(Dateline: January 2016) The Loneliest Galaxy In The Universe
By Ethan Siegel
Our greatest, largest-scale surveys of the universe have given us an unprecedented view of cosmic structure extending for tens of billions of light years. With the combined effects of normal matter, dark matter, dark energy, neutrinos and radiation all affecting how matter clumps, collapses and separates over time, the great cosmic web we see is in tremendous agreement with our best theories: the Big Bang and General Relativity. Yet this understanding was only possible because of the pioneering work of Edwin Hubble, who identified a large number of galaxies outside of our own, correctly measured their distance (following the work of Vesto Slipher's work measuring their redshifts), and discovered the expanding universe.
But what if the Milky Way weren't located in one of the "strands" of the great cosmic web, where galaxies are plentiful and ubiquitous in many different directions? What if, instead, we were located in one of the great "voids" separating the vast majority of galaxies? It would've taken telescopes and imaging technology far more advanced than Hubble had at his disposal to even detect a single galaxy beyond our own, much less dozens, hundreds or millions, like we have today. While the nearest galaxies to us are only a few million light years distant, there are voids so large that a galaxy located at the center of one might not see another for a hundred times that distance.
While we've readily learned about our place in the universe from observing what's around us, not everyone is as fortunate. In particular, the galaxy MCG+01-02-015 has not a single known galaxy around it for a hundred million light years in all directions. Were you to draw a sphere around the Milky Way with a radius of 100 million light years, we'd find hundreds of thousands of galaxies. But not MCG+01-02-015; it's the loneliest galaxy ever discovered. Our Milky Way, like most galaxies, has been built up by mergers and accretions of many other galaxies over billions of years, having acquired stars and gas from a slew of our former neighbors. But an isolated galaxy like this one has only the matter it was born with to call its own.
Edwin Hubble made his universe-changing discovery using telescope technology from 1917, yet he would have found absolutely zero other galaxies at all were we situated at MCG+01-02-015's location. The first visible galaxy wouldn't have shown up until we had 1960s-level technology, and who knows if we'd have continued looking? If we were such a lonely galaxy, would we have given up the search, and concluded that our galaxy encompassed all of existence? Or would we have continued peering deeper into the void, eventually discovering our unusual location in a vast, expanding universe? For the inhabitants of the loneliest galaxy, we can only hope that they didn't give up the search, and discovered the entire universe.
Image credit: ESA/Hubble & NASA and N. Gorin (STScI); Acknowledgement: Judy Schmidt, of the loneliest void galaxy in the known: MCG+01-02-015.
This article is provided by NASA Space Place. With articles, activities, crafts, games, and lesson plans, NASA Space Place encourages everyone to get excited about science and technology. Visit http://spaceplace.nasa.gov to explore space and Earth science!
How Will We Finally Image the Event Horizon of a Black Hole?
By Ethan Siegel
One hundred years ago, Albert Einstein first put forth his theory of General Relativity, which laid out the relationship between spacetime and the matter and energy present within it. While it successfully recovered Newtonian gravity and predicted the additional precession of Mercury's orbit, the only exact solution that Einstein himself discovered was the trivial one: that for completely empty space. Less than two months after releasing his theory, however, the German scientist Karl Schwarzschild provided a true exact solution, that of a massive, infinitely dense object, a black hole.
One of the curious things that popped out of Schwarzschild's solution was the existence of an event horizon, or a region of space that was so severely curved that nothing, not even light, could escape from it. The size of this event horizon would be directly proportional to the mass of the black hole. A black hole the mass of Earth would have an event horizon less than a centimeter in radius; a black hole the mass of the sun would have an event horizon just a few kilometers in radius; and a supermassive black hole would have an event horizon the size of a planetary orbit.
Our galaxy has since been discovered to house a black hole about four million solar masses in size, with an event horizon about 23.6 million kilometers across, or about 40 percent the size of Mercury's orbit around the sun. At a distance of 26,000 light years, it's the largest event horizon in angular size visible from Earth, but at just 19 micro-arc-seconds, it would take a telescope the size of Earth to resolve it – a practical impossibility.
But all hope isn't lost! If instead of a single telescope, we built an array of telescopes located all over Earth, we could simultaneously image the galactic center, and use the technique of VLBI (very long-baseline interferometry) to resolve the black hole's event horizon. The array would only have the light-gathering power of the individual telescopes, meaning the black hole (in the radio) will appear very faint, but they can obtain the resolution of a telescope that's the distance between the farthest telescopes in the array! The planned Event Horizon Telescope, spanning four different continents (including Antarctica), should be able to resolve under 10 micro-arc-seconds, imaging a black hole directly for the first time and answering the question of whether or not they truly contain an event horizon. What began as a mere mathematical solution is now just a few years away from being observed and known for certain!
Note: This month’s article describes a project that is not related to NASA and does not suggest any relationship or endorsement. Its coverage is for general interest and educational purposes.
Image credit: NASA/CXC/Amherst College/D.Haggard et al., of the galactic center in X-rays. Sagittarius A* is the supermassive black hole at our Milky Way's center, which normally emits X-ray light of a particular brightness. However, 2013 saw a flare increase its luminosity by a factor of many hundreds, as the black hole devoured matter. The event horizon has yet to be revealed.
This article was provided by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Our Solar System Is Almost Normal, But Not Quite
By Ethan Siegel
It was just over 20 years ago that the very first exoplanet was found and confirmed to be orbiting a star not so different from our own sun. Fast forward to the present day, and the stellar wobble method, wherein the gravitational tug of a planet perturbs a star's motion, has been surpassed in success by the transit method, wherein a planet transits across the disk of its parent star, blocking a portion of its light in a periodic fashion. Thanks to these methods and NASA's Kepler spacecraft, we've identified many thousands of candidate planets, with nearly 2,000 of them having been confirmed, and their masses and densities measured.
The gas giants found in our solar system actually turn out to be remarkably typical: Jupiter-mass planets are very common, with less-massive and more-massive giants both extremely common. Saturn—the least dense world in our solar system—is actually of a fairly typical density for a gas giant world. It turns out that there are many planets out there with Saturn’s density or less. The rocky worlds are a little harder to quantify, because our methods and missions are much better at finding higher-mass planets than low-mass ones. Nevertheless, the lowest mass planets found are comparable to Earth and Venus, and range from just as dense to slightly less dense. We also find that we fall right into the middle of the "bell curve" for how old planetary systems are: we're definitely typical in that regard.
But there are a few big surprises, which is to say there are three major ways our solar system is an outlier among the planets we've observed:
· All our solar system's planets are significantly farther out than the average distance for exoplanets around their stars. More than half of the planets we've discovered are closer to their star than Mercury is to ours, which might be a selection effect (closer planets are easier to find), but it might indicate a way our star is unusual: being devoid of very close-in planets.
· All eight of our solar system's planets’ orbits are highly circular, with even the eccentric Mars and Mercury only having a few percent deviation from a perfect circle. But most exoplanets have significant eccentricities, which could indicate something unusual about us.
· And finally, one of the most common classes of exoplanet—a super-Earth or mini-Neptune, with 1.5-to-10 times the mass of Earth—is completely missing from our solar system.
Until we develop the technology to probe for lower-mass planets at even greater distances around other star systems, we won't truly know for certain how unusual we really are!
