OSIRIS images of Rosetta's comet show spectacular streams of dust emitted into space

October 23, 2014, Max Planck Society
Two views of the same region on the “neck” of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. The right image was taken with an exposure time of less than a second and shows details on the comet’s surface. The left image was overexposed (exposure time of 18.45 seconds) so that surface structures are obscured. At the same time, however, jets arising from the comet’s surface become visible. The images were obtained by the wide-angle camera of OSIRIS, Rosetta’s scientific imaging system, on 20 October, 2014 from a distance of 7.2 kilometers from the surface. Credit: ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA

Rosetta's comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is beginning to show a clearly visible increase in activity. While in the past months most of the dust emitted from the body's surface seemed to originate from the neck region which connects the two lobes, images obtained by Rosetta's scientific imaging system OSIRIS now show jets of dust along almost the whole extent of the comet.

"At this point, we believe that a large fraction of the illuminated 's surface is displaying some level of activity", says OSIRIS scientist Jean-Baptiste Vincent from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research (MPS) in Germany. During the past few weeks, the OSIRIS team has witnessed a gradual but qualitative change. "In the first images from this summer that showed distinct of dust leaving the comet, these jets were limited to the neck region", says OSIRIS Principal Investigator Holger Sierks from the MPS. Now, jets appear also on the "body" and "head" of the comet.

Currently, still more than 450 million kilometers are separating 67P from the Sun. Based on a rich history of ground-based observations scientists expect a comet's activity to pick-up noticeably once it comes within 300 million kilometers of the Sun. "Being able to monitor these emissions from up close for the first time gives us much more detailed insights", says Sierks. From the OSIRIS images, the team now wants to derive a better understanding of the evolution of cometary activity and the physical processes driving it.

Since under normal circumstances, the comet's nucleus would outshine the jets, the necessary images must be drastically overexposed. "In addition, one image alone cannot tell us the whole story", says Sierks. "From one image we cannot discern exactly where on the surface a jet arises." Instead, the researchers compare images of the same region taken from different angles in order to reconstruct the three-dimensional structure of the jets.

In this image taken by OSIRIS, Rosetta’s onboard scientific imaging system, on 10 September, 2014 jets of cometary activity can be seen along almost the whole body of the comet. Credit: ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/ INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA.

While 67P's overall activity is clearly increasing, the mission's designated landing site on the "head" of the comet still seems to be rather quiet. However, there is some indication that new active areas are waking up about one kilometer from landing area J. These would allow the lander's instruments to study the comet's activity from an even closer distance.

Rosetta is an ESA mission with contributions from its member states and NASA. Rosetta's Philae lander is provided by a consortium led by DLR, MPS, CNES and ASI. Rosetta will be the first mission in history to rendezvous with a comet, escort it as it orbits the Sun, and deploy a lander to its surface.

Explore further: A map of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Related Stories

A map of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

September 9, 2014

High-resolution images of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko reveal a unique, multifaceted world. ESA's Rosetta spacecraft arrived at its destination about a month ago and is currently accompanying the comet as it progresses ...

Image: Rosetta selfie 16 km from comet

October 15, 2014

Using the CIVA camera on Rosetta's Philae lander, the spacecraft have snapped a 'selfie' at comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko from a distance of about 16 km from the surface of the comet. The image was taken on 7 October ...

Recommended for you

Nano-droplets are the key to controlling membrane formation

February 19, 2019

The creation of membranes is of enormous importance in biology, but also in many chemical applications developed by humans. These membranes are shaped spontaneously when soap-like molecules in water join together. Researchers ...

LOFAR radio telescope reveals secrets of solar storms

February 19, 2019

An international team of scientists led by a researcher from Trinity College Dublin and University of Helsinki announced a major discovery on the very nature of solar storms in the journal Nature Astronomy.

Pottery reveals America's first social media networks

February 19, 2019

Long before Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and even MySpace, early Mississippian Mound cultures in America's southern Appalachian Mountains shared artistic trends and technologies across regional networks that functioned in ...

Observation of quantized heating in quantum matter

February 19, 2019

Shaking a physical system typically heats it up, in the sense that the system continuously absorbs energy. When considering a circular shaking pattern, the amount of energy that is absorbed can potentially depend on the orientation ...

Lobster's underbelly is as tough as industrial rubber

February 19, 2019

Flip a lobster on its back, and you'll see that the underside of its tail is split in segments connected by a translucent membrane that appears rather vulnerable when compared with the armor-like carapace that shields the ...

38 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

DeliriousNeuron
1 / 5 (15) Oct 23, 2014
looks like birkeland currents to me.
Vietvet
4.5 / 5 (17) Oct 23, 2014
looks like birkeland currents to me.


