Messier 21 (M21) – The NGC 6531 Open Star Cluster

The Messier 21 open star cluster and the Trifid Nebula. Credit: Wikisky

Welcome back to Messier Monday! In our ongoing tribute to the great Tammy Plotner, we take a look at the Messier 21 open star cluster. Enjoy!

Back in the 18th century, famed French astronomer Charles Messier noted the presence of several “nebulous objects” in the night sky. Having originally mistaken them for comets, he began compiling a list of these objects so that other astronomers wouldn’t make the same mistake. Consisting of 100 objects, the Messier Catalog has come to be viewed as a major milestone in the study of Deep Space Objects.

One of these objects is Messier 21 (aka. NGC 6531), an open star cluster located in the Sagittarius constellation. A relatively young cluster that is tightly packed, this object is not visible to the naked eye. Hence why it was not discovered until 1764 by Charles Messier himself. It is now one of the over 100 Deep Sky Objects listed in the Messier Catalog.

Description:

At a distance of 4,250 light years from Earth, this group of 57 various magnitude stars all started life together about 4.6 million years ago as part of the Sagittarius OB1 stellar association. What makes this fairly loose collection of stars rather prized is its youth as a cluster, and the variation of age in its stellar members. Main sequence stars are easy enough to distinguish in a group, but low mass stars are a different story when it comes to separating them from older cluster members.

Messier 21 (NGC 6531). Atlas Image mosaic obtained as part of the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS), a joint project of the University of Massachusetts and the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation.
Atlas mosaic image of Messier 21 (NGC 6531) obtained as part of the Two Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS). Credit: 2MASS/UofM/IPAC/Catech/NASA/NSF

As Byeong Park of the Korean Astronomy Observatory said in a 2001 study of the object:

“In the case of a young open cluster, low-mass stars are still in the contraction phase and their positions in the photometric diagrams are usually crowded with foreground red stars and reddened background stars. The young open cluster NGC 6531 (M21) is located in the Galactic disk near the Sagittarius star forming region. The cluster is near to the nebula NGC 6514 (the Trifid nebula), but it is known that it is not associated with any nebulosity and the interstellar reddening is low and homogeneous. Although the cluster is relatively near, and has many early B-type stars, it has not been studied in detail.”

But study it in detail they did, finding 56 main sequence members, 7 pre-main sequence stars and 6 pre-main sequence candidates. But why did this cluster… you know, cluster in the way it did? As Didier Raboud, an astronomer from the Geneva Observatory, explained in his 1998 study “Mass segregation in very young open clusters“:

“The study of the very young open cluster NGC 6231 clearly shows the presence of a mass segregation for the most massive stars. These observations, combined with those concerning other young objects and very recent numerical simulations, strongly support the hypothesis of an initial origin for the mass segregation of the most massive stars. These results led to the conclusion that massive stars form near the center of clusters. They are strong constraints for scenarii of star and stellar cluster formation.” say Raboud, “In the context of massive star formation in the center of clusters, it is worth noting that we observe numerous examples of multiple systems of O-stars in the center of very young OCs. In the case of NGC 6231, 8 stars among the 10 brightest are spectroscopic binaries with periods shorter than 6 days.”

Credit: earthsky.org
Achernar, the flattest star known, is classified as be star. Credit: earthsky.org

But are there any other surprises hidden inside? You bet! Try Be-stars, a class of rapidly rotating stars that end up becoming flattened at the poles. As Virginia McSwain of Yale University’s Department of Astronomy wrote in a 2005 study, “The Evolutionary Status of Be Stars: Results from a Photometric Study of Southern Open Clusters“:

“Be stars are a class of rapidly rotating B stars with circumstellar disks that cause Balmer and other line emission. There are three possible reasons for the rapid rotation of Be stars: they may have been born as rapid rotators, spun up by binary mass transfer, or spun up during the main-sequence (MS) evolution of B stars. To test the various formation scenarios, we have conducted a photometric survey of 55 open clusters in the southern sky. We use our results to examine the age and evolutionary dependence of the Be phenomenon. We find an overall increase in the fraction of Be stars with age until 100 Myr, and Be stars are most common among the brightest, most massive B-type stars above the zero-age main sequence (ZAMS). We show that a spin-up phase at the terminal-age main sequence (TAMS) cannot produce the observed distribution of Be stars, but up to 73% of the Be stars detected may have been spun-up by binary mass transfer. Most of the remaining Be stars were likely rapid rotators at birth. Previous studies have suggested that low metallicity and high cluster density may also favor Be star formation.”

History of Observation:

Charles Messier discovered this object on June 5th, 1764. As he wrote in his notes on the occassion:

“In the same night I have determined the position of two clusters of stars which are close to each other, a bit above the Ecliptic, between the bow of Sagittarius and the right foot of Ophiuchus: the known star closest to these two clusters is the 11th of the constellation Sagittarius, of seventh magnitude, after the catalog of Flamsteed: the stars of these clusters are, from the eighth to the ninth magnitude, environed with nebulosities. I have determined their positions. The right ascension of the first cluster, 267d 4′ 5″, its declination 22d 59′ 10″ south. The right ascension of the second, 267d 31′ 35″; its declination, 22d 31′ 25″ south.”

Messier 21. Credit: Wikisky
Close up of the Messier 21 star cluster. Credit: Wikisky

While Messier did separate the two star clusters, he assumed the nebulosity of M20 was also involved with M21. In this circumstance, we cannot fault him. After all, his job was to locate comets, and the purpose of his catalog was to identify those objects that were not. In later years, Messier 21 would be revisited again by Admiral Smyth, who would describe it as follows:

“A coarse cluster of telescopic stars, in a rich gathering galaxy region, near the upper part of the Archer’s bow; and about the middle is the conspicuous pair above registered, – A being 9, yellowish, and B 10, ash coloured. This was discovered by Messier in 1764, who seems to have included some bright outliers in his description, and what he mentions as nebulosity, must have been the grouping of the minute stars in view. Though this was in the power of the meridian instruments, its mean apparent place was obtained by differentiation from Mu Sagittarii, the bright star about 2 deg 1/4 to the north-east of it.”

Locating Messier 21:

Once you have become familiar with the Sagittarius region, finding Messier 21 is easy. It’s located just two and a half degrees northwest of Messier 8 – the “Lagoon Nebula” – and about a half a degree northeast of Messier 20 – the “Trifid Nebula“. If you are just beginning to astronomy, try starting at the teapot’s tip star (Lambda) “Al Nasl”, and starhopping in the finderscope northwest to the Lagoon.

Credit IAU/Sky & Telescope magazineRoger Sinnott & Rick Fienberg
The location of M21 in the Sagittarius constellation. Credit: IAU/Sky & Telescope magazineRoger Sinnott & Rick Fienberg

While the nebulosity might not show in your finder, optical double 7 Sagittari, will. From there you will spot a bright cluster of stars two degrees due north. These are the stars embedded withing the Trifid Nebula, and the small, compressed area of stars to its northeast is the open star cluster M21. It will show well in binoculars under most sky conditions as a small, fairly bright concentration and resolve well for all telescope sizes.

