Spacecraft Returns Seven Particles From Birth of the Solar System 48
sciencehabit writes "After a massive, years-long search, researchers have recovered seven interstellar dust particles returned to Earth by the Stardust spacecraft. The whole sample weighs just a few trillionths of a gram, but it's the first time scientists have laid their hands on primordial material unaltered by the violent birth of the solar system. Once the sample panel was back on Earth, the problem quickly became finding any collected particles embedded in the aerogel. Out of desperation, Stardust team members called on 30,714 members of the general public. The 'dusters' of the Stardust@home project volunteered to examine microscopic images taken down through the aerogel. They used the world's best pattern-recognition system — the human eye and brain — to pick out the telltale tracks left by speeding particles."
Re: From interstellar space? (Score:4, Informative)
Isotopes. Read the Science article.
Re: (Score:3)
No thanks, I'd rather read The National Enquirer. It has less sensational hyperbole than Science.
But, but, but, Weekly World News has Bat Boy!
Re: (Score:2)
What's that you say? NASA has discovered Bat Boy in space? Stop the presses!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And MH370 was spotted on the moon!
In other words the best (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately the eye and brain are not the best pattern-recognition system. Humans tend to categorise random patterns as non-random patterns that match things they are familiar with or want to see.
Which means they are the best at seeing patterns.
No-one ever said anything about ACCURATE patterns... :-)
I would argue for this kind of search that just seeing any kind of pattern has value in narrowing things down, even if it's false.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but while a hawk would survey more data at a time, they couldn't find a room with a high enough ceiling.
Re: (Score:2)
Look at all those exclamation marks! What would Terry Pratchett think of you?
Astrophysics humour... (Score:3)
FTA:
Two particles weighing in at about 3 trillionths of a gram each...[...]...âoeIt would be very easy to lose them.â
Well, not quite ready for 'Night at the Improv', worth a grin anyhow.
Only two particles out of only seven impacts, over 200 days shows just how 'empty'[1] space really is.
[1] 'empty' space can be surprisingly a deceptive statement in astrophysics, though...:-)
Gah, slashcode mangled the double parenthesis again!
When do we get proper unicode support?
Re:Astrophysics humour... (Score:5, Interesting)
Empty? We are talking about the Solar System here. Even if you ignore the Sun and planets, this place is remarkably full. This sample from STARDUST demonstrates just how incredibly full it is.
(No sarcasm intended. A lot of the matter out there is in the form of an incredibly tenuous gas rather than particles.)
Re: (Score:2)
You apparently overlooked the '...' around 'empty', and the note[1], where I said that 'empty' is a deceptive description of space to astrophysisists.
What I was alluding to was the average Joe picturing vast volumes of space as being empty of stuff that can be detected with the human eye in context to TFA talking about using the human eye and brain in searching out these particles collected in the aerogell.
As far as space being actually mostly empty, that is not true. it is chock full of stuff, mostly requi
Re: (Score:2)
Only two particles out of only seven impacts, over 200 days shows just how 'empty'[1] space really is.
Here's hoping I recover some nerdcred after yesterday's Sherlock/Mycroft disaster:
"We Analyze Nothing."
Big bad bunnies (Score:4, Funny)
I've got dust particles from the origin of the solar system under my bed.
I'm pretty sure that was the last time anybody cleaned under there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Then what? (Score:1)
What will they do with the particles once they locate them? What sort of useful information could you glean or experiments could you perform on something like that?
Re: (Score:1)
I used to be a space freak, since moderated by more practical concerns. But if there's ever going to be an interstellar flight by a probe, we must understand the hazards of near-relativistic flight. One hazard is the impact of the average interstellar dust grain. We need to understand what the "average interstellar dust grain" is. I've done some calculations on what's understood so far, and a manned flight seems prohibitive, since it would have to be going so fast (0.3-0.8 of c) that the energy delivery of
Re: (Score:2)
I used to be a space freak, since moderated by more practical concerns.
Translation: My wife doesn't allow that shit any more.
But if there's ever going to be an interstellar flight by a probe, we must understand the hazards of near-relativistic flight. One hazard is the impact of the average interstellar dust grain. We need to understand what the "average interstellar dust grain" is. I've done some calculations on what's understood so far, and a manned flight seems prohibitive, since it would have to be going so fast (0.3-0.8 of c) that the energy delivery of the average dust grain is really catastrophic. I really can't imagine what sort of shield that can be constructed that would allow that sort of energy delivery in such a tiny cross-section to be dispersed in such a way that spares the crew as well as the ship's basic structure. I've been trying to find the early publications of the British Interplanetary Society for certain articles, largely without success (for free or a modest fee, anyway), to locate articles making claims about erosion-shield construction. I find their claims (via other publications quoting them) to be specious and I'm hungry to know more.
And that's too bad, because it sounds like you have something to contribute.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
. I really can't imagine what sort of shield that can be constructed that would allow that sort of energy delivery in such a tiny cross-section to be dispersed in such a way that spares the crew as well as the ship's basic structure.
I believe Scotty would like a word or two with you. Are you the same fellow who called his ship a garbage scow?
Re: (Score:2)
I really can't imagine what sort of shield that can be constructed that would allow that sort of energy delivery in such a tiny cross-section to be dispersed in such a way that spares the crew as well as the ship's basic structure.
The ship will need fuel for its fusion reactor, which will most likely be deuterium. Deuterium freezes at about 18K, and deep space is about 4K. So you can use the big chunk of frozen D2 as your shield. For a large crewed colony ship, this would be millions, or even billions of tonnes of D2. Another idea is to put your reactor right on the nose of your space ship. Then instead of using a tokamak or inertial confinement, you use the impact of the incoming gas/particles to induce fusion.
Re: (Score:1)
you use the impact of the incoming gas/particles to induce fusion.
Very clever, but how do you get started?
Re: (Score:2)
... devotees can pay an arm and a leg to be in the same room as the sacred dust motes.
Only if they're suspended in a Sun-beam!
Perspective (A week later) (Score:2)