Comet Elenin

  • Thread starter Dotini
  • 236 comments
  • 31,384 views
The following article contains a video of a CME literally chopping off the tail of a comet. Some CME's have reportedly accelerated to a significant fraction (40%?) of the speed of light on their passage from the Sun to the Earth. Can readers think of any physical processes could accelerate billions of tonnes of charged particles away from the gravitational pull of the Sun in such a short time?

http://www.stfc.ac.uk/News and Events/4831.aspx

A massive fireball of plasma and magnetism ejected from the Sun - a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) – has ripped off Comet Encke’s tail when it smashed into it. Scientists from the US and UK using NASA’s STEREO spacecraft to study the Sun, witnessed this never before seen event. Their findings are reported in the Astrophysical Journal Letters on 10th October.

Over the years, ground-based observers have seen comets lose their tails, due to the solar wind, but we have never seen a Coronal Mass Ejection smash into a comet in this way and literally chop its tail off.

Professor Richard Harrison from STFC’s Rutherford Appleton Lab is lead investigator for the HI (Heliospheric Imager) Camera that caught the moment “This was a spectacular result - snapping the exact moment the violent Sun broke the tail from Comet Encke. People think of space as empty or quiet, I think we have clearly demonstrated what a dynamic and dangerous place it can be!”

Professor Keith Mason, Chief Executive of the STFC which operates the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory and funds UK participation in STEREO said “This event shows in graphic detail the sheer power of a solar storm. It’s not hard to imagine the effect it would have on a spacecraft! The twin STEREO spacecraft are providing valuable insight on such solar phenomena.”

A CME is a large cloud of magnetized gas ejected into space by the Sun. They are violent eruptions with masses upwards of a few billion tons travelling anywhere from 100 to 3,000 kilometres per second. CMEs are known to cause geomagnetic storms that can present hazards for satellites, radio communications and power systems.

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini
 
Last edited:
blaaah
That's because you have been reading too much of the Daily Mail.
......................
Have we already mentioned the planet Tyche?
4 times bigger than Jupiter and in our own solar system, could be a 9th planet if it gets officially found. It is said to exist in the Oort cloud far off which is why we haven't seen it before. Could be a big influence in disrupting the orbits of comets.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...arch-begins-for-giant-new-planet-2213119.html
Click to expand...

Since ther has been no empirical observation of this planet have astronomers assumed it must be there due perturbations in the orbits of the outer planets, as in the case of the discovery of Neptune and Pluto? Because even if this planet is four times larger than Jupiter it would still be impossible to see from over 1500 AU away.
 
pluto2010.jpg

Images of Pluto which is thousands of times smaller than Tyche. Telescope observation should be easy enough when the location is found. WISE which hunted for the undiscovered objects is looking at temperature, and will see Tyche as an expected -73degrees opposed to other bodies which are near absolute zero. It should stick out being so warm comparatively.
But I don't know, would it still be a lot lot fainter than Pluto like you are suggesting even if it is thousands of times bigger?
 
4 times more massive != 4 times larger in diameter. Add in that the amount of available light from the sun falls off at a cubic rate with distance, and I'd imagine it to be quite dim in the visible spectrum.
 
Azuremen
4 times more massive != 4 times larger in diameter. Add in that the amount of available light from the sun falls off at a cubic rate with distance, and I'd imagine it to be quite dim in the visible spectrum.
Click to expand...
It can still be done. They will just have to maintain a long exposure. Or it may require the combined images from various types of telescopes. But it can be done.
 
FoolKiller
It can still be done. They will just have to maintain a long exposure. Or it may require the combined images from various types of telescopes. But it can be done.
Click to expand...

Well yes, with a long enough exposure and proper tracking, you can eventually resolve anything. I was mostly stating that it being a bit larger than Jupiter doesn't really make it easier at those distances. But I'm sure we could just point Hubble at it once found and produce images.

I think many people forget to remember that most of the pretty images of Pluto are computer generated and artistic, while actual images are relatively low resolution, telling little of the actual surface details.