And here are the quick facts, for your convenience:

Object Name: Messier 21
Alternative Designations: M21, NGC 6531
Object Type: Open Star Cluster
Constellation: Sagittarius
Right Ascension: 18 : 04.6 (h:m)
Declination: -22 : 30 (deg:m)
Distance: 4.25 (kly)
Visual Brightness: 6.5 (mag)
Apparent Dimension: 13.0 (arc min)

We have written many interesting articles about Messier Objects here at Universe Today. Here’s Tammy Plotner’s Introduction to the Messier Objects, , M1 – The Crab Nebula, M8 – The Lagoon Nebula, and David Dickison’s articles on the 2013 and 2014 Messier Marathons.

Be to sure to check out our complete Messier Catalog. And for more information, check out the SEDS Messier Database.

Sources:

Lights in the Sky: Meteors, Reentry, or E.T.?

A fireball lights up the skies over Dayton, Ohio. Image credit and copyright: John Chumack.

It happens a few times every year.

Last week, we poured our morning coffee, powered up our laptop and phone, and prepared to engage the day.

It wasn’t long before the messages started pouring in. ‘Bright fireball over the U.S. West Coast!’ ‘Major event lights up the California skies!’ and variations thereof. Memories of Chelyabinsk came immediately to mind. A bit of digging around ye ole web revealed video and a few authentic stills from the event.

Now, I always like to look these over myself before reading just what other experts might think. Chelyabinsk immediately grabbed our attention when we saw the first videos recording the shock wave of sound generated by the blast. ‘That sucker was close,’ we realized.

Thursday’s (Wednesday evening Pacific Time) event was less spectacular, but still interesting: the nighttime reentry of the Long March CZ-7 rocket body NORAD ID 2016-042E as it broke up over the U.S. West Coast.

How do we know this, and what do we look for? Is that flash a meteor, bolide, reentry or something stranger still?

Most good meteor footage comes from video recorders that are already up and running when the event occurs, to include security and dashboard cameras, and mobile phones already recording another event, such as a concert or game. How fast can YOU have your smartphone camera out and running? We only recently learned that a quick double tap of the home button will bring the camera on our Android to bear, no unlock needed.

If the event occurs on a Friday or Saturday night with lots of folks out on the town on a clear evening, we might see multiple captures come streaming-in of the event. Just such a fireball was witnessed over the United Kingdom on Friday evening, September 21st, 2012.

Likewise, the fakes are never far behind. We’ve seen ’em all, though you’re welcome to try and stump us. Such ‘meteor-wrongs’ that are commonly circulated as authentic are the reentry of Mir, the 1992 Peekskill meteor, Chelyabinsk, the reentry of Hayabusa, and screen grabs from the flick Armageddon… has anyone ever been fooled by this one?

Meteors generally have a very swift motion, and occur with a greater frequency as the observer rotates forward into the path of Earth’s motion around the Sun past local midnight. Remember, it’s the front of the windshield that picks up the bugs rolling down the highway.

Evening meteors, however, can have a dramatic slow, stately motion across the sky, as they struggle to catch up with the Earth. If they reach a brilliance of magnitude -14 — about one whole magnitude brighter than a Full Moon — said meteor is known as a bolide.

Sometimes, such a fireball can begin shedding fiery debris, in a dramatic display known as a meteor train or meteor precession. Such an event was witnessed over the northeastern United States on July 20th, 1860.

1860 meteor train. Painting by Frederic Church.
The 1860 meteor train. Painting by Frederic Church.

Bright meteors may exhibit colors, hinting at chemical competition. Green for nickel (Not kryptonite!) is typically seen. MeteoriteMen’s Geoffrey Notkin once told us a good rule of thumb: if you hear an accompanying sonic boom a few minutes after seeing a meteor, it’s close. Folks often think what they saw went down behind a hill or tree, when it was actually likely more than 50 miles distant — if it hit the ground at all.

Is that a meteor or a reentry? Reentries move slower still, and will shed lots of debris. Here’s what we’re looking at to judge suspect sighting as a reentry:

Heavens-Above: A great clearing house for satellite passes by location. One great tool is that Heavens-Above will generate a pass map for your location juxtaposed over a sky chart.

Aerospace Corp current reentries: Follows upcoming reentries of larger debris with refined orbits.

Space-Track: The U.S. Joint Space Operations Command’s tracking center for artificial objects in orbit around Earth. Access is available to backyard satellite spotters with free registration. The most accurate source for swiftly evolving orbital elements.

SeeSat-L: This message board always lights up with chatter whenever a possible reentry lights up the skies worldwide.

Stranger Skies

Bizarre sights await the keen eyed. A tumbling rocket booster can often flare in a manner similar to Iridium satellites. Satellites way out in geostationary orbit can flare briefly into naked eye visibility during ‘GEOSat flare season’ near the weeks surrounding either equinox.

Some gamma ray bursts, such as GRB 080319B flare up briefly above magnitude +6 into naked eye visibility from far across the Universe. As of yet, there’s never been a reliable observer sighting of such an event, though it should be possible… probably someone far back in humanity’s history witnessed just such a brief flash in the sky, pausing silently to wonder just what it was…

Kaboom! Image credit: NASA/Pi of the Sky.
Kaboom! Image credit: NASA/Pi of the Sky.

Going further back still, a nearby supernova or gamma-ray burst would leave a ghostly blue afterglow from Cerenkov radiation as it pummeled our atmosphere… though it would be a deadly planet-sterilizing indigo glow, not something you’d want to see. Thankfully, we live in the ‘Era of Mediocrity,’ safely outside of the 25-50 light year ‘kill zone’ for any potential supernova.

And what if those lights in the sky really were the vanguard of an alien invasion force? Well, if they really did land rayguns ablaze on the White House lawn, you’ll read it first here on Universe Today!

NASA Estimates SpaceX 2018 Mars Mission Will Cost Only $300 Million

Artists concept for sending SpaceX Red Dragon spacecraft to land propulsively on Mars as early as 2020. Credit: SpaceX

Ever since Musk founded SpaceX is 2002, with the intention of eventually colonizing Mars, every move he has made has been the subject of attention. And for the past two years, a great deal of this attention has been focused specifically on the development of the Falcon Heavy rocket and the Dragon 2 capsule – the components with which Musk hopes to mount a lander mission to Mars in 2018.

Among other things, there is much speculation about how much this is going to cost. Given that one of SpaceX’s guiding principles is making space exploration cost-effective, just how much money is Musk hoping to spend on this important step towards a crewed mission? As it turns out, NASA produced some estimates at a recent meeting, which indicated that SpaceX is spending over $300 million on its proposed Mars mission.

These estimates were given during a NASA Advisory Council meeting, which took place in Cleveland on July 26th between members of the technology committee. During the course of the meeting, James L. Reuter – the Deputy Associate Administrator for Programs at NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate – provided an overview of NASA’s agreement with SpaceX, which was signed in December of 2014 and updated this past April.

