This is an impromptu episode of Astronomy Cast that was recorded during Dragon*Con 2011. Pamela was scheduled to speak with a panel about strange things in space, but she ended up being the only person there. So Fraser jumped in, and this was what we did. We mostly talked about unusual things in the Solar System, but a few things in the rest of the Universe. Presented raw for your amusement.
A brand new Carnival of Space is hosted by Chris Dann from Weird Warp (who I now owe a few bottles of beer for letting me crash the party a bit late….)
Click here to read the Carnival of Space #219.
And if you’re interested in looking back, here’s an archive to all the past Carnivals of Space. If you’ve got a space-related blog, you should really join the carnival. Just email an entry to [email protected], and the next host will link to it. It will help get awareness out there about your writing, help you meet others in the space community – and community is what blogging is all about. And if you really want to help out, sign up to be a host. Send and email to the above address.
The conventional wisdom of galaxies is that they should have a central massive black hole (CMBH). The presence of such objects has been confirmed in our own galaxy as well as numerous other galaxies, including the Andromeda galaxy (M31) and even some dwarf galaxies. The mass of these objects, several million times the mass of the Sun, has been found to be related to many properties of galaxies as a whole, indicating that their presence may be critical in the formation and evolution of galaxies as a whole. As such, finding a massive galaxy without a central black hole would be quite surprising. Yet a recent study by astronomers from the University of Michigan Ann Arbor seems to have found an exception: The well known M85.
To determine the mass of the CMBH, the team used the spectrograph on board the Hubble Space Telescope to examine the pull the central object had on stars in the nearby vicinity. The higher this mass is, the more quickly the stars should orbit. This orbital velocity is detected as a shift in the color of the light, blue as the stars move towards us, red as they move away. The amount the light is shifted is dependent on just how fast they move.
Doppler shift of gas and dust caused by M84's supermassive black hole. Image Credit: Gary Bower, Richard Green (NOAO), the STIS Instrument Definition Team, and NASAThis technique has been used previously in other galaxies, including another large elliptical of similar brightness in the Messier catalog, M84. This galaxy had its CMBH probed by Hubble in 1997 and was determined to have a mass of 300 million solar masses.
When this method was applied to M85 the team did not discover a shift that would be indicative of a black hole with a mass expected for a galaxy of such size. Using another, indirect method of determining the CMBH mass by looking at the the amount of overall light from the galaxy, which is generally correlated with black hole mass, would indicate that M85 should contain a black hole of 300 million to 2 billion solar masses. Yet this study indicates that, if M85 contains a central black hole at all, the upper limit for the black hole would be around 65 million solar masses.
This study is not the first to report a non-detection for the galaxy, a 2009 study led by Alessandro Capetti from Osservatorio Astronoimco di Torino in Italy, searched M85 for signs of radio emission from the black hole region. Their study was unable to detect any significant radio waves from the core which, if M85 had a significant black hole, should be present, even with a small amount of gas feeding into the core.
Overall, these studies demonstrate a significant shortcoming in secondary methods of black hole mass estimation. Such indirect methods have been previously used with confidence and have even been the basis for studies drawing the connection between galaxy evolution and black hole mass. If cases like M85 are more common that previously thought, it may prompt astronomers to rethink just how connected black holes and a galaxies properties really are.
Artist's rendering of a vacuum tube, one of the main components of an atomic clock. Credit: NASA
[/caption]
When people think of space technologies, many think of solar panels, propulsion systems and guidance systems. One important piece of technology in spaceflight is an accurate timing device.
Many satellites and spacecraft require accurate timing signals to ensure the proper operation of scientific instruments. In the case of GPS satellites, accurate timing is essential, otherwise anything relying on GPS signals to navigate could be misdirected.
The third technology demonstration planned by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is the Deep Space Atomic Clock. The DSAC team plans to develop a small, low-mass atomic clock based on mercury-ion trap technology and demonstrate it in space.
What benefits will a new atomic clock design offer NASA and other players in near-Earth orbit and the rest of our solar system?
