Scientists surprised by solar wind data retrieved from Genesis mission

May 10, 2011 By Amina Khan, Los Angeles Times
Genesis Composite

The 2004 crash-landing of a NASA capsule into the deserts of Utah had mission scientists fearing for a while that samples collected by the Genesis mission, sent to capture particles from the sun's solar wind, were lost to science.

But much of the collected material did survive the crash, and it's now turning up surprises: unexpected discrepancies between the composition of the sun and that of the (which contains the sun's four closest planets, including Earth).

The early report, published online Monday in the journal , shows among other things that the pattern of in the solar wind (and thus, presumably, the sun) is very different from that of the inner planets.

Genesis launched in 2001 and flew to a point nearly 1 million miles from the Earth to collect particles - blown off the sun's surface at high speeds - from a region in space unaffected by the Earth's magnetic field. The spacecraft was starting to land, samples safely tucked away, when its parachute failed to deploy and the capsule smashed into the ground.

"Coming back to Earth was not a happy event for us," said mission principal investigator Donald Burnett, a geochemist at the California Institute of Technology. "We literally went out and picked up the pieces in Utah and came back - and managed to pick out some important science."

Like the planets, the sun contains various amounts of oxygen, nitrogen and other elements. But each element can come in heavier or lighter forms, called isotopes, depending on how many they have. The proportions of heavier oxygen to lighter oxygen, and so on are a feature that cosmochemists thought the planets would share with the sun, since they were ultimately formed out of the same coalescing cloud of dust and gas.

But it appears that there are significant differences. The Earth, for example, has more heavier oxygen in relation to lighter oxygen than does the sun - and that is at odds with current theories of space chemistry.

"We used to think that the sun and solar system were all made of the same stuff and things were pretty well mixed up," said Andrew M. Davis, a cosmochemist at the University of Chicago who chairs an independent committee that helps decide who in the scientific community gets to use the retrieved samples. "But somehow the ended up a little different from the Earth. We haven't figured out what it all means yet - but it's clearly important and it's making people rethink old ideas."

A broader report on findings from the mission is planned for publication within the next few weeks.

Explore further: Curiosity brushes 'Bonanza king' target anticipating fourth red planet rock drilling

4.6 /5 (17 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

What Genesis Solar Particles Can Tell Us

Sep 22, 2004

The recent crash of NASA's Genesis space probe may have looked like bad news for scientists, but its cargo of particles captured from the sun should still yield useful information, according to Qing-Zhu Yin, a planetary scientist at UC Davis. ...

Scientists analyse solar wind from moon rock

Apr 10, 2006

Australian National University scientists preparing for the analysis of solar wind samples from NASA’s Genesis mission believe they have already measured solar wind particles in an analysis of lunar soil.

NASA Sends First Genesis Early-Science Sample to Researchers

Jan 28, 2005

NASA scientists have sent to academic researchers an unprecedented piece of the sun gathered by the Genesis spacecraft, enabling the start of studies to achieve the mission's initial science objectives. Scientists at NAS ...

Piece of the Sun returns to Earth

Aug 30, 2004

In a dramatic ending that marks a beginning in scientific research, NASA's Genesis spacecraft is set to swing by Earth and jettison a sample return capsule filled with particles of the Sun that may ultimately ...

Genesis Scientists Don't Lose Hope

Sep 15, 2004

Scientists who conducted the preliminary assessment of the Genesis canister are encouraged by what they see. They believe it may be possible to achieve the most important portions of their science objectives. ...

Trajectory Maneuver Brings Spacecraft Closer to Home

Aug 12, 2004

Thirty days before its historic return to Earth with NASA's first samples from space since the Apollo missions, the Genesis spacecraft successfully completed its twentieth trajectory maneuver. ...

Recommended for you

Australian amateur Terry Lovejoy discovers new comet

8 hours ago

It's confirmed! Australian amateur astronomer Terry Lovejoy just discovered his fifth comet, C/2014 Q2 (Lovejoy). He found it August 17th using a Celestron C8 fitted with a CCD camera at his roll-off roof ...