Images credit: NASA / Kepler Dan Fabricky (L), of a selection of the known Kepler exoplanets; Rebecca G. Martin and Mario Livio (2015) ApJ 810, 105 (R), of 287 confirmed exoplanets relative to our eight solar system planets.
This article was provided by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
How We Know Mars Has Liquid Water On Its Surface
By Ethan Siegel
Of all the planets in the solar system other than our own, Mars is the one place with the most Earth-like past. Geological features on the surface such as dried up riverbeds, sedimentary patterns, mineral spherules nicknamed "blueberries," and evidence of liquid-based erosion all tell the same story: that of a wet, watery past. But although we've found plenty of evidence for molecular water on Mars in the solid (ice) and gaseous (vapor) states, including in icecaps, clouds and subsurface ices exposed (and sublimated) by digging, that in no way meant there'd be water in its liquid phase today.
Sure, water flowed on the surface of Mars during the first billion years of the solar system, perhaps producing an ocean a mile deep, though the ocean presence is still much debated. Given that life on Earth took hold well within that time, it’s conceivable that Mars was once a rich, living planet as well. But unlike Earth, Mars is small: small enough that its interior cooled and lost its protective magnetic field, enabling the sun's solar wind to strip its atmosphere away. Without a significant atmosphere, the liquid phase of water became a virtual impossibility, and Mars became the arid world we know it to be today.
But certain ions—potassium, calcium, sodium, magnesium, chloride and fluoride, among others—get left behind when the liquid water disappears, leaving a “salt” residue of mineral salts (that may include table salt, sodium chloride) on the surface. While pure liquid water may not persist at standard Martian pressures and temperatures, extremely salty, briny water can indeed stay in a liquid state for extended periods under the conditions on the Red Planet. It's more of a "sandy crust" like you'd experience on the shore when the tide goes out than the flowing waters we're used to in rivers on Earth, but it means that under the right temperature conditions, liquid water does exist on Mars today, at least in small amounts.
The measured presence and concentration of these salts, found in the dark streaks that come and go on steep crater walls, combined with our knowledge of how water behaves under certain physical and chemical conditions and the observations of changing features on the Martian surface supports the idea that this is the action of liquid water. Short of taking a sample and analyzing it in situ on Mars, this is the best current evidence we have for liquid water on our red neighbor. Next up? Finding out if there are any single-celled organisms hardy enough to survive and thrive under those conditions, possibly even native to Mars itself!
Images credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ. of Arizona, of a newly-formed gully on the Martian surface (L) and of the series of gullies where the salt deposits were found (R).
This article was provided by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Measure the Moon's Size and Distance During the Next Lunar Eclipse
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
The moon represents perhaps the first great paradox of the night sky in all of human history. While its angular size is easy to measure with the unaided eye from any location on Earth, ranging from 29.38 arc-minutes (0.4897°) to 33.53 arc-minutes (0.5588°) as it orbits our world in an ellipse, that doesn't tell us its physical size. From its angular size alone, the moon could just as easily be close and small as it could be distant and enormous.
But we know a few other things, even relying only on naked-eye observations. We know its phases are caused by its geometric configuration with the sun and Earth. We know that the sun must be farther away (and hence, larger) than the moon from the phenomenon of solar eclipses, where the moon passes in front of the sun, blocking its disk as seen from Earth. And we know it undergoes lunar eclipses, where the sun's light is blocked from the moon by Earth.
Lunar eclipses provided the first evidence that Earth was round; the shape of the portion of the shadow that falls on the moon during its partial phase is an arc of a circle. In fact, once we measured the radius of Earth (first accomplished in the 3rd century B.C.E.), now known to be 6,371 km, all it takes is one assumption—that the physical size of Earth's shadow as it falls on the moon is approximately the physical size of Earth—and we can use lunar eclipses to measure both the size of and the distance to the moon!
Simply by knowing Earth's physical size and measuring the ratios of the angular size of its shadow and the angular size of the moon, we can determine the moon's physical size relative to Earth. During a lunar eclipse, Earth's shadow is about 3.5 times larger than the moon, with some slight variations dependent on the moon's point in its orbit. Simply divide Earth's radius by your measurement to figure out the moon's radius!
Even with this primitive method, it's straightforward to get a measurement for the moon's radius that's accurate to within 15% of the actual value: 1,738 km. Now that you've determined its physical size and its angular size, geometry alone enables you to determine how far away it is from Earth. A lunar eclipse is coming up on September 28th, and this supermoon eclipse will last for hours. Use the partial phases to measure the size of and distance to the moon, and see how close you can get!
Image credit: Daniel Munizaga (NOAO South/CTIO EPO), using the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory, of an eight-image sequence of the partial phase of a total lunar eclipse.
Solar Wind Creates—and Whips—a Magnetic Tail Around Earth
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
As Earth spins on its axis, our planet's interior spins as well. Deep inside our world, Earth's metal-rich core produces a magnetic field that spans the entire globe, with the magnetic poles offset only slightly from our rotational axis. If you fly up to great distances, well above Earth's surface, you'll find that this magnetic web, called the magnetosphere, is no longer spherical. It not only bends away from the direction of the sun at high altitudes, but it exhibits some very strange features, all thanks to the effects of our parent star.
The sun isn't just the primary source of light and heat for our world; it also emits an intense stream of charged particles, the solar wind, and has its own intense magnetic field that extends much farther into space than our own planet's does. The solar wind travels fast, making the 150 million km (93 million mile) journey to our world in around three days, and is greatly affected by Earth. Under normal circumstances, our world's magnetic field acts like a shield for these particles, bending them out of the way of our planet and protecting plant and animal life from this harmful radiation.
But for every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction: as our magnetosphere bends the solar wind's ions, these particles also distort our magnetosphere, creating a long magnetotail that not only flattens and narrows, but whips back-and-forth in the onrushing solar wind. The particles are so diffuse that collisions between them practically never occur, but the electromagnetic interactions create waves in Earth's magnetosphere, which grow in magnitude and then transfer energy to other particles. The charged particles travel within the magnetic field toward both poles, and when they hit the ionosphere region of Earth’s upper atmosphere, they collide with ions of oxygen and nitrogen causing aurora. Missions such as the European Space Agency and NASA Cluster mission have just led to the first accurate model and understanding of equatorial magnetosonic waves, one such example of the interactions that cause Earth's magnetotail to whip around in the wind like so.
The shape of Earth's magnetic field not only affects aurorae, but can also impact satellite electronics. Understanding its shape and how the magnetosphere interacts with the solar wind can also lead to more accurate predictions of energetic electrons in near-Earth space that can disrupt our technological infrastructure. As our knowledge increases, we may someday be able to reach one of the holy grails of connecting heliophysics to Earth: forecasting and accurately predicting space weather and its effects. Thanks to the Cluster Inner Magnetosphere Campaign, Van Allen Probes, Mars Odyssey Thermal Emission Imaging System, Magnetospheric Multiscale, and Heliophysics System Observatory missions, we're closer to this than ever before.
Kids can learn about how solar wind defines the edges of our solar system at NASA Space Place. http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/interstellar
Image credit: ESA / C. T. Russell (L), of Earth's magnetic tail and its cause: the solar wind; Southwest Research Institute / IBEX Science Team (R), of the first image of the plasma sheet and plasmasphere created around Earth by the solar wind.
