[meteorite-list] NASA Announces Comet Encounter News Conference

From: cdtucson at cox.net <cdtucson_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 16:31:40 -0500
Message-ID: <20101122163140.QSR8O.179576.imail_at_fed1rmwml30>

Elizabeth,
You express yourself much better than I do but, I still don't get your reasoning.
It seems you are very quick to accept that what you *see* is dusty snow and CO2 jets spewing out H2O snow and you may be right.
So, wouldn't catching actual manganese silicate material spewed out of a Comet tell you at least as much about the make up of a comet as what the *visual only* of the H2O tells you ?
I mean if these jets are spewing out H2O from these jets and that leads you to conclude that this comet is made up of H2O then if you know for a fact they also spew Manganese / silicate. Doesn't that offer even greater evidence than a mere *observation* of H2O does?
We *captured* Brownleeite (manganese silicate) and we *observed* H2O!! Which scenario holds more weight for proof ?
I would thing the verifiable physical evidence would be much more telling about what these comets are made up of And yet no mention of a comet found on earth may have a primary make up of manganese by anything I have read so far? Additionally, To me this suggests that the Manganese being much stronger than H2O might be all that would survive of a comet meteorite.
Maybe this tells us we should be looking for manganese meteorites to be tested to see if they are cometary in origin?
I mean testing the isotopes in these manganese meteorites may just surprise some of us? But , again. Only NASA Scientists can do this testing.
If I were to find a manganese meteorite do you think anyone would help me get it tested?
Because from a pure Scientific point of view keeping your mind open to this possibility only makes Scientific sense. IMHO. And I can't wait to hear more about your eventual tests on Hartley 2 pics and studies..
Best Regards.
Carl
Carl or Debbie Esparza
Meteoritemax


---- Elizabeth Warner <warnerem at astro.umd.edu> wrote:
> Well, you ended up asking several questions...
>
> >> Is their anything to be learned by these pictures of Hartley 2 that
> we did not already know or not?
>
> Ahh, I think I'm starting to see where some of the confusion lies. You
> are operating under the assumption that everything we know about comets
> we know as an absolute fact... Well, for the most part yes, Yes, comets
> are essentially dirty snowballs. Dusty snowballs might be better. Some
> are dustier, some are snowier. But there are a lot of details that are
> getting glossed over in that summary that the public doesn't care about.
>
> And while we knew from various studies that comets are dusty snowballs,
> most of those observations were indirect or derived results. With
> Hartley 2, we *see* the CO2 jets spewing out H20 "snow"... we finally
> *see* the "snow"! It's not just spectroscopic distribution maps,
> spectra, etc. We can trace the jets we see in the coma down to features
> on the nucleus. We *see* what is going on rather than just inferring.
>
> So, yes, we learned new stuff!
>
> These are scientists. They are looking for information. We have gotten
> tons of data, but it is going to take more than just 2 weeks to properly
> process/analyze/understand it all. Theories will get revised/updated
> accordingly. We've posted what we can. The details will get written up
> in the journals and properly peer-reviewed and published. And then
> you'll have plenty to read. Have you bothered to read any of the papers
> published about Tempel 1 after Deep Impact? So the information is out
> there, you just haven't read it. Likewise, the info about Hartley 2 will
> eventually get published, but will you actually read it?
>
>
> As for your second question
> >> I mean can anyone relate this to what to look for in a cometary meteorite find or fall back here on Earth?
>
> I don't think that any scientist expects to find cometary meteorites
> because based on what we currently know about comets, they are simply to
> fragile and volatile to survive the atmosphere. Maybe when Rosetta
> reaches comet C-G and lands on it, we'll know more.
>
> Clear Skies!
> Elizabeth
>
>
>
>
>
> cdtucson at cox.net wrote:
> > Elizabeth, Bob, Chris,All,
> > This has been a very helpful and educational thread for me and I'm sure a few others.Unfortunatl,
> > It seems that everybody is using old scientific information to explain all of this.
> > So, let me ask one more question;
> > Is their anything to be learned by these pictures of Hartley 2 that we did not already know or not?
> > I mean can anyone relate this to what to look for in a cometary meteorite find or fall back here on Earth?
> > As you all well know . I fully admit that I know nothing about space. My only interest in space is how it relates to meteorite material and hunting.
> > This because I will never go to space but, I may find an important Cometary meteorite so, I would like to know what to look for.