Artists concept for sending SpaceX Red Dragon spacecraft to land propulsively on Mars as early as 2018. Credit: SpaceX
Artists concept for sending SpaceX Red Dragon spacecraft to land propulsively on Mars as early as 2018. Credit: SpaceX

In accordance with this agreement, NASA will be providing support for the company’s plan to send an uncrewed Dragon 2 capsule (named “Red Dragon”) to Mars by May of 2018. Intrinsic to this mission is the plan to conduct a propulsive landing on Mars, which would test the Dragon 2‘s SuperDraco Descent Landing capability. Another key feature of this mission will involve using the Falcon Heavy to deploy the capsule.

The terms of this agreement do not involve the transfer of funds, but entails active collaboration that would be to the benefit parties. As Reuters indicated in his presentation, which NASA’s Office of Communications shared with Universe Today via email (and will be available on the STMD’s NASA page soon):

“Building on an existing no-funds-exchanged collaboration with SpaceX, NASA is providing technical support for the firm’s plan to attempt to land an uncrewed Dragon 2 spacecraft on Mars. This collaboration could provide valuable entry, descent and landing (EDL) data to NASA for our journey to Mars, while providing support to American industry. We have similar agreements with dozens of U.S. commercial, government, and non-profit partners.”

Further to this agreement is NASA’s commitment to a budget of $32 million over the next four years, the timetable of which were partially-illustrated in the presentation: “NASA will contribute existing agency resources already dedicated to [Entry, Descent, Landing] work, with an estimated value of approximately $32M over four years with approximately $6M in [Fiscal Year] 2016.”

Diagram showing SpaceX's planned "Red Dragon" mission to Mars. Credit: NASA/SpaceX
Diagram showing SpaceX’s planned “Red Dragon” mission to Mars. Credit: NASA/SpaceX

According to Article 21 of the Space Act Agreement between NASA and SpaceX, this will include providing SpaceX with: “Deep space communications and telemetry; Deep space navigation and trajectory design; Entry, descent and landing system analysis and engineering support; Mars entry aerodynamic and aerothermal database development; General interplanetary mission advice and hardware consultation; and planetary protection consultation and advice.”

For their part, SpaceX has not yet disclosed how much their Martian mission plan will cost. But according to Jeff Foust of SpaceNews, Reuter provided a basic estimate of about $300 million based on a 10 to 1 assessment of NASA’s own financial commitment: “They did talk to us about a 10-to-1 arrangement in terms of cost: theirs 10, ours 1,” said Reuter. “I think that’s in the ballpark.”

As for why NASA has chosen to help SpaceX make this mission happen, this was also spelled out in the course of the meeting. According to Reuter’s presentation: “NASA conducted a fairly high-level technical feasibility assessment and determined there is a reasonable likelihood of mission success that would be enhanced with the addition of NASA’s technical expertise.”

Such a mission would provide NASA with valuable landing data, which would prove very useful when mounting its crewed mission in the 2030s. Other items discussed included NASA-SpaceX collaborative activities for the remainder of 2016 – which involved a “[f]ocus on system design, based heavily on Dragon 2 version used for ISS crew and cargo transportation”.

Artistic concepts of the Falcon Heavy rocket (left) and the Dragon capsule deployed on the surface of Mars (right). Credit: SpaceX
Artistic concepts of the Falcon Heavy rocket (left) and the Dragon capsule deployed on the surface of Mars (right). Credit: SpaceX

It was also made clear that the Falcon Heavy, which SpaceX is close to completing, will serve as the launch vehicle. SpaceX intends to conduct its first flight test (Falcon Heavy Demo Flight 1) of the heavy-lifter in December of 2016. Three more test flights are scheduled to take place between 2017 and the launch of the Mars lander mission, which is still scheduled for May of 2018.

In addition to helping NASA prepare for its mission to the Red Planet, SpaceX’s progress with both the Falcon Heavy and Dragon 2 are also crucial to Musk’s long-term plan for a crewed mission to Mars – the architecture of which has yet to be announced. They are also extremely important in the development of the Mars Colonial Transporter, which Musk plans to use to create a permanent settlement on Mars.

And while $300 million is just a ballpark estimate at this juncture, it is clear that SpaceX will have to commit considerable resources to the enterprise. What’s more, people must keep in mind that this would be merely the first in a series of major commitments that the company will have to make in order to mount a crewed mission by 2024, to say nothing of building a Martian colony!

In the meantime, be sure to check out this animation of the Crew Dragon in flight:

Further Reading: NASA STMD
TOTH: SpaceNews

The Constellation Caelum

the southern constellation Caelum. Credit: absoluteaxarquia.com

Welcome back to Constellation Friday! Today, in honor of our dear friend and contributor, Tammy Plotner, we examine the Caelum constellation. Enjoy!

In the 2nd century CE, Greek-Egyptian astronomer Claudius Ptolemaeus (aka. Ptolemy) compiled a list of the then-known 48 constellations. Until the development of modern astronomy, his treatise (known as the Almagest) would serve as the authoritative source on astronomy. This list has since come to be expanded to include the 88 constellation that are recognized by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) today.

One of these constellations is Caelum, which was discovered in in the 1750s by French astronomer Nicolas Louis de Lacaille, and is now counted among the 88 IAU-recognized constellations. It is the eight-smallest constellation, with an area just less than that of Corona Australis (another southern constellation), and is bordered by the Dorado, Pictor, Horologium, Eridanus, Lepus and Columba constellations.

Name and Meaning:

The name Caelum, in Latin, literally means “chisel”, though the word can also mean ‘the heavens’. According to an antiquated school of thought, the sky (caelum, ‘sky, heaven, the heavens’) is rounded, spinning, and burning; and the sky is called by its name because it has the figures of the constellations impressed into it – just like an engraved (caelare) vessel. In Lacaille’s imagination, he saw this constellation as therefore representing “les Burins”, or the tools of a sculptor.

IAU map showing the location of the southern Caelum Constellation. Credit: IAU and Sky&Telescope magazine
IAU map showing the location of the southern Caelum Constellation. Credit: IAU and Sky&Telescope magazine

Notable Features:

The constellation of Caelum has very little to offer observers using either binoculars or telescopes, with only four primary stars visible to the unaided eye and only eight stars with Bayer/Flamsteed designations. However, Gamma Caeli is a widely separated binary star system with a distance of 0.22°. It is composed of a magnitude 4.5 red giant and a magnitude 6.34 white giant.

For an extreme challenge, try locating Alpha Caeli. At an approximate distance of 65.7 light years from Earth, this yellow-white F-type main sequence dwarf with an apparent magnitude of +4.44 has an an extremely faint companion. It is magnitude 13, with a position angle of 121º and a separation 6.6″.

If you like long-term variable stars, you could always look for R Caeli, a long-term Mira-type that ranges from from 6.7 to 13.7 every 391 days. Or how about X Caeli, a Delta-Scuti type star? It’s changes are much faster – but far less noticeably. It changes by one tenth of a magnitude (6.3 to 6.4) every three hours and fourteen minutes.

