WHO IS HE?

This Is What The Milky Way’s Magnetic Field Looks Like

“The Milky Way’s gas, dust, stars and more create fascinating, measurable structures. Subtracting out all the foregrounds yields the cosmic background signal, which possesses tiny temperature imperfections. But the galactic foreground isn’t useless; it’s a map unto itself. All background light gets polarized by these foregrounds, enabling the reconstruction of our galaxy’s magnetic field.”

Have you ever wondered what our galaxy’s magnetic field looks like? As long as we restrict ourselves to looking in the type of light that human eyes can see, the optical portion of the spectrum, we’re extremely limited as far as what we can infer. However, if we move on to data from the microwave portion of the spectrum, and in particular we look at the data that comes from the polarization of background light (and the foreground light directly), we should be able to reconstruct our galaxy’s magnetic fields to the best precision ever. The Planck satellite, in addition to mapping the CMB to better precision than ever before, has enabled us to do exactly that.

Even though there are still some small questions and uncertainties, you won’t want to miss these incredible pictures that showcase just how far we’ve come!

This One Thought Experiment Shows Why Special Relativity Isn’t The Full Story

“In Einstein’s initial formulation of General Relativity way back in 1916, he mentioned the gravitational redshift (and blueshift) of light as a necessary consequence of his new theory, and the third classical test, after the precession of Mercury’s perihelion (already known at the time) and the deflection of starlight by a gravitational source (discovered during a total solar eclipse in 1919).

Although a thought experiment is an extremely powerful tool, practical experiments didn’t catch up until 1959, where the Pound-Rebka experiment finally measured a gravitational redshift/blueshift directly. Yet just by invoking the idea that energy must be conserved, and a basic understanding of particle physics and gravitational fields, we can learn that light must change its frequency in a gravitational field.”

If a photon flies through space towards Earth, it must gain energy and become bluer in nature as it approaches Earth’s surface. This idea, of a gravitational redshift or blueshift, dictates how a photon must change in energy in the presence of a gravitational field. Yet this effect, which only exists in General Relativity, could have been predicted as soon as special relativity was discovered by one simple thought experiment: to consider a particle-antiparticle pair dropped from high above the surface of the Earth, but to let the annihilation occur at varying locations.

If you considered that, you’d immediately realize how special relativity was insufficient for describing our Universe! Come learn how to reason it out for yourself today!

Your Gut in Space

Finding the Right Balance for the Microbiota

Trillions of microorganisms live on and in the human body, many of them essential to its function and health. These organisms, collectively known as the microbiota, outnumber cells in the body by at least five times. 

Microorganisms in the intestinal tract, the gut microbiota, play an especially important role in human health. An investigation on the International Space Station, Rodent Research-7 (RR-7), studies how the gut microbiota changes in response to spaceflight, and how that change in turn affects the immune system, metabolic system, and circadian or daily rhythms. 

Research shows that the microbiota in the mammalian digestive tract has a major impact on an individual’s physiology and behavior. In humans, disruption of microbial communities has been linked to multiple health problems affecting intestinal, immune, mental and metabolic systems.

The investigation compares two different genetic strains of mice and two different durations of spaceflight. Twenty mice, ten of each strain, launch to the space station, and another 20 remain on the ground in identical conditions (except, of course, for the absence of gravity). Mice are a model organism that often serves as a scientific stand-in for other mammals and humans. 

Fecal material collected from the mice every two weeks will be examined for changes in the gut microbiota. Researchers plan to analyze fecal and tissue samples after 30 and 90 days of flight to compare the effects of different durations of time in space. 

With a better understanding of relationships between changes such as disruption in sleep and an imbalance of microbial populations, researchers can identify specific factors that contribute to changes in the microbiota. Further studies then can determine proactive measures and countermeasures to protect astronaut health during long-term missions. 

Make sure to follow us on Tumblr for your regular dose of space: http://nasa.tumblr.com.

What is an Exoplanet?

An exoplanet or extrasolar planet is a planet outside our solar system that orbits a star. The first evidence of an exoplanet was noted as early as 1917, but was not recognized as such. However, the first scientific detection of an exoplanet was in 1988. Shortly afterwards, the first confirmed detection was in 1992. As of 1 April 2018, there are 3,758 confirmed planets in 2,808 systems, with 627 systems having more than one planet.

The High Accuracy Radial Velocity Planet Searcher (HARPS, since 2004) has discovered about a hundred exoplanets while the Kepler space telescope (since 2009) has found more than two thousand. Kepler has also detected a few thousand candidate planets, of which about 11% may be false positives.

