Space In General

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

This strange "cloud" puzzled people in several western states last night. Is it rocket fuel? Yes it is.

http://www.fox5ny.com/news/odd-cloud-seen-to-the-west-of-phoenix-yuma

Heard about this from friends back home in Yuma. Didn't really see much reason for concern. Could have been military testing.

 

[Dotini]

Technology for protection against Galactic Cosmic Rays is in its infancy, but will be required for successful long space missions.

An optimal shielding configuration has been realized during a phase I NASA NIACstudy, and it is referred to as a Magnetospheric Dipolar Torus (MDT).A This configuration has the singular ability to deflect the vast majority of the GCR including HZE ions.

 

[Carbon_6]

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Technology for protection against Galactic Cosmic Rays is in its infancy, but will be required for successful long space missions.

An optimal shielding configuration has been realized during a phase I NASA NIACstudy, and it is referred to as a Magnetospheric Dipolar Torus (MDT).A This configuration has the singular ability to deflect the vast majority of the GCR including HZE ions.

I'm learning magnetism in my physics class and I actually sort of understand what's happening in the picture.

 

[CodeRedR51]

 

[Dotini]

Amazing flowing river of charged particles. Click to see.
From today's edition of spaceweather.com

RARE VIDEOS OF STEVE: On April 10th, a G1-class geomagnetic storm was brewing over Canada as a stream of solar wind buffeted Earth's magnetic field. Matthew Wheeler of Robson Valley, British Columbia, stepped outside to see what was up--and STEVE appeared. "My dog barked at it for the entire hour it was visible," says Wheeler. "It was flowing like a river at astonishing speed." Click to play his must-see video:

STEVE may look like an aurora, but it is not. For one thing, it is soft purple, not green like typical auroras. And it has its own special form--tightly collimated into a narrow ribbon that can bisect the entire sky.

Researchers are only beginning to understand the phenomenon--aided by a chance encounter between STEVE and a European satellite a few years ago. In situ measurements revealed that STEVE is a hot (3000 degrees C) ribbon of ionized gas slicing through Earth's upper atmosphere some 300 km above the ground. It appears unpredictably during some, but not all, geomagnetic storms.

Another video--"my best yet," says Wheeler--shows the beautiful interaction between the soft-purple ribbon and nearby green "picket fence" auroras:



"The purple ribbon was moving much faster than the green pickets," says Wheeler. "And while their forms varied from smooth to ragged and back again, their path across the sky was almost constant for the whole hour--as it has since I first noticed STEVE over this valley in the 1980s."

Does STEVE really make dogs bark? "Mine does," says Wheeler. "In addition to barking at STEVE, my giant Akbash astronomy dog, Patch, has barked at the space station since he was a pup, and proudly seen it off the farm every time. He is also a valuable spotter of meteor showers. When I hear him barking upwards, it is time to go outside."

 

[JohnBM01]

This is my debut to space discussion.

Any of you who know me know that stars and space have fascinated me for the longest and inspire a lot of my creative works. I remember as a kid back in 1994 when I saw many more stars in the sky at a camp than I would usually see under city lights. Space has always fascinated me for as long as I can remember. It is why I have been intrigued seeing various space projects as well as many different space shuttle launches. Things like seeing galaxies, nebulae, and auroras are also fascinating to me. Even phenomena like solar storms have their appeal. I mean... this is a crazy universe we live in!

Either earlier this month or last month, I saw some of those live streams of Tesla putting one of their cars into space. As fake as it may look, I actually believe it is 100% real seeing that astronaut drive a Tesla into space.

 

[Dotini]

Spaceweather.com has warned us several times recently that potentially harmful radiation from space is having increasing affect on us due to shrinking magnetic fields around Earth, our Sun and our solar system. The following information is from a private researcher, so should not be taken as gospel, but I believe it is worth considering.