Of course it does, you're delirious.
britton_beckham
1 / 5 (15) Oct 24, 2014
@Vietvet. What does it look like to you? Water shooting off a dirty snowball? Last I checked there has been no water detected on the surface of this comet, and it's still 450 million kilometers from the sun (i.e. it's really cold) and it's black (not white like "ice snow"). It's a rock mate, and it's a rock from one side to the other -- no water, just rock through and through. Facts are pesky things... so maybe you are the delirious one. Mầy ơi
barakn
5 / 5 (15) Oct 24, 2014
It's a rock mate, and it's a rock from one side to the other -- no water, just rock through and through. Facts are pesky things... so maybe you are the delirious one.
Where did you get this "fact" ? Do you assume humans are made purely of skin because that's what you see on the surface?
JoeBlue
1 / 5 (7) Oct 24, 2014
@Vietvet. What does it look like to you? Water shooting off a dirty snowball? Last I checked there has been no water detected on the surface of this comet, and it's still 450 million kilometers from the sun (i.e. it's really cold) and it's black (not white like "ice snow"). It's a rock mate, and it's a rock from one side to the other -- no water, just rock through and through. Facts are pesky things... so maybe you are the delirious one. Má��y ơi


Dude, you completely missed that he was making a PUN.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (11) Oct 24, 2014
You assume only what you see, it may be wrong but you assume nothing beyond the observation. We have plenty of observation of the anatomy of humans, we have no direct evidence that suggests this comet is anything other than a solid rock with some debris scattered about. With collimated jets of material, similar attributes to asteroids, and a shape that defies standard comet theory but has been replicated in laboratories using electric discharge. http://ieeexplore...43014600
And there is Hyperion and it's discharge; http://phys.org/n...cle.html
Electric asteroids with it's discharge, http://www.nasa.g...PpvnF_LM
And Enceladus; http://www.univer...-plumes/
Vietvet
4.7 / 5 (12) Oct 24, 2014
"Dude, you completely missed that he was making a PUN."

Beckham, like cantthink, delirious neuron, yep, and a few others here believe the Grand Canyon was carved by a lightning bolt.

Are you part of that nutty crowd?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (9) Oct 24, 2014
"Dude, you completely missed that he was making a PUN."

Beckham, like cantthink, delirious neuron, yep, and a few others here believe the Grand Canyon was carved by a lightning bolt.

Are you part of that nutty crowd?

Why not, contrary to your beliefs there is empirical evidence which supports it.
http://worldnpa.o...6439.pdf
alfie_null
5 / 5 (11) Oct 24, 2014
Why not, contrary to your beliefs there is empirical evidence which supports it.
http://worldnpa.o...6439.pdf

worldnpa.org - the Natural Philosophy Alliance, which describes itself to Google as "Groups of scientists from around the world that are challenging beliefs in mainstream physics and astronomy." Don't have to work too hard to figure out what types that site's gonna attract. As evidenced by cantdrive's knowledge of the site.

A litmus test for any site that purports to deal with science is if that site acknowledges the problem of crackpots and is open about how it deals with them.

Some cranks - the harder you push them, the more obsessed they become.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (9) Oct 24, 2014
Once again, attack everything but the science involved in the paper. Typical.
DeliriousNeuron
1 / 5 (5) Oct 24, 2014
"Of course, if one ignores contradictory observations, one can claim to have an 'elegant' or 'robust' theory. But it isn't science."
— Halton Arp

barakn
5 / 5 (6) Oct 24, 2014
Some of you need to study up on space weathering. Long exposure to space darkens surfaces, a fact attested to by fresh impacts which tend to dig up brighter material from below the surface. The surface is clearly not the same as the interior, and that's true even of the Moon, which doesn't have a lot of volatiles boiling off its surface. It's even more true for comets.
Vietvet
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 24, 2014
"Why not, contrary to your beliefs there is empirical evidence which supports it.
http://worldnpa.o...6439.pdf"

There isn't an iota of evidence that the Grand Canyon was formed by a lightning bolt, nor the craters on any planetary body.

It's a laughable concept.
barakn
5 / 5 (7) Oct 24, 2014
This comet is less than half as bright as our moon, itself extremely dark with an albedo of only 12%. Note that this comet is outgassing HS, HCN, NH3, SO2, CH3OH, HCHO, CO2, and CO (scientists didn't expect much H2O at this distance and indeed aren't seeing it) http://phys.org/n...ker.html , all compounds that are volatile at lower temperatures than water. It's composition most closely resembles a rare kind of meteorite known as a carbonaceous chondrite http://en.wikiped...hondrite , well known for containing large amounts of water in addition to compounds containing carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, and other fun stuff. Those of you stating that it is "a rock" as if there was only one kind of rock have nothing of value to add to this discussion.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Oct 25, 2014
Note that this comet is outgassing HS, HCN, NH3, SO2, CH3OH, HCHO, CO2, and CO (scientists didn't expect much H2O at this distance and indeed aren't seeing it)

Yep, and they only expected CO2 and CO which is another unfulfilled prediction. Why is it that them being surprised is not surprising?
The detection of so many different molecules at this stage has been a surprise, ESA said.