On The Brightness Of Venus
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Throughout the past few months, Venus and Jupiter have been consistently the brightest two objects visible in the night sky (besides the moon) appearing in the west shortly after sunset. Jupiter is the largest and most massive planet in the solar system, yet Venus is the planet that comes closest to our world. On June 30th, Venus and Jupiter made their closest approach to one another as seen from Earth—a conjunction—coming within just 0.4° of one another, making this the closest conjunction of these two worlds in over 2,000 years.
And yet throughout all this time, and especially notable near its closest approach, Venus far outshines Jupiter by 2.7 astronomical magnitudes, or a factor of 12 in apparent brightness. You might initially think that Venus’s proximity to Earth would explain this, as a cursory check would seem to show. On June 30th Venus was 0.5 astronomical units (AU) away from Earth, while Jupiter was six AU away. This appears to be exactly the factor of 12 that you need.
Only this doesn't explain things at all! Brightness falls off as the inverse square of the distance, meaning that if all things were equal, Venus ought to seem not 12 but 144 times brighter than Jupiter. There are three factors in play that set things back on the right path: size, albedo, and illumination. Jupiter is 11.6 times the diameter of Venus, meaning that despite the great difference in distance, the two worlds spanned almost exactly the same angular diameter in the sky on the date of the conjunction. Moreover, while Venus is covered in thick, sulfuric acid clouds, Jupiter is a reflective, cloudy world, too. All told, Venus possesses only a somewhat greater visual geometric albedo (or amount of reflected visible light) than Jupiter: 67 percent and 52 percent, respectively. Finally, while Venus and Jupiter both reflect sunlight toward Earth, Jupiter is always in the full (or almost full) phase, while Venus (on June 30th) appeared as a thick crescent.
All told, it's a combination of these four factors—distance, size, albedo, and the phase-determined illuminated area—that determine how bright a planet appears to us, and all four need to be taken into account to explain our observations.
Don't fret if you missed the Venus-Jupiter conjunction; three more big, bright, close ones are coming up later this year in the eastern pre-dawn sky: Mars-Jupiter on October 17, Venus-Jupiter on October 26, and Venus-Mars on November 3.
Keep watching the skies, and enjoy the spectacular dance of the planets!
Image credit: E. Siegel, using the free software Stellarium (L); Wikimedia Commons user TimothyBoocock, under a c.c.-share alike 3.0 license (R). The June 30th conjunction (L) saw Venus and Jupiter pass within 0.4° of one another, yet Venus always appears much brighter (R), as it did in this image from an earlier conjunction.
No Surprise! Earth’s Strongest Gravity Lies Atop The Highest Mountains
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Put more mass beneath your feet and feel the downward acceleration due to gravity increase. Newton's law of universal gravitation may have been superseded by Einstein's, but it still describes the gravitational force and acceleration here on Earth to remarkable precision. The acceleration you experience is directly proportional to the amount of mass you "see," but inversely proportional to the distance from you to that mass squared.
The denser the mass beneath your feet, the stronger the gravitational force, and when you are closer to such a mass, the force is even greater. At higher elevations or even higher altitudes, you'd expect your gravitational force to drop as you move farther from Earth's center. You'd probably also expect that downward acceleration to be greater if you stood atop a large mountain than if you flew tens of thousands of feet above a flat ocean, with nothing but ultra-light air and liquid water beneath you for all those miles. In fact this is true, but not just due to the mountain’s extra mass!
Earth is built like a layer-cake, with the less dense atmosphere, ocean, and crust floating atop the denser mantle, which in turn floats atop the outer and inner cores of our planet. An iceberg’s buoyancy is enough to lift only about one tenth of it above the sea, with the other nine tenths below the surface. Similarly, each and every mountain range has a corresponding "invisible mountain" that dips deep into the mantle. Beneath the ocean floor, Earth's crust might be only three to six miles thick, but it can exceed 40 miles in thickness around major mountain ranges like the Himalayas and the Andes. It’s where one of Earth’s tectonic plates subducts beneath another that we see the largest gravitational anomalies: another confirmation of the theory of continental drift.
A combination of instruments aboard NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites, including the SuperSTAR accelerometer, the K-band ranging system and the onboard GPS receiver, have enabled the construction of the most accurate map of Earth's gravitational field ever: to accelerations of nanometers per second squared. While the mountaintops may be farther from Earth's center than any other point, the extra mass of the mountains and their roots – minus the mass of the displaced mantle – accounts for the true gravitational accelerations we actually see. It's only by the grace of these satellites that we can measure this to such accuracy and confirm what was first conjectured in the 1800s: that the full layer-cake structure of Earth must be accounted for to explain the gravity we experience on our world!
Image credit: NASA / GRACE mission / Christoph Reigber, et al. (2005): An Earth gravity field model complete to degree and order 150 from GRACE: EIGEN-GRACE02S, Journal of Geodynamics 39(1),1–10. Reds indicate greater gravitational anomalies; blues are smaller ones.
The "G" in GOES Is What Makes It Go
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Going up into space is the best way to view the universe, eliminating all the distortionary effects of weather, clouds, temperature variations and the atmosphere's airflow all in one swoop. It's also the best way, so long as you're up at high enough altitudes, to view an entire 50 percent of Earth all at once. And if you place your observatory at just the right location, you can observe the same hemisphere of Earth continuously, tracking the changes and behavior of our atmosphere for many years.
The trick, believe it or not, was worked out by Kepler some 400 years ago! The same scientist who discovered that planets orbit the sun in ellipses also figured out the relationship between how distant an object needs to be from a much more massive one in order to have a certain orbital period. All you need to know is the period and distance of one satellite for any given body, and you can figure out the necessary distance to have any desired period. Luckily for us, planet Earth has a natural satellite - the moon - and just from that information, we can figure out how distant an artificial satellite would need to be to have an orbital period that exactly matches the length of a day and the rotational speed of Earth. For our world, that means an orbital distance of 42,164 km (26,199 miles) from Earth's center, or 35,786 km (22,236 miles) above mean sea level.
We call that orbit geosynchronous or geostationary, meaning that a satellite at that distance always remains above the exact same location on our world. Other effects—like solar wind, radiation pressure and the moon—require onboard thrusters to maintain the satellite's precisely desired position above any given point on Earth's surface. While geostationary satellites have been in use since 1963, it was only in 1974 that the Synchronous Meteorological Satellite (SMS) program began to monitor Earth's weather with them, growing into the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) program the next year. For 40 years now, GOES satellites have monitored the Earth's weather continuously, with a total of 16 satellites having been launched as part of the program. To the delight of NASA (and Ghostbusters) fans everywhere, GOES-R series will launch in 2016, with thrice the spectral information, four times the spatial resolution and five times the coverage speed of its predecessors, with many other improved capabilities. Yet it's the simplicity of gravity and the geostationary "G" in GOES that gives us the power to observe our hemisphere all at once, continuously, and for as long as we like!
Image credit: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, of the first image ever obtained from a GOES satellite. This image was taken from over 22,000 miles (35,000 km) above the Earth's surface on October 25, 1975.
Is the Most Massive Star Still Alive?
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
The brilliant specks of light twinkling in the night sky, with more and more visible under darker skies and with larger telescope apertures, each have their own story to tell. In general, a star's color correlates very well with its mass and its total lifetime, with the bluest stars representing the hottest, most massive and shortest-lived stars in the universe. Even though they contain the most fuel overall, their cores achieve incredibly high temperatures, meaning they burn through their fuel the fastest, in only a few million years instead of roughly ten billion like our sun.
