Solar Storm Nearly Wipes Out NASA's Messenger 110
tcd004 writes "There was a close call last week when an enormous coronal ejection nearly hit Mercury and the orbiting Messenger spacecraft. Scientists at the Space Weather Laboratory flew into action, modeling the event to determine how close it had come to the spacecraft using data from the twin STEREO sun observers. The group used an animated model called WSA-ENLIL, named after a Sumerian lord of wind and storms. Enlil, who wears a crown of horns, is known for being a kind but also cruel god who sends forth disasters, including a great flood that wiped out humanity. Fortunately Messenger escaped Enlil's wrath."
Re:Are these efforts worthwhile? (Score:5, Informative)
Apart from the knowledge we obtain from these vehicles...can we justify these expensive ventures in these recession times?
Launched in the good ol' days of 2004, according to Wikipedia. Already made it's first flyby before the economic collapse.
The only way you could save money on it now is to shut down the ground team, effectively throwing away your investment and many years' work.
Re:Are these efforts worthwhile? (Score:5, Informative)
I might not be able to tell you exactly how this will benefit you, but in general more knowledge is never a bad thing. Consider the huge number of products and ideas that we use everyday that came from accidents or people just playing around (rubber, penicillin, and superglue, to name a few).
War, on the other hand, serves no creative purpose, but only destroys. I would ask you how we can continue to justify several different military actions during a recession.
One more thing: first, consider NASA's budget which is 0.6% of the federal budget. Now consider the Department of Defense's budget, which is 19%. (Both of these numbers are straight from Wikipedia for 2010.) I can't justify spending 32 times as much on wars that will only serve to kill people and create a worldwide hatred of America as we spend on our space program. It doesn't make any sense to me.
Re:Are these efforts worthwhile? (Score:4, Informative)
War, on the other hand, serves no creative purpose, but only destroys. I would ask you how we can continue to justify several different military actions during a recession.
Its not politically correct nor a popular notion, but massive technology and societal improvements are the direct result of war. To deny this is to admit one doesn't know history. And contrary to your assertion, war is frequently fueled by massive levels of creativity. Almost everything you take for granted in modern life, either directly or indirectly, can be attributed to war.
Re:Are these efforts worthwhile? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's the way it's been, however that's not because of any particular rule. It's more because it's easier to get funding to blow something up than to do something productive. People tend to be more willing to open their purses for something that they feel is in their interest, particularly if it helps them avoid something that scares them.
Societies that have other values tend to have other routes to developing technology. Ones which value agriculture tend to poor their resources there and into things which are related.
Re: (Score:2)
"Its not politically correct nor a popular notion, but massive technology and societal improvements are the direct result of war. To deny this is to admit one doesn't know history."
I have a bit of a grasp on History and I plainly deny that: the only direct result of war is people being killed. Everything else are indirect results and, as such, they could have been gotten by other ways -without the killing.
Adscribing technology and social advance to wars as if it were the only way to achieve those results j
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be talking around in circles without a coherent statement.
I have a bit of a grasp on History and I plainly deny that: the only direct result of war is people being killed
Well, by you're own admission, you just contradicted yourself. Factually, history completely disagrees with you. The fact you state you know history and then directly contradict history to make your point, entirely invalidates your point as well as your credibility.
Everything else are indirect results and, as such, they could have been gotten by other ways -without the killing.
I never said they couldn't be obtained in a world of purely research driven science. But no one lives in that world. No one. Furthermore, its true that some advancements may ev
Re: (Score:2)
Factually, history completely disagrees with you
And factually, present day completely disagrees with history. How's our roaring war economy doing now?
Re: (Score:2)
And factually, present day completely disagrees with history. How's our roaring war economy doing now?
Considering your idiotic statement is verifiably false, in what way do you believe stating verifiable lies makes your point? How stupid are you?
Re: (Score:2)
"Factually, history completely disagrees with you."
Actually? Then you can easily point me to the war started "to the advancement of Science and Technology", can you?
"I never said they couldn't be obtained in a world of purely research driven science."
Yes you did, since you pointed technology advancement as a direct outcome of war while the truth is that those advencements, except maybe for the case of weaponry development are just side effects that, by your own account could be achieved by other means with
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly depends on the war.
What massive technological improvements did we see as a result of the 6 day war?
And I hate to break it to you, but a war is between the armies of two or more countries. What the US is engaged in in Afghanistan and Iraq are not wars anymore - they are police actions.
But please, do enlighten the curious amongst us - what civilian technological advancemen
Re: (Score:2)
Certainly depends on the war.
What massive technological improvements did we see as a result of the 6 day war?