The Deep Space Atomic Clock demonstration mission will fly and validate an atomic clock that is 10-times more accurate than today’s systems. The project will demonstrate ultra-precision timing in space as well as the benefits said timing offers.
The DSAC will fly on an Iridium spacecraft and make use of GPS signals to demonstrate precision orbit determination and confirm the clock’s performance. As mentioned previously, precise timing and navigation are critical to the performance of many aspects of deep space and near-Earth exploration missions.
The DSAC team believes the demonstration will offer enhancements and cost savings for new missions, which include:
Increase Data Quantity: A factor of 2 to 3 increase in navigation and radio science data quantity by allowing coherent tracking to extend over the full view period of Earth stations.
Improve Data Quality: Up to 10 times more accurate navigation, gravity science, and occultation science at remote solar system bodies by using one-way radiometric links.
Enabling New Missions: Shift towards a more flexible and extensible one-way radio navigation architecture enabling development of capable in-situ satellite navigation systems and autonomous deep space radio navigation.
Reduce Proposed Mission Costs: Reduce mission costs for using the Deep Space Network (DSN) through aperture sharing and one-way downlink only time.
Benefits to GPS: Improve clock stability of the next GPS system by 100 times.
One example use for the DSAC is for a future mission that is a follow-up to the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO). A spacecraft equipped with the DSAC could avoid reliance on two-way communications using NASA’s Deep Space Network to perform orbital determination.
One of the benefits of avoiding said reliance on two-way communications would allow the mission to only require the DSN for one-way communication to transmit scientific data to Earth. Reducing the reliance on two-way communications would provide an additional benefit of cost savings.
In the previous example, the DSAC team estimates an $11 million dollar reduction in network operational costs, as well as a 100% increase in the amount of usable science and navigation data that could be received. Overview of Deep Space Atomic Clock (DASC) mission. Image Credit: NASA
The Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) office in the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate is collaborating with the NASA Office of the Chief Technologist in sponsoring this technology demonstration.
If successful the DSAC flight demonstration mission will bring the improved atomic clock technology to a technological readiness level that will allow it to be used in a wide variety of future space missions.
Read our earlier articles about the other technology demonstrations planned:
The Atlas Spaceflight Operations Center or ASOC is where the Atlas V launch vehicle, in this case the one which will launch the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) rover on its mission Nov. 25 at 10:21 a.m. EDT. Photo Credit: United Launch Alliance
[/caption]
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla – United Launch Alliance (ULA) uses a structure that incorporates several launch and support operations into one centralized facility. Known as the Atlas Spaceflight Operations Center (ASOC) is about 9,290 square-meters (100,000 square-foot) in size. The ASOC provides all of the required elements – command, control and communication with the Atlas V. It is from the ASOC that the mission is managed as well as monitoring and evaluating launch operations.
The ASOC is actually two separate buildings that were combined into one. More accurately an existing structure had modern sections added to it. The first section was originally built back in the early 60s as part of the Titan III Program. The ASOC was built for the Titan II Chemical Systems Division Solid Rocket Motors. During this period, it was referred to as the Motor Inert Storage (MIS).
The ASOC is actually two buildings in one. The original structure was built in the 60s for the Titan Program. Later elements allowed for spacecraft processing as well as launch operations to be conducted all under one roof. Photo Credit: Alan Walters/awaltersphoto.com
Later, after the awarding of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) contract to Lockheed Martin in Oct. of 1998, they added three additional stories to the MIS. Part of this was the addition of the ASOC’s Launch Control Center (LCC).
The blockbuster film, Transformers 3, Dark of the Moon, had a few scenes filmed at the ASOC. Josh Duhamel, who played Lt. Colonel William Lennox, stood in the center of the LCC while battling the Decepticons. The filming took place back in October of 2010.
Key scenes of the blockbuster fiml "Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon" were shot within the ASOC. Image Credit: Paramount Pictures
The different manners in which the various rockets supported by the Denver, Colorado-based ULA are produced are in large part determined by the history of the rockets themselves.
