Author: rolcott

Born and raised in Chicago, schooled in WI and NJ and WI (again), one-time Chem professor, one-time Massage Therapist, one-time mainframe Performance Analyst, one-time husband of Val, two-time Daddy and two-time Grampa, long-time enthusiast of Science and careful thinking.

A Pencil In Space

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Mathematics: Spherical Harmonics, Physics: Newton and Gravity, UncategorizedLeave a comment

<chirp, chirp> “Moire here.”

“I have a question I think you’ll find interesting, but it’s best we talk in person. Care for pizza?”

“If you’re buying.”

“Of course. Meet me at Eddie’s, twenty minutes. Bring Old Reliable.”

“Of course.”

Tall fellow, trimmed chevron mustache, erect bearing except when he’s leaning on that cane. “Moire?”

“That’s me. Good to meet you, Mr … ?”

“No names. Call me … Walt.”

We order, find a table away from the kitchen. “So, Walt, what’s this interesting question?”

“Been following this year’s Jupiter series in your blog. Read over the Kaspi paper, too, though most of that was over my head. What I did get was that his conclusions and your conclusions all come from measuring very small orbit shifts which arise from millionths of a g of force. Thing is, I don’t see where any of you take account of the Sun’s gravity. If the Sun’s pull holds Jupiter in orbit, it ought to swamp those micro-g effects. Apparently it doesn’t. Why not?”

“Well. That’s one of those simple questions that entail a complicated answer.”

“I’ve got time.”

“I’ll start with a pedantic quibble but it’ll clarify matters later on. You refer to g as force but it’s really acceleration. The one‑g acceleration at Earth’s surface means velocity changes by 980 meters/second per second of free fall. Drop a one kilogram mass, it’ll accelerate that fast. Drop a 100 kilogram mass, it’ll experience exactly the same acceleration, follow?”

“But the second mass feels 100 times the force.”

“True, but we can’t measure forces, only movement changes. Goes all the way back to Newton defining mass in terms of force and vice‑versa. Anyway, when you’re talking micro‑g orbit glitches you’re talking tiny changes in acceleration. Next step — we need the strength of the Sun’s gravitational field in Jupiter’s neighborhood.”

“Depends on the Sun’s mass and Jupiter’s mass. No, wait, just the Sun’s mass because that’s how it curves spacetime. The force depends on both masses.”

I’m impressed. “And the square of the very large distance between them.” <tapping on Old Reliable’s screen> “Says here the Sun’s field strength out there is 224 nano‑g, which is pretty small.”

“How’s that compare to what else is acting on Juno?”

<more tapping> “Jupiter’s local field strength crushes the Sun’s. At Juno’s farthest point it’s 197 micro‑g but at Juno’s closest point the field’s 22.7 million micro‑g and the craft’s doing 41 km/s during a 30-minute pass. Yeah, the Sun’s field would make small adjustments to Juno’s orbital speed, depending on where everybody is, but it’d be a very slow fluctuation and not the rapid shakes NASA measured.”

“How about side‑to‑side?”

“Good point, but now we’re getting to the structure of Juno’s orbit. Its eccentricity is 98%, a long way from circular. Picture a skinny oval pencil 8 million kilometers long, always pointed at Jupiter while going around it. It’s a polar orbit, rises above Jupiter on the approach, then falls below going away. The Sun’s effect is greatest when the orbit’s at right angles to the Sun‑Jupiter line. The solar field twists the oval away from N‑S on approach, trues it back up on retreat. That changes the angle at which Juno crosses Jupiter’s gravitational wobbles but won’t affect how it experiences the zonal harmonics.”

“Tell me about those zonal things.”

“A zone is a region, like the stripes on Jupiter, that circles a sphere at constant latitude. Technically, zonal harmonic Jn is the nth Legendre polynomial in cos(θ)—”

“Too technical.”

“Gotcha. Okay, each Jn names a shape, a set of gravitational ripples perpendicular to the polar axis. J0‘s a sphere with no ripples. Jupiter’s average field looks like that. A bigger n number means more ripples. Kaspi’s values estimate how much each Jn‘s intensity adds to or subtracts from J0‘s strength at each latitude. The Sun’s field can modify the intensity of J0 but none of the others.”

Walt grabs his cane, stands, drops a C‑note on the table. “This’ll cover the pizza and your time. Forget we had this conversation.” And he’s gone.

“Don’t mention it.”

~~ Rich Olcott

  • Thanks to Will, who asked the question.

Screaming Out Of Space

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Mathematics: Spherical Harmonics, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Cal (formerly known as Al) comes over to our table in his coffee shop. “Lessee if I got this right. Cathleen is smug twice. First time because the new results from Juno‘s data say her hunch is right that Jupiter’s atmosphere moves like cylinders inside each other. Nearly cylinders, anyhow. Second smug because Sy used the Juno data to draw a math picture he says shows the Great Red Spot but I’m lookin’ at it and I don’t see how your wiggle‑waggles show a Spot. That’s a weird map, so why’re you smug about it, Cathleen?”