Honestly, verifying Planet X, which has been hypothesized for a while due to the unique orbit of Pluto and awkward angle of Uranus, though other events have been considered for both.
 
Very interesting, this business of Tyche. But let it be noted that the evidence is thin. The guys who claim it have been Tyche fanboys for 20 years. Doubters are speaking out: http://www.space.com/10863-mystery-planet-tyche-debate.html

Matthew Holman, a planetary scientist at the Harvard Smithsonian Institute of Astrophysics, is not a Tyche believer.

Though he hasn't read the latest version of Matese's and Whitmire's argument, Holman told Life's Little Mysteries, "Based on past papers that I've seen looking at where long-period comets came from in the sky, and finding signatures of large perturbers of the Oort cloud, I was not persuaded by the evidence."

Hal Levison, a planetary scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colo., who recently authored a paper on the Oort cloud for Science Magazine, seconded that opinion.

"I haven't read this version of his paper, which he claims now has better statistics than the previous attempts, where he also claimed that he saw evidence of this object," Levison said. "But in previous papers, I really think he did his statistics wrong. Incredible claims require incredible proof and I really believe that he doesn't understand how to do this statistical analysis correctly."

"What Matese claims is that he sees an excess of comets coming from a particular place, which he attributes to the gravitational effects of a large planet in the Oort cloud. I have nothing against the idea, but I think the signal that he claims he sees is very subtle, and I'm not sure it's statistically significant," Levison told Life's Little Mysteries.

"There's another group in England that claims the same thing, but with Jupiter on the other side of the sun," Levison said. "And they also claim to explain the excess of comets."

For my own humble part, I doubt even the existence of the "Oort Cloud" itself.
After all, it's only an hypothesis and has never been observed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

However, I still think it's possible such a body as Tyche exists, as ancient and modern astronomers have all commented upon such oddities as Nemesis, Nibiru, Tyche and Planet X. It's another wonderful mystery!

Respectfully submitted, open to correction,
Dotini
 
blaaah
Hubble pictures of Pluto, if it can do that, then it can image a planet over 5 thousand times bigger.
Click to expand...
And the detail will look just as bad. Assuming it is there.

And it will be a while before we get that kind of image as WISE was infrared. That won't be ready until this spring.
 
But the point is it is actually visible even if it is a single white pixel on a black background, not invisible. Pluto was said to be invisible but it isn't. We can even see things different on Pluto as it rotates.
 
The Sun has an apparant magnitude of -6 from a distance of 15000 AU (not much brighter than Venus)). It's diameter is 2.5 times greater than that of Tyche. All planets and dwarf planets are completely invisible from this distance, and, considering it isn't a star, I'd be amazed if it is detected visually, at best you would get a single pixel that takes days to make any noticeable movement.

EDIT: The absolute limit for the HST is -31.50. Sedna has an apparent magnitude of -35.00 at it's aphelion of roughly 900 AU. Tyche would have a far lower magnitude than this, even if the perihelion is 15000 AU. It may only just be visible. But infrared would detect it certainly if the estimated surface temperature is equivalent to that of Mars'.
 
Last edited:
Edit:
fomalhaut-planet.jpg

We have already got images of a PLANET from 25 light years away which is 25x 63,072
which equals 15,768,800 AU away we have an visible light image of a planet.
That is more than a thousand times further away than Tyche.
 
Last edited:
blaaah
So if we take the image i posted as an example, it Pluto was 375 times further away, but 10,000 times bigger, it would be invisible?
Click to expand...

In visible light, almost undoubteably yes. Sedna is less than a 10th of the distance that Tyche is from the Sun (at aphelion) and less than 100th of the distance at perihelion, which it will aproach in 70 years time, and even that was detected by thermal imaging only. Tyche would appear about 15 times larger, but that is not enough for a telescope. Infrared should do it.
 
Just for fun, I'll bet this Tyche doesn't exist and will never be imaged in any way. But I'll be happy to lose.
 