For those looking for Deep Sky Objects, a big telescope is necessary. This is because NGC 1679 is about all there is to see, and it doesn’t appear lightly. Located about two degree south of Zeta Caeli, there’s not even a magnitude guess at this small spiral galaxy – but it does measure about 3.2 arc minutes, and appears to be an irregularly-shaped galaxy. There are indications that it may be a dwarf starburst galaxy.

Seen as “Cela Sculptoris” in the lower right of this 1825 star chart from Urania's Mirror. Credit: Sidney Hall/Library of Congress
The Caleum constellation, depicted as “Cela Sculptoris” in the lower right of this 1825 star chart from Urania’s Mirror. Credit: Sidney Hall/Library of Congress

History of Observation:

Caelum was introduced by Nicolas Louis de Lacaille in the 1750s to help chart the southern hemisphere skies. Lacaille gave the constellation the French name Burin, which was originally Latinized to Caelum Scalptorium (“The Engravers’ Chisel”). English astronomer Francis Baily would alter shorten this name to Caelem, as suggested by fellow astronomer John Herschel.

In Lacaille’s original chart, the constellation was shown both as two types of chisels – a burin (a steel-engraving chisl) and an échoppe (an etching chisel) – although it has come to be recognized simply as a chisel.

Finding Caelum:

Though it is quite small and faint, locating Caelum is not difficult if you know where to look. Using stellar coordinates, you can find it by looking to the first quadrant of the southern hemisphere (SQ1), and then tracing it to between latitudes +40° and -90°. Or, start by picking out Canopus (the brightest of Carina‘s stars), pan due east, and then spot the small chisel between its neighbors.

Caelum is bordered by Dorado and Pictor to the south, Horologium and Eridanus to the east, Lepus to the north, and Columba to the west. The Caelum constellation occupies an area of 125 square degrees, and can be seen during the month of January at around 9 pm.

We have written many interesting articles about the constellation here at Universe Today. Here is What Are The Constellations?What Is The Zodiac?, and Zodiac Signs And Their Dates.

Be sure to check out The Messier Catalog while you’re at it!

For more information, check out the IAUs list of Constellations.

Sources:

Chinese Fireball Freaks Out Las Vegas

Astronomers have confirmed that the fiery debris spotted over the south-western US this week was a Chinese rocket. Credit: NBC

Seeing a fireball erupt in the sky is not an unusual occurrence. Especially during late July, when the Delta Aquirid meteor shower is so near to peaking. At times like this, dozens of fiery objects can be observed streaking across the atmosphere. But on this occasion, the light show that was spotted over Las Vegas earlier this week had a stranger cause.

The fireball appeared on Wednesday July 27th, at around 9:30 p.m. (Pacific Time), and could be seen from California to Utah. News and videos of the fiery apparition were quickly posted on social media, where astronomers began to notice something odd. And as it turned out, it was NOT the result of a meteor shower, but was in fact was the second stage of a rocket hitting the atmosphere, courtesy of the Chinese National Space Agency.

Such was the conclusion of Phil Plait, an astronomer and writer for Slate. After seeing a video shot of the display, he took to Twitter to question the explanation that it was the result of the Delta Aquirids. Based on his observations, he asserted that the event was actually the result of space debris burning up in the atmosphere.

His posts encouraged Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, to do some checking. After looking into the matter, McDowell determined that the cause was a spent stage of a Chinese rocket falling back to Earth. As he posted on Twitter:

“Observation reports from Utah indicate the second stage from the first Chang Zheng 7 rocket, launched Jun 25, reentered at 0440 UTC.”

The Chang Zheng 7 is the latest in a line of Chinese rockets. It’s name translates to “Long March”, in honor of Mao’s forces marching into China’s interior during the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945). A liquid-fueled carrier rocket designed to handle medium to heavy payloads, this rocket was developed to replace the Chinese Space Agency’s Long March 2F crew-rated launch vehicle.

This rocket is expected to play a critical role in creation of the Chinese Space Station, and will serve as the launch vehicle for the Tianzhou robotic cargo spacecraft in the meantime. Monday, June 25th was the inaugural launch of the rocket, and after the second stage was spent, it re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere at 04:36 UTC (9:36 p.m. Pacific Time) on Wednesday.

The 2nd stage then began to burn up as it moved across the sky from southwest to northeast, moving at speeds of 20,000 km/h (12,427 mph). It eventually disintegrated after becoming visible all across the south-western US, burning up at an altitude of about 100 km (62.13 mi). At this point, observers reported hearing a large boom, and many were fortunate enough to get the whole thing on video (as you can see from the ones included here).

While discarded space vehicles burn up in the atmosphere all the time, this was one of those rare occasions when the object happened to weight 6 metric tons (6.6 short tons)! We’re just fortunate that space launches are so rigorously planned so as to prevent them from causing accidents and extensive property damage, unlike certain meteorites that show up uninvited (looking at you Chelyabinsk meteor!)

TOTH: Slate

What Is Bohr’s Atomic Model?

A depiction of the atomic structure of the helium atom. Credit: Creative Commons

Atomic theory has come a long way over the past few thousand years. Beginning in the 5th century BCE with Democritus‘ theory of indivisible “corpuscles” that interact with each other mechanically, then moving onto Dalton’s atomic model in the 18th century, and then maturing in the 20th century with the discovery of subatomic particles and quantum theory, the journey of discovery has been long and winding.

Arguably, one of the most important milestones along the way has been Bohr’ atomic model, which is sometimes referred to as the Rutherford-Bohr atomic model. Proposed by Danish physicist Niels Bohr in 1913, this model depicts the atom as a small, positively charged nucleus surrounded by electrons that travel in circular orbits (defined by their energy levels) around the center.

Atomic Theory to the 19th Century:

The earliest known examples of atomic theory come from ancient Greece and India, where philosophers such as Democritus postulated that all matter was composed of tiny, indivisible and indestructible units. The term “atom” was coined in ancient Greece and gave rise to the school of thought known as “atomism”. However, this theory was more of a philosophical concept than a scientific one.

Various atoms and molecules as depicted in John Dalton's A New System of Chemical Philosophy (1808). Credit: Public Domain
Various atoms and molecules as depicted in John Dalton’s A New System of Chemical Philosophy (1808). Credit: Public Domain

It was not until the 19th century that the theory of atoms became articulated as a scientific matter, with the first evidence-based experiments being conducted. For example, in the early 1800’s, English scientist John Dalton used the concept of the atom to explain why chemical elements reacted in certain observable and predictable ways. Through a series of experiments involving gases, Dalton went on to develop what is known as Dalton’s Atomic Theory.

This theory expanded on the laws of conversation of mass and definite proportions and came down to five premises: elements, in their purest state, consist of particles called atoms; atoms of a specific element are all the same, down to the very last atom; atoms of different elements can be told apart by their atomic weights; atoms of elements unite to form chemical compounds; atoms can neither be created or destroyed in chemical reaction, only the grouping ever changes.