“The map’s weird because it’s abstract and way different from the maps you’re used to. It’s also weird because of how the data was collected. Sy, you tell him about the arcs.”

“Okay. Umm… Cal, the maps you’re familiar with are two‑dimensional. City maps show you north‑south and east‑west, that’s one dimension for each direction pair. Maps for bigger‑scale territories use latitude for north‑south and longitude for east‑west but the principle’s the same. The Kaspi group’s calculations from Juno‘s orbit data give us a recipe for only a one‑dimensional map. They show how Jupiter’s gravity varies by latitude, nothing about longitude. We could plot that as a rectangle, latitude along the x‑axis, relative strength along the y‑axis. I thought I’d learn more by wrapping the x‑axis around the planet so we could look for correlations with Jupiter’s geography. I found something and that’s why Cathleen’s smug. Me, too.”

“Why latitude but nothing about longitude?”

“Because of the way Juno‘s orbit works. The spacecraft’s not hovering over the planet or even circling it like the ISS circles Earth. NASA wanted to minimize Juno‘s exposure to Jupiter’s intense magnetic and radiation fields. The craft spends most of its 53‑day orbit at extreme distance, up to millions of kilometers out. When it approaches, it screams in at about 41 kilometers per second, that’s 91 700 mph, on a mostly north‑to‑south vector so it sees all latitudes from a few thousand kilometers above the cloud‑tops. Close approach lasts only about three hours, for the whole planet, and then the thing is on its way out again. During that three hours, the planet rotates about 120° underneath Juno so we don’t have a straight vertical N‑S pass down the planet’s face. Gathering useful longitude data’s going to take a lot more orbits.”

“So you’re sayin’ Juno felt gravity glitches at all different angles going pole to pole, but only some of the angles going round and round.”

“Exactly.”

“So now explain the wiggle‑waggles.”

“They represent parts‑per‑million variations in the field pulling Juno towards Jupiter at each latitude. Where the craft is over a more massive region it’s pulled a bit inwards and Sy’s map shows that as a green bump. Over a lighter region Juno‘s free to move outward a little and the map shows a pink dip. Kaspi and company interpret the heaviness just north of the equator to be a dense inward flow of gas all around the planet. Maybe it is. Sy and I think the pink droplet south of the equator could reflect the Great Red Spot lowering the average mass at its latitude. Maybe it is. As always, we need more data, okay? Now I’ve got questions for you, Sy.”

“Shoot.”

“You built your map by multiplying each Jn‑shape by its Kaspi gravitational intensity then adding the multiplied shapes together. But you only used Jn‑shapes with integer names. Is there a J½?”

“Some mathematicians play with fractional J‑thingies but I’ve not followed that topic.”

“Understandable. Next question — the J‘s look so much like sine waves. Why not just use sine‑shapes?”

“I used Jn‑shapes because that’s how Kaspi’s group stated their results. They had no choice in the matter. Jn‑shapes naturally appear in spherical system math. The nice thing about Jn‑shapes is that n provides a sort of wavelength scale. For instance, J35 divides Jupiter’s pole‑to‑pole arc into 36 segments each as wide as Earth’s diameter. Here’s a plot of intensity against n.”

Adapted from Kaspi, Figure 2a

“Left to right, red light to blue.”

“Exactly.”

~ Rich Olcott

Zoning Out over Jupiter

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Mathematics: Spherical Harmonics, Physics: Waves, UncategorizedLeave a comment

I’m nursing my usual mug of eye‑opener in Cal’s Coffee Shop when astronomer Cathleen and chemist Susan chatter in. “Morning, ladies. Cathleen, prepare to be even more smug.”

“Ooo, what should I be smug about?”

“Your Jupiter suggestion. Grab some coffee and a couple of chairs.” <screen‑tapping on Old Reliable> “Ready? First step — purple and violet. You’ll never see violet or purple light coming from a standard video screen.”

“He’s going spectrum‑y on us, right, Cathleen?”

“More like anti‑spectrum‑y, Susan. Purple light doesn’t exist in the spectrum. We only perceive that color when we see red mixed with blue like that second band on Sy’s display. Violet light is a thing in nature, we can see it in flowers and dyes and rainbows beyond blue. Standard screens can’t show violet because their LEDs just emit red, blue and green wavelengths. Old Reliable uses mixtures of those three to fake all its colors. Where are you going with this, Sy?””

“Deeper into Physics. Cast your eyes upon the squiggles to the right. The one in the middle represents the lightwave coming from purple‑in‑the‑middle. The waveform’s jaggedy, but if you compare peaks and troughs you can see its shape is the sum of the red and blue shapes. I scaled the graphs up from 700 nanometers for red and 450 for blue.”

“Straightforward spectroscopy, Sy, Fourier analysis of a complicated linear waveform. Some astronomers make their living using that principle. So do audio engineers and lots of other people.”