Because of this, it's only the youngest of all star clusters that contain the hottest, bluest stars, and so if we want to find the most massive stars in the universe, we have to look to the largest regions of space that are actively forming them right now. In our local group of galaxies, that region doesn't belong to the giants, the Milky Way or Andromeda, but to the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), a small, satellite galaxy (and fourth-largest in the local group) located 170,000 light years distant.
Despite containing only one percent of the mass of our galaxy, the LMC contains the Tarantula Nebula (30 Doradus), a star-forming nebula approximately 1,000 light years in size, or roughly seven percent of the galaxy itself. You'll have to be south of the Tropic of Cancer to observe it, but if you can locate it, its center contains the super star cluster NGC 2070, holding more than 500,000 unique stars, including many hundreds of spectacular, bright blue ones. With a maximum age of two million years, the stars in this cluster are some of the youngest and most massive ever found.
At the center of NGC 2070 is a very compact concentration of stars known as R136, which is responsible for most of the light illuminating the entire Tarantula Nebula. Consisting of no less than 72 O-class and Wolf-Rayet stars within just 20 arc seconds of one another, the most massive is R136a1, with 260 times the sun's mass and a luminosity that outshines us by a factor of seven million. Since the light has to travel 170,000 light years to reach us, it's quite possible that this star has already died in a spectacular supernova, and might not even exist any longer! The next time you get a good glimpse of the southern skies, look for the most massive star in the universe, and ponder that it might not even still be alive.
Images credit: ESO/IDA/Danish 1.5 m/R. Gendler, C. C. Thöne, C. Féron, and J.-E. Ovaldsen (L), of the giant star-forming Tarantula Nebula in the Large Magellanic Cloud; NASA, ESA, and E. Sabbi (ESA/STScI), with acknowledgment to R. O'Connell (University of Virginia) and the Wide Field Camera 3 Science Oversight Committee (R), of the central merging star cluster NGC 2070, containing the enormous R136a1 at the center.
The Heavyweight Champion of the Cosmos
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
As crazy as it once seemed, we once assumed that the Earth was the largest thing in all the universe. 2,500 years ago, the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras was ridiculed for suggesting that the Sun might be even larger than the Peloponnesus peninsula, about 16% of modern-day Greece. Today, we know that planets are dwarfed by stars, which themselves are bound together by the billions or even trillions into galaxies.
But gravitationally bound structures extend far beyond galaxies, which themselves can bind together into massive clusters across the cosmos. While dark energy may be driving most galaxy clusters apart from one another, preventing our local group from falling into the Virgo Cluster, for example, on occasion, huge galaxy clusters can merge, forming the largest gravitationally bound structures in the universe.
Take the "El Gordo" galaxy cluster, catalogued as ACT-CL J0102-4915. It’s the largest known galaxy cluster in the distant universe. A galaxy like the Milky Way might contain a few hundred billion stars and up to just over a trillion (1012) solar masses worth of matter, the El Gordo cluster has an estimated mass of 3 × 1015 solar masses, or 3,000 times as much as our own galaxy! The way we've figured this out is fascinating. By seeing how the shapes of background galaxies are distorted into more elliptical-than-average shapes along a particular set of axes, we can reconstruct how much mass is present in the cluster: a phenomenon known as weak gravitational lensing.
That reconstruction is shown in blue, but doesn't match up with where the X-rays are, which are shown in pink! This is because, when galaxy clusters collide, the neutral gas inside heats up to emit X-rays, but the individual galaxies (mostly) and dark matter (completely) pass through one another, resulting in a displacement of the cluster's mass from its center. This has been observed before in objects like the Bullet Cluster, but El Gordo is much younger and farther away. At 10 billion light-years distant, the light reaching us now was emitted more than 7 billion years ago, when the universe was less than half its present age.
It's a good thing, too, because about 6 billion years ago, the universe began accelerating, meaning that El Gordo just might be the largest cosmic heavyweight of all. There's still more universe left to explore, but for right now, this is the heavyweight champion of the distant universe!
Learn more about “El Gordo” here: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/april/nasa-hubble-team-finds-monster-el-gordo-galaxy-cluster-bigger-than-thought/.
El Gordo is certainly huge, but what about really tiny galaxies? Kids can learn about satellite galaxies at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/satellite-galaxies/.
Image credit: NASA, ESA, J. Jee (UC Davis), J. Hughes (Rutgers U.), F. Menanteau (Rutgers U. and UIUC), C. Sifon (Leiden Observatory), R. Mandelbum (Carnegie Mellon U.), L. Barrientos (Universidad Catolica de Chile), and K. Ng (UC Davis). X-rays are shown in pink from Chandra; the overall matter density is shown in blue, from lensing derived from the Hubble space telescope. 10 billion light-years distant, El Gordo is the most massive galaxy cluster ever found.
Minor Mergers Have Massive Consequences for Black Holes
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
When you think of our sun, the nearest star to our world, you think of an isolated entity, with more than four light years separating it from its next nearest neighbor. But it wasn't always so: billions of years ago, when our sun was first created, it very likely formed in concert with thousands of other stars, when a giant molecular cloud containing perhaps a million times the mass of our solar system collapsed. While the vast majority of stars that the universe forms—some ninety-five percent—are the mass of our sun or smaller, a rare but significant fraction are ultra-massive, containing tens or even hundreds of times the mass our star contains. When these stars run out of fuel in their cores, they explode in a fantastic Type II supernova, where the star's core collapses. In the most massive cases, this forms a black hole.
Over time, many generations of stars—and hence, many black holes—form, with the majority eventually migrating towards the centers of their host galaxies and merging together. Our own galaxy, the Milky Way, houses a supermassive black hole that weighs in at about four million solar masses, while our big sister, Andromeda, has one nearly twenty times as massive. But even relatively isolated galaxies didn't simply form from the monolithic collapse of an isolated clump of matter, but by hierarchical mergers of smaller galaxies over tremendous timescales. If galaxies with large amounts of stars all have black holes at their centers, then we should be able to see some fraction of Milky Way-sized galaxies with not just one, but multiple supermassive black holes at their center!
It was only in the early 2000s that NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory was able to find the first binary supermassive black hole in a galaxy, and that was in an ultra-luminous galaxy with a double core. Many other examples were discovered since, but for a decade they were all in ultra-massive, active galaxies. That all changed in 2011, with the discovery of two active, massive black holes at the center of the regular spiral galaxy NGC 3393, a galaxy that must have undergone only minor mergers no less than a billion years ago, where the black hole pair is separated by only 490 light years! It's only in the cores of active, X-ray emitting galaxies that we can detect binary black holes like this. Examples like NGC 3393 and IC 4970 are not only confirming our picture of galaxy growth and formation, but are teaching us that supermassive relics from ancient, minor mergers might persist as standalone entities for longer than we ever thought!
Check out some cool images and artist reconstructions of black holes from Chandra: http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/category/blackholes.html.
Kids can learn all about Black Holes from this cool animation at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/black-holes.
Images credit: NGC 3393 in the optical (L) by M. Malkan (UCLA), HST, NASA (L); NGC 3393 in the X-ray and optical (R), composite by NASA / CXC / SAO / G. Fabbiano et al. (X-ray) and NASA/STScI (optical).