Discovery of the Electron:

By the late 19th century, scientists also began to theorize that the atom was made up of more than one fundamental unit. However, most scientists ventured that this unit would be the size of the smallest known atom – hydrogen. By the end of the 19th century, this would change drastically, thanks to research conducted by scientists like Sir Joseph John Thomson.

Through a series of experiments using cathode ray tubes (known as the Crookes’ Tube), Thomson observed that cathode rays could be deflected by electric and magnetic fields. He concluded that rather than being composed of light, they were made up of negatively charged particles that were 1ooo times smaller and 1800 times lighter than hydrogen.

The Plum Pudding model of the atom proposed by John Dalton. Credit: britannica.com
The Plum Pudding model of the atom proposed by J.J. Thomson. Credit: britannica.com

This effectively disproved the notion that the hydrogen atom was the smallest unit of matter, and Thompson went further to suggest that atoms were divisible. To explain the overall charge of the atom, which consisted of both positive and negative charges, Thompson proposed a model whereby the negatively charged “corpuscles” were distributed in a uniform sea of positive charge – known as the Plum Pudding Model.

These corpuscles would later be named “electrons”, based on the theoretical particle predicted by Anglo-Irish physicist George Johnstone Stoney in 1874. And from this, the Plum Pudding Model was born, so named because it closely resembled the English desert that consists of plum cake and raisins. The concept was introduced to the world in the March 1904 edition of the UK’s Philosophical Magazine, to wide acclaim.

The Rutherford Model:

Subsequent experiments revealed a number of scientific problems with the Plum Pudding model. For starters, there was the problem of demonstrating that the atom possessed a uniform positive background charge, which came to be known as the “Thomson Problem”. Five years later, the model would be disproved by Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden, who conducted a series of experiments using alpha particles and gold foil – aka. the “gold foil experiment.”

In this experiment, Geiger and Marsden measured the scattering pattern of the alpha particles with a fluorescent screen. If Thomson’s model were correct, the alpha particles would pass through the atomic structure of the foil unimpeded. However, they noted instead that while most shot straight through, some of them were scattered in various directions, with some going back in the direction of the source.

Credit: glogster.com
Diagram detailing the “gold foil experiment” conducted by Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden. Credit: glogster.com

Geiger and Marsden concluded that the particles had encountered an electrostatic force far greater than that allowed for by Thomson’s model. Since alpha particles are just helium nuclei (which are positively charged) this implied that the positive charge in the atom was not widely dispersed, but concentrated in a tiny volume. In addition, the fact that those particles that were not deflected passed through unimpeded meant that these positive spaces were separated by vast gulfs of empty space.

By 1911, physicist Ernest Rutherford interpreted the Geiger-Marsden experiments and rejected Thomson’s model of the atom. Instead, he proposed a model where the atom consisted of mostly empty space, with all its positive charge concentrated in its center in a very tiny volume, that was surrounded by a cloud of electrons. This came to be known as the Rutherford Model of the atom.

The Bohr Model:

Subsequent experiments by Antonius Van den Broek and Niels Bohr refined the model further. While Van den Broek suggested that the atomic number of an element is very similar to its nuclear charge, the latter proposed a Solar-System-like model of the atom, where a nucleus contains the atomic number of positive charge and is surrounded by an equal number of electrons in orbital shells (aka. the Bohr Model).

In addition, Bohr’s model refined certain elements of the Rutherford model that were problematic. These included the problems arising from classical mechanics, which predicted that electrons would release electromagnetic radiation while orbiting a nucleus. Because of the loss in energy, the electron should have rapidly spiraled inwards and collapsed into the nucleus. In short, this atomic model implied that all atoms were unstable.

Diagram of an electron dropping from a higher orbital to a lower one and emitting a photon. Image Credit: Wikicommons
Diagram of an electron dropping from a higher orbital to a lower one and emitting a photon. Image Credit: Wikicommons

The model also predicted that as electrons spiraled inward, their emission would rapidly increase in frequency as the orbit got smaller and faster. However, experiments with electric discharges in the late 19th century showed that atoms only emit electromagnetic energy at certain discrete frequencies.

Bohr resolved this by proposing that electrons orbiting the nucleus in ways that were consistent with Planck’s quantum theory of radiation. In this model, electrons can occupy only certain allowed orbitals with a specific energy. Furthermore, they can only gain and lose energy by jumping from one allowed orbit to another, absorbing or emitting electromagnetic radiation in the process.

These orbits were associated with definite energies, which he referred to as energy shells or energy levels. In other words, the energy of an electron inside an atom is not continuous, but “quantized”. These levels are thus labeled with the quantum number n (n=1, 2, 3, etc.) which he claimed could be determined using the Ryberg formula – a rule formulated in 1888 by Swedish physicist Johannes Ryberg to describe the wavelengths of spectral lines of many chemical elements.

Influence of the Bohr Model:

While Bohr’s model did prove to be groundbreaking in some respects – merging Ryberg’s constant and Planck’s constant (aka. quantum theory) with the Rutherford Model – it did suffer from some flaws which later experiments would illustrate. For starters, it assumed that electrons have both a known radius and orbit, something that Werner Heisenberg would disprove a decade later with his Uncertainty Principle.

In addition, while it was useful for predicting the behavior of electrons in hydrogen atoms, Bohr’s model was not particularly useful in predicting the spectra of larger atoms. In these cases, where atoms have multiple electrons, the energy levels were not consistent with what Bohr predicted. The model also didn’t work with neutral helium atoms.

The Bohr model also could not account for the Zeeman Effect, a phenomenon noted by Dutch physicists Pieter Zeeman in 1902, where spectral lines are split into two or more in the presence of an external, static magnetic field. Because of this, several refinements were attempted with Bohr’s atomic model, but these too proved to be problematic.

In the end, this would lead to Bohr’s model being superseded by quantum theory – consistent with the work of Heisenberg and Erwin Schrodinger. Nevertheless, Bohr’s model remains useful as an instructional tool for introducing students to more modern theories – such as quantum mechanics and the valence shell atomic model.

It would also prove to be a major milestone in the development of the Standard Model of particle physics, a model characterized by “electron clouds“, elementary particles, and uncertainty.

We have written many interesting articles about atomic theory here at Universe Today. Here’s John Dalton’s Atomic Model, What is the Plum Pudding Model, What is the Electron Cloud Model?, Who Was Democritus?, and What are the Parts of the Atom?

Astronomy Cast also has some episodes on the subject: Episode 138: Quantum Mechanics, Episode 139: Energy Levels and Spectra, Episode 378: Rutherford and Atoms and Episode 392: The Standard Model – Intro.