Students see world from station crew's point of view

Aug 19, 2014

NASA is helping students examine their home planet from space without ever leaving the ground, giving them a global perspective by going beyond a map attached to a sphere on a pedestal. The Sally Ride Earth ...

Mars deep down

Aug 19, 2014

Scarring the southern highlands of Mars is one of the Solar System's largest impact basins: Hellas, with a diameter of 2300 km and a depth of over 7 km.

User comments : 58

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

TaxPaid
May 10, 2011
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Quantum_Conundrum
May 10, 2011
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
MaskedMarauder
2.9 / 5 (15) May 10, 2011
Biblical Creation? HAHAHAHA.. so some noble, white, bearded god, sitting on a throne that is willing to brutally beat, torture, and murder his own son created the world in 6000 years, eh? Oh man, you christians amaze me to no end... push your knowledge around based on a book written by a pagan emperor turned christian... Please, save us the silliness.
J-n
3 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
I am Really glad they were able to get some data from the mission!! It is always exciting to have data change that pushes us to change the way we think about something.
_____________________________________________________________

I still laugh at QC cause he demands his voice be heard yet can't be bothered to address some fundamental issues in his theories.

Please Address these bible quotes:

Leviticus 25:44-46
Luke 12:47-48
Ephesians 6:5
Exodus 21:20-21
Exodus 21:2-11

Then again i'm sure you'll ignore this like you've ignored many past requests.

Your god Advocates for slavery, please explain.
marraco
3.8 / 5 (11) May 10, 2011
I see the moderators deleted my post because I disagreed with the Standard Model of cosmic and solar system origins.

Has it become the scientific norm to simply censor anyone who disagrees with the pathetically, obviously wrong standard model of solar system formation?

These findings regarding these isotope differences actually supports the Biblical creation story more than the Standard Model of solar system formation, since it shows that the Earth and Sun are of two seperate creative events.

It is sad that the atheist moderator would rather delete the post than deal with the facts.

Funny that a spacecraft called "Genesis" would actually find evidence which validates the Genesis creation account more than the standard model.

Actually, the probe found traces of tomato juice, a percentage of carbohydrates, and processed grass. So it's scientific proof of the creation of the Fliying Spaguetti Monster.
It helps to decide between bible and pastafarism, which won.
MaskedMarauder
3.8 / 5 (4) May 10, 2011
J-n, actually, so am I. I hate to see any program totally fail. and the universe is usually stranger than fiction... or anything we can begin to dream of. (which makes it really cool for us layman)
Quantum_Conundrum
May 10, 2011
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
MaskedMarauder
2.3 / 5 (9) May 10, 2011
Right on marraco... gotta keep your tithings going to the great flying spahgetti monster, else he unleashes with his torrents of tomato juice on your domicile.

And I certainly appreciate any god that can advocate slavery... need a few of my own, do the chores around the house and be my whipping boy when I get ticked off at work, yes? what a deal!
J-n
3.3 / 5 (6) May 10, 2011
Masked - I think the most beautiful thing about science is when things are proved to be wrong, or data turns out different than expected.

Scientists then rush to find where the fault was, and to correct it. Was it the experiment? Was it the Theory? Do we modify the existing theory or is there a totally different one that fits experimental data better?

Of course there are those who will stick to their old ideas like glue, but that's the beauty of science.. Just because one old guy in a crazy hat says something is 'so' does not make it so.

So yeah, i love situations like this. Not only did the experiment turn out to give usable data despite the problems, but the data turned out not quite as expected!!!

___________________________________________________________

Still waiting QC!
CSharpner
4.3 / 5 (9) May 10, 2011
I see the moderators deleted my post because I disagreed with the Standard Model of cosmic and solar system origins.

While I completely disagree with your assertion that it supports the Biblical creation story, I do not like that they deleted your comment, regardless of how much I might have disagreed with it.