Laura Wells Research, News, And Astronomy
Published on Mar 22, 2018

UV A/B/C - Ultraviolet A/B/C UVC is the most dangerous type of UV Radiation. the ozone layer is SUPPOSED to protect us from damaging uv radiation And UVC Is not supposed to reach ground level. However, UVC is being read at ground level a lot lately. And UV A/B are coming in massive amounts more than normal and more than usual. Some areas were/is even seeing over 13 on UV maps!! The UV scale goes from 1 - 11 .. They had to add more numbers . Remember that this has an impact on DNA and can damage molecules, kind of like I talked about a couple years ago in that big post about “5 waves of energy” and what it does to the DNA and Molecules .. it’s not even summer yet and UVC is being read at ground level here where I live in Oklahoma. It will continue to get worse and you will see it more wide spread and in bigger numbers. This could also be the cause of your sudden oncoming heart problems and migraines/Headaches along with Geomagnetic activity and huge abnormal spikes in the Schumann resonance (Earths heartbeat-electromagnetic field spectrum frequency of planet earth) hps.org states “energy UV radiation associated with the UVC category is very strongly absorbed by most organic materials. The strong absorption by organic molecules, including DNA, leads to severe damage to the molecule and to the organism's reproductive processes, leading to the death of the microbes. The UVC radiation is sufficiently energetic that individual photons may produce chemical bond breakage and ionization of some atoms and molecules” UV info The three types of UV radiation are classified according to their wavelength. They differ in their biological activity. The shorter the wavelength, the more harmful the UV radiation. (UVC is shortest) World Health Org - “Short-wavelength UVC is the most damaging type of UV radiation. However, it is completely filtered by the atmosphere and does not reach the earth's surface.” but wait it is .. and more and more in larger areas Here is a link (1.) to check local numbers for your area, and here is a link (2.) On what the scale and numbers mean Remember to keep none toxic sun screen on hand 1. https://www.epa.gov/sunsafety/uv-index-1 2. https://www.epa.gov/sunsafety/uv-inde... UV Index scale A UV Index reading of 0 to 2 means low danger from the sun's UV rays for the average person. A UV Index reading of 3 to 5 means moderate risk of harm from unprotected sun exposure. A UV Index reading of 6 to 7 means high risk of harm from unprotected sun exposure. Protection against skin and eye damage is needed. A UV Index reading of 8 to 10 means very high risk of harm from unprotected sun exposure. Take extra precautions because unprotected skin and eyes will be damaged and can burn quickly. A UV Index reading of 11 or more means extreme risk of harm from unprotected sun exposure. Take all precautions because unprotected skin and eyes can burn in minutes. Remember it is now reaching over 13 in some areas

 

[CodeRedR51]

Made a trip to LA this past weekend. Among the stops were the California Science Center for the Endeavour exhibit, then a trip to the SpaceX headquarters immediately after for a look at the Falcon 9 standing out front. Hoping to go back in a couple weeks for the Falcon 9 launch on the 19th.

I've seen a Space Shuttle on display before at Kennedy Space Center, but it never gets old. The best part is that this is just a temporary display. They are planning on constructing a completely new building and standing the shuttle into launch configuration with a tank and boosters (there is a tank currently on display there as well). Can't wait to see that.

 

[CodeRedR51]

SpaceX had a successful launch today putting the first satellite for Bangladesh into geostationary orbit. The most significant part of the launch was that this was the first flight for the newly revised Falcon 9 configuration (Block 5). Launch and landing went off without a hitch. 👍

 

[ProjectWHaT]

It's an amazing time to be alive. Who says we're born too early to explore space

 

[Danoff]

It's an amazing time to be alive. Who says we're born too early to explore space

...because of a geostationary communications satellite for Bangladesh? Here's a list of active missions:

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/?type=current

...Juno (which is set to end soon) being a particularly exciting entry.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

..because of a geostationary communications satellite for Bangladesh?

I meant SpaceX being able to reliably land their launchers for re-use shows how much we've come in space tech and will allow us to explore space

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I meant SpaceX being able to reliably land their launchers for re-use shows how much we've come in space tech and will allow us to explore space

I don't see how that will allow us to explore space. Also while it's cool they are able to do the reusable launcher it's not as if it isn't something that wasn't attempted before and couldn't have been solved if it was given the time. That's not to say Space X isn't doing good work, they are, but their actual rockets and prices that they are made available for are far more amazing.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

I don't see how that will allow us to explore space. Also while it's cool they are able to do the reusable launcher it's not as if it isn't something that wasn't attempted before and couldn't have been solved if it was given the time.

I don't see how it doesn't allow us to explore space. If they're able to re-use launchers, then less money would be needed to actually build new launchers every single time which allows for more missions and experiments

 

[CodeRedR51]

That's not to say Space X isn't doing good work, they are, but their actual rockets and prices that they are made available for are far more amazing.

