"Weird Crystals" Found in Comet Wild 2 Sample

jatslo · Feb 22, 2006

20-million more to go <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

Saiph · Feb 22, 2006

mike: First, I'll acknowledge that NASA was an extension of the US air force. However, it is expressly been a civilian agency for over 4 decades. however, it does recieve a lot of funding from the military..why? The military recognizes the militaristic capabilities of technology developed by nasa, for nasa. Nasa developes new rocket engine to better launch satellites. Military see's new long range missle engine. That does not make nasa military, only that it contracts with the military. jatslo: Well, you're top ten didn't prove your point. Try digging harder to provide coherent evidence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Feb 22, 2006

First: I resent being accused of calmly, and with calculated intent, creating propaganda. If you make accusations that I have intentionally misled people on this board, you better back it up with concrete evidence. Maybe I didn't make myself clear...the MER situation was an exception made for specific reasons that don't normally apply. 99.99% of what NASA does the public, unfortunately, doesn't care about. So, NASA doesn't go through any extraordinary measures (like publicized, real time data releases) to bring it to their attention. was that evasive? NO, it was providing the specific reasons NASA made the exception. Did I think the MER data release was a good idea? Yes. Would I like to see it more often? Yes. Do I think NASA is covering up things when they adhere to their long-standing standard policy of a 1-year hold? No. Why? Because the 1-year hold motivates people to use NASA facilities. People would think twice before using them, if they were under considerable risk of having the hard work put into creating the proposal, monitoring the work, and analyzing the data, just to get scooped (making all that data analysis redundant). I would instead use some other facility, like keck, subaru, etc, to do the work. That and the data is eventually released. Look at the Sload Digital Sky survey. Heck, I've pulled actual data out of there and worked it into a paper (that's being published). Anyway: Who am I? Look at my user profile. I don't hide anything other than my specific personal information (real name etc). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

JonClarke · Feb 22, 2006

And other good thread seems to be doomed for phenomena because people can't stick to the point and want to bring in conspiratorial rubbish. Isn't thread hickacking a violation of the TOS? Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

Saiph · Feb 22, 2006

Not technically, and I probably shouldn't have risen to the bait myself. I'm willing to cut and run (even into another thread if desired). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

bonzelite · Feb 22, 2006

the proof is further provided in this erroneous exchange, as the position shifts from outright denial that NASA is military, to a provisional basis for military involvement. "ok. yes. NASA was a military wing, but today is only an occasional subcontractor to the military, with some funding from the military. so it really has nothing to do with the military, but it does. ok?" mike: First, I'll acknowledge that NASA was an extension of the US air force. However, it is expressly been a civilian agency for over 4 decades. however, it does recieve a lot of funding from the military..why? The military recognizes the militaristic capabilities of technology developed by nasa, for nasa. Nasa developes new rocket engine to better launch satellites. Military see's new long range missle engine. That does not make nasa military, only that it contracts with the military. she's half-pregnant.

Saiph · Feb 22, 2006

you said NASA was a military entity. That's different than contracting for the military. anyway, I'm done with the NASA rant in the thread. You want to hash it out more, I'll join you in another thread. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

bonzelite · Feb 22, 2006

yep, better cut your losses and turn tail.

JonClarke · Feb 22, 2006

What the???? You are generally reasonably level headed and generally reasd to learn so where does this over the top and completely uncalled for stuff come from? Terms like "Double talk", "diversionary propaganda", "erroneous", and "nonsensical" applied to a contribuitor of Saiph's calibre amounts to a personal attack. This is a violation of the TOS. So is thread hijacking. If you really want to a conspiracy exchange about stardust, start it in phenomena where it belongs. If you do, you will need facts, not assertion. Keep this thread to discussion about the actual discoveries of the mission, please. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

bonzelite · Feb 22, 2006

hello, Jon. haven't seen you in a while. as a sidebar, i've read most of the Hartmann book. here is a cool overview video on Stardust: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0113_060113_stardust_video.html and this: http://www.planetary.org/news/2006/0119_Stardust_Samples_Returned_from_Space_In.html of note is that the Stardust return mission is the first in 30+ years to actually return anything from space.

telfrow · Feb 22, 2006

whomever or whatever "Saiph" is... Well, Bonz, you almost said it publicly. <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.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>

telfrow · Feb 22, 2006

Back on track. Jon, the forsterite reported from the Stardust sample is also found in iron meteorites, isn't it? <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>

telfrow · Feb 22, 2006

Well, maybe this qualifies as a "weird" crystal... <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Stardust Status Report 02/21/06 Happy Valentine's from Stardust! As part of the first Sample Processing Cycle, the keystone of the first released particle was taken to the National Synchrotron Light Source at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York and examined by the far-IR beam. The particle was shown to be definitely a cometary mineral and not secondary debris. As part of the second Sample Processing Cycle, the terminal particle - the particle at the end of the tract - was removed from the keystone for further analyses on Valentine's Day. To our surprise, we found the particle to be heart-shaped! Happy Valentine's to the world from Stardust! I have been assured that this is the real shape of the particle! This particle will be embedded in sulfur first with few wafers removed for mineralogy and petrology studies, and then the remainder of the particle will be pressed into Au foil for isotopic studies. 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>

exoscientist · Feb 22, 2006

stevehw33 said: Those are NOT weird crystals. They are typical of meteoritic materials and little more. Sadly, our hyped media finds it necessary to add misleading 'teasers' to titles of articles, which do little but undermine their credibility and ethics. In what was otherwise a VERY interesting article, altho MSNBC is hardly a trustworthy source, given NBC"s sordid & LONG history of such things as 'human footprints' found near dinorsaur's and legions of other discreditted stuff, almost as bad as Fox and other such tripe. Apparently one can't get the news much any more without having to sort out the cra--ola. There were "wacky" results reported by a British team, as discussed in the Nature article linked in the first post of this thread. Presumably those British researchers know olivine and simple organics are well known to exist in comets. Then one imagines they were referring to something else. Bob Clark <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

chew_on_this · Feb 22, 2006

Steves posts tend to be on the "wacky" side anyway. Comprehension is not his strong suit.