Nice try in idiocy and trolling. Factually, the 6-day war was also deemed the end of tank warfare and the return to massive civilian deaths. As a result of such proclamations, the state of the art in metallurgy and material sciences received a boost. The resulting research has made advances to almost everything you see as "modern" today. Not to mention, composite armors are now standard fair on main battle tanks which means dramatically extended lives for tank crews.
Absolutely, the scale and scope of the wa
Re: (Score:1)
One more thing: first, consider NASA's budget which is 0.6% of the federal budget. Now consider the Department of Defense's budget, which is 19%.
19% is spent on the prevention of war. That's how you can justify several different military actions during a recession.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
lets just say "prevention" != "engagement"
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger issue is that as soon as you start putting that kind of money into the DoD people want to see the military do something. Libya is a much better user of resources than Iraq was, albeit, a much cheaper conflict to get involved in. Even if they don't give us access to their resources, having an unstable regime headed by a dictator isn't in our best interest.
There's also the issue of the things which are going unfunded so that we can devote that much money to the defense department. Things like prope
Re: (Score:2)
The bigger issue is that as soon as you start putting that kind of money into the DoD people want to see the military do something.
Why put the money into DoD at all?
Libya is a much better user of resources than Iraq was, albeit, a much cheaper conflict to get involved in. Even if they don't give us access to their resources, having an unstable regime headed by a dictator isn't in our best interest.
Violating sovereignty of another nation state (even the one led by an unstable dictator) is in the interest of the world's "pinnacle of freedom and democracy"? Taking sides in an internal conflict is right and justified? I don't remember the United States being so proactive during the war in my homeland. In fact, I remember certain embargoes while we were attacked. It must be just my memory.
For some reason, my logic must be screwed up as well, since I don't see anyone talki
Re: (Score:2)
I don't remember the United States being so proactive during the war in my homeland. In fact, I remember certain embargoes while we were attacked. It must be just my memory.
The embargoes affected everyone in the former Yugoslavia including Serbia and Montenegro. It's just unfortunate that the victims were more strongly affected than the aggressors. But that's how conflicts are peacefully resolved. Big fish eats little fish.
Re: (Score:2)
The embargoes affected everyone in the former Yugoslavia including Serbia and Montenegro.
Which, even despite I'm in one of the attacked countries, does not make me happy.
It's just unfortunate that the victims were more strongly affected than the aggressors. But that's how conflicts are peacefully resolved. Big fish eats little fish.
Rather odd way at looking at things. Denying defensive weaponry and other things to build up a resistance surely is an effective way to resolve a conflict. Because then it cannot even be called a conflict; if there's only one properly armed side, how can you call it a conflict?
If you however think there is someone who is defending himself, and has a right to defend himself, just help or don't interfere. Imposing a weapon import
Re: (Score:2)
If you however think there is someone who is defending himself, and has a right to defend himself, just help or don't interfere. Imposing a weapon import embargo on a state that cannot defend itself means its citizens will be "dealt with" by the other side.
Any silver tongued politician could have told you that they were "helping" not just "interfering". This sort of game is played whenever there is concern about evils committed somewhere, but nobody in power wants to be at risk from doing something concrete. Games were played in the days prior to the Second World War and in Cambodia and Rwanda. Evil was allowed to fester and grow.
This is why I consider a military as more than a thing that breaks things, kills people, and destroys societies. There are alway
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Everything always must come down to Israel, doesn't it? This seems like an ironic twist on the Godwin's Law.
United States is on the other side of the world compared to the Middle East. It is not directly threatened. Israel does not seem like a natural ally. United States is not threatened militarily and it's not really threatened by the Middle Eastern countries at all, and should not look at small countries as its allies. United States should feel much more threatened by the China.
Government of the Gitmo Na
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The US wasn't threatened militarily in Korea or Vietnam, either. Israel is small, but influential with a very strong military and they are a nuclear power(supposedly).
Who gave them that?
They also have the itchiest trigger finger. If Israel goes to full-scale war, it will send the whole region down the shitter
Are you saying that Israel is the problem? I am not that actively tracking the status in the region, but they never seemed like a major troublemaker to me. If they are, what is the logic in destroying everyone around them?
and invite countries like Russia to get involved since they do a lot of business with other countries in the region(thus protecting their interests, same thing the US does).
Russia is not half-way around the world.
Israel only comes up because it is one of the reasons why countries like the US intervene. Ultimately, you want to keep the issues within the country. Manageable. The larger the conflict within the country, the greater the potential for it to spread. Israel is attached because of that, but so are other countries that major countries have major interests in
I'm afraid I do not understand how all this justifies entering the conflict in Libya. If Gaddafi was mad enough to openly attack Israel, he had over 40 years to do so. I'm also not sure that bringing US' "sons of bitches" into powe
Re: (Score:2)
What if Libya is a prevention of wider conflict, or future conflict?
