Rosetta Spacecraft Catches Comet Eruption 42
An anonymous reader writes: On March 12, the Rosetta spacecraft was imaging Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko from a distance of 75 kilometers (46 miles) and by pure chance it spotted an eruption of dusty material from the shaded nucleus. Long-duration spacecraft are essential if we are to fully understand the evolution of a comet as it gradually heats up during its approach to the sun. And it just so happens that Rosetta is always in orbit around 67P's nucleus, ready to spot any transient event that could erupt at any time on the surface
This latest event focuses on the comet's shaded underside. It is assumed that some sunlight slowly heated an outcrop, providing enough energy to sublimate subsurface ices, ejecting vapor and dust as a jet. The transient jet was imaged and measured by Rosetta's scientific imaging system OSIRIS. There is also the possibility that a wave of heating passed through the icy material, eventually producing a more explosive jet event.
This latest event focuses on the comet's shaded underside. It is assumed that some sunlight slowly heated an outcrop, providing enough energy to sublimate subsurface ices, ejecting vapor and dust as a jet. The transient jet was imaged and measured by Rosetta's scientific imaging system OSIRIS. There is also the possibility that a wave of heating passed through the icy material, eventually producing a more explosive jet event.
look at that (Score:1)
the duck farts
Re: (Score:1)
you mean ESA?
Re: (Score:1)
Doh!
Dice, invent an Undo, and I'll stop ragging on you.
Pure chance? (Score:2)
Re:Pure chance? (Score:5, Funny)
hours upon hours and then more hours of mind numbing boredom spontaneously broken up by a sensational robbery, kidnapping, or sublimation.
does that title look like a Porn video recap? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And it just so happens ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Who writes this crap?
Trajectory (Score:1)
Does the sudden change in the mass from the melt in the comet and the effect of the jets change its velocity and trajectory?
Re: (Score:3)
Basically, yes. This is what's referred to as "non-gravitational forces" (you can Google the term, but Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article). It makes it harder to predict the orbits of comets under some circumstances.
Re: (Score:2)
pure chance? (Score:4, Insightful)
If I spend 24x7 staring in your bathroom window you don't call it "pure chance" that I happened to see you taking a shower.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'd call it hard graft.
Re: (Score:2)
That is all I know.
That is all you think; sadly for you, you have no credibility, or evidence for your alternative (do you even posit one?) I find them persuasive, and you not at all. Water is the most common compound in the universe. It's painfully fucking obvious that comets are dirty snowballs. Only a ignorant crank or slashdot armchair blowhard would disagree without presenting something contradictory.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it hard to understand why this kind of accounting is still considered science. The standard model of comets is so wildy wrong, it's absolutely laughable. Comets are electrical, as is the universe. The sooner we all get that, the sooner w don't have to listen to ludicrous "science" telling us that although it looks like a rock, that it's darker than carbon, lighter than sponge, and still has water under pressure causing jets from a nucleus that clearly sees little sunlight, and has a surface temperature so cold, you can't touch it. Yet somehow that translates to heat, expansion, and gas jets erupting out.
No, this sucker's electrical! We expected ice, and when we tried to anchor to it, the surface didn't give way - not quite spongy carbon then? (if you read about the calculated mass!) Seriously, these "scientists" need to get a life, bite the big one, and accept they've been wrong for so long it's laughable. Accept that the Electric universe is the only way forwards for now at least - and embrace it. Then we'll stop getting all these "surprises" and "freak events" and "luck", and start to see it for what it really is.
www.thunderbolts.info
You forgot the bit about the dish running away with the spoon.
Can it dodge? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Emily Lakdawalla's blog has quite a bit of good information about what's going on. With pretty pictures. [planetary.org]
More problematic than jets coming from the comet (which are pretty diffuse and low speed in reality) is that twice passing comet particles have come close enough to be mistaken for the stars that the spacecraft use to orient themselves. Since it's moving past so fast the spacecraft assumes that something is wrong and puts everything in Safe mode.
Electric Comet? (Score:2)
Can we finally admit the Electric Universe guys are at least right about comets? This "jet" is coming from the dark side of the comet? Doesn't seem likely.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if the Electric Universe guys had been correct about even a single prediction or observation since Velikovsky and company came up with it it might be easier to accept. For now it's just quackery, of the same level of science as homeopathy or phrenology.
Re: (Score:2)