Space In General

Go Ms Tree and Go Ms Chief have been retired from the SpaceX fleet. Fairing catching apparently didn't work out, so they'll be fishing them out of the water from now on using a single boat that is designed to do so.

 
From today's edition of space weather.com:



SPRITE SEASON BEGINS: Spring is the season for sprites, and Paul Smithjust photographed a magnificent display over Kansas. "These were my first big sprites of the season," says Smith, who took this picture on April 6th:



"They were so bright, I saw a couple of them with my unaided eyes," he adds.

Sprites are a weird form of lightning that leap up from powerful thunderstorms. The ones Smith saw are "jellyfish sprites", named for their resemblance to sea creatures. Their red tentacles stretch about 90 km high, almost touching the edge of space. Other forms exist, too.

At this time of year, severe storms set the stage for sprite formation. Mesoscale convective systems sweep across the Great Plains, cracking with intense electric fields that drive electrons up and into sprites. La Niña conditions in the Pacific Ocean may amplify this process.

Although the sprites were in Kansas, Smith saw them from Oklahoma. This weather satellite image shows the observing geometry.



"I was about 200 miles away from the thunderstorm," says Smith. Turns out, that's about the right distance. You have to be far away to see sprites over the top of the thunderclouds.

Although sprites have been reported by pilots and storm chasers for more than a century, many scientists were skeptical. Can you blame them? "Doctor, I just saw a giant red jellyfish in the sky!" A turning point came in 1989 when sprites were photographed by researchers at the University of Minnesota and cameras onboard the space shuttle. Now sprites are in the mainstream. See for yourself.

------------------

Uranus X-ray flare story
https://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2021/uranus/
 
SN15 will be making it's way towards launch platform A today.



And another Starlink launch went off without a hitch yesterday. Good footage of the landing from the booster.



Also, I have applied for a heat shield technician position at the Boca Chica facility.
 
From today's edition of spaceweather.com:

THE CHANCE OF STORMS JUST DOUBLED: If you think you're safe from geomagnetic storms, think again. A new study just published in the research journal Space Weather finds that powerful storms may be twice as likely as previously thought.

Jeffrey Love of the US Geological Survey, who authored the study, analyzed Earth's strongest geomagnetic storms since the early 1900s. Previous studies looked back only to the 1950s. The extra data led to a surprise:

"A storm as intense as, say, the Québec Blackout of 1989 is predicted to occur, on average, about every four solar cycles. This is twice as often as estimated using only the traditional shorter dataset," says Love.


Above: The data Love used in his analysis. Red and blue circles denote the two strongest storms in each solar cycle. Dst is a measure of geomagnetic activity that can be estimated from old magnetogram chart recordings.

A study like this is part physics, part math, and part detective work.

Love has spent recent years digging deeply into historical records, trying to figure out how often intense geomagnetic storms occur. It's tricky. Old records of magnetic activity aren't always easy to find or interpret. Love recalls the example of Vassouras, Brazil, where important magnetic data were recorded during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921:

"My colleague, Hisashi Hayakawa, discovered that a copy of the Vassouras yearbook (an annual summary of magnetic data) was held in a Japanese archive maintained by the World Data Center in Kyoto. It contained a magnetogram we needed; the chart recording was in fragments, upside down, and mislabeled, all of which had to be sorted out. I digitized it myself, and we were able to use the data to estimate the intensity of the 1921 storm."


Above: A mixed-up fragment of a 1921 magnetogram chart recording from Brazil.

Tricky indeed. Love did similar digging for other storms as far back as Solar Cycle 14, which peaked in 1906. Ultimately, he was able to piece together a list of the most intense events. The top two storms of each solar cycle formed his dataset.

Then the statistics began. The methods Love used are not new, per se, but they are new to the field of space weather. Love explains: "Extreme-value statistical methods were developed by statisticians in the 1920s to 1940s. From there, it took a while for the methods to be distilled down and presented in an approachable way for non-statisticians. They are really only now starting to be used in the space weather community."

A key result of Love's research is the odds of another Québec-class storm: On March 13, 1989, a coronal mass ejection (CME) slammed into Earth's magnetic field. It hit with unusual force, because a previous CME had cleared a path for it. Within 90 seconds of impact, the Hydro-Québec power grid failed, plunging millions of Canadians into darkness.


Above: The morning after–a March 14, 1989, report of the Great Quebec Blackout in Montreal’s newspaper, the Gazette. [more]

As the geomagnetic storm intensified, bright auroras spread as far south as Florida, Texas, and Cuba. Some onlookers thought they were witnessing a nuclear exchange. Decades later, power grid operators are still figuring out how to protect their systems from a repeat calamity.

