What scientists found after sifting through dust in the solar system

What scientists found after sifting through dust in the solar system
In this illustration, several dust rings circle the sun. These rings form when planets' gravities tug dust grains into orbit around the sun. Recently, scientists have detected a dust ring at Mercury's orbit. Others hypothesize the source of Venus' dust ring is a group of never-before-detected co-orbital asteroids. Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center/Mary Pat Hrybyk-Keith

Just as dust gathers in corners and along bookshelves in our homes, dust piles up in space too. But when the dust settles in the solar system, it's often in rings. Several dust rings circle the Sun. The rings trace the orbits of planets, whose gravity tugs dust into place around the Sun, as it drifts by on its way to the center of the solar system.

The consists of crushed-up remains from the formation of the solar system, some 4.6 billion years ago—rubble from asteroid collisions or crumbs from blazing comets. Dust is dispersed throughout the entire solar system, but it collects at grainy rings overlying the orbits of Earth and Venus, rings that can be seen with telescopes on Earth. By studying this dust—what it's made of, where it comes from, and how it moves through space—scientists seek clues to understanding the birth of planets and the composition of all that we see in the solar system.

Two recent studies report new discoveries of dust rings in the inner solar system. One study uses NASA data to outline evidence for a dust ring around the Sun at Mercury's . A second study from NASA identifies the likely source of the dust ring at Venus' orbit: a group of never-before-detected asteroids co-orbiting with the planet.

"It's not every day you get to discover something new in the inner solar system," said Marc Kuchner, an author on the Venus study and astrophysicist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. "This is right in our neighborhood."

Another Ring Around the Sun

Guillermo Stenborg and Russell Howard, both solar scientists at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C., did not set out to find a dust ring. "We found it by chance," Stenborg said, laughing. The scientists summarized their findings in a paper published in The Astrophysical Journal on Nov. 21, 2018.

They describe evidence of a fine haze of cosmic dust over Mercury's orbit, forming a ring some 9.3 million miles wide. Mercury—3,030 miles wide, just big enough for the continental United States to stretch across—wades through this vast dust trail as it circles the Sun.

Ironically, the two scientists stumbled upon the dust ring while searching for evidence of a dust-free region close to the Sun. At some distance from the Sun, according to a decades-old prediction, the star's mighty heat should vaporize dust, sweeping clean an entire stretch of space. Knowing where this boundary is can tell scientists about the composition of the dust itself, and hint at how planets formed in the young solar system.

So far, no evidence has been found of dust-free space, but that's partly because it would be difficult to detect from Earth. No matter how scientists look from Earth, all the dust in between us and the Sun gets in the way, tricking them into thinking perhaps space near the Sun is dustier than it really is.

Stenborg and Howard figured they could work around this problem by building a model based on pictures of interplanetary space from NASA's STEREO satellite—short for Solar and Terrestrial Relations Observatory.

Ultimately, the two wanted to test their new model in preparation for NASA's Parker Solar Probe, which is currently flying a highly elliptic orbit around the Sun, swinging closer and closer to the star over the next seven years. They wanted to apply their technique to the images Parker will send back to Earth and see how dust near the Sun behaves.

Scientists have never worked with data collected in this unexplored territory, so close to the Sun. Models like Stenborg and Howard's provide crucial context for understanding Parker Solar Probe's observations, as well as hinting at what kind of space environment the spacecraft will find itself in—sooty or sparkling clean.

Two kinds of light show up in STEREO images: light from the Sun's blazing outer atmosphere—called the corona—and light reflected off all the dust floating through space. The sunlight reflected off this dust, which slowly orbits the Sun, is about 100 times brighter than coronal light.

This visualization displays a simulation of the dust ring at Venus's orbit around the sun. Scientists hypothesize a group of never-before-detected asteroids orbiting the sun with Venus are responsible for supplying Venus's dust ring. Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio/Tom Bridgman

"We're not really dust people," said Howard, who is also the lead scientist for the cameras on STEREO and Parker Solar Probe that take pictures of the corona. "The dust close to the Sun just shows up in our observations, and generally, we have thrown it away." Solar scientists like Howard—who study solar activity for purposes such as forecasting imminent space weather, including giant explosions of solar material that the Sun can sometimes send our way—have spent years developing techniques to remove the effect of this dust. Only after removing light contamination from dust can they clearly see what the corona is doing.