I recommend using Google SideWiki (built into the Google toolbar). You can leave comments on ANY web site. They're stored on Google and seen by other Google toolbar users. The web site to which you leave the comment has no moderation control on the side-wiki comments at all, so the physorg moderators will never delete them.

Let me know if you do that and I'll turn on my side-wiki bar to see your comments.

When someone hides something, I'm all that more eager to find out what the hell they hid. That doesn't mean I support the deleted comment. I just want to know what crazy ass shit was removed or what hair-brained reason they had for deleting it. :)
Quantum_Conundrum
1.3 / 5 (13) May 10, 2011
And I certainly appreciate any god that can advocate slavery... need a few of my own, do the chores around the house and be my whipping boy when I get ticked off at work, yes? what a deal!


You can choose to live in willfull ignorance if you wish.

However, now that I've corrected your lies....

...if you go away believing what you wrote, and what J-N wrote, you will no longer be "ignorant".

You will be a deliberate liar and a fool.
Quantum_Conundrum
2 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
CSharpner:

Hey thanks, I think.
I'm going to try that and see how it works, though hopefully it won't try to install too many extra add-ons.

As I general rule I dislike plug-ins due to the imbedded spyware, but I'll try this out.
Quantum_Conundrum
1.9 / 5 (15) May 10, 2011
... based on a book written by a pagan emperor turned christian... Please, save us the silliness.


If you are referring to Constantine, Every book and epistle in the Bible pre-dates Constantine by centuries to millenia.

This can be easily verified by the Dead Sea Scrolls and a few other independent manuscripts.

Try again.
71STARS
2 / 5 (7) May 10, 2011
Why is it necessary to believe one religion's creation theory and banish all the preceding ones that Man lived with for eons? Who can say which is "correct" and which is "sheer wishful thinking"? Remember, there was a whole other world before the Bible was written for a particular tribe of people. There's an old saying: As you believe; so it is.

As for the solar wind data, very glad to see that particles change over their little ride here. Now THAT'S the wonders of the Universe, from time immemorial. Great discovery.
Bog_Mire
2.6 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
QC, what is your take on the Australian Aborigine's "Dream Time" Genesis belief system, which pre-dates Christianity by about 38 000 years? Do you discount their "Gods" and their creation myths? If so, can you explain why? Can you explain why they were walking the Australian continent 34 000 + years before your "God" created it?
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (18) May 10, 2011
Data from the sun surprises scientists, but not those scientists who KNOW the sun has nothing to do with 'global climate change.
Dunbar
2.9 / 5 (7) May 10, 2011
QC, do you suspect Jehova and Allah are the same dude?
sstritt
2.3 / 5 (4) May 10, 2011
Where's Oliver? This should be up his alley!
Quantum_Conundrum
1.5 / 5 (13) May 10, 2011
So what is the creature called "Behemoth" God is discussing with Job?

Elephants and Rhinos do not have large tails, nor does any other larger grass eating organism alive.

What meets that description?

http://en.wikiped...auropoda

This fits the description of Behemoth far better than any living organism.
MaskedMarauder
2.9 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
I prefer hedonism to Christianity.. I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints... the sinners are much more fun...

and I do so guilt free! woo HOO~! and I find your singular mind on a certain aspect of religion to be quite entertaining... silly, but entertaining.
Isaacsname
3.5 / 5 (6) May 10, 2011
QC, do you suspect Jehova and Allah are the same dude?


Oh noes, we never have different names for the same thing, nope, not humans, never. 0o
omatumr
2.4 / 5 (16) May 10, 2011
"discrepancies between the composition of the sun and the inner solar system . . . "


Are caused by:

1.) Severe mass fractionation in the Sun [1],

2.) Nuclear reactions that produced most elements in the inner solar system in the deep interior of a supernova [2], and

3.) Nuclear reactions that produced most elements in the outer solar system in the outer layers of the supernova [3].