“Patience, Cathleen, I’m going beyond linear. Fourier’s work applies to variation along a line. Legendre and Poisson extended the analysis to—”

“Aah, spherical harmonics! I remember them from Physical Chemistry class. They’re what gives shapes to atoms. They’ve got electron shells arranged around the nucleus. Electron charge stays as close to the nucleus as quantum will let it. Atoms absorb light energy by moving charge away from there. If the atom’s in a magnetic field or near other atoms that gives it a z-axis direction then the shells split into wavey lumps going to the poles and different directions and that’s your p-, d– and f-orbitals. Bigger shells have more room and they make weird forms but only the transition metals care about that.”

The angular portion of the lowest-energy spherical harmonics
Credit: Inigo.quilez, under CCA SA 3.0 license
Adapted from Wieczorek and Meschede under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

“Considering you left out all the math, Susan, that’s a reasonable summary. I prefer to think of spherical harmonics as combinations of wave shapes at right angles. Imagine a spherical blob of water floating in space. If you tap it on top, waves ripple down to the bottom and back up again and maybe back down again. Those are zonal waves. A zonal harmonic averages over all E‑W longitudes at each N‑S latitude. Or you could stroke the blob on the side and set up a sectorial wave pattern that averages latitudes.”

“How about center‑out radial waves?”

“Susan’s shells do that job. My point was going to be that what sine waves do for characterizing linear things like sound and light, spherical harmonics do for central‑force systems. We describe charge in atoms, yes, but also sound coming from an explosion, heat circulating in a star, gravity shaping a planet. Specifically, Jupiter. Kaspi’s paper you gave me, Cathleen, I read it all the way to the Results table at the tail end. That was the rabbit‑hole.”

“Oh? What’s in the table?”

“Jupiter’s zonal harmonics — J‑names in the first column, J‑intensities in the second. Jn‘s shape resembles a sine wave and has n zeroes. Jupiter’s never‑zero central field is J0. Jn increases or decreases J0‘s strength wherever it’s non‑zero. For Jupiter that’s mostly by parts per million. What’s cool is the pattern you see when you total the dominating Jeven contributions.”

Data from Kaspi, et al.

Cathleen’s squinting in thought. “Hmm… green zone A would be excess gravity from Jupiter’s equatorial bulge. B‘s excess is right where Kaspi proposed the heavy downflow. Ah‑HAH! C‘s pink deficit zone’s right on top of the Great Red Spot’s buoyant updraft. Perfect! Okay, I’m smug.”

~ Rich Olcott

Revising The Model

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Uncategorized4 Comments

Cathleen’s perched at a table in Cal’s Coffee Shop, sipping a latte and looking smug. “Hi, Sy.”

“Hi, yourself. Did somebody you don’t like get a well‑deserved comeuppance?”

“Nothing that juicy. Just an old hunch that’s gotten some strong new supporting evidence. I love it when that happens.”

“So what’s the hunch and what’s the evidence?”

“You’ve already heard the hunch.” <dialing up an image on her phone> “Remember this sketch?”

“Hmmm, yeah, you and Vinnie were debating Jupiter’s atmosphere. Its massive airflows could self‑organize as an oniony nest of concentric spherical shells, or maybe concentric cylinders like that picture on your phone. Later on Vinnie thought up a more dynamic option — cylindrical shells encasing sets of smaller tornados like roller bearings. You shot that one down, right?”

“Mostly. I did admit something like that might work at the poles. Anyway, I’ve liked the concentric cylinders model for quite a while. This paper I just read says I’m almost but not quite right. Kaspi and company’s data says the cylinders are cone sections, not cylinders, and they’re not north‑south symmetrical.” <dialing up another image> “It’s like this except I’ve exaggerated the angles.”

“Doesn’t look all that different to me. Congratulations on the near‑win. What’s the new model based on? Did Juno drop another probe into the atmosphere?”

“Nope. Remote sensing, down as far as 3000 kilometers.”

“I thought Jupiter’s cloud decks blocked infrared.”

“Another nope. Not infrared sensing, gravity.”

“Didn’t know Juno carried a gravimeter.”

“It doesn’t, that’d be way too heavy and complex. Juno itself was the remote sensor. Whenever NASA’s Deep Space Network captured a data transmission from Juno, they also recorded the incoming radio signal’s precise frequency. Juno‘s sending frequency is a known quantity. Red‑shifts and blue‑shifts as received told us Juno‘s then‑current velocity relative to Earth. The shifts are in the parts‑per‑million range, tiny, but each speed‑up or slow‑down carries information about Jupiter’s gravitational field at that point in Juno‘s orbit. Given velocity data for enough points along enough orbits, you can build a gravity atlas. This paper reports what the researchers got from orbits 1 through 37.”

“Cute idea. They’ve built the atlas, I suppose, but what can gravity say about your wind cylinders?”