Keeping an Eye on Storms and More
By Kieran Mulvaney
In late July 2013, Tropical Storm Flossie barreled furiously toward Hawaii. The question was not if it would strike, but when and where it might do so.
During the afternoon hours of July 29, forecasts predicted landfall later that week on the state’s Big Island; however, by the time residents of the 50th state awoke the following morning things had changed. NOAA’s Central Pacific Hurricane Center warned that the islands of Oahu, Molokai and Maui were now at a greater risk.
This overnight recalculation was thanks to the Day/Night Band viewing capabilities of the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite, or VIIRS, on board the Suomi National Polar-Orbiting Partnership (Suomi NPP) satellite. VIIRS is able to collect visible imagery at night, according to Mitch Goldberg, program scientist for NOAA’s Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), of which Suomi NPP is a part. That means it was able to spot some high-level circulation further north than expected during the nighttime hours. This was an important observation which impacted the whole forecast. Without this forecast, said the Hurricane Center’s Tom Evans, “we would have basically been guessing on Tropical Storm Flossie's center.”
Polar-orbiting satellites, like Suomi NPP and the future JPSS-1 and JPSS-2 (scheduled for launch in 2017 and 2021, respectively), sweep in a longitudinal path over Earth as the planet rotates beneath them—scanning the globe twice a day. VIIRS, the imager that will be aboard all the JPSS satellites, images 3,000 km-wide swaths on each orbit, with each swath overlapping the next by 200 km to ensure uninterrupted global coverage. This high-resolution, rapidly updating coverage allows researchers to see weather patterns change in near real-time.
Instruments on Suomi NPP allow scientists to study such long-term changes too—things like, “the patterns of sea surface temperature, or coral bleaching,” says Goldberg. They are even used by the World Bank to determine how much energy is burned off and wasted from natural gas flares on oil drilling platforms.
While scientists are excited by the JPSS series’ wide range of capabilities, the ability to address pressing immediate concerns is, for many, the most tangible value. That was certainly the case in July 2013, when thanks to Suomi NPP, authorities had ample time to close ports and facilities, open shelters, activate emergency procedures, and issue flash flood warnings. Despite heavy rains, high surf, and widespread power outages, accidents and injuries were few. By the time the storm passed, Hawaii was soaked.
But it was largely unharmed.
Learn more about JPSS here: http://www.jpss.noaa.gov.
Kids can learn all about how hurricanes form at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/hurricanes.
Caption: S-NPP captured this image of Tropical Storm Flossie heading toward Hawaii using its VIIRS Combined Day-Night Band sensor. Credit: NOAA.
Where the Heavenliest of Showers Come From
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
You might think that, so long as Earth can successfully dodge the paths of rogue asteroids and comets that hurtle our way, it's going to be smooth, unimpeded sailing in our annual orbit around the sun. But the meteor showers that illuminate the night sky periodically throughout the year not only put on spectacular shows for us, they're direct evidence that interplanetary space isn't so empty after all!
When comets (or even asteroids) enter the inner solar system, they heat up, develop tails, and experience much larger tidal forces than they usually experience. Small pieces of the original object—often multiple kilometers in diameter—break off with each pass near the sun, continuing in an almost identical orbit, either slightly ahead-or-behind the object's main nucleus. While both the dust and ion tails are blown well off of the main orbit, the small pieces that break off are stretched, over time, into a diffuse ellipse following the same orbit as the comet or asteroid it arose from. And each time the Earth crosses the path of that orbit, the potential for a meteor shower is there, even after the parent comet or asteroid is completely gone!
This relationship was first uncovered by the British astronomer John Couch Adams, who found that the Leonid dust trail must have an orbital period of 33.25 years, and that the contemporaneously discovered comet Tempel-Tuttle shared its orbit. The most famous meteor showers in the night sky all have parent bodies identified with them, including the Lyrids (comet Thatcher), the Perseids (comet Swift-Tuttle), and what promises to be the best meteor shower of 2014: the Geminids (asteroid 3200 Phaethon). With an orbit of only 1.4 years, the Geminids have increased in strength since they first appeared in the mid-1800s, from only 10-to-20 meteors per hour up to more than 100 per hour at their peak today! Your best bet to catch the most is the night of December 13th, when they ought to be at maximum, before the Moon rises at about midnight.
The cometary (or asteroidal) dust density is always greatest around the parent body itself, so whenever it enters the inner solar system and the Earth passes near to it, there's a chance for a meteor storm, where observers at dark sky sites might see thousands of meteors an hour! The Leonids are well known for this, having presented spectacular shows in 1833, 1866, 1966 and a longer-period storm in the years 1998-2002. No meteor storms are anticipated for the immediate future, but the heavenliest of showers will continue to delight skywatchers for all the foreseeable years to come!
What’s the best way to see a meteor shower? Check out this article to find out: http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/asteroids/best-meteor-showers .
Kids can learn all about meteor showers at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/meteor-shower.
Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / W. Reach (SSC/Caltech), of Comet 73P/Schwassman-Wachmann 3, via NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, 2006.
Space Place in a Snap: Where Does the Sun's Energy Come From?
By The Space Place Team
This month, the Space Place is doing something a little bit different for our monthly column — providing you with a beautifully informative and educational poster about the mechanics of our sun. This poster accompanies our latest "Space Place in a Snap" animation. This "Snap" series is a set of narrated videos and posters that, together, explain basic scientific concepts in a dynamic new medium. Entertaining in their own right, we also wish to bring this new resource to your attention as an educational tool. In this edition, we address the important question of why our sun is so hot.
To download the poster as a pdf, click here: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/partners/2014-10/2014/sun-snap.pdf.
To see the video that goes along with this poster, visit: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/sun-heat.
Twinkle, Twinkle, Variable Star
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
As bright and steady as they appear, the stars in our sky won't shine forever. The steady brilliance of these sources of light is powered by a tumultuous interior, where nuclear processes fuse light elements and isotopes into heavier ones. Because the heavier nuclei up to iron (Fe), have a greater binding energies-per-nucleon, each reaction results in a slight reduction of the star's mass, converting it into energy via Einstein's famous equation relating changes in mass and energy output, E = mc2. Over timescales of tens of thousands of years, that energy migrates to the star's photosphere, where it's emitted out into the universe as starlight.
There's only a finite amount of fuel in there, and when stars run out, the interior contracts and heats up, often enabling heavier elements to burn at even higher temperatures, and causing sun-like stars to grow into red giants. Even though the cores of both hydrogen-burning and helium-burning stars have consistent, steady energy outputs, our sun's overall brightness varies by just ~0.1%, while red giants can have their brightness’s vary by factors of thousands or more over the course of a single year! In fact, the first periodic or pulsating variable star ever discovered—Mira (omicron Ceti)—behaves exactly in this way.
There are many types of variable stars, including Cepheids, RR Lyrae, cataclysmic variables and more, but it's the Mira-type variables that give us a glimpse into our Sun's likely future. In general, the cores of stars burn through their fuel in a very consistent fashion, but in the case of pulsating variable stars the outer layers of stellar atmospheres vary. Initially heating up and expanding, they overshoot equilibrium, reach a maximum size, cool, then often forming neutral molecules that behave as light-blocking dust, with the dust then falling back to the star, ionizing and starting the whole process over again. This temporarily neutral dust absorbs the visible light from the star and re-emits it, but as infrared radiation, which is invisible to our eyes. In the case of Mira (and many red giants), it's Titanium Monoxide (TiO) that causes it to dim so severely, from a maximum magnitude of +2 or +3 (clearly visible to the naked eye) to a minimum of +9 or +10, requiring a telescope (and an experienced observer) to find!