Hence the reason for landing the boosters = re-usability = cost savings. Bangladesh satellite aside, this was the first launch for the updated Falcon 9 (Block 5) that has numerous updates allowing each booster to be re-used up to 10 times. Their goal is to be able to recover the booster, attach a new payload and re-launch with as little downtime as possible. They could feasibly launch the same rocket within 24 hours if they wanted. Guess what that does? Saves money. They will have more launches this year than any other company. Guess that says something.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Hence the reason for landing the boosters = re-usability = cost savings. Bangladesh satellite aside, this was the first launch for the updated Falcon 9 (Block 5) that has numerous updates allowing each booster to be re-used up to 10 times. Their goal is to be able to recover the booster, attach a new payload and re-launch with as little downtime as possible. They could feasibly launch the same rocket within 24 hours if they wanted. Guess what that does? Saves money. They will have more launches this year than any other company. Guess that says something.

Obviously, I rather not argue with you on it since you're judgement is a bit compromised which is seemingly why you don't get my point.

You're telling a guy that actually is in this industry the reason money is saved...I'm willing to bet I know the better. And even if I wasn't it's not all that hard to understand. For some reason you took my comment as an insult to Space X when in reality you just quoted me praising them. If it was as simple as just reusing a rocket stage and packing it full of fuel after quick debrief and reset, everyone would do it for sure. There is more to it.

I don't see how it doesn't allow us to explore space. If they're able to re-use launchers, then less money would be needed to actually build new launchers every single time which allows for more missions and experiments

Okay? And before Space X rockets weren't getting put up in space all too often I suppose...

Which in fact isn't true. The main operators before Space X still operate the same way as far as space missions go when they get elected over Space X. Cost doesn't change when Space X potentially loses a reusable. General design practices overall seem to dictate why the Space X route is cheaper beyond just the reusable first stage.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Official photos from last week's launch are up. https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex

This one is my favorite:

Bangabandhu Satellite-1 Mission by Official SpaceX Photos, on Flickr

 

[Joey D]

This is pretty cool: https://arstechnica.com/science/201...eo-spacecraft-flew-through-a-plume-on-europa/

Scientists think they've found evidence of water plumes shooting up from Europa. It's pretty intriguing too since helps the case that life might actually be on that moon.

 

[Danoff]

I don't see how it doesn't allow us to explore space. If they're able to re-use launchers, then less money would be needed to actually build new launchers every single time which allows for more missions and experiments

Yup, it's true that driving down costs means better access to space. The jury is still out on whether Space X will actually do that in a way that's sustainable. I'm excited about them too, but they're not really impacting exploration yet.

The good news is, it is an exciting time to be alive in terms of space exploration.

 

[TheCracker]

I was watching a TV show earlier in the week about a group of British scientists who had moved to California in the early sixties when the US was desperate for astronomers for help with 'the space race'. Some had stayed out there and others moved back to the UK but had remained friends and were now meeting up back in the US to celebrate their 50th anniversary and to take a road trip to retrace their steps on some outdoorsy adventures they'd taken at the time (hikes up to remote observatories etc). They spent a lot of time travelling around in a hired SUV so there was a lot of reminiscing and general banter going on. One of the professors mentioned that he personally thought that too much time and effort was put into putting man into space and especially on the moon and that had those resources been channelled into developing automated exploration robots/machines then he thought we would be much more advanced with space exploration by now. It got me thinking that maybe he was right.

I know it wouldn't have captured the public's imagination in the same way and by default the nations purse-strings may not have been as lose as they were. Had there been a greater loss of life earlier on that had turned the public's view on it the other way, or had Russia not been all that bothered by space exploration, maybe we'd have sent more and more advanced probes to planets and moons by now and even discovered basic life in our solar system?

 

[wfooshee]

Meaningful unmanned exploration, beyond "Let's send a camera out there and see what it shows," requires a sophisticated level of autonomy. That's fairly hard to achieve when your computing power requires acres of floor space, as opposed to a belt clip or a wrist strap. Missions like Surveyor were not autonomous at all, They went, they landed, and ground control told the equipment, "do this, do that."

So, then, you advance your computing power faster! Well, they did! If you didn't live through it, you have NO IDEA how rapidly electronics developed during the 60s. I've owned a car that had tubes in its radio! In the home, a table-top AM radio that didn't need thirty seconds of warm-up time before it would play was a Big Deal, and that radio still had to be plugged in to the wall outlet. Then handheld, battery powered radios??! STOP! It'll never get any better than that!