“Winds in Jupiter’s atmosphere are driven by heat rising from the core. Put a balloon 3000 kilometers down. Heated air inside the balloon expands. That has two effects. One, the balloon is less dense than its surroundings so it rises. Two, the work of expanding against outside pressure drains thermal energy and cools the balloon’s air molecules. The process continues until the balloon gets up to where its temperature and pressure match what’s outside, right?”

“Which is probably going to be well above 3000 kilometers. Hmm… if you’ve got lots of balloons doing that, as they fly upward they leave a vacuum sort of. Excess balloons up top will be pulled downward to fill the void.”

“Now organize all those balloons in a couple of columns, one going up and one down. Will they have equal mass?”

“Interesting. No, they won’t. The rising column rises because it’s less dense than its surroundings and the falling column falls because it’s more dense. More mass per unit volume in the falling column so that’s heavier.”

“Eighteenth Century Physics. Planetary rotation forces columns of each kind to merge into a nest of separate cones. Rising‑column warm cones support Jupiter’s white ammonia‑ice zones. Falling‑column cool cones disclose red‑brown belts. The gravity field is stronger above the dense falling regions, weaker over the light rising ones. Juno responded to gravity’s wobbles; the researchers built their models to fit Juno‘s wobbles. The best models aren’t quite concentric cylinders, because the cones tilt poleward. This graphic tells the story. The rectangle shows a 3000‑kilometer vertical section. The between-shell boundaries are effective — the paper specifically says that mass transport inward from the outermost shell is insignificant.”

Adapted from NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSI/SWRI/MSSS/ASI/ INAF/JIRAM/Björn Jónsson
CC BY 3.0

“You said the data’s asymmetric?”

“Yep. The strongest part of the gravitational signal came from flow angling down and equator‑ward, 21°N to 13°N.”

“Why’s that?”

“Maybe the Great Red Spot down south drives everything northward. We don’t know.”

~ Rich Olcott

Mea Culpa, Sorta

On By rolcottIn General: Fun StuffLeave a comment

<breaking through the fourth wall> I, the author of this blog, stand before you both proud and abashed. There may be a word for that combination, just as “pareidolia” is the word for our tendency to see faces in inanimate objects.

Credit: NASA

This particular episode of “proud but abashed” began with an attack of pareidolia when I saw this Perseverence photo (→) that NASA retrieved from Mars.

Look closely at the large rock just to the right of center. See those two closed smiley eyes above chubby cheeks that look like they’re mashed into a pillow? I did, too, and now I can’t unsee them. Not to mention the belly button closer to us but that’s another story. Naturally, the mental image reminded me of the “rock monster” CGI effect (see photo below but it’s better in animation) in the Galaxy Quest movie (a knowing and funny parody of Star Trek; watch it if you haven’t already seen it and besides, Missy Pyle was adorable as Laliari).

Just a little later I saw yet another of those click‑bait “They don’t want you to see…” memes. That completed the circuit for a conceptual spark. As often happens, mischief ensued. It took just a few minutes of work with my digital graphics toolkit to produce this cartoon that I meant to be satirical —

I posted it in a few places. What was interesting was what happened next.

First and best, of course, was that a lot of folks recognized it as a joke. Many flagged it with a Like or HaHa and I’m sure many more just smiled (or not) and scrolled on and that’s okay.

One person wrote (I think he was kidding) “Bird poop.” There were several mentions (I think they were kidding) of “Men In Black” and “Pokémon.”

Then there are the people who took the altered image as faithful reportage and looked for explanations — “it’s a chance reflection off the robot’s metal skin” or “the Sun must have moved and illuminated an area that had been shadowed.” One responder expressed surprise and indignation that NASA would allow distribution (though the cartoon’s header says they hadn’t) of material that could incite panic. They were quite earnest about that.

It’s not the first time I’ve posted a graphic that didn’t get the reception I’d expected. There’s this pie chart (→) that compares readings for the same temperature according to different scales. (Rankine is Fahrenheit-sized degrees counting up from absolute zero. Rømer‘s, the first transferrable temperature scale, ran from zero at the freezing point of brine, up to 60 at the boiling point of water. No-one uses it any more.)

Yeah, I know the chart makes no sense, which is why I thought it was funny. I was sharply criticized for abusing the software. The carpers would start with something like, “A pie chart is supposed to demonstrate the relationship between the whole and a portion of it,” and go on from there. They were quite earnest about that.

Hey, numbers are abstractions. Why have them if we can’t chart them any way we feel like?

Other people assert numeric freedom, so I’m not alone in this. Someone in New Cuyama, California got creative and put up this sign (→). The arithmetic is good, I checked, but I wish they’d used a monospace font to put the numbers in proper columns. Anyway, the sign’s layout naturally led me to create the pie chart you see beneath it.

So — proud to have given some people a smile, but also abashed. Oh, well.

~~ Rich Olcott

Map-ematics

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, General: Fun Stuff, Uncategorized1 Comment

Big Vinnie lumbers into my office, a grin on his face and a sheaf of papers in his hand. “Sy, you gotta see these, you’ll love ’em.”