Sources:

See a Wonderful Aldebaran Occultation with a Spectacular Twist

Stellarium
This map shows the 23% illuminated crescent Moon from the central U.S. around 10:00 UT Friday morning. Observers who begin observing earlier may also see stars in the Hyades cluster occulted. Credit: Stellarium
This map shows the 23% illuminated crescent Moon from the central U.S. around 10:00 UT Friday morning. Observers who start observing earlier may also see stars in the Hyades cluster occulted. Credit: Stellarium

We’re in for a celestial show from two of the sky’s glitterati this week. On Friday morning July 29 around 10:00 UT (5 a.m. CDT), the crescent Moon will occult the star Aldebaran from the eastern and southern U.S. south of a line from Toledo, Ohio through St. Louis, Tulsa and El Paso, Texas. North of that line, the Moon will slide just south of the star in a spectacular conjunction. But the real action lies within a half-mile of either side of the line, where lucky observers will see a grazing occultation.

Use this map to help you plan your occultation adventure. Much of North and South America will see a wonderful conjunction, while many areas will witness the occultation. If you can drive to the graze line, do it! Credit: David Dunham
Use this map to help you plan your occultation adventure. Much of North and South America will see a wonderful conjunction, while many areas will witness the occultation. If you can drive to the graze line, do it! Credit: David Dunham

As the Moon’s orbital motion carries it eastward at the rate of one lunar diameter per hour, Aldebaran will appear to approach the sunlit northern cusp and then scrape along the Moon’s northern limb. You’ll need binoculars or a small telescope to see the initial approach, but once star reaches the semi-dark, earthlit portion of the Moon, the graze will be visible with the naked eye.

This diagram shows the the grazing path of Aldebaran. As the Moon moves east, the star will appear to move to the right or west. Credit: David Dunham
This diagram shows the the grazing path of Aldebaran. As the Moon moves east, the star will appear to move to the right or west. Be sure not to miss it — the entire grazing event lasts just 3 minutes. Credit: David Dunham

The edge or limb of the Moon appears smooth to the eye, but it’s rife with polar mountain peaks. As Aldebaran creeps along the craggy limb, it will repeatedly flash in and out of view as peaks and cliffs momentarily block it from sight. And here’s the truly amazing thing. Observers along the western section of the graze line, where the event takes place in fairly dark sky, can watch the star blink in and out of view without optical aid when it reaches the dark part of the lunar disk. Wow!

Aldebaran's large size means it won't disappear instantaneously when it's covered either by the lunar limb during occultation or by mountains along the grazing path. Credit: Wikipedia
Aldebaran’s large size means it won’t disappear instantaneously when it’s covered either by the lunar limb during occultation or by mountains along the grazing path. Credit: Wikipedia

Aldebaran is no small star. An orange giant 67 light years from Earth, it’s 44 times the diameter of the Sun. That means that sometimes only a part of the star at a time will covered at a time in some cases, so the length of the flashes will vary. According to David Dunham, president of the International Occultation Timing Association (IOTA), Aldebaran will disappear for one-tenth of a second up to a second as the Moon rolls east, allowing some observers to sense the size of the star. Wow x 100!

Aldebaran, the brightest star in Taurus the Bull hangs near the edge of the moon two minutes before it was covered up. The star was easily visible through the telescope. Credit: Bob King
Aldebaran hangs near the edge of the moon two minutes before it was occulted last October in this photo taken with a smartphone. The star was easily visible through the telescope. Credit: Bob King

Skywatchers further east along the graze line and in other areas where the occultation / conjunction takes place after sunrise shouldn’t pass up the chance to see the event. During last October’s occultation of Aldebaran, I was able to see and photograph the star in my 10-inch scope in daylight no problem. The moon will be closer to the Sun this time around, but give it try anyway. This is the best grazing occultation of Aldebaran visible from North America in the current 4-year series.

For the many who live either north or south of the graze line, the views will still be fantastic. You’ll either see an occultation and subsequent reappearance of the star at the dark limb … or a fine conjunction. The forecast looks good for my city, so I plan on heading out to watch an orange giant meet the skinny Moon. I wish you clear skies and happy shooting!

For more information about the event including detailed weather forecasts and grazing maps, check out the IOTA’s public announcement pageClick here for Universal Times for the disappearance and reappearance of the star for over 1,000 cities.

The Photon Sieve Could Revolutionize Optics

Scientists at NASA"s Goddard Space Flight Center are developing small, inexpensive optics to study the Sun's corona. Credit: NASA's GSFC, SDO AIA Team

Ever since astronomers first began using telescopes to get a better look at the heavens, they have struggled with a basic conundrum. In addition to magnification, telescopes also need to be able to resolve the small details of an object in order to help us get a better understanding of them. Doing this requires building larger and larger light-collecting mirrors, which requires instruments of greater size, cost and complexity.

However, scientists working at NASA Goddard’s Space Flight Center are working on an inexpensive alternative. Instead of relying on big and impractical large-aperture telescopes, they have proposed a device that could resolve tiny details while being a fraction of the size. It’s known as the photon sieve, and it is being specifically developed to study the Sun’s corona in the ultraviolet.

Basically, the photon sieve is a variation on the Fresnel zone plate, a form of optics that consist of tightly spaced sets of rings that alternate between the transparent and the opaque. Unlike telescopes which focus light through refraction or reflection, these plates cause light to diffract through transparent openings. On the other side, the light overlaps and is then focused onto a specific point – creating an image that can be recorded.

This image shows how the photon sieve brings red laser light to a pinpoint focus on its optical axis, but produces exotic diffraction patterns when viewed from the side. Credits: NASA/W. Hrybyk
Image showing the photon sieve bringing red laser light to a pinpoint focus on its optical axis, and producing exotic diffraction patterns. Credits: NASA/W. Hrybyk

The photon sieve operates on the same basic principles, but with a slightly more sophisticated twist. Instead of thin openings (i.e. Fresnel zones), the sieve consists of a circular silicon lens that is dotted with millions of tiny holes. Although such a device would be potentially useful at all wavelengths, the Goddard team is specifically developing the photon sieve to answer a 50-year-old question about the Sun.

Essentially, they hope to study the Sun’s corona to see what mechanism is heating it. For some time, scientists have known that the corona and other layers of the Sun’s atmosphere (the chromosphere, the transition region, and the heliosphere) are significantly hotter than its surface. Why this is has remained a mystery. But perhaps, not for much longer.

As Doug Rabin, the leader of the Goddard team, said in a NASA press release:

“This is already a success… For more than 50 years, the central unanswered question in solar coronal science has been to understand how energy transported from below is able to heat the corona. Current instruments have spatial resolutions about 100 times larger than the features that must be observed to understand this process.”

With support from Goddard’s Research and Development program, the team has already fabricated three sieves, all of which measure 7.62 cm (3 inches) in diameter. Each device contains a silicon wafer with 16 million holes, the sizes and locations of which were determined using a fabrication technique called photolithography – where light is used to transfer a geometric pattern from a photomask to a surface.

