probe hits Comet Tempel 1 (NASA)Before we look at the claims behind this doomsday scenario, we must first study Earth’s risk of actually being hit by a comet. We know we’ve been hit by comets in the past, and we will most definitely be hit by more in the future, but the coast is clear for at least a few decades from a marauding comet or asteroid. In fact, meteoroids in the form of chunks of rock are far more numerous than icy comets, and we are hit by several sizeable rocky meteoroids throughout the year (take 2008 TC3, the first predicted meteoroid atmospheric impact, for example).
Although rare, planetary impacts by comets do happen. As Shoemaker-Levy 9 showed us in 1994 when 2km-wide fragments of the comet bombarded the Jovian atmosphere, we mustn’t be complacent when considering a large impact event by comets or asteroids. The dazzling light show by Shoemaker-Levy 9 actually stimulated efforts to increase sky surveys for a possibly catastrophic impact event. Although a vast number of near-Earth objects (NEOs) have been identified, a very small number are considered to be a risk.
Fragments of Shoemaker-Levy 9 (NASA/HST)
The 270 meter-wide asteroid 99942 Apophis caused a stir in 2006 when it became the highest ranking asteroid on the Torino impact hazard scale. Apophis is now expected to glide safely past the Earth in 2029, but depending on the gravitational deflection caused by Earth in 2029, Apophis could pass through a gravitational “keyhole”, creating another impact possibility on April 13th, 2036. Still, the odds are not worth betting on; would you put money on a 1 in 45,000 chance of an Apophis 2036 impact?
There are other lumps of rock out there, but most are benign, and certainly not a threat to everyday life in 2012. However, we must be aware that asteroids are a very real future threat to humanity. As a result of this increased awareness, other NEOs have been discovered and tracked. Objects such as 2007 VK184, a 130 meter-wide asteroid may cause problems in the distant future, but the probability of impact is still extremely low. Astronomers from the Catalina Sky Survey estimate a few possible impact dates for 2007 VK184, but the odds never exceed a 0.037% chance of hitting Earth in the next 100 years. Other asteroids are currently being tracked and they may cause some concern over a century from now (although none surpass a Torino scale of Level 1, and if they do, all tend to fall back to the “normal” Level 0).
In short, the skies are clear from any imminent (certainly within the next 4 years) impact from an asteroid. Comets do not feature as a significant risk either. There is no astronomical evidence supporting otherwise.
This doesn’t stop organizations such as ex-NASA astronaut Rusty Schweickart’s B612 Foundation from planning for possible future asteroid/comet threats. While Hollywood movies would have us believe blowing a comet up with a nuclear bomb will be a very good idea, the B612 Foundation disagrees. In fact, it could be a very bad idea. The key thing to remember when reading about NEO surveys or asteroid/comet deflection techniques is that we need a lot of lead time to stand any hope of deflecting a possible catastrophic impact event. This does not indicate a concern in the near future, it is simply a prudent precaution to safeguard the distant future of our planet.
The 2012 Comet-Google Conspiracy The evidence for a comet... or Planet X... whichever. The void in Google Sky, are they hiding something? (Google)So, it looks like we are safe from any astronomical impact. That’s not to say we won’t be hit by a small meteoroid, large fireballs occur regularly (remember the November 21st Canada bolide, and the most recent December 6th Colorado fireball, the largest of which was possibly caused by a 10-tonne rocky meteoroid). Also, this is not to say we won’t discover more NEOs within the next four years (we could spot a threatening object tomorrow for all we know), but the point is that there is absolutely no evidence for any civilization-ending comet impact in 2012. Any claims to the contrary are completely false.
So why are we seeing ads touting the “2012 Comet” theory? As far as I can tell, it is based on one very flimsy piece of evidence. So, lets load up Google Earth to see where the problem is…
If you have Google Earth installed on your computer, you have the ability to look “up” rather than just down at the Earth’s surface. Switching the software to the night sky allows you to see the constellations and will guide you and a dazzling tour of the observable Universe. Despite this overload of information, is Google hiding something? Is the huge search-engine based company actively trying to hide observations of a comet from us?
Using Google Earth data for optical, infrared (IRAS) and microwave (WMAP) surveys (Google)
Guide Google Earth to RA:5h 54m 00s, Dec: -6° 00′ 00″ and zoom in. If you don’t have Google Earth, this region can also be found in the online version of Google Sky. You’ll see an ominous rectangular void (a.k.a. the “Google Anomaly” in the images above) right next to the Orion Nebula, south of Orion’s Belt.
Note: The Constellation of Orion and therefore the “Google Anomaly” is in a very conspicuous location of the night sky, observable from northern and southern hemispheres.
This void is only apparent in the optical data; if you switch the data set to the microwave survey carried out by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), you’ll find the void is replaced by data. Also, infrared data covers the region pretty nicely.
Note: This infrared view of the sky was observed by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS).
So, the theory is that Google is hiding observations of an incoming comet. But there is an added twist to the comet conspiracy theory; the comet is also referred to as a “comet planet” and therefore a Planet X candidate (but I thought Planet X was a brown dwarf candidate?). Yes, Planet X seems to be at the root of all doomsday scenarios.