Almost ALL of the computing power for space travel, manned or unmanned, was on the ground, in big refrigerated rooms with a lot of kilowatts available. Onboard computers did nothing as far as actual computing, they controlled the timing of things, based on numbers keyed into them by the astronauts, and those numbers were read to them by ground controller from printouts that came off of the ground computers. With those numbers, the onboard computer could fire a thruster at the right time for the right duration, but actually figuring those numbers out was way beyond what the onboard "computers" could do! For an unmanned mission, those numbers were transmitted in a data stream, usually at an incredibly low rate. You want Surveyor to point the camera north and take a picture? It'll be ready to do that day after tomorrow...

Another thing about autonomy is that you have to know what to expect. We have cars that can literally drive themselves. Put your destination in the GPS, and the car will get you there, using lanes, exits, on ramps, and routes, as appropriate, and dealing with traffic, red lights, weather, whatever. Put that same computer on an airplane or a boat, though, and someone's gonna die. The autonomy has no idea now what to expect. Its conditions for decision-making don't exist any more. So there's more to it than electronics measured in fraction of microns, it's anticipation of the needs for the decision trees. When you're going someplace that you have no experience with, it's not quite possible to build a useful decision tree into the autonomy.

 

[Danoff]

When you're going someplace that you have no experience with, it's not quite possible to build a useful decision tree into the autonomy.

However, software development and uploads (firmware updates basically) are very much a thing in space missions. You'd be astounded at what a few engineers on the ground do with a couple of years to tweak their routines. They make some sophisticated changes, en route and even in orbit at the target.

 

[Dotini]

New evidence that mega-object "Planet Nine", exists well beyond the orbit of Pluto.

Lucy Reading-Ikkanda/Quanta Magazine

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2018/05/evidence-of-planet-nine-found-in-mysterious-deep-space-object/
https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-worlds-extraordinary-orbit-points-to-planet-nine-20180515/

 

[PeterJB]

I'm still not convinced it's there. If it's meant to be a similar size to Uranus or Neptune we would have found it by now, considering that we find objects in that region that are microscopic by comparison, and that is such an obscene distance that I cannot see how it has any gravitational effect on any other known bodies without it being the size of a small star.

 

[Danoff]

I'm still not convinced it's there. If it's meant to be a similar size to Uranus or Neptune we would have found it by now, considering that we find objects in that region that are microscopic by comparison, and that is such an obscene distance that I cannot see how it has any gravitational effect on any other known bodies without it being the size of a small star.

Our ability to detect gravitational effects on objects we know about is pretty good. Like... really good. Good enough to notice when something tiny is out of place. It doesn't seem crazy to me that there could be a large undiscovered object that has a highly irregular orbit far from the sun. Such an object would not be particularly easy to find, especially when it's far out in its orbit, which may have been the entire time humans were looking at the sky.

...on the other hand! It could be some other modeling error.

 

[Dennisch]

Didn't they find a whole bunch of Kuyperbelt objects who are on the same~ish elliptical orbit, making it highly likely for a larger object which causes those orbits?

I'm pretty sure they were talking about this in the latest season of How the Universe works.

 

[PeterJB]

I just think that at that distance it would need to be larger than a medium-sized gas giant.

 

[Danoff]

I just think that at that distance it would need to be larger than a medium-sized gas giant.

If they put the mass at 10x earth's mass, that's smaller than any of the gas giants. 10x smaller than Saturn (which is not particularly dense). Half the mass of neptune. It would only significantly perturb any of the other objects in the solar system when it close to the sun in its orbit, which would happen very infrequently with such an orbit.

If it does exist, formation poses a bit of a problem. My guess is that they would theorize that it did not originate in this solar system but was picked up along the way.

 

[eran0004]

I'm still not convinced it's there. If it's meant to be a similar size to Uranus or Neptune we would have found it by now, considering that we find objects in that region that are microscopic by comparison, and that is such an obscene distance that I cannot see how it has any gravitational effect on any other known bodies without it being the size of a small star.

The sky is big though. Finding some random objects in space is easy, but finding a specific object is hard unless you know exactly where to look for it. Neptune (although 170 years ago) was discovered by first predicting where it should be and then searching for the planet in that area.