Visible in the constellation of Cetus during the fall-and-winter from the Northern Hemisphere, Mira is presently at magnitude +7 and headed towards its minimum, but will reach its maximum brightness again in May of next year and every 332 days thereafter. Shockingly, Mira contains a huge, 13 light-year-long tail -- visible only in the UV -- that it leaves as it rockets through the interstellar medium at 130 km/sec! Look for it in your skies all winter long, and contribute your results to the AAVSO (American Association of Variable Star Observers) International Database to help study its long-term behavior!
Check out some cool images and simulated animations of Mira here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/20070815/v.html.
Kids can learn all about Mira at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/mira/en/.
Caption and Images credit: NASA's Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) spacecraft, of Mira and its tail in UV light (top); Margarita Karovska (Harvard-Smithsonian CfA) / NASA's Hubble Space Telescope image of Mira, with the distortions revealing the presence of a binary companion (lower left); public domain image of Orion, the Pleiades and Mira (near maximum brightness) by Brocken Inaglory of Wikimedia Commons under CC-BY-SA-3.0 (lower right).
Droughts, Floods and the Earth's Gravity, by the GRACE of NASA
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
When you think about gravitation here on Earth, you very likely think about how constant it is, at 9.8 m/s2 (32 ft/s2). Only, that's not quite right. Depending on how thick the Earth's crust is, whether you're slightly closer to or farther from the Earth's center, or what the density of the material beneath you is, you'll experience slight variations in Earth's gravity as large as 0.2%, something you'd need to account for if you were a pendulum-clock-maker.
But surprisingly, the amount of water content stored on land in the Earth actually changes the gravity field of where you are by a significant, measurable amount. Over land, water is stored in lakes, rivers, aquifers, soil moisture, snow and glaciers. Even a change of just a few centimeters in the water table of an area can be clearly discerned by our best space-borne mission: NASA's twin Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites.
Since its 2002 launch, GRACE has seen the water-table-equivalent of the United States (and the rest of the world) change significantly over that time. Groundwater supplies are vital for agriculture and provide half of the world's drinking water. Yet GRACE has seen California's central valley and the southern high plains rapidly deplete their groundwater reserves, endangering a significant portion of the nation's food supply. Meanwhile, the upper Missouri River Basin—recently home to severe flooding—continues to see its water table rise.
NASA's GRACE satellites are the only pieces of equipment currently capable of making these global, precision measurements, providing our best knowledge for mitigating these terrestrial changes. Thanks to GRACE, we've been able to quantify the water loss of the Colorado River Basin (65 cubic kilometers), add months to the lead-time water managers have for flood prediction, and better predict the impacts of droughts worldwide. As NASA scientist Matthew Rodell says, "[W]ithout GRACE we would have no routine, global measurements of changes in groundwater availability. Other satellites can’t do it, and ground-based monitoring is inadequate." Even though the GRACE satellites are nearing the end of their lives, the GRACE Follow-On satellites will be launched in 2017, providing us with this valuable data far into the future. Although the climate is surely changing, it's water availability, not sea level rise, that's the largest near-term danger, and the most important aspect we can work to understand!
Learn more about NASA’s GRACE mission here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/.
Kids can learn all about launching objects into Earth’s orbit by shooting a (digital) cannonball on NASA’s Space Place website. Check it out at: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/how-orbits-work/.
Image credit: NASA Earth Observatory image by Jesse Allen, using GRACE data provide courtesy of Jay Famigleitti, University of California Irvine and Matthew Rodell, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Caption by Holli Riebeek.
The Invisible Shield of our Sun
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Whether you look at the planets within our solar system, the stars within our galaxy or the galaxies spread throughout the universe, it's striking how empty outer space truly is. Even though the largest concentrations of mass are separated by huge distances, interstellar space isn't empty: it's filled with dilute amounts of gas, dust, radiation and ionized plasma. Although we've long been able to detect these components remotely, it's only since 2012 that a manmade spacecraft --Voyager 1 -- successfully entered and gave our first direct measurements of the interstellar medium (ISM).
What we found was an amazing confirmation of the idea that our Sun creates a humongous "shield" around our solar system, the heliosphere, where the outward flux of the solar wind crashes against the ISM. Over 100 AU in radius, the heliosphere prevents the ionized plasma from the ISM from nearing the planets, asteroids and Kuiper belt objects contained within it. How? In addition to various wavelengths of light, the Sun is also a tremendous source of fast-moving, charged particles (mostly protons) that move between 300 and 800 km/s, or nearly 0.3% the speed of light. To achieve these speeds, these particles originate from the Sun's superheated corona, with temperatures in excess of 1,000,000 Kelvin!
When Voyager 1 finally left the heliosphere, it found a 40-fold increase in the density of ionized plasma particles. In addition, traveling beyond the heliopause showed a tremendous rise in the flux of intermediate-to-high energy cosmic ray protons, proving that our Sun shields our solar system quite effectively. Finally, it showed that the outer edges of the heliosheath consist of two zones, where the solar wind slows and then stagnates, and disappears altogether when you pass beyond the heliopause.
Unprotected passage through interstellar space would be life-threatening, as young stars, nebulae, and other intense energy sources pass perilously close to our solar system on ten-to-hundred-million-year timescales. Yet those objects pose no major danger to terrestrial life, as our Sun's invisible shield protects us from all but the rarer, highest energy cosmic particles. Even if we pass through a region like the Orion Nebula, our heliosphere keeps the vast majority of those dangerous ionized particles from impacting us, shielding even the solar system's outer worlds quite effectively. NASA spacecraft like the Voyagers, IBEX and SOHO continue to teach us more about our great cosmic shield and the ISM's irregularities. We're not helpless as we hurtle through it; the heliosphere gives us all the protection we need!
Want to learn more about Voyager 1’s trip into interstellar space? Check this out: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-278.
Kids can test their knowledge about the Sun at NASA’s Space place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/solar-tricktionary/.
Caption and Image credit: Hubble Heritage Team (AURA / STScI), C. R. O'Dell (Vanderbilt), and NASA, of the star LL Orionis and its heliosphere interacting with interstellar gas and plasma near the edge of the Orion Nebula (M42). Unlike our star, LL Orionis displays a bow shock, something our Sun will regain when the ISM next collides with us at a sufficiently large relative velocity.
A Glorious Gravitational Lens
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
As we look at the universe on larger and larger scales, from stars to galaxies to groups to the largest galaxy clusters, we become able to perceive objects that are significantly farther away. But as we consider these larger classes of objects, they don't merely emit increased amounts of light, but they also contain increased amounts of mass. Under the best of circumstances, these gravitational clumps can open up a window to the distant universe well beyond what any astronomer could hope to see otherwise.
The oldest style of telescope is the refractor, where light from an arbitrarily distant source is passed through a converging lens. The incoming light rays—initially spread over a large area—are brought together at a point on the opposite side of the lens, with light rays from significantly closer sources bent in characteristic ways as well. While the universe doesn't consist of large optical lenses, mass itself is capable of bending light in accord with Einstein's theory of General Relativity, and acts as a gravitational lens!