In several cases, multiple planets have been observed around a star. About 1 in 5 Sun-like stars have an “Earth-sized” planet in the habitable zone. Assuming there are 200 billion stars in the Milky Way, one can hypothesize that there are 11 billion potentially habitable Earth-sized planets in the Milky Way, rising to 40 billion if planets orbiting the numerous red dwarfs are included.

The least massive planet known is Draugr (also known as PSR B1257+12 A or PSR B1257+12 b), which is about twice the mass of the Moon. The most massive planet listed on the NASA Exoplanet Archive is HR 2562 b, about 30 times the mass of Jupiter, although according to some definitions of a planet, it is too massive to be a planet and may be a brown dwarf instead.

There are planets that are so near to their star that they take only a few hours to orbit and there are others so far away that they take thousands of years to orbit.

Some are so far out that it is difficult to tell whether they are gravitationally bound to the star. Almost all of the planets detected so far are within the Milky Way. Nonetheless, evidence suggests that extragalactic planets, exoplanets further away in galaxies beyond the local Milky Way galaxy, may exist. The nearest exoplanet is Proxima Centauri b, located 4.2 light-years (1.3 parsecs) from Earth and orbiting Proxima Centauri, the closest star to the Sun.

Besides exoplanets, there are also rogue planets, which do not orbit any star and which tend to be considered separately, especially if they are gas giants, in which case they are often counted, like WISE 0855−0714, as sub-brown dwarfs. The rogue planets in the Milky Way possibly number in the billions (or more).

Some planets orbit one member of a binary star system, and several circumbinary planets have been discovered which orbit around both members of binary star. A few planets in triple star systems are known and one in the quadruple system Kepler-64.

Methods of detecting exoplanets

1° Radial velocity

A star with a planet will move in its own small orbit in response to the planet’s gravity. This leads to variations in the speed with which the star moves toward or away from Earth, i.e. the variations are in the radial velocity of the star with respect to Earth. The radial velocity can be deduced from the displacement in the parent star’s spectral lines due to the Doppler effect. The radial-velocity method measures these variations in order to confirm the presence of the planet using the binary mass function.

2º Transit photometry

While the radial velocity method provides information about a planet’s mass, the photometric method can determine the planet’s radius. If a planet crosses (transits) in front of its parent star’s disk, then the observed visual brightness of the star drops by a small amount; depending on the relative sizes of the star and the planet. 

3° Direct Imaging

Exoplanets are far away, and they are millions of times dimmer than the stars they orbit. So, unsurprisingly, taking pictures of them the same way you’d take pictures of, say Jupiter or Venus, is exceedingly hard.

New techniques and rapidly-advancing technology are making it happen.

The major problem astronomers face in trying to directly image exoplanets is that the stars they orbit are millions of times brighter than their planets. Any light reflected off of the planet or heat radiation from the planet itself is drowned out by the massive amounts of radiation coming from its host star. It’s like trying to find a flea in a lightbulb, or a firefly flitting around a spotlight.

On a bright day, you might use a pair of sunglasses, or a car’s sun visor, or maybe just your hand to block the glare of the sun so that you can see other things.

This is the same principle behind the instruments designed to directly image exoplanets. They use various techniques to block out the light of stars that might have planets orbiting them. Once the glare of the star is reduced, they can get a better look at objects around the star that might be exoplanets.

4° Gravitational Microlensing

Gravitational microlensing occurs when the gravitational field of a star acts like a lens, magnifying the light of a distant background star. This effect occurs only when the two stars are almost exactly aligned. Lensing events are brief, lasting for weeks or days, as the two stars and Earth are all moving relative to each other. More than a thousand such events have been observed over the past ten years.

If the foreground lensing star has a planet, then that planet’s own gravitational field can make a detectable contribution to the lensing effect. Since that requires a highly improbable alignment, a very large number of distant stars must be continuously monitored in order to detect planetary microlensing contributions at a reasonable rate. This method is most fruitful for planets between Earth and the center of the galaxy, as the galactic center provides a large number of background stars.

5° Astrometry

This method consists of precisely measuring a star’s position in the sky, and observing how that position changes over time. Originally, this was done visually, with hand-written records. By the end of the 19th century, this method used photographic plates, greatly improving the accuracy of the measurements as well as creating a data archive. If a star has a planet, then the gravitational influence of the planet will cause the star itself to move in a tiny circular or elliptical orbit. 

Effectively, star and planet each orbit around their mutual centre of mass (barycenter), as explained by solutions to the two-body problem. Since the star is much more massive, its orbit will be much smaller. Frequently, the mutual centre of mass will lie within the radius of the larger body. Consequently, it is easier to find planets around low-mass stars, especially brown dwarfs.

source

source (+ Methods of detecting exoplanets)

source

images: NASA/ESA, ESO

animations: x, x, x, x, x

+ Exoplanets

Some intriguing exoplanets

3 Ways To Eliminate eLearning Friction With Mobile Learning And Microlearning

“In a world that grows increasingly more mobile, it’s important to embrace mobile technology and microlearning to eliminate eLearning friction caused by distracted learners and a poor learning experience.”