> > It seems that even though a new mineral was found in comet dust called brownleeite. This being a manganese silicate. You would expect this would have opened up the Science of space . But as far as I can tell it has not. I mean what was the significance of this fact and the close-ups of Hartley 2 if we don't establish and then publicize new information?
> > Even The Carancas Fall and Crater began to re-write some of the books about impacts until it was decided that that was just an exception. Exception it may be it still caused a huge crater and remember we are talking about a meteorite so delicate that it is easily crushed between two fingers. And still it created a huge crater.
> > Maybe I ask too much of the space scientists but, we do spend a great deal of tax payer dollars on NASA so we might be entitled to at least some good use of our gathered science from these extremely expensive missions.
> > Many scientists have told me that they will not do isotopic study except when ordered by other NASA associated scientists.
> > So, in other words. Only NASA people can order NASA tests paid for by the public? I for one would not mind paying for this added service. Perhaps a new discovery is out their waiting to be classified?
> > I am a long way fro tipperary here but my point is that we hunters are starved for new and updated information. So it becomes a bit frustrating when we get very little info from NASA news conferences. Again. What's new? They are still muddy snowballs????
> > Thanks. Carl
> > --
> > Carl or Debbie Esparza
> > Meteoritemax
> >
> >
> > ---- Elizabeth Warner <warnerem at astro.umd.edu> wrote:
> >> "Vapor is the evaporation of boiling liquid water."
> >>
> >> And that is the only possible source of water vapor?? So, have you ever
> >> been in a cloud? fog?? What was boiling to make those then??
> >>
> >> Again, your limited experience with how materials behave on Earth in
> >> atmosphere, under pressure and with gravitational forces is blinding you
> >> to the fact that materials can and do behave differently in space.
> >>
> >> Water might boil at 100 C at sea level, but in space it "boils" away at
> >> very low temperatures.
> >> http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem07/chem07192.htm
> >>
> >> Vapor in the context given by the EPOXI scientists refers to H2O (and
> >> other materials) in a gaseous form. Ice would refer to that material
> >> being in a solid form. That solid form does not necessarily mean it is a
> >> block of ice like an icecube.
> >>
> >> And I'm sure you've heard the riddle of what weighs more: a pound of
> >> feathers or a pound of lead?
> >>
> >> They "weigh" the same, but you are going to need a whole heck of alot of
> >> feathers to get a pound!
> >>
> >> Clear Skies!
> >> Elizabeth
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> cdtucson at cox.net wrote:
> >>> Hi Bob.
> >>> Perhaps you did not read the NASA link I provided in my previous post.
> >>> Here it is in case you missed it;
> >>> http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/11/19/spacecraft-flies-past-snowstorm-comet/
> >>>
> >>> Again, all do respect here.
> >>>
> >>> To be clear my questions here relate to gaining the knowledge of what rocks to look for that might be of a cometary origin. Not to knock others opinions. I just want logical answers.
> >>> The link does say they think it is "water ice" as opposed to other substances.
> >>> They go on to say that "jets of carbon dioxide *appear to be* fueled by water vapor. Vapor is the evaporation of boiling liquid water. But later say there are also large hailstone chunks to boot.
> >>> I think it looks like hot dust (smoke) .
> >>>
> >>> They say some of the hailstorm of "Fluffy Ice" that hit the spacecraft may have been between the size of a golf ball and a basketball. This with NO damage to the spacecraft?
> >>> Dr. A. Hearn also points out "how different Comets are from one another".
> >>> Aw Ha moment here? They are different!
> >>>
> >>> You ask. How could they stay hot?
> >>> That is the big question.
> >>> I suppose it depends upon what they are made of. Iron might stay hot longer than mica for example.
> >>> And or, Perhaps they contain some source of renewable energy source within them? . A source that is yet known to us?
> >>> How do we know whether they are cooling or not?
> >>> That coupled with the fact that all things take time.
> >>> Look no farther than the published cooling rates of iron meteorites.
> >>> The Tucson iron meteorite is said to not display the widmanstten pattern on an etched surface primarily because in spite of the fact that it contains plenty of nickel, it cooled too fast.
> >>> This cooling rate has been calculated for the Tucson Iron ring meteorite to be in the order of 1 degree C per one thousand years. This again is considered a rapid cooling rate.
> >>> No, nothing makes much sense if you believe what they say that hailstones the size of golf balls to basketballs hit this craft. It had to of been smoke from the intense heat of this comet to have not damaged the craft. ice and even melted ice in the form of water at 27K miles per hour would have damaged the craft.