1. "The Sun is a plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass",
Physics of Atomic Nuclei 69, 1847-1856 (2006)
http://arxiv.org/.../0609509

2. "Strange xenon, extinct super-heavy elements, and
the solar neutrino puzzle", Science 195, 208-209 (1977)
www.sciencemag.or...74/208-b

3. "Isotopic ratios in Jupiter confirm intra-solar diffusion",
Meteoritics 33, A97, 5011 (1998).
http://www.lpi.us...5011.pdf

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel

jamey
4.6 / 5 (5) May 10, 2011
I would have guessed, myself, that the O16/O18 discrepency would relate to there being a preferential supply of oxygen here, concentrated by gravity, to absorb cosmic radiation - similar to the constantly renewing levels of C14 in the atmosphere.
MaskedMarauder
2.1 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
Super cool, thanks QC, you have answered my questions about life, the universe, and everything... I think I will continue enjoying my hedonistic life, be considered to be an ANTI-CHRIST and go out with a smile, versus whatever it is you do.. hee hee. and thoughts like that give me a smile when I am on my beach with a couple of hot babes, a good beer, wearing nothing but a smile, whilst folks like you are busy flogging themselves... HAHAHA.. sniff. god I love people like you QC, you keep me laughing all the way to my next life... whatever that may happen to be... sniff.. thanks for the chuckle.
MaskedMarauder
3.4 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
QC you humor me immensely.. you truly believe that crap, based on a book and faith.. I have several books and zero faith in some god who would willingly murder his own son and call that love. or flood and entire world because his little creatures weren't praying to him in the manner that suited him. or would destroy a city because he was jealous. This is the actions of an all knowing god? who loves you? I find it nothing short of amazing that you could find some twisted way to turn torture, murder into a act of love... something to think on, if your god is willing to do that to his own kid, what do you think he would be willing to do to you? if this is a loving god, keep him, and good luck, I suspect you are going to need it.... in the meantime, me and a house full of swingers are going to have a few brews, some great sex, and very good times... while you "saints" are doing your version of the "hail mary"... hahahaha sniff. god I love you guys.. you make my day brighter... hee hee
Jayman
2.8 / 5 (4) May 10, 2011
Love it when God always turns out to be the greatest scientist ever! :-)
richgibula
5 / 5 (10) May 10, 2011
Why does every discussion of the universe or the solar system degenerate into a theological discussion? When should man stop investigating the universe around us and just sit in the corner reading the bible or koran to find everything we need in life? If we should investigate the universe, then leave the pre-prepared theological conclusions to a different forum.
The most dangerous people in this world are those that only concern themselves in the afterlife without regard to their current life or that of others.
jjoensuu
4 / 5 (4) May 10, 2011
So QC...you are saying that God would torture people in hell for the rest of eternity for 70-something years of sins here on earth?
jjoensuu
4.8 / 5 (4) May 10, 2011
Actually apropos hell one could ask:
Did the first sinner Adam end up in hell? In this Bible I got here it says God told him he would go back to dust. I take that to mean that Adam went back to the state he was in before he was created. And where was he before he was created? I think NO-WHERE.

Besides burning humans in hell would require some funky souls or funky fire because AFAIK spirit creatures (which I guess are same as souls) cannot be burnt with fire.

And there's the issue that we would have to have some immortal soul in the first place. But if we did, then Jesus never really died in the hands of Romans (he just sort of changed form as I guess supposedly happens if we have some immortal soul). And if Jesus never really died why did he have to come here for a show like that?
jjoensuu
4.8 / 5 (5) May 10, 2011
Plus there is the issue that why would Jesus have to die for us if:
A. we already are immortal because of that soul, and
B. God supposedly is so forgiving. God could just have forgiven us our trespasses or-what-now and nothing would have had to change.