I’ll try to make this as quick as possible:
1) IRAS Data A popular image on Planet X websites. Is this Planet X, or is it simply a young galaxy? (NASA - possible source)The Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) was an orbiting telescope that lasted for 10 months in 1983. It performed an infrared survey of the entire sky, churning up some fantastic observations of ultra-luminous young galaxies and intergalactic “cirrus”. However, before these objects were formally identified, the media (in particular the Washington Post) hinted heavily that some of these objects could be the fabled “Planet X” in the outskirts of our Solar System. This is one of the key theories doomsayers cite as fact that Planet X exists. Using dubious logic, several authors claim these early observations prove that Planet X is in fact the Sumerian planet “Nibiru”. Nibiru is therefore a brown dwarf. In this theory, death and destruction quickly follows, including the appearance of an alien race called the Annunaki (our alien ancestors) who want their planet back. Wonderful science fiction, with no roots in science fact.
So, is this “2012 comet” actually Planet X? If it is (disregarding the obvious fact that a comet is not a planet, let alone a brown dwarf), why is the Google Anomaly only a void patch in optical data? If Google and NASA were trying to hide evidence of a “comet” (by removing a region of optical data), surely they’d remove the IRAS data too? In any case, the IRAS data shows no object within the anomaly. Besides, why would Google leave a very obvious patch of missing optical data, when they could have just airbrushed the object from the dataset?
In conclusion, the Google Anomaly is in fact missing data, pure and simple. There’s no comet there, and simply because there is missing data does not prove the existence of anything sinister.
2) Just Look Up
Just in case you needed a little more convincing that the 2012 comet/Planet X theory was complete bunkum, think about the location of this proposed comet. The Google Anomaly is in full view for most of the planet throughout the year as it is in the constellation of Orion, right in the neighbourhood of some of the most famous, and well-studied stars and nebulae (the Horsehead Nebula and the Great Orion Nebula for example). If anyone looks at the Google Anomaly with suspicion, why not look straight up and see for yourself? Amateur astronomers have access to very advanced optics, so I think that if there was a suspect “comet planet” in the region, it would have been spotted by now (without Google’s help).
In Conclusion
The truth is that the Planet X conspiracy theory is wrong, but the 2012 comet theory is even worse. The chances of a large planet swinging through the inner solar system in 2012 has the same odds as a comet impact on that date: nil.
We cannot predict the future, and no ancient prophecy will prove the existence of a modern astronomical “end of the world” scenario. I am sure 2012 will be a significant year for spiritual and religious reasons, I’m not debating that. However, for doomsayers to use modern science to prove their inaccurate doomsday creations for personal gain is not only irresponsible, it can be very damaging.
The megawatt-class military laser housed inside a 747 (USAF)
[/caption]
“We remain on track to complete a lethal demonstration in 2009,” says an Airborne Laser (ABL) developer. “There’s nothing like flaming missile wreckage to show the world the system is viable and that it works.”
Indeed, and it looks like the initial dreams of having an anti-missile laser system have come one more step closer to reality, but not quite as envisioned in President Regan’s “Star Wars” project as announced in 1983 as part of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Rather than having an orbital laser, the USAF and a group of military contractors have test-fired a powerful, missile-melting laser housed inside a Boeing 747. It may only be a stationary test, but in an effort to deal with the threat of missile launches from rogue nations, the ABL is one more step closer to completion…
On reading a recent article about the ABL, it became abundantly clear as to the priorities of the US government: defending the nation against the possibility of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) being launched from one of the growing number of “rogue nations” or well-funded terrorist factions. Having just written a few articles about NASA budget concerns, the development of the military ABL sounds more like the recent media coverage of NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory (MSL). Woefully behind schedule and grossly over-budget. But in the case of the ABL, there appears to have been little concern (so far) as military budgets are more generous than NASA’s.
After 12 years of development, sucking up $4.2 billion, the most powerful military laser could be collecting its first airmiles as soon as next year. However, this isn’t what President Regan had in mind when he announced the Cold War era Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) 25 years ago. The SDI has since been watered down (due to the break-up of the Soviet Union), and ambitious projects have taken a back seat. Although the dream of having an orbital laser defence platform has since been deemed technically difficult and expensive, the laser-in-an-airliner concept appears to be an ideal compromise.
And so, at Edwards Air Force Base on November 24th, the military and defence contractors Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, watched the first test of the weapon on a stationary target. It appears that it worked and, although details are sketchy, it worked very well. This is a huge milestone in the 12-year development of the system as this is the first time the laser was fired from its winged transportation. All that is required is a full-flight test of the system and the US will be a lot closer to the remote protection against ICBM attack.
So how does it work? During times of tension when missile launches are a threat, the laser-carrying 747 will fly in a holding pattern a few hundred miles away from the location of missile silos or mobile scud units. Should the heat signature of a launching missile be detected by satellites or ground-based military units, the ABL will spin its nose-mounted turret at the launching missile. On firing, the megawatt laser (the precise energy is classified) will hit the accelerating missile. The incident radiation from the laser will melt, bend and buckle the missile during the very early stages of launch, guaranteeing its break-up. The threat will therefore be neutralised. As the computer systems used are so advanced, and as laser light travels at the speed of light, it is hoped this weapon will have a near-instantaneous reaction time.
The scope for the ABL doesn’t stop at ICBMs. There is a huge potential that it may be used to target satellites, possibly rendering spy satellite systems useless during times of war. However, the ABL targeting system is set up to target the missile launch heat signature, but this may be developed to include a satellite targeting system. Weapons analysts have also pointed out that the ABL could be used against other aircraft, possibly making jet dogfights a thing of the past. This may lead to an era of entirely laser-fought battles.
It is essential the military project explores all the possibilities for the ABL as Obama’s transition team will be looking closely at this expensive endeavour, possibly leading to its cancellation if its use is exclusive only to ICBMs…