It's composition most closely resembles a rare kind of meteorite known as a carbonaceous chondrite

Doesn't look much like a dirty snowball though, that's the discussion here and that which you seem to support.
Vietvet
4.3 / 5 (6) Oct 25, 2014
"Doesn't look much like a dirty snowball though, that's the discussion here--"

Only if you're talking to yourself.
britton_beckham
1 / 5 (7) Oct 25, 2014
@Vietvet, I really don't believe most of the "theories" that main stream science has produced since Einstein. Most--not all--are crocks of shit; the fairy tales like: Dark matter, dark energy, black holes, worm holes, neutron stars, quantum incoherence, the big bang, star and planetary formation, ort clouds. None of these above mentioned things have ever been observed and therefore are nothing but hypotheses. On the contrary, electrical interactions in space are now very much observed by nearly all our space craft and on nearly everything we look at. I tend to believe observation over computer-modeled nonsense. Empirical evidence isn't made in a computer simulation, it's seen and recorded.

But the EU wasn't the start of my awakening, I have questioned these things since I was literally a child; because they never made sense, and they still don't. All this and you don't need to go any further than the observed anomalies on the sun. The standard model chokes to death!
barakn
5 / 5 (6) Oct 25, 2014
Yep, and they only expected CO2 and CO which is another unfulfilled prediction. Why is it that them being surprised is not surprising? -cantthink85

I would love to see where EU predicted the other molecules. Wait, it didn't?
Vietvet
4.4 / 5 (7) Oct 25, 2014
"But the EU wasn't the start of my awakening, I have questioned these things since I was literally a child; because they never made sense, and they still don't. All this and you don't need to go any further than the observed anomalies on the sun. The standard model chokes to death!"

Personal conjecture isn't science. Just because you aren't capable of understanding the standard model doesn't mean it's not valid.
movementiseternal
Oct 26, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
yep
1 / 5 (4) Oct 26, 2014
Vietvet
4 / 5 (4) Oct 26, 2014
http://worldnpa.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6439.pdf


You idiots never give up.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Oct 27, 2014
Wishing Rosetta continued success, looking forward to the ride 'round the sun. On a comet, no less.

The EU folks will be happy to know that one of the eleven science instruments on the Rosetta orbiter is the RPC (Rosetta Plasma Consortium), and that a couple of the ten science instrument packages on the lander include ROMAP (Rosetta lander Magnetometer and Plasma Monitor) and SESAME (Surface Electric Sounding and Acoustic Monitoring Experiment). See the Rosetta Fact Sheet.

Not that they should get their hopes up too much, tho', as a remedy for pareidolia of the frontal lobes is beyond the scope of the mission. On second thought, they'll see sure and certain proof in the data of an EU, so there you go.
yep
1 / 5 (3) Oct 27, 2014
http://science.na...ackling/
http://phys.org/n...sit.html

You idiots never give up.

"Every person takes the limits of their own field of vision for the limits of the world" Authur Schopenhauer.
Just in case you missed it before, and as always you see things not as they are but you are.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Oct 27, 2014
and as always you see things not as they are but you are

Some of the melons I see at the store are bigger than my head, and arguably twice as smart since they would never respond to such nonsense.
yep
1 / 5 (2) Oct 27, 2014
Which nonsense? Denying EDM, or ad hominem attacks?

"You see things not as they are but you are" it seems that is the definition of pareidolia. You better check that melon of yours it seems to be getting soft.
http://www.skepdi...dol.html
Not really surprising coming out of you considering the black hole fantasy dogma you adhere to.
ViperSRT3g
5 / 5 (2) Oct 27, 2014
The comments of this article were so much more entertaining than the article itself. Still though, it's awesome as hell to finally be able to see exactly where on a comet the dust and ice are sublimating into space from. I can't wait to see the photos from when the comet gets within the inner solar system.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 27, 2014
http://worldnpa.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6439.pdf
@yep
you've posted this before in defense of eu... but it also shows that there will be some forensic means of differentiating the craters and tell them from asteroid/other impacts

your z-pinch plasma craters paper proves that the predominant craters on the moon are of external origin and not plasma (and the evidence is against plasma on large craters without the required forensic evidence of discharge within it)