Besides what happened to the people that lived before Jesus was on earth, since they had no Jesus to put faith in? Did they go to hell?
RealScience
4 / 5 (4) May 11, 2011
While of Jehovah, according to the Bible, we have:

"God is not the author of confusion..." 1 Cor. 14,33,



QC - I thought that in your opinion, your God created the universe with light from distant stars and galaxies already in progress: Sounds like the confuser to me.

theknifeman
not rated yet May 11, 2011
So if ever there were a place for an isotope to pick up or lose neutrons, would it not be in the midst of fusion? Is this a possibility?
astro_optics
1.8 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
MaskedMarauder, you just managed to offended: Jews, Christians of all denominations, Muslims, Mormons...etc... You're a brave man!
PieRSquare
5 / 5 (8) May 11, 2011
For the love of whoever or whatever can we please knock it off with all the freakin' religious debates!?! There are other places to do that. It's gotten so bad in here I can't even be bothered to sift through the peevish arguments to find the comments that actually have something to do with the story.

I, for one, am thrilled to see that we got some great science out of genesis. I remember watching it wobbling on the way down and thinking "That can't be good"
Mayor__Dooley
4 / 5 (4) May 11, 2011
All this religious bunk is worse than the clothing spammers. Please refrain from jostling these dribbling religious loonies, giving them a soapbox to make fools of themselves is tiresome.
Drew_L
5 / 5 (2) May 11, 2011
Jeezuz no more bible babble please....but if you must please explain dinosaurs and carbon dating lol
RegenegeR
5 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
Can we get back to science here please?

You can take your religious quarrels to the skeptics annotated bible, a site dedicated to such things.

This is Physorg. A site dedicated to things phisical, measurable, and calculable. Keep the metaphysics to their own sites!
MaskedMarauder
2.2 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
sorry guys, but baiting these bible thumpers is such grand fun... and I am here so infrequently that I derived great humor from the entire string. to those that are not part of the christian right, my apologies.... to those that are part of the christian right.. sniff**. thanks for the laugh... snort**
PieRSquare
5 / 5 (3) May 11, 2011
@MaskedMarauder: I am here frequently and this stopped being funny a long time ago. If you want to shoot fish in a barrel do it somewhere else.
I'm tempted to report any further science vs religion comments (from either side) as abuse. We're here to debate science not the merit of science. If we all do it then they will get sick of sifting through the complaints and might establish some sort of editorial policy that helps keep things on topic.
PieRSquare
5 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
Just checked the comments guidelines (see link below the new comment box) and this is already against their policy. Let's help clean these forums up by reporting violators.
LuckyBrandon
1.7 / 5 (6) May 11, 2011
I'm wondering if a faster spin/deeper part of the gravitational well is simply causing hte lighter elements to gravitate in towards the sun. In the beginning of our solar system, perhaps it was a well mixed grouping, but over time and as those elements were used in abundance for planet formation, combined with the greater gravitational pull on the lighter elements...the theory still works

QC-the fool is the person that believes something else is looking out for them. People with that belief hold back all of man kind. It's been that way since its inception (a good reference there would be, well, ANYTHING on the dark ages).
Stephen Hawking put it best I think: "I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road."

So why are you on a science/physics site if your god did it all? Seems to me you have your answer (be it fallacy or not), so why bother with us folks who actually require PROOF and not FICTIO
DontBeBlind
1 / 5 (11) May 11, 2011
@ QC Brother, Remember the verse " do not throw your pearls before swine" That's all your doing here bro. You cant make a foolish man wise. All the questions you full filled for them was just a waste of your time. Do not forget your trying to teach people here who really think they are descendants of monkeys. With not 1 bit of proof. They put their faith in false science , which takes more faith then to believe in a god. Anyways, since they will never say it , i will. TY for trying to help them out. Best of luck to you all.
LuckyBrandon
3.2 / 5 (9) May 11, 2011
@dontbeblind-no proof huh. hmm, we can take any number of lifeforms (in fact, ANY) and WATCH adaptation and evolution in action. You have it backwards, there is no proof of a god (in fact, statistically I'm more likely to be eaten by a shark while swimming in the ocean and getting ran over by a cruise ship while being struck by lightning-yea, its that low of a probability).
Science doesn't involve faith, it involves theory, then proof of that theory, and if the proof shows the theory to be off, then it is changed to match the FACTS.
The fact is, we are an infinitely small spec of nothing in this universe...I'm sure "god" meant it to be that way right...wasted space and elements all just for us special little humans right?
Please explain our cousin species (neanderthal and others) if your god made us in his image...he must've made more in his image.
People in today's day and age have no place believing religions that were formed BECAUSE OF A LACK OF SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING!!
omatumr
1.6 / 5 (8) May 11, 2011
. . . can we please knock it off with all the freakin' religious debates!?!