“Launch vehicles are processed in various ways due to the design of the rocket, the backgrounds of the engineers, designing the rocket and how the rocket evolved all played their part,” said United Launch Alliance’s Mike Woolley. “The facilities available to the designers of the launch vehicle’s systems, the topography and geography of the installation as well as the rules, regulations, restrictions of the area played there part in how each of the individual launch systems are processed.”
The Atlas V launch vehicle is one of the two primary launch systems that is supported by the United Launch Alliance (the other being the Delta IV). Image Credit: Lockheed Martin
The ASOC is one part of the overall launch flow for the Atlas V launch vehicle. The other elements (excluding Space Launch Complex 41) are the Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF) and Vertical Integration Facility (VIF).
with a rooms looking down into it, The ASOC a Mission Directors Center, the Spacecraft Operations Center, the Engineering Support Facility, engineering support room which has been dubbed the “Gator Room” as well as an executive conference room.
Inside of the ASOC is the Atlas Launch Control Center or LCC. This allows for rockets to be prepard for flight as well as the launches themselves - to be managed from one building. Photo Credit: United Launch Alliance
The ASOC also has a hospitality room as well as a viewing room on the third floor (the roof is also made available for viewing launches). Lockheed Martin chose to cut back the number of support structures and decided to just build on to the existing MIS building. By doing this, Atlas engineers and technicians as well as the Atlas launch control center are close to the High ay where the Atlas V launch vehicle is processed for flight. This not only reduces the amount of time to process the Atlas booster, but it reduces costs as well.
The last Atlas V that was in the High Bay of the ASOC was the one that will be utilized to send the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) rover, dubbed Curiosity. The Atlas V 541 (AV-028) recently underwent what is known as a Wet Dress Rehearsal (WDR) where the rocket is taken all the way up to launch. This is done to test out the rocket’s key systems before the payload is attached to the launch vehicle. Currently, MSL is set to launch from Space Launch Complex-41 (SLC-41) on Nov. 25 at 10:21 a.m. EDT.
The next mission that will be launched on the Atlas V Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle is JPL's Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) rover. Photo Credit: Alan Walters/awaltersphoto.com
Dust storm on Mars. Image credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS
[/caption]
“It’s early morning and the Sun comes out…” And from no where a huge Martian dust devil shakes its way across the red sands, flinging debris up into the atmosphere. While planetary scientists have been able to determine how fast these whirling, swirling storms travel across the arid landscape, they’ve never quite been able to tell just how fast the winds within them move. Until now…
Thanks to the work of David Choi, a postdoc at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, we’re now able to reasonably record wind speeds through the use of high resolution images taken from HiRISE onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. When lucky, the camera captures the storms as a “work in progress” – detailing small features. By pinpointing these signature marks, Choi was able to determine the wind speeds by knowing the timing between frames.
According to the news release, the winds are traveling at about 45 meters each second — what we Earthlings would consider “hurricane-force,” or above 33 meters per second. However, at other times the winds would slow to between 20 and 30 meters per second. These new findings were then compiled and Choi presented his results October 3 in Nantes, France, at the joint meeting of the European Planetary Science Congress and the American Astronomical Society’s Division for Planetary Sciences.
“As a whole, they’re not like a hurricane, but there are pockets or gusts that exceed hurricane-force,” Choi says.
These storms generally appeared around 3:00 Mars Local Time and measured about 30 meters to 250 meters in diameter, and stretched upwards between 150 meters and 700 meters. Wow… “Here I am… Rock you like a hurricane!”
A remarkable finding of the early 21st century, that kind of sits alongside the Nobel prize winning discovery of the universe’s accelerating expansion, is the finding that the universe is geometrically flat. This is a remarkable and unexpected feature of a universe that is expanding – let alone one that is expanding at an accelerated rate – and like the accelerating expansion, it is a key feature of our current standard model of the universe.
It may be that the flatness is just a consequence of the accelerating expansion – but to date this cannot be stated conclusively.