Doug Rabin, Adrian Daw, John O’Neill, Anne-Marie Novo-Gradac, and Kevin Denis are developing an unconventional optic that could give scientists the resolution they need to see finer details of the physics powering the sun’s corona. Other team members include Joe Davila, Tom Widmyer, and Greg Woytko, who are not pictured. Credits: NASA/W. Hrybyk
The Goddard team led by Doug Rabin (left) is working on a new optic device that will drastically reduce the size of telescopes. Credits: NASA/W. Hrybyk

However, in the long-run, they hope to create a sieve that will measure 1 meter (3 feet) in diameter. With an instrument of this size, they believe they will be able to achieve up to 100 times better angular resolution in the ultraviolet than NASA’s high-resolution space telescope – the Solar Dynamics Observatory. This would be just enough to start getting some answers from the Sun’s corona.

In the meantime, the team plans to begin testing to see if the sieve can operate in space, a process which should take less than a year. This will include whether or not it can survive the intense g-forces of a space launch, as well as the extreme environment of space. Other plans include marrying the technology to a series of CubeSats so a two-spacecraft formation-flying mission could be mounted to study the Sun’s corona.

In addition to shedding light on the mysteries of the Sun, a successful photon sieve could revolution optics as we know it. Rather than being forced to send massive and expensive apparatus’ into space (like the Hubble Space Telescope or the James Webb Telescope), astronomers could get all the high-resolution images they need from devices small enough to stick aboard a satellite measuring no more than a few square meters.

This would open up new venues for space research, allowing private companies and research institutions the ability to take detailed photos of distant stars, planets, and other celestial objects. It would also constitute another crucial step towards making space exploration affordable and accessible.

Further Reading: NASA

What is Earth’s Axial Tilt?

Earth's axial tilt (or obliquity) and its relation to the rotation axis and plane of orbit. Credit: Wikipedia Commons

In ancient times, the scholars, seers and magi of various cultures believed that the world took a number of forms – ranging from a ziggurat or a cube to the more popular flat disc surrounded by a sea. But thanks to the ongoing efforts of astronomers, we have come to understand that it is in fact a sphere, and one of many planets in a system that orbits the Sun.

Within the past few centuries, improvements in both scientific instruments and more comprehensive observations of the heavens have also helped astronomers to determine (with extreme accuracy) what the nature of Earth’s orbit is. In addition to knowing the precise distance from the Sun, we also know that our planet orbits the Sun with one pole constantly tilted towards it.

Earth’s Axis:

This is what is known axial tilt, where a planet’s vertical axis is tilted a certain degree towards the ecliptic of the object it orbits (in this case, the Sun). Such a tilt results in there being a difference in how much sunlight reaches a given point on the surface during the course of a year. In the case of Earth, the axis is tilted towards the ecliptic of the Sun at approximately 23.44° (or 23.439281° to be exact).

Earth's axis points north to Polaris, the northern hemisphere's North Star, and south to dim Sigma Octantis. Illustration: Bob King
Earth’s axis points north to Polaris, the northern hemisphere’s North Star, and south to dim Sigma Octantis. Credit: Bob King

Seasonal Variations:

This tilt in Earth’s axis is what is responsible for seasonal changes during the course of the year. When the North Pole is pointed towards the Sun, the northern hemisphere experiences summer and the southern hemisphere experiences winter. When the South Pole is pointed towards the Sun, six months later, the situation is reversed.

In addition to variations in temperature, seasonal changes also result in changes to the diurnal cycle. Basically, in the summer, the day last longer and the Sun climbs higher in the sky. In winter, the days become shorter and the Sun is lower in the sky. In northern temperate latitudes, the Sun rises north of true east during the summer solstice, and sets north of true west, reversing in the winter. The Sun rises south of true east in the summer for the southern temperate zone, and sets south of true west.

The situation becomes extreme above the Arctic Circle, where there is no daylight at all for part of the year, and for up to six months at the North Pole itself (known as a “polar night”). In the southern hemisphere, the situation is reversed, with the South Pole oriented opposite the direction of the North Pole and experiencing what is known as a “midnight sun” (a day that lasts 24 hours).

The four seasons can be determined by the solstices (the point of maximum axial tilt toward or away from the Sun) and the equinoxes (when the direction of tilt and the Sun are perpendicular). In the northern hemisphere, winter solstice occurs around December 21st, summer solstice around June 21st, spring equinox around March 20th, and autumnal equinox on or about September 22nd or 23rd. In the southern hemisphere, the situation is reversed, with the summer and winter solstices exchanged and the spring and autumnal equinox dates swapped.

Changes Over Time:

The angle of the Earth’s tilt is relatively stable over long periods of time. However, Earth’s axis does undergo a slight irregular motion known as nutation – a rocking, swaying, or nodding motion (like a gyroscope) – that has a period of 18.6 years. Earth’s axis is also subject to a slight wobble (like a spinning top), which is causing its orientation to change over time.

Known as precession, this process is causing the date of the seasons to slowly change over a 25,800 year cycle. Precession is not only the reason for the difference between a sidereal year and a tropical year, it is also the reason why the seasons will eventually flip. When this happens, summer will occur in the northern hemisphere during December and winter during June.

Precession of the Equinoxes. Image credit: NASA
Artist’s rendition of the Earth’s rotation and the precession of the Equinoxes. Credit: NASA

Precession, along with other orbital factors, is also the reason for what is known as “length-of-day variation”. Essentially, this is a phenomna where the dates of Earth’s perihelion and aphelion (which currently take place on Jan. 3rd and July 4th, respectively) change over time. Both of these motions are caused by the varying attraction of the Sun and the Moon on the Earth’s equatorial region.

Needless to say, Earth’s rotation and orbit around the Sun are not as simple we once though. During the Scientific Revolution, it was a huge revelation to learn that the Earth was not a fixed point in the Universe, and that the “celestial spheres” were planets like Earth. But even then, astronomers like Copernicus and Galileo still believed that the Earth’s orbit was a perfect circle, and could not imagine that its rotation was subject to imperfections.

It’s only been with time that the true nature of our planet’s inclination and movements have come to be understood. And what we know is that they lead to some serious variations over time – both in the short run (i.e. seasonal change), and in the long-run.

We’ve written many articles about the Earth and the seasons for Universe Today. Here’s Why is the Earth Tilted?, The Rotation of the Earth, What Causes Day and Night?, How Fast Does the Earth Rotate?, Why Does the Earth Spin?

If you’d like more information on the Earth’s axis, check out NASA’s Solar System Exploration Guide on Earth. And here’s a link to NASA’s Earth Observatory.

We’ve also recorded an episode of Astronomy Cast all about Earth. Listen here, Episode 51: Earth.

How Far is Mars from the Sun?

The eccentricity in Mars' orbit means that it is . Credit: NASA

With the Scientific Revolution, astronomers became aware of the fact that the Earth and the other planets orbit the Sun. And thanks to Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton, the study of their orbits was refined to the point of mathematical precision. And with the subsequent discoveries of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and the Kuiper Belt Objects, we have come to understand just how varied the orbits of the Solar Planets are.