> >>> Incidentally , I took a piece of coal in the dark and illuminated it. Sorry, but it looks nothing like the close-up pics of Hartley 2 and that is the comet we are talking about here. No antique distant pics from the past can compare with these new pics. We are in a new age of discovery and should give up these old and possibly obsolete photos and theories of the past.
> >>> One more thing.
> >>> If these so called "infrared spectrometers" tell us what this Comet is made of then I would love to hear it? Please spare me the Fluffy ice though. What other minerals are abundant on comet hartley 2? Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Again.
> >>> IMHO.
> >>> Carl
> >>> --
> >>> Carl or Debbie Esparza
> >>> Meteoritemax
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---- Bob King <nightsky55 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Carl and all,
> >>>> I thought it was clear that the fluffy snow chunks were water ice.
> >>>> They can determine composition of materials on and around the comet
> >>>> with the infrared spectrometer aboard the probe. Water was discovered
> >>>> a while back by ground-based telescopes in quite a number of comets.
> >>>> Also, while some of the stuff spewing out is a few inches across,
> >>>> there's probably a lot more that's tinier - everything from smoke-like
> >>>> dust particles to tiny bits of snow. Perhaps something on this smaller
> >>>> end of the scale struck the craft during its flyby.
> >>>> A demonstration I use for my class is to take a piece of black coal,
> >>>> turn off the lights and light it only by the beam from a small lamp to
> >>>> simulate how a comet appears in space. You'd be surprised by how
> >>>> brightly coal "shines" again the unlit background.
> >>>> Comets were long ago found to not be hot. How could something the
> >>>> interior of something that small (approx 1 mile long) on an orbit that
> >>>> takes it beyond Jupiter remain warm for very long? Only the outer
> >>>> surface is warmed by sunlight.
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Bob
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Ron Baalke <baalke at zagami.jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> >>>>> Nov. 15, 2010
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dwayne Brown
> >>>>> Headquarters, Washington
> >>>>> 202-358-1726
> >>>>> dwayne.c.brown at nasa.gov
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jia-Rui Cook
> >>>>> Jet Propulsion Laboratory
> >>>>> 818-354-0850
> >>>>> jccook at jpl.nasa.gov
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Lee Tune
> >>>>> University of Maryland, College Park
> >>>>> 301-405-4679
> >>>>> ltune at umd.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> MEDIA ADVISORY: M10-161
> >>>>>
> >>>>> NASA ANNOUNCES COMET ENCOUNTER NEWS CONFERENCE
> >>>>>
> >>>>> WASHINGTON -- NASA will hold a news conference at 1 p.m. EST on
> >>>>> Thursday, Nov. 18, to discuss new scientific findings from the recent
> >>>>> EPOXI mission spacecraft encounter with comet Hartley 2.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The news conference will originate from the NASA Headquarters
> >>>>> auditorium at 300 E St. SW in Washington. It will be carried live on
> >>>>> NASA Television.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Media representatives may attend the conference, ask questions by
> >>>>> phone or from participating NASA locations. To RSVP or obtain dial-in
> >>>>> information, journalists must send their name, affiliation and
> >>>>> telephone number to Steve Cole at stephen.e.cole at nasa.gov or call
> >>>>> 202-358-0918 by 11 a.m. EST on Nov. 18.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The news conference participants are:
> >>>>> -- Michael A'Hearn, EPOXI principal investigator, University of
> >>>>> Maryland
> >>>>> -- Jessica Sunshine, EPOXI deputy principal investigator, University
> >>>>> of Maryland
> >>>>> -- Tim Larson, EPOXI project manager, Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
> >>>>> Pasadena, Calif.
> >>>>> -- Pete Schultz, EPOXI scientist, Brown University
> >>>>>
> >>>>> NASA's EPOXI spacecraft successfully flew past comet Hartley 2 on Nov.
> >>>>> 4, providing scientists the most extensive observations of a comet in
> >>>>> history.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For NASA TV streaming video and downlink information, visit:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.nasa.gov/ntv
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For more information about NASA's EPOXI mission visit:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.nasa.gov/epoxi
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -end-
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ______________________________________________
> >>>>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> >>>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >>>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >>>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>>>>
> >>>> ______________________________________________
> >>>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> >>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>> ______________________________________________
> >>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> >>> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >>>
> >> ______________________________________________
> >> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> >> Meteorite-list mailing list
> >> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> >> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 22 Nov 2010 04:31:40 PM PST