The first prediction that real-life galaxy clusters would behave as such lenses came from Fritz Zwicky in 1937. These foreground masses would lead to multiple images and distorted arcs of the same lensed background object, all of which would be magnified as well. It wasn't until 1979, however, that this process was confirmed with the observation of the Twin Quasar: QSO 0957+561. Gravitational lensing requires a serendipitous alignment of a massive foreground galaxy cluster with a background galaxy (or cluster) in the right location to be seen by an observer at our location, but the universe is kind enough to provide us with many such examples of this good fortune, including one accessible to astrophotographers with 11" scopes and larger: Abell 2218.
Located in the Constellation of Draco at position (J2000): R.A. 16h 35m 54s, Dec. +66° 13' 00" (about 2° North of the star 18 Draconis), Abell 2218 is an extremely massive cluster of about 10,000 galaxies located 2 billion light years away, but it's also located quite close to the zenith for northern hemisphere observers, making it a great target for deep-sky astrophotography. Multiple images and sweeping arcs abound between magnitudes 17 and 20, and include galaxies at a variety of redshifts ranging from z=0.7 all the way up to z=2.5, with farther ones at even fainter magnitudes unveiled by Hubble. For those looking for an astronomical challenge this summer, take a shot at Abell 2218, a cluster responsible for perhaps the most glorious gravitational lens visible from Earth!
Learn about current efforts to study gravitational lensing using NASA facilities: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/january/nasas-fermi-makes-first-gamma-ray-study-of-a-gravitational-lens/.
Kids can learn about gravity at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/what-is-gravity/.
Caption: Abel 2218. Image credit: NASA, ESA, and Johan Richard (Caltech). Acknowledgement: Davide de Martin & James Long (ESA/Hubble).
The Hottest Planet in the Solar System
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
When you think about the four rocky planets in our Solar System—Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars—you probably think about them in that exact order: sorted by their distance from the Sun. It wouldn't surprise you all that much to learn that the surface of Mercury reaches daytime temperatures of up to 800°F (430°C), while the surface of Mars never gets hotter than 70°F (20°C) during summer at the equator. On both of these worlds, however, temperatures plummet rapidly during the night; Mercury reaches lows of -280°F (-173°C) while Mars, despite having a day comparable to Earth's in length, will have a summer's night at the equator freeze to temperatures of -100°F (-73°C).
Those temperature extremes from day-to-night don't happen so severely here on Earth, thanks to our atmosphere that's some 140 times thicker than that of Mars. Our average surface temperature is 57°F (14°C), and day-to-night temperature swings are only tens of degrees. But if our world were completely airless, like Mercury, we'd have day-to-night temperature swings that were hundreds of degrees. Additionally, our average surface temperature would be significantly colder, at around 0°F (-18°C), as our atmosphere functions like a blanket: trapping a portion of the heat radiated by our planet and making the entire atmosphere more uniform in temperature.
But it's the second planet from the Sun -- Venus -- that puts the rest of the rocky planets' atmospheres to shame. With an atmosphere 93 times as thick as Earth's, made up almost entirely of carbon dioxide, Venus is the ultimate planetary greenhouse, letting sunlight in but hanging onto that heat with incredible effectiveness. Despite being nearly twice as far away from the Sun as Mercury, and hence only receiving 29% the sunlight-per-unit-area, the surface of Venus is a toasty 864°F (462°C), with no difference between day-and-night temperatures! Even though Venus takes hundreds of Earth days to rotate, its winds circumnavigate the entire planet every four days (with speeds of 220 mph / 360 kph), making day-and-night temperature differences irrelevant.
Catch the hottest planet in our Solar System all spring-and-summer long in the pre-dawn skies, as it waxes towards its full phase, moving away from the Earth and towards the opposite side of the Sun, which it will finally slip behind in November. A little atmospheric greenhouse effect seems to be exactly what we need here on Earth, but as much as Venus? No thanks!
Check out these “10 Need-to-Know Things About Venus”: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Venus .
Kids can learn more about the crazy weather on Venus and other places in the Solar System at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/planet-weather.
Caption: NASA's Pioneer Venus Orbiter image of Venus's upper-atmosphere clouds as seen in the ultraviolet, 1979.
The Power of the Sun's Engines
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Here on Earth, the sun provides us with the vast majority of our energy, striking the top of the atmosphere with up to 1,000 Watts of power per square meter, albeit highly dependent on the sunlight's angle-of-incidence. But remember that the sun is a whopping 150 million kilometers away, and sends an equal amount of radiation in all directions; the Earth-facing direction is nothing special. Even considering sunspots, solar flares, and long-and-short term variations in solar irradiance, the sun's energy output is always constant to about one-part-in-1,000. All told, our parent star consistently outputs an estimated 4 × 1026 Watts of power; one second of the sun's emissions could power all the world's energy needs for over 700,000 years.
That's a literally astronomical amount of energy, and it comes about thanks to the hugeness of the sun. With a radius of 700,000 kilometers, it would take 109 Earths, lined up from end-to-end, just to go across the diameter of the sun once. Unlike our Earth, however, the sun is made up of around 70% hydrogen by mass, and it's the individual protons — or the nuclei of hydrogen atoms — that fuse together, eventually becoming helium-4 and releasing a tremendous amount of energy. All told, for every four protons that wind up becoming helium-4, a tiny bit of mass — just 0.7% of the original amount — gets converted into energy by E=mc2, and that's where the sun's power originates.
You'd be correct in thinking that fusing ~4 × 1038 protons-per-second gives off a tremendous amount of energy, but remember that nuclear fusion occurs in a huge region of the sun: about the innermost quarter (in radius) is where 99% of it is actively taking place. So there might be 4 × 1026 Watts of power put out, but that's spread out over 2.2 × 1025 cubic meters, meaning the sun's energy output per-unit-volume is just 18 W / m3. Compare this to the average human being, whose basal metabolic rate is equivalent to around 100 Watts, yet takes up just 0.06 cubic meters of space. In other words, you emit 100 times as much energy-per-unit-volume as the sun! It's only because the sun is so large and massive that its power is so great.
It's this slow process, releasing huge amounts of energy per reaction over an incredibly large volume, that has powered life on our world throughout its entire history. It may not appear so impressive if you look at just a tiny region, but — at least for our sun — that huge size really adds up!
Check out these “10 Need-to-Know Things About the Sun”: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Sun .
Kids can learn more about an intriguing solar mystery at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/sun-corona.
Caption: Composite of 25 images of the sun, showing solar outburst/activity over a 365 day period. Image credit: NASA/Solar Dynamics Observatory/Atmospheric Imaging Assembly/S. Wiessinger; post-processing by E. Siegel.
Old Tool, New Use: GPS and the Terrestrial Reference Frame
By Alex H. Kasprak
Flying over 1300 kilometers above Earth, the Jason 2 satellite knows its distance from the ocean down to a matter of centimeters, allowing for the creation of detailed maps of the ocean’s surface. This information is invaluable to oceanographers and climate scientists. By understanding the ocean’s complex topography—its barely perceptible hills and troughs—these scientists can monitor the pace of sea level rise, unravel the intricacies of ocean currents, and project the effects of future climate change.
But these measurements would be useless if there were not some frame of reference to put them in context. A terrestrial reference frame, ratified by an international group of scientists, serves that purpose. “It’s a lot like air,” says JPL scientist Jan Weiss. “It’s all around us and is vitally important, but people don’t really think about it.” Creating such a frame of reference is more of a challenge than you might think, though. No point on the surface of Earth is truly fixed.