Québec was once thought to be a 100 year storm. Extreme value statistics suggest a different answer. "It's more like 45 years," says Love.

In other words, the chance of storms just doubled.
 
"Humility demands that we accept that there are scientific riddles that no one can unlock right now."
- The Guardian


OpinionParticle physics

The Guardian view on particle physics: have we got the model wrong?
Editorial

Experiments suggest that the subatomic world may be much more complex than we thought

3508.jpg

A Cern simulation of a Higgs boson decaying into four muons. ‘This week came the news that there may be new particles or forces that aren’t accounted for in the standard model.’ Photograph: Science & Society Picture Librar/SSPL via Getty
Fri 9 Apr 2021 12.05 EDT

To find out how the universe truly works, scientists have for decades worked on the standard model of particle physics. When the Higgs boson was found at the Large Hadron Collider almost a decade ago, it was supposed to be the final piece in the jigsaw at the smallest, subatomic scale. Yet this week came the news that there may be new particles or forces that aren’t accounted for in the standard model.

What these might be is a mystery hidden, say researchers at Fermilab in the US, within muons, a bulkier relative of electrons, one of the building blocks of matter. Scientists at Cern in Geneva also think they have picked up something unexpected in muon-electron interactions, contrary to standard model predictions. Do they possess differences besides their mass? The answer might be yes. There are holes in the standard model. It does not account for gravity and does not explain dark matter, which makes up two-thirds of reality, nor why nearly all the anti-matter created in the big bang has disappeared. And it has little about the “dark energy” to which we ascribe the accelerating expansion of the universe.

Whatever is missing from the standard model might explain these phenomena. Science is still progressing. Humility demands that we accept that there are scientific riddles that no one can unlock right now. But by being curious and building on what we know, we can discover more answers all the time. Whereas Einstein’s general relativity looked at enormous scales, the standard model concerned itself with the very tiny – where measurement is hard to make accurately. The latest discrepancies may be a statistical fluke. What scientists cannot say is that they have made a discovery. But for the moment the thrill is that experiment appears ahead of the theory.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-particle-physics-have-we-got-the-model-wrong
 
Last edited:
SN15 had what I assume was a successful cryo and thrust puck test today. Hopefully we see them remove the thrust simulator tomorrow and get some engines installed ASAP for a static fire by the end of the week.

Screenshot_20210412-155304.png


Edit:

 
Last edited:
"Humility demands that we accept that there are scientific riddles that no one can unlock right now."
- The Guardian


OpinionParticle physics

The Guardian view on particle physics: have we got the model wrong?
Editorial

Experiments suggest that the subatomic world may be much more complex than we thought

3508.jpg

A Cern simulation of a Higgs boson decaying into four muons. ‘This week came the news that there may be new particles or forces that aren’t accounted for in the standard model.’ Photograph: Science & Society Picture Librar/SSPL via Getty
Fri 9 Apr 2021 12.05 EDT

To find out how the universe truly works, scientists have for decades worked on the standard model of particle physics. When the Higgs boson was found at the Large Hadron Collider almost a decade ago, it was supposed to be the final piece in the jigsaw at the smallest, subatomic scale. Yet this week came the news that there may be new particles or forces that aren’t accounted for in the standard model.

What these might be is a mystery hidden, say researchers at Fermilab in the US, within muons, a bulkier relative of electrons, one of the building blocks of matter. Scientists at Cern in Geneva also think they have picked up something unexpected in muon-electron interactions, contrary to standard model predictions. Do they possess differences besides their mass? The answer might be yes. There are holes in the standard model. It does not account for gravity and does not explain dark matter, which makes up two-thirds of reality, nor why nearly all the anti-matter created in the big bang has disappeared. And it has little about the “dark energy” to which we ascribe the accelerating expansion of the universe.

Whatever is missing from the standard model might explain these phenomena. Science is still progressing. Humility demands that we accept that there are scientific riddles that no one can unlock right now. But by being curious and building on what we know, we can discover more answers all the time. Whereas Einstein’s general relativity looked at enormous scales, the standard model concerned itself with the very tiny – where measurement is hard to make accurately. The latest discrepancies may be a statistical fluke. What scientists cannot say is that they have made a discovery. But for the moment the thrill is that experiment appears ahead of the theory.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-particle-physics-have-we-got-the-model-wrong

This article is written so badly. Have we got it wrong?!? Are things more complex than we thought!?!? Are there things unaccounted for?!?!? Humility!! Mystery!!! Unexpected!!! Riddles!!!