PeterJB
In visible light, almost undoubteably yes. Sedna is less than a 10th of the distance that Tyche is from the Sun (at aphelion) and less than 100th of the distance at perihelion, which it will aproach in 70 years time, and even that was detected by thermal imaging only. Tyche would appear about 15 times larger, but that is not enough for a telescope. Infrared should do it.
Click to expand...

I have updated my post with a different scenario to ponder.
 
Theoretically it could exist, since it has been predicted based on all long-term comets coming from the same place. And investigation into gravitational disturbances has lead to the discovery of Neptune, Pluto, and various other dwarf planets. Their aren't Stars close enough to affect orbits in our own solar system, so their must large enough to create orbits as unusual as Sedna's for example, and have an influence from such a great distance that we can detect.
 
blaaah
We have already got images of a PLANET from 25 light years away which is 25x 63,072
which equals 15,768,800 AU away we have an visible light image of a planet.
That is more than a thousand times further away than Tyche.
Click to expand...


The difference is we can see which stars have planets encircling them. From our vantage point, certain stars have a weird wobble to them. Tell tale sign of a large gas giant orbiting the star. If someone was viewing our star from an extremely long distance away, they would see the wobble.

The difference with Tyche, Nemesis, Planet X, whatever you want to call it, it is a large body, vast distance away, not emitting or reflecting much if any light at our visible spectrum.

It is possible that there is a proto-planet out there, and chances are there is one that got launched out of orbit billions of years ago. Neptune and Uranus most likely formed closer to the Sun, then moved to their orbits through some sort of event.
 
Jawsers
It is possible that there is a proto-planet out there, and chances are there is one that got launched out of orbit billions of years ago. Neptune and Uranus most likely formed closer to the Sun, then moved to their orbits through some sort of event.
Click to expand...

Their orbits are far too regular to be the result of being forced further outward. Any sources on this claim they formed further inward in the system and then were forced out, or is this just your idea?
 
New comet news. Nasa have reported to have discovered the crater made by their 375kg projectile Deep Impact mission in 2005 on the comet Tempel 1.
The crater is subtle, 150m wide, and partially refilled from it's own ejection material.
The crater suggest a soft weak target area of the comet.
The comet has made quite a few surface changes to itself since 2005 with craters merging and material lost as it has orbited the Sun.
dn20135-2_600.jpg

dn20135-3_600.jpg

The 2nd image shows a composite before view and next to it the current area. The arrows marking the edges of the impact crater. Doesn't look like much does it.
 
Well, there wasn't really an event in that model, just a gradual change in orbits, including Jupiter and Saturn, not just Uranus and Neptune. Really is quite interesting though, especially the part about the Neptune and Uranus position changes. Makes sense under the modeling conditions it would seem.

By the way, an event, at least in my mind, is something that happens in a generally short period of time, such as the Shoemaker-Levy comet event with Jupiter. Or whatever likely gave Uranus its insane tilt.
 
Azuremen
Well, there wasn't really an event in that model, just a gradual change in orbits, including Jupiter and Saturn, not just Uranus and Neptune. Really is quite interesting though, especially the part about the Neptune and Uranus position changes. Makes sense under the modeling conditions it would seem.

By the way, an event, at least in my mind, is something that happens in a generally short period of time, such as the Shoemaker-Levy comet event with Jupiter. Or whatever likely gave Uranus its insane tilt.
Click to expand...

Intrigued by Azuremen's comment, I found this provocative assessment by a renowned catastrophist:

Axial tilt of major celestial bodies

Object...... Axial tilt (°)... Axial tilt (radians)
Mercury.... ~0.01............ 0.00
Venus...... 177.4.............. 3.10
Earth....... 23.44.............. 0.41
Moon....... 6.688.............. 0.03
Mars......... 25.19..............0.44
Ceres........ ~4................. 0.07
Pallas........ ~60................ ~1
Jupiter....... 3.13............... 0.06
Saturn....... 26.73............. 0.47
Uranus....... 97.77............ 1.71
Neptune..... 28.32............. 0.49
Pluto.......... 119.61........... 2.09


Clearly, if our system had formed up from a swirling disk of solar material as claimed, all axial tilts should be approximately the same and near zero. What the data appears to be saying is that the sun captured most of the other bodies and did not originate with them...