As usual, it’s all about Einstein. The Einstein field equations enable the geometry of the universe to be modelled – and a great variety of different solutions have been developed by different cosmology theorists. Some key solutions are the Friedmann equations, which calculate the shape and likely destiny of the universe, with three possible scenarios:
• closed universe – with a contents so dense that the universe’s space-time geometry is drawn in upon itself in a hyper-spherical shape. Ultimately such a universe would be expected to collapse in on itself in a big crunch.
• open universe – without sufficient density to draw in space-time, producing an outflung hyperbolic geometry – commonly called a saddle-shape – with a destiny to expand forever.
• flat universe – with a ‘just right’ density – although an unclear destiny.
The Friedmann equations were used in twentieth century cosmology to try and determine the ultimate fate of our universe, with few people thinking that the flat scenario would be a likely finding – since a universe might be expected to only stay flat for a short period, before shifting to an open (or closed) state because its expansion (or contraction) would alter the density of its contents.
Matter density was assumed to be key to geometry – and estimates of the matter density of our universe came to around 0.2 atoms per cubic metre, while the relevant part of the Friedmann equations calculated that the critical density required to keep our universe flat would be 5 atoms per cubic metre. Since we could only find 4% of the required critical density, this suggested that we probably lived in an open universe – but then we started coming up with ways to measure the universe’s geometry directly.
There’s a You-Tube of Lawrence Krauss (of Physics of Star Trek fame) explaining how this is done with cosmic microwave background data (from WMAP and earlier experiments) – where the CMB mapped on the sky represents one side of a triangle with you at its opposite apex looking out along its two other sides. The angles of the triangle can then be measured, which will add up to 180 degrees in a flat (Euclidean) universe, more than 180 in a closed universe and less than 180 in an open universe.
These findings, indicating that the universe was remarkably flat, came at the turn of the century around the same time that the 1998 accelerated expansion finding was announced.
Although the contents of the early universe may have just been matter, we now must add dark energy to explain the universe's persistent flatness. Credit: NASA.
So really, it is the universe’s flatness and the estimate that there is only 4% (0.2 atoms per metre) of the matter density required to keep it flat that drives us to call on dark stuff to explain the universe. Indeed we can’t easily call on just matter, light or dark, to account for how our universe sustains its critical density in the face of expansion, let alone accelerated expansion – since whatever it is appears out of nowhere. So, we appeal to dark energy to make up the deficit – without having a clue what it is.
Given how little relevance conventional matter appears to have in our universe’s geometry, one might question the continuing relevance of the Friedmann equations in modern cosmology. There is more recent interest in the De Sitter universe, another Einstein field equation solution which models a universe with no matter content – its expansion and evolution being entirely the result of the cosmological constant.
De Sitter universes, at least on paper, can be made to expand with accelerating expansion and remain spatially flat – much like our universe. From this, it is tempting to suggest that universes naturally stay flat while they undergo accelerated expansion – because that’s what universes do, their contents having little direct influence on their long-term evolution or their large-scale geometry.
But who knows really – we are both literally and metaphorically working in the dark on this.
The relativistic motion of clocks on board GPS satellites exactly accounts for the superluminal effect, says physicist. Credit: axirv
[/caption]
Oh, yeah. Moving faster than the speed of light has been the hot topic in the news and OPERA has been the key player. In case you didn’t know, the experiment unleashed some particles at CERN, close to Geneva. It wasn’t the production that caused the buzz, it was the revelation they arrived at the Gran Sasso Laboratory in Italy around 60 nanoseconds sooner than they should have. Sooner than the speed of light allows!
Since the announcement, the physics world has been on fire, producing more than 80 papers – each with their own opinion. While some tried to explain the effect, others discredited it. The overpowering concensus was the OPERA team simply must have forgotten one critical element. On October 14, 2011, Ronald van Elburg at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands put forth his own statement – one that provides a persuasive point that he may have found the error in the calculations.
To get a clearer picture, the distance the neutrinos traveled is straightforward. They began in CERN and were measured via global positioning systems. However, the Gran Sasso Laboratory is located beneath the Earth under a kilometre-high mountain. Regardless, the OPERA team took this into account and provided an accurate distance measurement of 730 km to within tolerances of 20 cm. The neutrino flight time is then measured by using clocks at the opposing ends, with the team knowing exactly when the particles left and when they landed.