Vinnie and I go way back, so I string him along a little. “New clients, I suppose? Wealthy ones, with interesting problems?”

“Nah, just goofiness. Me and Larry, don’t think you’ve met him yet, were having pizza in Eddie’s place. Larry’d brought his laptop and we got to playing with some map software he just bought. You ever hear of a GIS?”

“Geographic Information Systems? Sure, they go back a century and a half to the guy who mapped cholera cases in London and traced the source back to a contaminated water pump. You use a GIS to produce mapped visualizations of useful geographically‑distributed statistics.”

“Yeah, that, except we weren’t going for anything useful. Here’s the first one we did. We had a list of states alphabetical‑like. There’s whole blocks that start with the same letter, like eight that start with ‘M.’ We told the mapper to put a different color on any three or more that share a letter. Silly, huh?”

“Mm-hm. I don’t see any pattern to it.”

“Right. We didn’t, either, so we went on to build a second map where each state’s colored by the date it entered the Union. We tried a bunch of different color schemes, finally settled on this one.”

“Nice. You can almost see the country growing year‑to‑year. … Ah, Hawai’i’s in there, too, tucked away in the southwest corner. It’s color’s so pale you have to look for it. West Virginia — let me guess, right around 1860 or so, right?”

“1863. Those folks rebelled against the Southern rebellion. Anyway, Jeremy was kinda looking over our shoulder and this map lit a fire for him. You know he’s doing an Indigenous History project with Professor Begaye. He ran off and brought back a list of where each state’s name came from. We coded that up, fed it to the program and this came out.”

“Wow. The Europeans pretty much claimed the coasts but look at all the green. It’s like the states acknowledged they were built on Native land. Indiana comes right out and admits it.”

“Yup. Jeremy said it was pretty poor compensation. I understand how he feels.”

“So, did you map anything more than the USA?”

“Of course. Larry wanted more silly so we went with the number of letters in each country’s name.”

“I don’t understand this one. Peru’s green for its short name, naturally, and so are Chad and Cuba, but why are Iran and Iraq different colors? Russia’s name isn’t longer than Saudi Arabia and Madagascar. How can five‑letter Congo be purple for a really long name? Doesn’t make sense.”

“Our name list came from the International Standards Organization. Larry and me, we’re both international charter pilots. We’re often checking ISO files for radio frequencies, airport codes and the like. According to ISO, Iraq is ‘IRAQ‘, but Iran is ‘IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF).’ Russia is ‘RUSSIAN FEDERATION‘ which is longer than the other two. The USA would be redder if it was ‘UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,’ but it’s ‘UNITED STATES‘ and tied with ‘LIECHTENSTEIN‘ and ‘GUINEA‑BISSAU‘ at 13 characters so it’s brown.”

“And Congo?”

“The ISO name is ‘CONGO, THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE.’ That’s not even the longest. It’s beat by ‘KOREA, DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF‘ and ‘MACEDONIA, THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF.’ Politics, I suppose, and maybe ego. But I ain’t showed you the coolest map.”

“I’m all eyes.”

“You’ve read Andy Weir’s book, ‘The Martian‘?”

“Of course. Saw the movie, too. It was a nice change watching a drama that didn’t involve people battling each other physically or emotionally.”

“Uh. Yeah. I just saw it as an adventure story. Whatever. You remember Watney’s epic drive across that red desert to recover parts from the Pathfinder lander and then get to the launch vehicle?”

“Mm‑hm, though I don’t remember the geography.”

“Well, here’s his road map — Aries Base in Acidalia Planitia to Pathfinder in Chryse Planitia to take‑off from Schiaparelli Crater. Cool, huh?”

“Quite cool.”

Mars image credit: EMM/EXI/Dimitra Atri/NYU Abu Dhabi Center for Space Science

~~ Rich Olcott

A Disk of Heat And Violence

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Chemistry, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Susan suddenly sits bolt upright. “WOW! Kareem, that Chicxulub meteor that killed off the dinosaurs — paleontologists found iridium from it all over the world, right?”

“Right, the famous K‑T or K‑Pg boundary So?”

“It’d take a lot of iridium to cover the world. Iridium’s deep in the Periodic Table’s Soft Siderophile territory. Iron’s Soft. When Earth was molten, iron would extract and concentrate iridium. That’s why there’s so little iridium in Earth’s crust ’cause it’s all gone to the core. That iridium‑carrying meteorite must have been the iron kind.”

“Probably.”

Vinnie guffaws. “HAW! Earth’s Hard and crunchy on the outside, Soft and chewy in the inside, just like a good cookie.”

“Or an armored knight, from the dragon’s viewpoint. But how did Earth get that way, Cathleen?”

“Long story, Sy. The academics are still arguing about the details.”

“I love a good story, especially if it ends up explaining asteroid Psyche.”