What if Libya is the trigger for a wider conflict, or future conflict?
Re: (Score:2)
If you really think dropping bombs on people is the best way to prevent war, then I humbly suggest you read Three Cups of Tea [amazon.com] by Greg Mortenson.
Re: (Score:2)
""prevention of war" by going to war? And you said that with a straight face?"
Not that I share such an opinion, but you can bet khallow is not the first one to try that path: did you never heard about the Latin saying 'si vis pacem para bellum', or its "original" from Vegetius 'Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum'.
That's more or less 1500 years ago, so not really hot news.
Re: (Score:2)
Peace through superior firepower?
Re: (Score:3)
There's a big difference between being the biggest, toughest kid on the playground that no one wants to mess with because they *know* they will get pummeled if they try, and being the bully on the playground who goes around picking fights.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you think the money is spent? The paychecks of thousands of people are directly related to spaceflight -- your neighbors and mine. The programs themselves buy products of every description, from commodities like gases and metals to highly engineered and specialized electronics and mechanical assemblies, from companies both large and small -- not to mention the services of a wide range of people, from painters to software engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
To be sure, in the case of MESSENGER; but IMHO the GP was asking about policy, not an implementation: He mentions "these vehicles" and "these expensive ventures", yet there is only one MESSENGER spacecraft.
Or maybe he's just a troll, and we're both screwed ^_^
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely not. We need that money to fund more pointless never-ending wars like the ones on drugs and terrorism. We need to be researching less invasive ways to invade the privacy of citizens, so we can make the nation secure without anyone realizing that we're doing it by monitoring them 24/7. We need bigger CEO bonuses so that the wealthy can make all the rest of us happier by keeping the money that doesn't buy happiness. We need to route more money through the political process in case someone there
Re: (Score:2)
Apart from the knowledge we obtain? Well no. Duh. The knowledge we obtain from these vehicles is the only benefit anyone ever intended or expected to get from them, so if you deliberately exclude that from the calculations, then of course we can't justify it.
The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology club.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apart from the knowledge we obtain from these vehicles...can we justify these expensive ventures in these recession times?
Apart from the knowledge we obtain from this sort of endeavor...can we justify the value of the human race? Seriously, this is the goal. Everything we've done and all of our efforts as a species it lead up to this sort of exploration of the frontiers of science, astronomy, and meaning. If we don't do something other than reproduce and advertise, if we're only interested in looking inward and never outward, why do we even need to exist?
Re: (Score:2)
"why do we even need to exist?"
I know this one: 42
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No sir! You are misinformed (Score:2)
Those parts are increasingly coming from China. [nwsource.com] Wake up!
Faux budgetary concern (Score:2)
Some of us actually come here for the science stories. Anyone with even a minimal understanding of the amount of money MESSENGER requires in comparison to the federal budget overall can see your concern is facetious. Please take your lame political trolling to an iDevice "story" and leave us nerds in peace.
Yeah, yeah (Score:5, Funny)
Enlil, who wears a crown of horns, is known for being a kind but also cruel god who sends forth disasters, including a great flood that wiped out humanity.
When you meet one of them, you've met them all. A bunch of jerks, if you ask me.
Re: (Score:1)
goddamn gods
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe that's what happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, that flood that wiped out humanity is the reason why none of us are here today.
Re: (Score:3)
At least this answers the question that pagan fanboys have been asking for millennia: "Who'd win, Mercury or Enlil?"
Re: (Score:3)
At least this answers the question that pagan fanboys have been asking for millennia: "Who'd win, Mercury or Enlil?"
That thread had been quiet for about 400 years, but no, you just had to flame it up again. Classical trolls incoming.
Also... (Score:2)
How exactly does one get to be "kind" and "cruel" at the same time? God or no god. How does that work?
He cruelly cuts people's breaks and then he kindly saves them from their burning cars?
Or does he give gifts - that also have a random chance of killing their recipient?
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly does one get to be "kind" and "cruel" at the same time?
Don't date much, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
Sumerian deities? No.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I find it hard to believe that you've actually met one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Change orbits? (Score:2)
I wonder if stuff like that has the potential to change orbits of plants. If the Sun were to push itself enough out of position everything circling it would begin to have irregular orbits around it and things could get really bad.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if stuff like that has the potential to change orbits of plants.
I'm certainly concerned about my garden... I can never keep it the right distance from my house!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
sounds like fun , lets find out what happens... I have an ant, you get the catapult!
Re: (Score:2)
sounds like fun , lets find out what happens... I have an ant, you get the catapult!
My uncle would be upset with you.
An interesting experiment (Score:2)
First you have to find a plant in orbit, though...