mikeemmert · Feb 22, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Back on track.<hr /></blockquote>(Whew!) This is my greatest concern right now. Astronauts on lunar missions all reported a strong smell like gunpowder from lunar dust. But the smell has gone away. If people take this material out now, they can no longer detect the distinctive odor. There seem to be two main theories on this; dangling, high-energy chemical bonds from meteorite-shattered crystals modifying the atmosphere of the lander, or imbedded solar wind particles. Since all astronauts smelled the same thing, it's unlikely to be observer error. What was that smell, really? That information is lost forever. They started sending up thermos-like bottles to hold the samples, but the sharp edges of the moondust ripped the seals to shreds. Or, perhaps, the same energetic chemicals responsible for the smell attacked the seals. At any rate, the samples were contaminated. I hope this mission avoided that tragedy.

paulanderson · Feb 22, 2006

Yes, I pointed that out also, a few posts ago. The scientists themselves described (or hinted at) what they found as being unusual, in their own words, but again, stevew33 took it out of context, and goes on to criticize MSNBC, which had nothing to do with that initial Nature report that I posted.

silylene old · Feb 23, 2006

Well, I have to say, occaisonally I have seen some weird and unexpected crystals at work, formed as particulate residues in contaminated plasma etch chambers. These are very tiny, and can be imaged in a SEM. Perhaps I will post a picture next time I come across one (I didn't save any on my harddrive). Sometimes these crystals from the etch chambers look rather like the pictures posted here. No one has ever researched these particles in detail to my knowledge, and I couldn't find anything on the net. The extreme conditions in a plasma etch chamber and the extreme conditions in space do have some aspects in common. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

JonClarke · Feb 23, 2006

Fosterite, magnesium olivine, Mg2SiO4, is one of God's favourite minerals. It's is found in comets, meteorites, and stellar nebulae, as well as being a common mineral in the crust and mantle of terrestrial planets. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

telfrow · Feb 23, 2006

That's what I thought. Thanks, Jon. <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>

paulanderson · Feb 26, 2006

Oh yes, I'm well aware that organic compounds don't necessarily mean evidence for life, but still an important finding. Another article also, from Discovery Channel: Comet Dust Has Hints of Organic Matter http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20060220/stardust_spa.html

dmjspace · Mar 1, 2006

centsworth_II said: "They are typical of meteoritic materials and little more.' You should take more care to not confuse meteors and comets. Or do you belong to the asteroids = comets crowd? Ha ha! How delightfully ironic! stevehw33 has been one of the most vociferous critics of the "asteroids=comets" model (the EPH, specifically). His latest post just shows how muddled the differences between the two entities have become. Hint: whenever you hear a scientist being quoted saying "this is weird," it means "Holy crap. I didn't predict this." The EPH predicts the compositions of comets and asteroids will be essentially the same. Wild 2 is showing the same "weird" stuff the snowball model didn't expect: evidence of superheated or "processed" elements, such as olivine or this gem, forsterite/peridot. The EPH predicts comets will be little different from asteroids. It predicts the presence of compounds formed in the presence of liquid water. It expects highly evolved compounds. The "dirty snowball" model has enough nails in its coffin already. But I guess a few more won't hurt to drive the point home to the staunchest dirty snowball believers.

dmjspace · Mar 1, 2006

Saiph said: as for nasa being a military entity: please, support that statement. From what I know of how it's organized, it isn't anything of the sort. With regard to the discoveries NASA makes in its explorations, the National Aeronautics and Space Act, in concordance with the United State Code (Title 42, Chapter 26, Subchapter I, Section 2457 (i)), states that “the Administration shall be considered a defense agency of the United States.” The significance of this clause may not be readily apparent. Yet, along with the Constitution of the United States—which charges the government first and foremost with “providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States,”—this clause guarantees that matters deemed crucial to the country’s national security will be handled by military minds—not NASA scientists. Does NASA make discoveries that could be considered vital to "national security" interests? Probably. Is the Wild 2 finding one of them? Probably not. But the loophole is there. And the eagerness with which the current administration slaps a "national security" tag on things, you can bet that loophole is being used to its fullest extent. Perhaps next time we're tempted to repeat the mantra that NASA is purely a civilian agency, we'll think twice about furthering that myth.

CalliArcale · Mar 1, 2006

Okay, folks, this thread got back on track once. Please don't resume the digression. If you want to discuss whether NASA is secretly a military agency or somesuch, please do it in a different thread. It is not appropriate for this thread and displaces discussion of the Stardust samples. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Mar 1, 2006

I don't want to continue the NASA tangent, but I would like to point out that dmj just suplied the sort of solid evidence required to support that statement. That's evidence I can respect. With that, if anybody wishes to discuss this further, lets adjourn to another thread (or PM's). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

"Weird Crystals" Found in Comet Wild 2 Sample

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

Saiph

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

Saiph

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

bonzelite

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

telfrow

Guest

exoscientist

Guest

chew_on_this

Guest

mikeemmert

Guest

paulanderson

Guest

silylene old

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

telfrow

Guest

paulanderson

Guest

dmjspace

Guest

dmjspace

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page