“It starts 4½ billion years ago, when the Solar System was a rotating disk of galactic debris, clouds of hydrogen plus heavier dust and grit spewed out by energetic stars. Some of the atoms in that grit were important, right, Kareem?”

“Yup. Iron and nickel for planetary cores, silicon and oxygen for the crusts, radioactive isotopes of potassium, uranium and thorium but especially the short‑lived radioactives like aluminum‑26. Half‑life for that one’s only a million years.”

Al, Eddie and Vinnie erupt.
 ”If the short‑timers are gone, how come you say they were important?”
  ”How do we know they were even there?”
   ”If it’s such a short‑timer, is that stuff even a thing any more?”

Kareem’s not used to such a barrage but Cathleen’s a seasoned teacher. “Aluminum‑26 definitely is still a thing, because it’s continually produced by cosmic rays colliding with silicon atoms that aren’t too deeply buried. The production rate is so steady that Kareem’s colleagues estimate how long a meteorite was exposed to cosmic rays from its load of aluminum‑26 decay products compared to its related stable isotopes. We know aluminum‑26 was in the early debris because we’ve found its decay products on Earth. We even know how much — about 50 atoms per million stable aluminum atoms.”

Kareem regains his footing. “As to why it’s important, molten silicate droplets in the early system became chondrules when they aggregated to form chondritic meteorites. The droplets couldn’t have stayed that hot just from nuclear fission by their long‑lived radioactives. The short‑timers, especially aluminum‑26, must have supplied the extra heat early on. If short‑timers could keep the droplets molten, they certainly could have kept the newly‑forming planets molten for a while. Being fluid’s important because that’s the only state where Susan’s Hard‑Soft phase separation can happen.”

Cathleen nods. “The radioactives were just part of the story, though. The early system was a chaotic place. Forget notions of everything smoothly whirling around like the rings of Saturn. Except for the biggest objects, the idea of an orbit was just silly. Each object was gravitationally influenced by beaucoodles of other objects of all sizes that didn’t even all go in the same direction. There was crashing, lots of crashing. Every smash‑up converted kinetic energy to heat, lots of heat. Each collision could generate fragments which would cascade on to other collisions, maybe even become meteorites. Large objects would accumulate mass and heat energy in violent mergers with smaller objects. A protoplanet’s atom‑level Hard‑Hard and Soft‑Soft interactions would have plenty of chemical opportunities to assemble cohesive masses rising or sinking through the liquid melt just because of buoyancy and there you’ve got your layers.”

“But collisions didn’t have to be violent, Cathleen. Fragments could hang together through gravity or surface stickiness. That’s how the Bennu and Ryugu rubble pile asteroids formed.”

“Good point, Kareem, and that brings us to Psyche. We know its density is higher than stone but less than iron. The asteroid could be part of a planetoid’s interior, surviving after violent collisions chipped away the surface rock. It could be a rubble pile of loose metallic bits. It could be a mix of metal and rock like the Museum’s pallasite slice. Or an armored shell. We just won’t know until the Psyche mission gets there.”

~~ Rich Olcott

Planetary Chemistry

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Chemistry, UncategorizedLeave a comment

The deal’s gone round to Susan. “Another thing, Kareem — your assumption ignores Chemistry.”

“Didn’t Cathleen take care of that with her nuclear reactions in the star’s core?”

“Not even close. Nuclear reactions in general are literally a million or more times more energetic than chemical ones. Your classic AA alkaline battery is 1½ volts, right, but the initial step in Cathleen’s proton‑to‑helium process would net 1½ megavolts if we could set it up in a battery. Regular chemistry just re‑arranges atoms, doesn’t have a chance when nuclear’s going on.”

“Like trying to carve a cameo with dynamite, huh?”

“Not quite. If nuclear is dynamite, then bench chemistry is a bandsaw. I’d say the analog for carving a cameo would be cell biology. That operates at the millivolt level.”

Cathleen holds up her tablet again. “Speaking of abundance graphs, here’s another one I built for my Astronomy class. I divided each element’s atom count in Earth’s crust by its atom count in the Universe. I color-coded the points according to Goldschmidt’s classification scheme. The lines mark the average ratio for each class. Compared to the Universe, oxide‑formers are ten times more concentrated in the crust than sulfide‑formers are, 150 times more concentrated than iron‑mixers, 900 times more than gases. I see the numbers but I don’t feel comfortable with them. Kareem, what do I tell my students?”

“Happy to explain the what, but Susan will have to explain the why. Goldschmidt started as a mineralogist, invented Geochemistry while bouncing around between Sweden, Norway and Germany until he barely escaped from the Nazis and was smuggled into England. He pioneered using crystallographic and thermodynamic analysis in geology. His scheme slotted each chemical element into one of those five classes. For example, he lumped the five lightest inert gases together with hydrogen, nitrogen and carbon into what he called the Atmophile class because they mostly stay in the atmosphere.”

“Carbon?”