If you want an actually decent take on this subject, use PBS Spacetime (which I know @Dotini has posted here). It's much less filled with emotive language and just acknowledges that understanding why some models don't line up with other models is the whole point of this experiment and exactly what scientists are hoping to find because it will help push scientific understanding.

This Guardian article acts like scientists figured they were god and had it all figured out until suddenly a routine experiment unexpectedly showed them that humility was needed and that the world was more complex than they ever imagined. Wrong. Scientists knew something was up and designed the experiment in hopes that it would show discrepancies that it did.

 
As some of you know, I will be heading down to Boca Chica aka "Starbase" (I'm staying in Brownsville actually) to hopefully catch SN15's launch. Not sure if it will happen while I am there as they have yet to even install the engines (hopefully Thurs-Fri) but I might get to catch a static fire test. It was hard for me to pinpoint the exact time as I had to give 2 weeks notice for vacation time and I have a 2nd Covid shot on the 27th so I had to squeeze the trip in before that. So I'll just go and look around for a week and then try to get back there for the first launch of the full stack.

Driving my car (highly modified Elantra Sport :P ) 2 days to Brownsville, spending 5 days there, and driving 2 days back. Camping the first night in Alpine, TX and then spending the rest of the trip in hotels. I'll definitely make a couple update posts along the way.

168932290_10159358458856543_622852165960830609_n.jpg
 
Mars is a shattered and blasted planet, cautioning us all that Earth could go the same way.




Geologists will appreciate the focus on peculiar rocks.

 
Last edited:
Man, that's really cool =)

EDIT: First flight in 3 hours.

I'm idly wondering about how they've planned for various failures.

I'd assume that Perseverance is relatively close by for communications, and also because it can't drive that fast and is exploring and conducting its own studies. When helicopters fall over, they tend to get a big fragmenty and without much of an atmosphere to slow the parts down the blast radius will be big. A catastrophic failure could, therefore, see helicopter parts impacting Perseverance... which would harm that mission dramatically.

Hopefully not, like, but I'm wondering how they're planning to mitigate that.


Edit: Looks like a success - spun up, took off, hovered at a 3m apogee, landed, and spun down again. One photo through so far, showing Ingenuity's shadow, 3m below :D

First ever controlled, powered take-off and re-landing on another planetary body. Good stuff.
 
Last edited:
Test-flight was a success!

Pic from the onboard camera and a screenshot from the stream showing the drone hovering 3 meters above the ground.
pia24584-1041.jpg

17Yngoy6vW0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Must have an insane motor on it to get the required lift.
Seems it's a 350W motor :lol:

Although it looks pretty tiny, each blade is two feet long - so about four feet wingspan - and the angle on them is super aggressive. They spin at 2,500rpm, which is pretty much drone speed despite each rotor being about 20 times the size of your average drone's!

Of course it doesn't need much to beat Martian gravity, but with 1% atmosphere it needs to shovel a lot of air to even do that. Can't wait to see it change direction.
 
From today's edition of Spaceweather.com:

M-CLASS SOLAR FLARE:
Sunspot AR2816 erupted during the late hours of April 19th (2342 UT), producing a strong M1-class solar flare. NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory recorded the extreme ultraviolet flash:



This is one of the strongest flares of young Solar Cycle 25. A pulse of X-rays and ultraviolet radiation from the flare ionized the top of Earth's atmosphere, causing a shortwave radio blackout over the Pacific Ocean: blackout map. Mariners and ham radio operators in the area might have noticed unusual propagation conditions at frequencies below 10 MHz.

There is a chance that the explosion also hurled a coronal mass ejection (CME) toward Earth. If so, it would probably arrive on April 22-23. The jury's still out, though. We need to wait for more data from SOHO coronagraphs to confirm the CME. Stay tuned. Aurora alerts: SMS Text.
 
Saw a post on FB yesterday from "Science News Magazine," whoever they are. Headline was "NASA's Ingenuity just became the first spacecraft to fly on another planet."

Really?! You have the word "Science" in your name and you call an aircraft a spacecraft.

These people are the reason I'm so far above average!
 
Last edited:
As well as the overt link between the Wright Brothers and Ingenuity - the helicopter carried a piece of the Wright Flyer, so it became part of the first powered flight on two planets - there's another slightly more surprising one.

The world's oldest living person, Kane Tanaka, is the last person on Earth who was alive for both events. She is 118 years old, and was a month shy of her first birthday when the Wright Flyer took off at Kitty Hawk.
 
The world's oldest living person, Kane Tanaka, is the last person on Earth who was alive for both events. She is 118 years old, and was a month shy of her first birthday when the Wright Flyer took off at Kitty Hawk.

That's wild.
 
Back