But were the clocks perfectly synchronized?
Keeping time is again the domain of the GPS satellites which each broadcasting a highly accurate time signal from orbit some 20,000km overhead. But is it possible the team overlooked the amount of time it took for the satellite signals to return to Earth? In his statement, van Elburg says there is one effect that the OPERA team seems to have overlooked: the relativistic motion of the GPS clocks.
Sure, radio waves travel at the speed of light, so what difference does the satellite position make? The truth is, it doesn’t.. but the time of flight does. Here we have a scenario where one clock is on the ground while the other is orbiting. If they are moving relative to one another, this calculation needs to be included in the findings. The orbiting probes are positioned from West to East in a plane inclined at 55 degrees to the equator… almost directly in line with the neutrino flight path. This means the clock on the GPS is seeing the neutrino source and detector as changing.
“From the perspective of the clock, the detector is moving towards the source and consequently the distance travelled by the particles as observed from the clock is shorter,” says van Elburg.
According to the news source, he means shorter than the distance measured in the reference frame on the ground and the OPERA team overlooks this because it thinks of the clocks as on the ground not in orbit. Van Elburg calculates that it should cause the neutrinos to arrive 32 nanoseconds early. But this must be doubled because the same error occurs at each end of the experiment. So the total correction is 64 nanoseconds, almost exactly what the OPERA team observes.
Is this the final answer for traveling faster than the speed of light? No. It’s just another possible answer to explain a new riddle… and a confirmation of a new revelation.
The X-37, versions of which have flown twice into space already, is now being proposed as a potential means of transportation for crews to the International Space Station. Photo Credit: Boeing
[/caption]
As reported online at Space.com, the Boeing Company is already working on the CST-100 space taxi as a means of transportation to and from the International Space Station (ISS). But the aerospace firm is not content with just this simple space capsule and is looking into whether-or-not another of Boeing’s current offerings – the X-37B space plane could be modified to one day ferry crew to and from the orbiting laboratory as well.
proposed variant of the spacecraft, dubbed the X-37C, is being considered for a role that has some similarities to the cancelled X-38 Crew Return Vehicle (CRV). The announcement was made at a conference hosted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) and reported on Space.com.
The USAF has already launched two of the X-37B Orbital Text Vehicles (OTV) from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. Photo Credit: ULA/Pat Corkery
The X-37B or Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV) has so far been launched twice by the U.S. Air Force from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. One of the military space planes completed the craft’s inaugural mission, USA-212, on Apr. 22, 2010. The mini space plane reentered Earth’s atmosphere and conducted an autonomous landing at Vandenberg Air Force on Dec. 3, 2010.
The U.S. Air Force then went on to launch the second of the space planes on mission USA-226 on Mar. 5, 2011. With these two successful launches, the longest-duration stay on orbit by a reusable vehicle and a landing under its belt, some of the vehicle’s primary systems (guidance, navigation, thermal protection and aerodynamics among others) are now viewed as having been validated. The vehicle has performed better than expected with the turnaround time being less than predicted.
If the X-37C is produced, it will be roughly twice the size of its predecessor. The X-37B is about 29 feet long; this new version of the mini shuttle would be approximately 48 feet in length. The X-37C is estimated at being approximately 165-180 percent larger than the X-37B. This increase in the size requires a larger launch vehicle.
This larger size also highlights plans to have the spacecraft carry 5 or 6 astronauts – with room for an additional crew member that is immobilized on a stretcher. The X-38, manufactured by Scaled Composites, was designed, built and tested to serve as a lifeboat for the ISS. In case of an emergency, crew members on the ISS would have entered the CRV and returned to Earth – a role that now could possibly be filled by the X-37C. The key difference being that the CRV only reached the point of atmospheric drop tests – the X-37B has flown into space twice.
