Category: Astronomy: Planetary Science

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

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

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

Comets, Asteroids And Water

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, UncategorizedLeave a comment

“So what about the article, Cal?”

“What article?”

“The article about NASA’s Psyche mission to Psyche, the article in the magazine that you came in here ranting about. What did it say?”

“Not much, actually. It was mostly gee‑whizzery about how the Psyche asteroid is solid metal and probably worth trillions because of its gold and stuff. It’s a new mag, probably desperate for eyeball grabbers so I’m not making bets on it but is any of that possible?”

Kareem, our geologist, takes the bait. “You guys know I specialize in old rocks because they tell us Earth’s early geochemistry. I want to identify when in our history liquid water gave life a chance to start up. That’s why I keep up with asteroid news. Asteroids are the oldest rocks around, far older than what we’ve been able to dig up from the ancient cratons in Canada and Australia. Cratonic rocks max out at around 4 billion years but asteroids and Earth as a planet go back a half‑billion years more. We’ve learned a lot from asteroid‑sourced meteorites, but they’re just a tease. The cooking they get on their way through the atmosphere can burn out part of any water they had. That’s why I followed the Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS‑REx missions so closely — they brought us fresh samples from asteroids that should date back to the Solar System’s birth.”

“How about comets, Kareem? They’re ice‑balls. Those gorgeous tails they spout when they warm up, they’re all water and CO2 and like that. Earth coulda got our water from comets.”

“Good point, Al — sorry, I mean Cal — except for two things. First, asteroids are a lot closer to Earth than comets. The densest part of the asteroid belt courses twice as wide as Earth’s orbit, about a hundred million miles outward from us. Short‑period comets generally drop in from the Kuiper Belt, which is about fifteen times wider. Long‑period comets hang out a thousand times farther out.”

“Yeah, but they do head in our direction every so often and a billion years is a long time. What’s your second thing?”

“Isotopes. You know about light hydrogen and heavy hydrogen, right? They’re both hydrogen, one proton and one electron, but the heavy kind carries a neutron along with the proton in its nucleus. Their chemistry is the same unless speed is a factor. At any given temperature, the lighter atom moves about 40% faster than its heavier cousin. Water molecules containing only light hydrogens evaporate faster than their heavier neighbors because the speedy atoms are primed to rip their molecule loose from the surrounding liquid or ice.”

“Wait, water evaporates from ice?”

“Mm-hm, except technically it’s called sublimation when ice is involved. That was a crucial process in the Solar System’s history. Five billion years ago we were this big disk of gas and dust. When the Sun finally got dense enough to light up, its radiated heat energy baked volatile components like water and such out of the metals and silicates in the rocky inner system. That’s why Earth had to import our water once we cooled off. Volatility is relative, of course. Eventually the volatiles condensed back to solid form in the ice belts near and beyond Uranus and Neptune. That’s your cometary ice balls.”

“But now you’re gonna say that ancient ice evap–, sublimated, too.”

“Sure. It’s a continual process. Sometimes a released molecule docks back on again, but mostly not. Anyhow, the light water molecules happily bounced off into the Universe whenever they could. The heavy ones stayed put. Cometary ice gradually became roughly twice as heavy‑enriched as the rest of the Solar System including us.”

“So when you look at Earth water…”

“It can’t have come from comets which is why we’re looking at asteroids.”

“Ah, but does asteroid water match Earth’s?”

“Mostly, Sy. We’ve found a few meteorites with a high heavy‑hydrogen content, but so few that they’d be <ahem> swamped by the water from all the other meteorites. Most meteorite isotopes match what we have on Earth. You’re drinking asteroid water.”

Comet Hale-Bopp Credit: E. Kolmhofer, H. Raab; Johannes-Kepler-Observatory, Linz, Austria, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons
Asteroid Bennu Credit: NASA/Goddard/University of Arizona

~~ Rich Olcott

Eclipse Correction

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, UncategorizedLeave a comment

From: Robin Feder <rjfeder@fortleenj.com>
To: Sy Moire <sy@moirestudies.com>
Subj: Bad diagram

My Dad said I should write you about the bad video that is in your “Elliptically Speaking” post. It shows a circle around a blue dot that’s supposed to be the Earth, and an oval shape that’s supposed to be the Moon’s orbit around the Earth, and blinking thingies that are supposed to show what eclipses look like. I took a screen shot of the video to show you. But the diagram is all wrong because it has two places where the Moon is far away from the Earth and two places where the Moon is closer and that’s wrong. All the orbit pictures I can find in my class books show there’s only one of each. Please fix this. Sincerely, Robin Feder