Re: (Score:2)
Mir!
.
In its last days, there were all kinds of moulds, spores and fungi growing on the outside. Possibly more complex life. That makes Mir a plant that was in orbit, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, ITYM inside. Not much growing on the outside.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, pretty sure the news at the time was outside. Which is fine. There were oxygen leaks, resulting in air surrounding Mir. Further, as NASA demonstrated at the ISS, some bacteria and mold can handle hard radiation just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sorry to pick on you, self-professed fan of loud music, but something that ignorant of the physical processes of the Universe just friggin hurts. To quote an old physics gent: That's not right. It's not even wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
You get his idea though: if you're standing in the center of a 100% frictionless frozen pond in a vacuum, you have no way of progressing forward. So if you actually want to get off the pond what do you do? You take off your mitten and toss it in the opposite direction. Or, if you're the sun, you have a coronal ejection, spewing pieces of yourself into the void.
This could, conceivably, move the sun. And yes, the planets wouldn't just follow along with it automagically -- they have their own momentum as w
Re:Change orbits? (Score:4, Informative)
The most physically obvious thing you are overlooking is the amount of material in a CME. Even at their most violent a CME would be hard pressed to top 1e-20 of the Sun's mass, which would mean that with an eruption speed topping 3000 km/sec the most kick it could give would change the Sun's speed by less than the radius of a hydrogen atom per hour.
So, to follow your analogy, it is not so much like throwing your mitten in the opposite direction than it is trying to jet your way to the bank by a single, unenthusiastic fart. Which, as a strategy, is pretty close to the usual generous slashdot manner.
Re: (Score:1)
So, to follow your analogy, it is not so much like throwing your mitten in the opposite direction than it is trying to jet your way to the bank by a single, unenthusiastic fart. Which, as a strategy, is pretty close to the usual generous slashdot manner.
You sir made my day! I tip my hat to thee.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait! You said vacuum. Well, that eliminates the breathing solution. However, you probably wouldn't do to well in a mittenless space suit either.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Physics does not work like that.
Another Great Flood? (Score:2)
"...including a great flood that wiped out humanity."
Jesus, there was another one of those? How many does that make for humanity?
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus, there was another one of those? How many does that make for humanity?
He doesn't know. Ask his dad.
Re: (Score:2)
Around here we have a 100 year flood every year.
Re: (Score:2)
"Jesus, there was another one of those? How many does that make for humanity?"
I'm doing a small portion of His light work today...
It depends on where you live.
"The multiple flood hypothesis was first proposed by R.B. Wiatt, Jr., in 1980. Wiatt argued for a sequence of multiple floods â" 40 or more.[11][12][13] Wiatt's proposal was based mainly on analysis from glacial lake bottom deposits in Ninemile Creek and the flood deposits in Burlingame Canyon. His most compelling argument for separate floods was
Re: (Score:2)
Milky Way Pie (Score:2)
"There was a close call last week when an enormous coronal ejection nearly hit Mercury and the orbiting Messenger spacecraft.
Sun caught jerking off; nearly blows load all over Earth's satellites; Earth raises big fuzzy eyebrows in shock.
so... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Humanity Wiped Out? (Score:2)
"including a great flood that wiped out humanity"
Wait. We were wiped out? Why am I always the last one to be told about these things?!!!
NASA has an app for that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
For those that avoid apple and want to use computers; you can view the model predictions with the 'iNTEGRATED SPACE WEATHER ANALYSIS SYSTEM' which is very cross platform and browser: http://iswa.gsfc.nasa.gov/iswa/iSWA.html [nasa.gov] , look under the "Events" tab.
Here's a direct link to the heliosphere model showing the coronal mass ejection and Messenger that was discussed: http://iswa.ccmc.gsfc.nasa.gov:8080/IswaSystemWebApp/StreamArgumentServlet?cygnetInstanceId=65209753&argumentId=1 [nasa.gov]
I'm not sure why this is co
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, I'm not sure why it was necessary to explain who Enlil is.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know enough about this story, as I was out of town all last week. (I do IT support for the solar missions that were mentioned)
STEREO and SDO have 'space weather' feeds, where they get data in near-real time. As CMEs are slow moving (can take a day to reach earth), we actually *do* have advance warning about them, and many of the near-earth spacecraft can be told to go into some sort of a protective mode (eg, turn so they don't take the full brunt of it).
I have no idea if it was possible in this pa
Impressive (Score:1)
Scientists at the Space Weather Laboratory flew into action, modeling the event to determine how close it had come to the spacecraft
They modeled how close it came to destroying the orbiter? Wow, that's pretty impressive, guys...way to keep one step ahead...
Re: (Score:2)