Certain elements of the X-37C proposal highlight mission aspects of the cancelled X-38 Crew Return Vehicle. Photo Credit: NASA.gov
The crewed variant of the X-37 space plane would contain a pressurized compartment where the payload is normally stored, it would have a hatch that would allow for astronauts to enter and depart the spacecraft. Another hatch would be located on the main body of the mini shuttle so as to allow access to the vehicle on the ground. The X-37C, like its smaller cousin, would be able to rendezvous, dock, reenter the atmosphere and land remotely, without the need of a pilot. Acknowledging the need for pilots to control their own craft however, the X-37C would be capable of accomplishing these space flight requirements under manual control as well.
As mentioned in the Space.com article, one of the other selling points for the X-37C is its modular nature. Different variants could be used for crewed flights or unmanned missions that could return delicate cargo from the ISS. Neither the Russian Soyuz spacecraft, nor commercially-developed capsules are considered as appropriate means of returning biological or crystal experiments to Earth due to the high rate of acceleration that these vehicles incur upon atmospheric reentry. By comparison the X-37B experiences just 1.5 “g” upon reentry.
The launch vehicle that would send the proposed X-37C to orbit would be the United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. In provided images the X-37C is shown utilizing a larger version of the Atlas booster and without the protective fairing that covered the two X-37B space planes that were launched.
Jean-Jacques Dordain. Credit: ESA photo by S. Corvaja
[/caption]
What’s new in the avenue of space exploration? Right now the European Space Agency (ESA) has issued a formal invitation to Russia to join the U.S.-European Mars exploration program in a last-ditch attempt to save the project from being cut in half, ESA Director-General Jean-Jacques Dordain said October 13th.
The appeal to Russia, which came in the form of a letter to the head of the Russian space agency, Roscosmos, is likely ESA’s only hope of saving the full U.S.-European Mars exploration project, which Europe calls ExoMars, Dordain said in an interview. At this point in time, the agency is hoping for a solid answer by the beginning of 2012. This will allow for planning for a two-launch mission of the ExoMars program and lead to a full partnership between the Russian Space Agency and NASA. What’s more, this partnership could mean additional support for the U.S.-European program and even incorporate a Proton rocket launch carrying a jointly-build Mars telecommunications orbiter and an entry, descent and landing system in 2016.
By cutting NASA’s budget, the U.S. contribution to world-wide space programs looks bleak… even with the planned 2018 launch, aboard a NASA-provided Atlas 5 rocket, of the Euro-American Mars rover. This lack of funds hurts everyone – including ESA – dashing hopes of of purchasing its own Ariane 5 rocket for the 2016 mission. Even though NASA appears to be committed at this point, there’s always the uncertainty of the U.S. economic picture.
“At this point I am becoming a Doubting Thomas in that I believe only what I can see,” Dordain said. “But NASA has said nothing that would lead me to believe the 2018 mission is not going forward. At this point I have only two options: Keep the mission as we would like it by finding an additional partner, or reduce the mission.”
This doesn’t mean that ESA isn’t trying. Even by cutting the budget to a single-launch isn’t totally the answer. By making such drastic changes in the middle of an already planned scenario means changing tactics when design teams are already on a tight schedule. Cutting the budget also means cutting jobs – and that’s a problem in its own right. At this point, ESA is even willing to release nations from their commitments to keep the program, with modifications, intact.
Dordain said his approach to Roscosmos is not simply a request for an in-kind contribution of a Proton rocket for the 2016 launch. He said he would like Russia involved in ExoMars as a full third participant with NASA and ESA, and that the Russian role could include provision of experiments. “This could end up being an even grander mission than it would have with a full Russian participation,” Dordain said. “It’s not simply a matter of asking the Russians, ‘Please provide us a launcher.’”
Dordain briefed ESA’s ruling council on the ExoMars situation October 13 and will give an update at the council’s mid-December meeting. The current ExoMars contract for the 2016 mission, which had already been extended while ESA waited for a NASA commitment that never came, runs through December and can be extended to January, Dordain said.
It will be a waiting game from here. With luck, the Russians will answer by January 2012 and NASA will have a clearer picture of its own financial responsibilities by February 2012. Let’s hope the ExoMars Mission doesn’t have to pay the price.