“Yeah, that one’s iffy because coal and limestone. His reasoning involved carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and methane which don’t show up in rocks. There are other edge cases, like radon which ought to count as a gas but shows up in rocks and basements because it’s locked where it was generated as part of uranium’s decay sequence. We mostly find uranium in oxide minerals so Goldschmidt put it and radon into his Lithophile class of metals that occur in oxides. That’s opposed to mercury, silver and a dozen or so other elements that generally show up in sulfide minerals — that’s his Chalcophile class. There’s another dozen or so that dissolve into molten iron so they’re Siderophiles. We don’t see much of those in Earth’s crust because they were swept down to the core as the molten planet differentiated. Finally, there’s a whole batch of radioactives that huddle together as Other. But why those elements do those things, I dunno. Susan, your turn.”

“It’s a lovely application of Pearson’s Hard‑Soft Acid‑Base theory. Hard chemical thingies have a high charge‑to‑volume ratio. Also, their charge is tightly bound so it doesn’t polarize. Oxide, carbonate and fluoride ions are Hard, and so are alkali and alkali metal ions like sodium and calcium. Uranium’s Hard when it’s at high oxidation state like in a uranyl ion UO22+. (Eddie, stop snickering, that’s its proper name.) Soft thingies are just the reverse — big thingies with mushy electron clouds. Iodide is Soft and so are mercury, silver and gold ions. Bulk metals are extremely Soft, chemically speaking, because their electron clouds are so diffuse. The point is, Hard thingies combine best with Hard thingies, Soft thingies with Soft.”

“So the Lithophiles are Hard metals that make Hard‑Hard stony oxides. I suppose that extends to fluorides and carbonates?”

“Sure.”

“Then the sulfide ores, Goldschmidt’s Chalcogens, are Soft‑Soft compounds. The Siderophile metals combine with each other better than anyone else, and the Atmophiles don’t combine with anything. Cool.”

“Ah‑HAH! Then on my graph the Hard oxides are most common in the crust because they’re light and so float above the heavier Soft sulfides and the ultra‑Soft metals that sink to the core. Our planet is layered by Hardness.”

“Does the same logic apply to asteroids?”

“Sort of.”

~~ Rich Olcott

The Road to Gold

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Stellar Science, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Cathleen and Susan share a look.
 ”A conclusion way too far, Kareem.”
  ”Yep, you’ve overbounded your steps.”

Kareem tosses in a couple of chips. “Huh? What did I skip over? Where?”

Cathleen sees his bet and raises. “When you said that the Psyche asteroid’s gold content would be similar to what we dig up on Earth, you skipped many orders of magnitude in applying the Cosmological Principle.”

“I didn’t realize I’d done that. What’s the Cosmological Principle?”

“There’s several ways to state it, but they boil down to, ‘We’re not special in the Universe.‘ We think that fundamental constants and physical laws determined here on Earth have the same values and work the same way everywhere. Astrophysics just wouldn’t work as well as it does if the electron charge or Newton’s Laws of Motion were different a million lightyears away from us.”

“Wait, what about that galaxy that’s going to collide with us even though everything’s supposed to be flying away?”

“Fair question. The un‑boiled Principle includes some qualification clauses, especially the one that says, ‘when averaged over a large enough volume.’ How big a volume depends on what you’re studying. For motions of galaxies and such you have to average over a couple hundred million lightyears. Physical constants measured locally seem to be good out to the edge of the Observable Universe. Elemental abundances are somewhere in‑between — the very oldest, farthest‑away galaxies have less of the heavy stuff than we do around here. <pulls her tablet from her purse> Which brings me to this chart I built for one of my classes.”

“You’re going to have to explain that.”

“Sure. Both graphs are about element abundance. We get the numbers from stellar and galactic spectra so we’re averaging the local Universe out to a few hundred thousand lightyears. Left‑to‑right we’ve got hydrogen, helium, lithium and so on out to uranium in the big graph, out to iron in the small one. Up‑and‑down we’ve got atom count for each element, divided by the number of iron atoms so iron scores at 1.0. The range is huge, 31 000 hydrogens per single iron atom, all the way down to 17 rhenium atoms per billion irons. I needed this logarithmic scale to make the points I wanted to make in class.”

Vinnie sweetens the pot. “You’ve got that nice zig‑zag going in the little graph, Cathleen, but things get weird around iron and the big graph has that near‑constant series starting around 60. Why the differences?”

<lays down Q‑J‑10‑9‑8, all hearts, pulls in the chips> “Perfect straight line, Vinnie. The different behaviors come from nuclear cookery at different stages of a star’s life. Most new‑born stars start by fusing hydrogen nuclei, protons, to produce helium nuclei, alpha particles. Those two swamp everything else. As the star evolves to higher temperatures, proton‑addition processes generate successively more massive nuclei. Carbon starts a new pattern, because alpha‑addition processes it initiates generate the sawtooth pattern you picked up on — an alpha has two protons so each alpha fusion contributes to the atomic number peak two units along the line.”

“What happens with iron?”

“What happens when you put a blow torch to a red‑hot metal ball?”

