Deep Impact Update

yevaud · Mar 17, 2006

Ice layers record comet creation The Deep Impact mission is casting new light on how comets formed and how they shed their ice in space. The US space agency probe sent a 370kg projectile crashing into Comet Tempel 1 and then studied the plume of debris with its suite of instruments. Nasa's mission scientists say images from last July's encounter reveal as many as seven different layers on the comet's surface. Their results were presented at a major science conference in Houston, US. Team member Mike Belton told the meeting he thought the layering was a sign of how comets like Tempel 1 were built up from lesser objects. In the outer part of the early Solar System, smaller bodies called cometesimals collided and merged, gradually piling up to form the larger objects we know as comets. Similar collisions in the inner Solar System led to a loose accumulation of fragments that largely retained their internal structure. But primordial material in the outer regions was travelling at relatively lower speeds and contained less solid material. As the cometesimals hit the surface of a growing comet nucleus, they "flowed" on to the surface, researchers believe. Deep Impact's scientists think the interior structure of Tempel 1 resembles layers of material piled up on one another - a signature of the process that formed the icy body. Full Story <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

*YAWN!* This tells us absolutely nothing. Nasa's mission scientists say images from last July's encounter reveal as many as seven different layers on the comet's surface. Where are the images?! There hasn't been an image update on the official Deep Impact Web site since last October! Was one of those "seven different layers" a layer of ice "not below the top metre" of the comet surface? Again, where are the images? As the cometesimals hit the surface of a growing comet nucleus, they "flowed" on to the surface, researchers believe. Deep Impact's scientists think the interior structure of Tempel 1 resembles layers of material piled up on one another - a signature of the process that formed the icy body. [Emphasis added.] These sound like guesses to me. In fact, the whole scenario sounds like it was put together with tape and spit...kind of like their hypothesized "cometesimals." <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> After reading the article, especially the "Growing 'snowball'" section, I had an irresistable urge to add, "Yeah, that's the ticket!" Seriously, since the above post involves a great deal of obvious speculation, and this thread may feature more such fantasizing, I respectfully suggest that this thread be moved to the Phenomena forum. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

yevaud · Mar 17, 2006

Clearly, you have a different skew on this. Please prove it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

Prove WHAT? I'm just saying that I don't buy it. Period. Indeed, I would call on NASA to "prove it." WHERE ARE THE IMAGES? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

yevaud · Mar 17, 2006

The images are probably still being assessed by NASA, JPL, and so on. They *do* get first whack at them, you know. As far as the "prove it" part, if you vehemently disagree, then you must have an alternate solution. Please state it and prove it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

Try here. Edit: This is the official mission home page. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

yevaud · Mar 17, 2006

Well, well. Wasn't so hard after all, huh? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />The images are probably still being assessed by NASA, JPL, and so on. They *do* get first whack at them, you know.<hr /></blockquote> If that is the case, then what was the purpose of this press release, in the first place? Why not make this announcement IN CONJUNCTION WITH the release of the images showing a seven-layered crater? <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />As far as the "prove it" part, if you vehemently disagree, then you must have an alternate solution. Please state it and prove it.<hr /></blockquote> Can YOU "prove" that there was such a thing as a "solar nebula?" Or "cometesimals?" <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Try here.<hr /></blockquote> Thank you. I may have missed them, but I do not see any images of a seven-layered crater there, either. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

The photos/illustrations that may have accompanied the last press release haven't been posted. Apparently, I misunderstood your statement: "Where are the images?! There hasn't been an image update on the official Deep Impact Web site since last October!" I thought you were talking about images and information in general. When the illustrations/photos that may have accompanied the press release are posted, they'll likely be on the University of Maryland site first. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

Yeah. I was talking specifically about images related directly to this release. Also, I hope that they don't release "illustrations." I'm not interested in drawings, I want to see the "images from last July's encounter [that] reveal as many as seven different layers on the comet's surface." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

The UM site is on my list of favorites. I check it once in a while to see if anything new has been released. If there are photos or illustrations, I'll post the link. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

Again, if they're just illustrations, save the effort. Anyone can make a drawing of anything that they like. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