Consider Mars, Earth’s second-closest neighbor, and a planet that is often referred to as “Earth’s Twin”. While it has many things in common with Earth, one area in which they differ greatly is in terms of their orbits. In addition to being farther from the Sun, Mars also has a much more elliptical orbit, which results in some rather interesting variations in temperature and weather patterns.

Perihelion and Aphelion:

Mars orbits the Sun at an average distance (semi-major axis) of 228 million km (141.67 million mi), or 1.524 astronomical units (over one and a half times the distance between Earth and the Sun). However, Mars also has the second most eccentric orbit of all the planets in the Solar System (0.0934), which makes it a distant second to crazy Mercury (at 0.20563).

This means that Mars’ distance from the Sun varies between perihelion (its closest point) and aphelion (its farthest point). In short, the distance between Mars and the Sun ranges during the course of a Martian year from 206,700,000 km (128.437 million mi) at perihelion and 249,200,000 km (154.8457 million mi) at aphelion – or 1.38 AU and 1.666 AU.

Speaking of a Martian year, with an average orbital speed of 24 km/s, Mars takes the equivalent of 687 Earth days to complete a single orbit around the Sun. This means that a year on Mars is equivalent to 1.88 Earth years. Adjusted for Martian days (aka. sols) – which last 24 hours, 39 minutes, and 35 seconds – that works out to a year being 668.5991 sols long (still almost twice as long).

Mars in also the midst of a long-term increase in eccentricity. Roughly 19,000 years ago, it reached a minimum of 0.079, and will peak again at an eccentricity of 0.105 (with a perihelion distance of 1.3621 AU) in about 24,000 years. In addition, the orbit was nearly circular about 1.35 million years ago, and will be again one million years from now.

Axial Tilt:

Much like Earth, Mars also has a significantly tilted axis. In fact, with an inclination of 25.19° to its orbital plane, it is very close to Earth’s own tilt of 23.439°. This means that like Earth, Mars also experiences seasonal variations in terms of temperature.  On average, the surface temperature of Mars is much colder than what we experience here on Earth, but the variation is largely the same.

. Credit and copyright: Encyclopedia Britannica
Mars eccentric orbit and axial tilt result in considerable seasonal variations. Credit and Copyright: Encyclopedia Britannica

All told, the average surface temperature on Mars is -46 °C (-51 °F). This ranges from a low of -143 °C (-225.4 °F), which takes place during winter at the poles; and a high of 35 °C (95 °F), which occurs during summer and midday at the equator. This means that at certain times of the year, Mars is actually warmer than certain parts of Earth.

Orbit and Seasonal Changes:

Mars’ variations in temperature and its seasonal changes are also related to changes in the planet’s orbit. Essentially, Mars’ eccentric orbit means that it travels more slowly around the Sun when it is further from it, and more quickly when it is closer (as stated in Kepler’s Three Laws of Planetary Motion).

Mars’ aphelion coincides with Spring in its northern hemisphere, which makes it the longest season on the planet – lasting roughly 7 Earth months. Summer is second longest, lasting six months, while Fall and Winter last 5.3 and just over 4 months, respectively. In the south, the length of the seasons is only slightly different.

Mars is near perihelion when it is summer in the southern hemisphere and winter in the north, and near aphelion when it is winter in the southern hemisphere and summer in the north. As a result, the seasons in the southern hemisphere are more extreme and the seasons in the northern are milder. The summer temperatures in the south can be up to 30 K (30 °C; 54 °F) warmer than the equivalent summer temperatures in the north.

Mars' south polar ice cap, seen in April 2000 by Mars Odyssey. NASA/JPL/MSSS
Mars’ south polar ice cap, seen in April 2000 by the Mars Odyssey probe. Credit: NASA/JPL/MSSS

It also snows on Mars. In 2008, NASA’s Phoenix Lander found water ice in the polar regions of the planet. This was an expected finding, but scientists were not prepared to observe snow falling from clouds. The snow, combined with soil chemistry experiments, led scientists to believe that the landing site had a wetter and warmer climate in the past.

And then in 2012, data obtained by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter revealed that carbon-dioxide snowfalls occur in the southern polar region of Mars. For decades, scientists have known that carbon-dioxide ice is a permanent part of Mars’ seasonal cycle and exists in the southern polar caps. But this was the first time that such a phenomena was detected, and it remains the only known example of carbon-dioxide snow falling anywhere in our solar system.

In addition, recent surveys conducted by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, the Mars Science Laboratory, the Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM), the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN) and the Opportunity and Curiosity Rovers have revealed some startling things about Mars’ deep past.

For starters, soil samples and orbital observation have demonstrated conclusively that roughly 3.7 billion years ago, the planet had more water on its surface than is currently in the Atlantic Ocean. Similarly, atmospheric studies conducted on the surface and from space have proven that Mars also had a viable atmosphere at that time, one which was slowly stripped away by solar wind.

Scientists were able to gauge the rate of water loss on Mars by measuring the ratio of water and HDO from today and 4.3 billion years ago. Credit: Kevin Gill
Scientists were able to gauge the rate of water loss on Mars by measuring the ratio of water and HDO from today and 4.3 billion years ago. Credit: Kevin Gill

Weather Patterns:

These seasonal variations allow Mars to experience some extremes in weather. Most notably, Mars has the largest dust storms in the Solar System. These can vary from a storm over a small area to gigantic storms (thousands of km in diameter) that cover the entire planet and obscure the surface from view. They tend to occur when Mars is closest to the Sun, and have been shown to increase the global temperature.

The first mission to notice this was the Mariner 9 orbiter, which was the first spacecraft to orbit Mars in 1971, it sent pictures back to Earth of a world consumed in haze. The entire planet was covered by a dust storm so massive that only Olympus Mons, the giant Martian volcano that measures 24 km high, could be seen above the clouds. This storm lasted for a full month, and delayed Mariner 9‘s attempts to photograph the planet in detail.

And then on June 9th, 2001, the Hubble Space Telescope spotted a dust storm in the Hellas Basin on Mars. By July, the storm had died down, but then grew again to become the largest storm in 25 years. So big was the storm that amateur astronomers using small telescopes were able to see it from Earth. And the cloud raised the temperature of the frigid Martian atmosphere by a stunning 30° Celsius.

These storms tend to occur when Mars is closest to the Sun, and are the result of temperatures rising and triggering changes in the air and soil. As the soil dries, it becomes more easily picked up by air currents, which are caused by pressure changes due to increased heat. The dust storms cause temperatures to rise even further, leading to Mars’ experiencing its own greenhouse effect.

We have written many interesting articles about the distance of the planets from the Sun here at Universe Today. Here’s How Far Are the Planets from the Sun?, How Far is Mercury from the Sun?, How Far is Venus from the Sun?, How Far is the Earth from the Sun?, How Far is the Moon from the Sun?, How Far is Jupiter from the Sun?, How Far is Saturn from the Sun?, What is Uranus’ Distance from the Sun?, What is the Distance of Neptune from the Sun? and How Far is Pluto from the Sun?

For more information, Astronomy for beginners teaches you how to calculate the distance to Mars.

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.