To create a terrestrial reference frame, you need to know the distance between as many points as possible. Two methods help achieve that goal. Very-long baseline interferometry uses multiple radio antennas to monitor the signal from something very far away in space, like a quasar. The distance between the antennas can be calculated based on tiny changes in the time it takes the signal to reach them. Satellite laser ranging, the second method, bounces lasers off of satellites and measures the two-way travel time to calculate distance between ground stations.
Weiss and his colleagues would like to add a third method into the mix—GPS. At the moment, GPS measurements are used only to tie together the points created by very long baseline interferometry and satellite laser ranging together, not to directly calculate a terrestrial reference frame.
“There hasn’t been a whole lot of serious effort to include GPS directly,” says Weiss. His goal is to show that GPS can be used to create a terrestrial reference frame on its own. “The thing about GPS that’s different from very-long baseline interferometry and satellite laser ranging is that you don’t need complex and expensive infrastructure and can deploy many stations all around the world.”
Feeding GPS data directly into the calculation of a terrestrial reference frame could lead to an even more accurate and cost effective way to reference points geospatially. This could be good news for missions like Jason 2. Slight errors in the terrestrial reference frame can create significant errors where precise measurements are required. GPS stations could prove to be a vital and untapped resource in the quest to create the most accurate terrestrial reference frame possible. “The thing about GPS,” says Weiss, “is that you are just so data rich when compared to these other techniques.”
You can learn more about NASA’s efforts to create an accurate terrestrial reference frame here: http://http://space-geodesy.nasa.gov/.
Caption: Artist’s interpretation of the Jason 2 satellite. To do its job properly, satellites like Jason 2 require as accurate a terrestrial reference frame as possible. Image courtesy: NASA/JPL-Caltech.
A Two-Toned Wonder from the Saturnian Outskirts
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Although Saturn has been known as long as humans have been watching the night sky, it's only since the invention of the telescope that we've learned about the rings and moons of this giant, gaseous world. You might know that the largest of Saturn's moons is Titan, the second largest moon in the entire Solar System, discovered by Christiaan Huygens in 1655. It was just 16 years later, in 1671, that Giovanni Cassini (for whom the famed division in Saturn's rings—and the NASA mission now in orbit there—is named) discovered the second of Saturn's moons: Iapetus. Unlike Titan, Iapetus could only be seen when it was on the west side of Saturn, leading Cassini to correctly conclude that not only was Iapetus tidally locked to Saturn, but that its trailing hemisphere was intrinsically brighter than its darker, leading hemisphere. This has very much been confirmed in modern times!
In fact, the darkness of the leading side is comparable to coal, while the rest of Iapetus is as white as thick sea ice. Iapetus is the most distant of all of Saturn's large moons, with an average orbital distance of 3.5 million km, but the culprit of the mysterious dark side is four times as distant: Saturn's remote, captured moon, the dark, heavily cratered Phoebe!
Orbiting Saturn in retrograde, or the opposite direction to Saturn's rotation and most of its other Moons, Phoebe most probably originated in the Kuiper Belt, migrating inwards and eventually succumbing to gravitational capture. Due to its orbit, Phoebe is constantly bombarded by micrometeoroid-sized (and larger) objects, responsible for not only its dented and cavity-riddled surface, but also for a huge, diffuse ring of dust grains spanning quadrillions of cubic kilometers! The presence of the "Phoebe Ring" was only discovered in 2009, by NASA's infrared-sensitive Spitzer Space Telescope. As the Phoebe Ring's dust grains absorb and re-emit solar radiation, they spiral inwards towards Saturn, where they smash into Iapetus—orbiting in the opposite direction—like bugs on a highway windshield. Was the dark, leading edge of Iapetus due to it being plastered with material from Phoebe? Did those impacts erode the bright surface layer away, revealing a darker substrate?
In reality, the dark particles picked up by Iapetus aren't enough to explain the incredible brightness differences alone, but they absorb and retain just enough extra heat from the Sun during Iapetus' day to sublimate the ice around it, which resolidifies preferentially on the trailing side, lightening it even further. So it's not just a thin, dark layer from an alien moon that turns Iapetus dark; it's the fact that surface ice sublimates and can no longer reform atop the leading side that darkens it so severely over time. And that story—only confirmed by observations in the last few years—is the reason for the one-of-a-kind appearance of Saturn's incredible two-toned moon, Iapetus!
Learn more about Iapetus here: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/science/moons/iapetus.
Kids can learn more about Saturn’s rings at NASA’s Space Place: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/saturn-rings.
Caption: Saturn & the Phoebe Ring (middle). Images credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Keck; Iapetus (top left) - NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute/Cassini Imaging Team; Phoebe (bottom right) - NASA/ESA/JPL/Space Science Institute/Cassini Imaging Team.
Surprising Young Stars in the Oldest Places in the Universe
By Dr. Ethan Siegel
Littered among the stars in our night sky are the famed deep-sky objects. These range from extended spiral and elliptical galaxies millions or even billions of light years away to the star clusters, nebulae, and stellar remnants strewn throughout our own galaxy. But there's an intermediate class of objects, too: the globular star clusters, self-contained clusters of stars found in spherically-distributed halos around each galaxy.
Back before there were any stars or galaxies in the universe, it was an expanding, cooling sea of matter and radiation containing regions where the matter was slightly more dense in some places than others. While gravity worked to pull more and more matter into these places, the pressure from radiation pushed back, preventing the gravitational collapse of gas clouds below a certain mass. In the young universe, this meant no clouds smaller than around a few hundred thousand times the mass of our Sun could collapse. This coincides with a globular cluster's typical mass, and their stars are some of the oldest in the universe!
These compact, spherical collections of stars are all less than 100 light-years in radius, but typically have around 100,000 stars inside them, making them nearly 100 times denser than our neighborhood of the Milky Way! The vast majority of globular clusters have extremely few heavy elements (heavier than helium), as little as 1% of what we find in our Sun. There's a good reason for this: our Sun is only 4.5 billion years old and has seen many generations of stars live-and-die, while globular clusters (and the stars inside of them) are often over 13 billion years old, or more than 90% the age of the universe! When you look inside one of these cosmic collections, you're looking at some of the oldest stellar swarms in the known universe.
Yet when you look at a high-resolution image of these relics from the early universe, you'll find a sprinkling of hot, massive, apparently young blue stars! Is there a stellar fountain of youth inside? Kind of! These massive stellar swarms are so dense -- especially towards the center -- that mergers, mass siphoning and collisions between stars are quite common. When two long-lived, low-mass stars interact in these ways, they produce a hotter, bluer star that will be much shorter lived, known as a blue straggler star. First discovered by Allan Sandage in 1953, these young-looking stars arise thanks to stellar cannibalism. So enjoy the brightest and bluest stars in these globular clusters, found right alongside the oldest known stars in the universe!
Learn about a recent globular cluster discovery here: http://www.nasa.gov/press/2013/september/hubble-uncovers-largest-known-group-of-star-clusters-clues-to-dark-matter.gov.
Kids can learn more about how stars work by listening to The Space Place’s own Dr. Marc: http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/podcasts/en/#stars.
Caption: Globular Cluster NGC 6397. Credit: ESA & Francesco Ferraro (Bologna Astronomical Observatory)/NASA, Hubble Space Telescope, WFPC2.