“The ball melts.”

“Why?”

“Cause the extra energy’s too much for what holds the ball together.”

“Well, there you go. The forces that hold an atomic nucleus together have their limits, too. Iron and its next‑but‑one neighbor nickel are right on the edge of stability for alpha reactions. The alpha process in the core of a normal star can’t make anything heavier.”

“So how do we get the heavy guys?”

“Novas, supernovas and beyond. Those events are so energetic and so chaotic there’s non‑zero probability for any kind of atom to form and evolve to something stable before it can break down. Massive atoms just have a lower probability so there’s less of them when things settle down. Gold, for instance, at only 330 atoms per billion atoms of iron. The explosions spray heavy atoms throughout their neighborhood.”

Kareem antes the next pot. “So you’re saying my mistake was to assume that asteroid Psyche’s composition would match whole‑Universe heavy‑element statistics?”

“Well, that was his first mistake, right, Susan?”

~~ Rich Olcott

GOLD! GOLD! GOLD! Not.

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Chemistry, UncategorizedLeave a comment

“Ya think there’s water on the Psyche asteroid, Kareem?”

“No more than a smidgeon, Cal.”

“Why so little? They’ve found hundreds of tons of it on the Moon.”

“Wait, water found on the moon? I’d heard about the Chinese rover finding sulfur but I didn’t think anybody’s gotten into a shadowy area that may be icy because sunlight never heats it.”

“Catch up, Eddie. We’ve known about hydrogen on the Moon since the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter almost 15 years ago. We just weren’t sure any of it was water‑ice. Could be hydroxyls coating the outside of oxide and silicate moon rocks, or water of crystallization locked into mineral structures.”

“That’s the kind of caveat I’d expect from a chemist, Susan, throwing chemical complexity into the mess.”

“Well, sure, Sy. Silicate chemistry is a mess. Nature rarely gives us neat lab‑purified materials. The silicon‑oxygen lattice in a silicate can host almost any combination of interstitial metal ions. On top of that, the solar wind showers the Moon with atomic and ionic hydrogens eager to bond with surface oxygens and maybe even migrate further into the bulk. The Apollo astronauts found plagioclase rocks, right? That name covers a whole range of aluminum‑silicate compositions from calcium‑rich like we find in meteorites to sodium‑rich that are common in Earth rocks. The astronauts’ rocks were dry, dry, dry, but that collecting was done where the missions landed, near the Moon’s equator. What’s got the geologists all excited is satellite data from around the Moon’s south pole. The spectra suggest actual water molecules at or just below the surface there. Lots of water.”

“Mm-hm, me and a lot of other Earth‑historians would love to compare that water’s isotopic break‑out against Earth and the asteroids and comets.”

“Understood, Kareem. but why so down on Psyche having water?”

“Two arguments. Attenuation, for one. Psyche is 2½ times farther from the Sun than the Earth‑Moon system. Per unit area at the target, stuff coming out of the Sun thins out as the square of the distance. The solar wind near Psyche is at least 85% weaker than what the Moon gets. If Psyche’s built up any watery skin it’s much thinner than the Moon’s. And that’s assuming that they’re both covered with the same kind of rocks.”

“The other argument?”

“Depends on Psyche’s density which we’re still zeroing in on.”

“This magazine article says it’s denser than iron. That’s why they’re shouting ‘GOLD! GOLD! GOLD!‘ like Discworld Dwarfs, ’cause gold is heavier than iron.”

“Shouldn’t that be ‘dwarves‘?”

“Not according to Terry Pratchett. He ought to know ’cause he wrote the books about them.”

“True. So’s saying gold and a lot of the other precious metals are much denser than iron. Unfortunately, it now looks like Psyche isn’t. An object’s density is its mass divided by its volume. You measure an asteroid’s mass by how it affects the orbits of nearby asteroids. That’s hard to do when asteroids average as far apart as the Moon and the Earth. Early mass estimates were as much as three times too big. Also, Psyche’s potato‑shaped. Early size studies just happened to have worked from images taken when the asteroid was end‑on to us. Those estimates had the volume too small. Divide too‑big by too‑small you get too‑big squared.”

“So we still don’t know the density.”

“As I said, we’re zeroing in. Overall Psyche seems to be a bit denser than your average stony meteorite but nowhere near as dense as iron, let alone gold or platinum. We’re only going to get a good density value when our spacecraft of known mass orbits Psyche at close range.”

“No gold?”

“I wouldn’t say none. Probably about the same gold/iron ratio that we have here on Earth where you have to process tonnes of ore to recover grams of gold. Your best hope as an astro‑prospector is that Psyche’s made of solid metal, but in the form of a rubble‑pile like we found Ryugu and Bennu to be. That would bring the average density down to the observed range. It’d also let you mine the asteroid chunk‑wise. Oh, one other problem…”

“What’s that?”

“Transportation costs.”

Adapted from a NASA illustration
Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ASU

~~ Rich Olcott