What Makes Something A Planet, According To An Astrophysicist?

“A dolphin may look like a fish, but it’s really a mammal. Similarly, the composition of an object is not the only factor in classifying it: its evolutionary history is inextricably related to its properties. Scientists will likely continue to argue over how to best classify all of these worlds, but it’s not just astronomers and planetary scientists who have a stake in this. In the quest to make organizational sense of the Universe, we have to confront it with the full suite of our knowledge.

Although many will disagree, moons, asteroids, Kuiper belt and Oort cloud objects are fascinating objects just as worthy of study as modern-day planets are. They may even be better candidates for life than many of the true planets are. But each object’s properties are inextricably related to the entirety of its formation history. When we try to classify the full suite of what we’re finding, we must not be misled by appearances alone.”

You’ve heard about the IAU’s definition, where in order to be a planet, you must pull yourself into hydrostatic equilibrium, orbit the Sun and nothing else, and gravitationally clear your orbit. You’ve also heard about the controversial new definition from geophysical/planetary science arguments, that planets should be based on their ability to pull themselves into a spheroidal shape alone.

Well, what about a third way: defining planets (and a whole classification scheme) based on astrophysical concerns alone? It’s time to start thinking about it!

HiPOD (31 August 2018) Dunes in South Xainza Crater

   – They look so innocent… (270 km above the surface. Black and white is less than 5 km across; enhanced color is less than 1 km.)

NASA/JPL/University of Arizona

(Source)

I love the sky colors ☀️ 🌤❤️

Extreme Science: Launching Sounding Rockets from The Arctic

This winter, our scientists and engineers traveled to the world’s northernmost civilian town to launch rockets equipped with cutting-edge scientific instruments.

This is the beginning of a 14-month-long campaign to study a particular region of Earth’s magnetic field — which means launching near the poles. What’s it like to launch a science rocket in these extreme conditions?

Our planet is protected by a natural magnetic field that deflects most of the particles that flow out from the Sun — the solar wind — away from our atmosphere. But near the north and south poles, two oddities in Earth’s magnetic field funnel these solar particles directly into our atmosphere. These regions are the polar cusps, and it turns out they’re the ideal spot for studying how our atmosphere interacts with space.

The scientists of the Grand Challenge Initiative — Cusp are using sounding rockets to do their research. Sounding rockets are suborbital rockets that launch to a few hundred miles in altitude, spending a few minutes in space before falling back to Earth. That means sounding rockets can carry sensitive instruments above our atmosphere to study the Sun, other stars and even distant galaxies.

They also fly directly through some of the most interesting regions of Earth’s atmosphere, and that’s what scientists are taking advantage of for their Grand Challenge experiments.

One of the ideal rocket ranges for cusp science is in Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, off the coast of Norway and within the Arctic circle. Because of its far northward position, each morning Svalbard passes directly under Earth’s magnetic cusp.

But launching in this extreme, remote environment puts another set of challenges on the mission teams. These launches need to happen during the winter, when Svalbard experiences 24/7 darkness because of Earth’s axial tilt. The launch teams can go months without seeing the Sun.

Like for all rocket launches, the science teams have to wait for the right weather conditions to launch. Because they’re studying upper atmospheric processes, some of these teams also have to wait for other science conditions, like active auroras. Auroras are created when charged particles collide with Earth’s atmosphere — often triggered by solar storms or changes in the solar wind — and they’re related to many of the upper-atmospheric processes that scientists want to study near the magnetic cusp.

But even before launch, the extreme conditions make launching rockets a tricky business — it’s so cold that the rockets must be encased in styrofoam before launch to protect them from the low temperatures and potential precipitation.

When all is finally ready, an alarm sounds throughout the town of Ny-Ålesund to alert residents to the impending launch. And then it’s up, up and away! This photo shows the launch of the twin VISIONS-2 sounding rockets on Dec. 7, 2018 from Ny-Ålesund.

These rockets are designed to break up during flight — so after launch comes clean-up. The launch teams track where debris lands so that they can retrieve the pieces later.

The next launch of the Grand Challenge Initiative is AZURE, launching from Andøya Space Center in Norway in April 2019.

 For even more about what it’s like to launch science rockets in extreme conditions, check out one scientist’s notes from the field: https://go.nasa.gov/2QzyjR4

For updates on the Grand Challenge Initiative and other sounding rocket flights, visit nasa.gov/soundingrockets or follow along with NASA Wallops and NASA heliophysics on Twitter and Facebook.

@NASA_Wallops | NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility | @NASASun | NASA Sun Science