Well, I wasn't thinking of posting the link just for you, Sirius. You might not be interested in the illustrations that accompanied the release, but others might. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

siriusmre · Mar 17, 2006

Of course! I'm just letting it be known where I am on this. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

bonzelite · Mar 17, 2006

the article is another lame attempt to ad hoc core accretion theory. the wording is very reaching, vague, stupid, is typical "press-release-ese" and explains nothing conclusive; the same guesses repackaged. they do not know whatsoever how comets formed via the deep impact data using their myopic accretion idea, but moreover, yet AGAIN, we see the hackneyed and trite "diry snowball" fallacy that has become the village idiot of "official" decrees. at least the article redeems itself at the end ---excerpt from the article: When comets are heated by the Sun, ice sublimes and is lost to space in a process known as outgassing. Some scientists have proposed that this material is coming from deep below the surface crust of the comet. But temperature data from Tempel 1's nucleus suggests the material must be lost from only a few centimetres below the surface. "The normal outgassing of the comet has been modelled by different people as coming from bare ice on the surface to subsurface ice that migrates through pores to escape, or from 40-50m below the surface," Deep Impact's chief scientist Mike A'Hearn told the BBC News website. "I think it is clear from what we have here that the ice that is subliming is within the upper metre. Whether it's 5cm or 20cm below, I wouldn't want to say; but it's not below the top metre. That rules out a lot of the models." Yevaud, i know this is another attempt by you to sell dirty snowballs to us and we are not buying them anymore. the layers and layers of the comet are not layers and layers of frosty the snowman. the comet is dust with volatiles. find another story. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

Yevaud, i know this is another attempt by you to sell dirty snowballs to us and we are not buying them anymore. It's a bit much (and unnecessary) to make it personal, isn't it Bonz? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

bonzelite · Mar 17, 2006

yevaud will bring it. he is a big boy now. i'm ready to get what he brings back. he'll be back later. so where are you, telfrow? where is your opinion? let's hear it. let's hear your opinion about frosty the snowman. step up to the plate. let's stick with the premise of the dirty snowman that is being force fed to us like rotten liver pate'.

yevaud · Mar 17, 2006

Well, it's very simple, Sirius. If you so vehemently disagree with the findings of the Mission teams, then you must coversely, have your own theory on what is or isn't occurring with respect to comets. Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to request that you explain to me what you think that is, and why. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

bonzelite · Mar 17, 2006

" they are composed of a great deal of water ice, in fact." that's fact, stevie?

maxtheknife · Mar 17, 2006

Yeowzaaa!

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

so where are you, telfrow? I made it clear, Bonz, in the Ice On Comet Tempel 1 thread when I posted information about the Giotto encounter with Halley. Here's a repost of the final statement I made in that post: So nearly 20 tons of gas per second was emitted from about 10% of the nucleus, with 80% of the gas emitted identified as water. That's 16 tons per second of water from just 10% of the surface. Roughly, that's 960 tons of water per hour, 23,040 tons of water per day and 161,280 tons of water per week. That's one heck of a lot of water. So, once again, I pose the question: if it didn't come from a "dirty snowball, " "snowy dirtball," "dirty iceball" or "icy dirtball," where the heck it come from? Edited for spelling. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

bonzelite · Mar 17, 2006

you don't seem to understand, do you? volatile content does not make the whole comet frosty the snowcone. you want to repost that whole thread, i'd be happy to see that. i will find it and just repost everything, then. and we can have the same argument again and again until a comet comes and impacts the earth and we're all vaporized. comet halley is not the written book on comets, nor is it's high water vapor content in the tail a slam-dunk that the coma is composed of mostly water. further data on other comets is demonstrating this.

telfrow · Mar 17, 2006

I never said it did, did I? I reposted that statement because you asked (demanded) I (re)define my position. You apparently forgot what that position was. So I posted it again. 80% of the content of the outgassing was water. The other 20% was dust. There is evidence that ratio, at times, may have changed to 1 to 1, or a 50-50 mix. So it's not all water. But there is a significant amount of water in a comet. And there is also a significant amount of dust. Frosty snowcone? Dirty iceball? Icy snowball? IMO, it's probably more like a icy sponge. A loosely compacted collection of dust and water ice, covered by a layer of accumulated dust. So answer the question: where the heck does does all that water come from? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild. - Tennyson </div>

yevaud · Mar 18, 2006

Anvel, I'd provide better source material, but this was essentially it. Even many of the science sites with sections on Deep Impact link to the same BBC story. Sorry. As to the acrimony that has suddenly popped up in this thread: this was posted as an interesting news update, and nothing more. If some of you so choose to turn this into a source of tension, that's your business; I was merely trying to be informative. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

Deep Impact Update

yevaud

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

yevaud

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

yevaud

Guest

telfrow

Guest

yevaud

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

telfrow

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

telfrow

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

telfrow

Guest

siriusmre

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

telfrow

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

yevaud

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

maxtheknife

Guest

telfrow

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

telfrow

Guest

yevaud

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page