all you are doing is posting a paper and hoping to draw people to the pseudoscience side of stupid
The standard model chokes to death!
@britton_beckham
read this about the fable the eu tried to pass of regarding the sun
http://www.tim-th...sun.html

the eu is completely debunked pseudoscience, and like Vietvet says:
just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it aint real

you CAN learn more by going here: http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
learn the basics
don't get conned

yep
1 / 5 (3) Oct 27, 2014
To draw attention to the fact that you do not know what you are saying when denying the possibility of electric discharge machining on comets or planets. Which seem obvious when looking at the observational evidence from the cold cathode jets in the pictures above.
This paper may help you, though none of them ever have before so I'm not getting my hopes up.
https://repositor...quence=1

Thompson's misapplication of gas models in a plasma environment debunks himself more than EU.
I totally understand, your beliefs are vested in theory speculated from a time when gravity was the prime mover and we did not have the equipment to see beyond the visible spectrum.
Its hard to teach old dogs new tricks especially stubborn ones.

gkam
1 / 5 (1) Oct 28, 2014
I looked up "world npa". They are a house in Texas.

You can find it here: 32°52'30.48" N 97°10'21.74" W
yep
1 / 5 (3) Oct 28, 2014
Viper, the dirty snow ball water scenario is as dead as the big bang, the observational evidence is cathode spark erosion breaking down minerals containing oxygen, then negatively ionized they combine with the positively charged hydrogen from the solar wind forming hydroxyl molecules that have been mistaken for water. These ionized tails can be billions of meters long with halos billions of meters across and have very little to do with solar heating.
Vietvet
5 / 5 (1) Oct 28, 2014
Viper, the dirty snow ball water scenario is as dead as the big bang, the observational evidence is cathode spark erosion breaking down minerals containing oxygen, then negatively ionized they combine with the positively charged hydrogen from the solar wind forming hydroxyl molecules that have been mistaken for water. These ionized tails can be billions of meters long with halos billions of meters across and have very little to do with solar heating.


Where's the links to a peer reviewed study?
yep
1 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
Vietvet
5 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
@yep

Your link http://ieeexplore...D4346306 doesn't offer any science, just conjecture.

Your other link http://benthamope...OAAJ.pdf isn't any better, arguments without evidence. It's an essay not a study.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
http://ieeexplore...D4346306
@yep
can you find any references that are published in a peer reviewed journal with an impact in astrophysics?
ieee is an engineering journal and has no impact in astrophysics, so to give it as a reference for astrophysics only proves that you have no empirical evidence
it is the reason that eu publishes to ieee
another reason eu is successfully publishes to ieee
the New York-based Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) both pulled dozens of papers recently after a computer scientist came forward with information about their illegitimacy. Cyril Labbe from Joseph Fourier University in France had been tracking papers published by the two groups when he found that many were produced using a software program known as SCIgen, which randomly strings together words and phrases to produce phony papers.
http://www.natura...ers.html
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
Thompson's misapplication of gas models in a plasma environment debunks himself more than EU
@yep
i will pass on your overwhelming evidence of debunking... no, wait... all you are giving is conjecture, sorry.
you have no evidence that Thompson is wrong, and you are simply pointing a finger and saying "nuh-uh! he's wrong!" without any empirical evidence
I at least was able to link a page where Thompson debunked your eu electric star BS
and if you will read Thompson's post, he gives plenty of references supporting his reasons, which your eu cannot refute (including the blant omission of well known physics that were published years before the eu moron tried to push the electric star crap-o-la)

so it is not about teaching old dogs new tricks, it is about proving your point and giving empirical evidence supporting an assertion about physics
it is about linking reputable science/papers as evidence, all of which you've failed to do so far

epically failed, i might add
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 28, 2014
your beliefs are vested in theory speculated from...we did not have the equipment to see beyond the visible spectrum
@yep
lets look at both pages again:
http://www.tim-th...sun.html

http://electric-c.../sun.htm

Thmopson references known physics and gives links to reputable science and well known experimental data (such as PPPL plasma physics lab, etc) whereas your "dr s" continually self references using electric cosmos links, youtube and no other outside references: i wonder why?

so your argument against Thompson is based upon your lack of knowledge of physics as well as you being conned into believing a pseudoscience, nothing else

you can follow Thompsons links and review the physics yourself and refute it, but given your inability to recognize a con kinda makes this point useless, as you are obviously not able to comprehend reality

IOW - you are a blatant liar and you don't understand physics
when you post pseudoscience, you post lies.
yep
1 / 5 (1) Oct 31, 2014
http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.3096
That electic winds blowing
Comprehend reality? Like singularities and super dense matter? No thanks I quit believing in the Easter bunny to.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.