I, for one, am thrilled to see that we got some great science out of genesis. I remember watching it wobbling on the way down and thinking "That can't be good"


I agree. The Genesis Mission confirmed many of the conclusions reached from analysis of solar-wind-implanted isotopes and element in lunar soils returned by the Apollo Mission [1] and in Jupiter's He-rich atmosphere by the Galileo Probe [2].

1. "Solar abundances of the elements", Meteoritics 18, 209-222 (1983)
www.omatumr.com/a...nces.pdf

2. "Isotopic ratios in Jupiter confirm intra-solar diffusion",
Meteoritics and Planetary Science 33, A97, abstract 5011 (1998)
www.lpi.usra.edu/...5011.pdf

Religious debates contribute nothing.

marraco
5 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
Why does every discussion of the universe or the solar system degenerate into a theological discussion? When should man stop investigating the universe around us and just sit in the corner reading the bible or koran to find everything we need in life? If we should investigate the universe, then leave the pre-prepared theological conclusions to a different forum.
The most dangerous people in this world are those that only concern themselves in the afterlife without regard to their current life or that of others.

Because they are breaking "Comments guidelines: please read before you post.":

Avoid political and religious discussions
savroD
4 / 5 (4) May 11, 2011
I can't believe you let this fool QC drag you guys into the mud so he can have a lot of postings for this nonsense. Oh well I guess if his non-existent god did not want them sheared, he would not have made them sheep!

In a word, the guy is NUTS! Case Closed!
FTL4Life
not rated yet May 11, 2011
Are they planning to rebuild/relaunch this mission? I think data retrieved from a crashed probe should be verified before we start rewritting the textbooks.
LKD
5 / 5 (2) May 11, 2011
Anyone who'd rather go to hell instead of heaven is insane. Period


Yes. 100% Can we get on topic finally?

I'm curious how the particles managed to survive. That is truly impressive designing.
MaskedMarauder
not rated yet May 11, 2011
the next question becomes, was there any potential for contaminents? I mean it sounds like this probe impacted pretty badly... Can they validate that the samples they received were intact?
jamesrm
not rated yet May 11, 2011
"Why does every discussion of the universe or the solar system degenerate into a theological discussion?"

Trolls and the fools who feed them, uh-da

Is this physorg or metaphysorg?
MaskedMarauder
not rated yet May 11, 2011
@jamesrm, and all, my apologies for getting off on a spoof of QC, and I am trying to get back to the subject at hand, and my question again, how could they confirm that the samples had not been compromised by the impact?

and I am sure it will not be the last time that I defer to some humor on the theological discussions held here.
PieRSquare
5 / 5 (5) May 11, 2011
@MaskedMarauder, its less than graceful landing obviously made it difficult to sort out what is and isn't contamination. This is probably why we're reading about the science results seven years after it landed. If I remember correctly the particles were captured by exposing aerogel blocks in space and pointing them towards the sun. When the particles hit they became embedded deep in the gel leaving trails behind them. Some of the blocks were ruined and some did better during the impact. I'm guessing that in the ones that did better that any contamination would tend to stay near the surface because the impact was about 200 mph and solar wind particles travel much faster and were embedded deeper. There are probably had other methods they used to figure out what was what.
Sanescience
3.7 / 5 (3) May 11, 2011
I respect the principle of variety of ideas. I also must warn against the paralysis of debate ad nauseum.