Uranus and Pluto don't fit into any sort of a pattern and may have been picked up in separate events.

The (present) sun, Mercury, Ceres, and Jupiter with tilts under ten degrees probably comprise an original system.
 
Wait, so he is saying because the axial tilts, not the actual planes of orbit, are off, they must be captured bodies?

Did he not consider what impacts can do to axial tilt?

The inner most planets have almost no axial tilt, Venus as well because it is retrograde. And this would be because the sun will collect most smaller objects.
 
Azuremen
Wait, so he is saying because the axial tilts, not the actual planes of orbit, are off, they must be captured bodies?

Did he not consider what impacts can do to axial tilt?

The inner most planets have almost no axial tilt, Venus as well because it is retrograde. And this would be because the sun will collect most smaller objects.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Azuremen, I'm no trained catastrophist. Up until the 1950's, 100% of geologists were of the uniformitarian persuasion, including my Dad, a petroleum geologist. He fell under the spell of Velikovsky (another renowned catastrophist), who did indeed speak of collisions between planets. More interested in cars, I of course ignored my Dad and Velikovsky.

Venus is apparently so tilted that it did indeed become, ipso facto, retrograde!
 
Dotini
Sorry, Azuremen, I'm no trained catastrophist. Up until the 1950's, 100% of geologists were of the uniformitarian persuasion, including my Dad, a petroleum geologist. He fell under the spell of Velikovsky (another renowned catastrophist), who did indeed speak of collisions between planets. More interested in cars, I of course ignored my Dad and Velikovsky.

Venus is apparently so tilted that it did indeed become, ipso facto, retrograde!
Click to expand...

Oddly enough my grandfather worked in petroleum as well, PhD in Geology.

That aside, the current rotation of Venus I thought was attributed to the dense atmopheric conditions that create tidal forces from heating in junction with tidal locking effects from the gravity of the Sun itself.

The inclinations of the orbits doesn't have enough deviation to really merit much catastrophic reasoning though.
 
Not sure if we are talking about the same thing but I read the planets change their angle to the orbital plane over time. Mars changes it's axis by 90degrees over 10-20 million years.

Also I read about the prediction horizon for the solar system, it is "only" 10 million years, meaning it's chaotic and certain things can not be precisely predicted, such as not knowing where Pluto will be in 100 million years time, one side of the Sun or the other, it will be in the same orbit, but no idea where about in it.
What we do know is that in about a billion years our solar system will lose either Mercury or Venus or both completely forever. Mercury will slip out of it's orbit and pass Venus causing the loss. Some luck is involved on whether Earth or any other planet gets splatted by them on their way out. But the odds of them hitting something are highly remote. The event might even make Venus swing around Earth and actually cause Earth to be chucked out of the Solar System, the odds are long though, but the initial event happening in a billion years time is almost certain. At least one planet will go bye-bye.
 
^ Where did you get this information from?
 
Azuremen
Oddly enough my grandfather worked in petroleum as well, PhD in Geology.

That aside, the current rotation of Venus I thought was attributed to the dense atmopheric conditions that create tidal forces from heating in junction with tidal locking effects from the gravity of the Sun itself.

The inclinations of the orbits doesn't have enough deviation to really merit much catastrophic reasoning though.
Click to expand...

Hi, Azuremen. Did your grandfather work in Texas during the 40's -70's? If so, it's likely he and my father crossed paths a time or two.

The 'insane' tilt of Uranus and retrograde motion of some of the other major bodies and moons is held to be prima facie evidence of some kind of catastrophic event. Collision, capture, explosion of a former major body in the asteroid belt, or whatever it was is the subject of much debate. Discoveries about cometary impacts (dinosaur extinction) on Earth and more recently the vivid Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact with Jupiter, have wooed many former uniformitarians away from slow-motion-only ideas of planetary evolution.

Respectfully submitted, open to correction,
Dotini
 

Latest Posts

Back