From: Sy Moire <sy@moirestudies.com>
To: Robin Feder <rjfeder@fortleenj.com>
Subj: Bad Diagram

You’re absolutely correct. That’s a terrible graphic and I’ll have to apologize to Cathleen, Teena and all my readers. Thanks for drawing my attention to my mistake. When I built that animation I was thinking too much about squashed circles and not enough about orbits. I’ve revised the animation, moving the Earth and its circle sideways a bit. Strictly speaking, Earth and the Moon both orbit around their common center of gravity. Also, the COG should be at one focus of an ellipse. An ellipse has two foci located on either side of the figure’s center. However, both of those corrections for the Earth‑Moon system are so small at this scale that you wouldn’t be able to see them. I drew my oval (not a true ellipse) out of scale to make the effect more visible.

Moving the oval so that there’s only one close place and one far place (astronomers call them perigee and apogee) meant that I also had to move the blinking eclipse markers. I think the new locations do a better job of showing why we have both annular and total eclipses. You just have to imagine the Sun being beyond the Moon in each special location so that the eclipse shadow meets the Earth.

I’ve swapped out the bad diagram on the website. Here’s a screenshot of the better diagram I’ve put in its place.

Please remember to use proper eclipse-viewing eyewear when you look at this October’s annular eclipse. And give my regards to your Dad.

~~ Rich Olcott

  • Thanks to Ric Werme for gently pointing out my bogus graphic.

Elliptically Speaking

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, Uncategorized2 Comments

“Oh. I have one other eclipse question, Dr O’Brien.”

“What’s that, Teena?”

“Well, I found a list of solar eclipses—”

“An interesting place to start, especially for a 10‑year‑old.”

“And it had three kinds of eclipse — total, partial and annual. ‘Total‘ must be when the Moon covers up the whole Sun like when I wink my eye tight. ‘Partial‘ sounds like when I only squinch up my eye like this. I guess that happens when we’re just on the edge of an eclipse track so we still see part of the Sun like we see just part of the Moon most of the time. But my eye wide open is like there’s no eclipse at all. There’s no fourth way to hold my eye left over for ‘annual.’ Besides, ‘annual‘ means ‘every year.’ Is there some special kind of eclipse that comes every year but we don’t see it?”

Cathleen doesn’t quite hide a smile. “Sorry, dear, I think you’ve misread a word. It’s not ‘annual,’ it’s ‘annular.’ They’re very similar and they both came from Latin but they came from different Latin words and have different meanings today. ‘Annual‘ means ‘yearly,’ just as you said. ‘Annular‘ means ‘ring‑shaped‘, like a circle with a hole in the middle.”

“A ring‑shaped eclipse? Is there a big hole in the Moon we only see sometimes?”

“Quite the reverse. The Moon and its shadow are compact, no holes even in an annular eclipse. What we see in those eclipses is a ring of the Sun’s light around the outside of a black disk of Moon‑shadow. The bright ring is called an ‘annulus‘ and you must be very careful to use the special dark glasses to look at it.”

“But … Uncle Sy said the reason we’re so lucky we can see eclipses is that the Moon is just the right size to match the size of the Sun. Does the Moon get smaller for an annular eclipse?”

“Hold up your thumb. Now move your arm out until your thumb just covers my head. Can’t see me at all, can you? Now move your arm out just a little farther until you can see my hair but not my face. Got it? Your thumb didn’t change size, did it?”

“No, it just looked smaller and I could see more of you past it.”

“Right. That’s how an annular eclipse works.”

<drawing Old Reliable from its holster> “Excuse me, Cathleen, I think this might help.”

“What are all those circles, Uncle Sy, and why does it blink?”

“It’s like a map of space. The blue disk represents Earth and the gray disk represents the Moon. If the Moon were always the same distance from Earth it’d follow the black circle, but it doesn’t. It follows the red line which isn’t a true circle. It’s a special shape of squashed circle, called an ellipse. Very few moons or planets follow a truly circular orbit — their track is almost always elliptical to some degree. Now you tell me what the blinky things are about and don’t say it’s when the Moon stops in its orbit because it doesn’t. The animation motion pauses to call attention to when the eclipses happen.”

“Okayyy… Oh! They’re what we’d see in an eclipse, right? The red … ellipse?… brings the Moon closer to us or farther away. When it’s close like over there it’s like my thumb covering Dr O’Brien’s whole head and we don’t see any of the Sun and that’s a total eclipse, right? When we have an eclipse if the Moon’s outside of that circle like on the side, it’s like my thumb farther away and that’s why your picture has the orange ring, it’s an annulus, right?”