One must respect the spirit with which the original article is created, and this is clearly not about pedantic philosophical existentialism. Shame.
Sanescience
3 / 5 (2) May 11, 2011
That said, I wonder if the difference in isotopes are effected by the centrifugal forces of the early solar system forming. Or recent studies that the presences of neutrinos effect rates of decay. Or perhaps extreme heat, pressure, and magnetic fields are factors. Or perhaps those elements cast off the sun by solar winds are biased toward lighter isotopes.

Some very complex math involved, the equations will be checked again and again for subtle issues.
omatumr
1.9 / 5 (9) May 11, 2011
I wonder if the difference in isotopes are effected by the centrifugal forces of the early solar system forming. . . . Or perhaps those elements cast off the sun by solar winds are biased toward lighter isotopes.

Some very complex math involved, the equations will be checked again and again for subtle issues.


Solar mass fractionation is not complex:

The abundance of a light isotope of mass (mL) is enriched in the photosphere and in the solar wind relative to that of a heavier isotopes of mass (mH) by ~9-stages of mass-dependent fractionation (F).

F = [(mH/(mL)]^9/2; F = [(mH/(mL)]^4.5

www.omatumr.com/D...Data.htm

"The Sun is a plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass",
Physics of Atomic Nuclei 69, 1847-1856 (2006)

http://arxiv.org/.../0609509
yyz
5 / 5 (3) May 11, 2011
@PieR, Mask,

Most of the recovered solar wind particles from the Genesis mission are kept in a 'superclean' facility at the Johnson Space Center and are carefully attended to by "curators" who maintain the collection and handle sample requests by researchers: http://genesismis...kkey.htm

PieRSquare
5 / 5 (3) May 11, 2011
Thanks, yyz. Made a mistake before, Genesis used wafers of various pure materials to capture specific types of solar wind particles. Stardust (comet sample return) was the mission that used aerogel collectors. Should do my homework before running my mouth.
omatumr
1.5 / 5 (8) May 12, 2011
Scientists surprised by solar wind data . . .


Space scientists are surprised almost every day by observations that do not match their models.

E.g., Scientists who have long ignored empirical evidence that:

a.) The Sun and other stars generate H by neutron decay and discard it to interstellar space (neutron => H atom + 0.782 MeV), and

b.) Neutron repulsion powers the Sun, the cosmos, and sustains our lives on the thin skin of this ball of dirt orbiting the Sun,

Those same scientists expressed surprised by today's reports of

Energetic explosions near the collapsed core of the Crab Nebula, created by a supernova explosion in ~1054 AD.

www.physorg.com/n...ula.html

www.bbc.co.uk/new...13362958

Do these surprises carry a message?
yogurtforthesoul
not rated yet May 15, 2011
Perhaps the solar wind is in fact to strong to grab them, especially as they aren't isotopes (magnetically "grabbed"). The majority goes past us and perhaps gets gobbled up by the larger gas planets.

You might be able to check this with a pair or three solar collectors within our magnetic belt and one outside it. The last one could go: maybe at the poles, magnetic "reconnect" points, or high atmosphere for "burning up" scenarios).
nickelsworth
3 / 5 (2) May 17, 2011
Solar Heliophysics and Geophysics. Both are intimately entwined and vaguely understood. Both sciences reside within 'the universal house of commons'. Both are still very much in their infancies. Pure Science has no personal Ego. It rejects the politics of Mankind. It is the search for basic truths. That said, I'm not 'as fart as I stink I am'. Yet, I observe the 'sine' of the sun as a transmitter and the earth as the receiver with a big problem with it's oscillator. Respectfully..
Bog_Mire
1 / 5 (1) May 17, 2011
Solar Heliophysics and Geophysics. Both are intimately entwined and vaguely understood. Both sciences reside within 'the universal house of commons'. Both are still very much in their infancies. Pure Science has no personal Ego. It rejects the politics of Mankind. It is the search for basic truths. That said, I'm not 'as fart as I stink I am'. Yet, I observe the 'sine' of the sun as a transmitter and the earth as the receiver with a big problem with it's oscillator. Respectfully..

nice