“You broke the code, Teena, Well done!”

“I think it’s silly to have two words like eclipse and ellipse that sound so much alike but they’re so different. Like annual and annulus.”

“Sorry about that, sweetie, but we pretty much have to take the language as we find it. English has a long and complicated history. Sometimes I’m surprised it works at all. Sometimes it doesn’t and that makes problems.”

~~ Rich Olcott

Eclipse Vectors

On By rolcottIn Astronomy: Planetary Science, UncategorizedLeave a comment

“I think I understand why we have eclipse seasons, Dr O’Meara, but why do the two eclipses in a season travel in such different directions?”

Image from GreatAmericanEclipse.com

“Put this question on top of Teena’s, Cathleen. Everyone knows the Sun rises in the East because the Earth rotates towards the East. But it seems like eclipses fly eastward even faster than the Earth turns. If that’s true, why?”

“As an Astronomy educator, Sy, I wish ‘everyone’ were truly everyone. You wouldn’t believe the arguments I get from some students when I’m trying to teach 21st Century material. Why are they even in my class?”

“We can only wonder. You and the Flatties, Kareem and the 6000‑year Earthers, poor Jennifer over in Public Health having to cope with the anti‑vaxxers; these contrarians seem to be everywhere. They’re excellent models of Orwellian doublethink — they happily use their science‑dependent smart phones, internet and GPS while they’re trashing Science. Split brains? I dunno.”

“C’mon, Uncle Sy, that’s boring grown‑up stuff. What about my eclipses? Why do they go north or south like that? Does it have to do with those angles that were drawn too big?”

“Sorry, sweetie. Dr O’Meara showed us that the Moon can only make an eclipse if it’s near the Solar System’s plane where Earth’s center stays. The angle of the Moon’s orbital plane only matters when the Moon is away from there.”

“Earth’s center is the Equator! All the eclipses should go on the Equator. But they don’t. That’s wrong.”

“The Equator’s around Earth’s center, Teena, but so are other circles. Think of your globe at home. Does the North Pole point straight up?”

“Noo‑oh … you mean the tilt? Mom said that was about Winter and Summer.”

“Well, she’s not wrong. In the northern hemisphere we have Summer when the North Pole tilts toward the Sun, Winter when it tilts away. That’s only part of the story, though. In Spring and Fall the tilt is broadside to the Sun. Not as hot as Summertime, not as cold as Winter. Those three gyroscopes give us eclipse seasons. But they do more. Look at these diagrams.”

“Sorry, I don’t understand what you’re showing me.”

“No worries. In the upper one, the Earth’s in the rear. The North Pole is the green arrow. The Equator’s the yellow band. Pole and Equator are both tilted 23°. The Sun is in front, shining at the Earth. The Earth orbits the Sun counterclockwise so it’s moving to our left. Moving in that direction gives the northern hemisphere more and more daylight so it’s northern Springtime going towards Summer. Okay?”

“Yyyes….”

“Good. The sketch shows eclipse conditions, when the Moon and its shadow are in Earth’s orbital plane. The only places on Earth that can see the eclipse are on the red band. That’s another circle where the plane intersects the Earth’s surface. What direction does that band point on Earth?”

<chortle> “It goes northeast, just like I noticed on that map! Okay, let me think about the other picture… The North Pole’s a gyroscope and doesn’t change direction so we’re looking at us from the other side … Yeah! That red band goes southeast on Earth. Perfect! … Umm, everything’s upside‑down for Bindi in Australia, so does she … Wait, in the upper picture when it’s Springtime for us it’s Autumn for her so her Autumn eclipses go northeast, just like our Springtime ones do! And her Spring’s the bottom picture and her Springtime eclipses go southeast like our Autumn ones, right?”

Image from GreatAmericanEclipse.com

“Smart girl! I’m going to tell your Mom about your thinking and she’ll be so proud of you. Now, Cathleen, how about speedy eclipses going east faster than the Earth does?”

“It’s not the eclipse going fast, Sy, it’s the Moon. Relative to the Sun‑Earth line, the Moon in its orbit is traveling eastward at just under 3700 kilometers per hour. Meanwhile, a point on Earth’s Equator is heading in the same direction at just under 1700 kph. Places away from the Equator move even slower. The Moon and its shadow win the race going away.”

~~ Rich Olcott

  • Thanks again to Naomi Pequette for her expertise and eclipse‑related internet links.