The two scientists built their model as a tool for others to get rid of the pesky dust in STEREO—and eventually Parker Solar Probe—images, but the prediction of dust-free space lingered in the back of their minds. If they could devise a way of separating the two kinds of light and isolate the dust-shine, they could figure out how much dust was really there. Finding that all the light in an image came from the corona alone, for example, could indicate they'd found dust-free space at last.

Mercury's dust ring was a lucky find, a side discovery Stenborg and Howard made while they were working on their model. When they used their new technique on the STEREO images, they noticed a pattern of enhanced brightness along Mercury's orbit—more dust, that is—in the light they'd otherwise planned to discard.

"It wasn't an isolated thing," Howard said. "All around the Sun, regardless of the spacecraft's position, we could see the same five percent increase in dust brightness, or density. That said something was there, and it's something that extends all around the Sun."

Scientists never considered that a ring might exist along Mercury's orbit, which is maybe why it's gone undetected until now, Stenborg said. "People thought that Mercury, unlike Earth or Venus, is too small and too close to the Sun to capture a dust ring," he said. "They expected that the solar wind and magnetic forces from the Sun would blow any excess dust at Mercury's orbit away."

With an unexpected discovery and sensitive new tool under their belt, the researchers are still interested in the dust-free zone. As Parker Solar Probe continues its exploration of the corona, their model can help others reveal any other dust bunnies lurking near the Sun.

Asteroids Hiding in Venus' Orbit

This isn't the first time scientists have found a dust ring in the inner solar system. Twenty-five years ago, scientists discovered that Earth orbits the Sun within a giant ring of dust. Others uncovered a similar ring near Venus' orbit, first using archival data from the German-American Helios space probes in 2007, and then confirming it in 2013, with STEREO data.

Since then, scientists determined the dust ring in Earth's orbit comes largely from the , the vast, doughnut-shaped region between Mars and Jupiter where most of the solar system's asteroids live. These rocky asteroids constantly crash against each other, sloughing dust that drifts deeper into the Sun's gravity, unless Earth's gravity pulls the dust aside, into our planet's orbit.

At first, it seemed likely that Venus' dust ring formed like Earth's, from dust produced elsewhere in the solar system. But when Goddard astrophysicist Petr Pokorny modeled dust spiraling toward the Sun from the asteroid belt, his simulations produced a ring that matched observations of Earth's ring—but not Venus'.

This discrepancy made him wonder if not the asteroid belt, where else does the dust in Venus' orbit come from? After a series of simulations, Pokorny and his research partner Marc Kuchner hypothesized it comes from a group of never-before-detected asteroids that orbit the Sun alongside Venus. They published their work in The Astrophysical Journal Letters on March 12, 2019.

"I think the most exciting thing about this result is it suggests a new population of asteroids that probably holds clues to how the solar system formed," Kuchner said. If Pokorny and Kuchner can observe them, this family of asteroids could shed light on Earth and Venus' early histories. Viewed with the right tools, the asteroids could also unlock clues to the chemical diversity of the solar system.

Because it's dispersed over a larger orbit, Venus' dust ring is much larger than the newly detected ring at Mercury's. About 16 million miles from top to bottom and 6 million miles wide, the ring is littered with dust whose largest grains are roughly the size of those in coarse sandpaper. It's about 10 percent denser with dust than surrounding space. Still, it's diffuse—pack all the dust in the ring together, and all you'd get is an asteroid two miles across.

What scientists found after sifting through dust in the solar system
Asteroids represent building blocks of the solar system’s rocky planets. When they collide in the asteroid belt, they shed dust that scatters throughout the solar system, which scientists can study for clues to the early history of planets. (illustration) Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center Conceptual Image Lab

Using a dozen different modeling tools to simulate how dust moves around the solar system, Pokorny modeled all the dust sources he could think of, looking for a simulated Venus ring that matched the observations. The list of all the sources he tried sounds like a roll call of all the rocky objects in the solar system: Main Belt asteroids, Oort Cloud comets, Halley-type comets, Jupiter-family comets, recent collisions in the asteroid belt.

"But none of them worked," Kuchner said. "So, we started making up our own sources of dust."

Perhaps, the two scientists thought, the dust came from asteroids much closer to Venus than the asteroid belt. There could be a group of asteroids co-orbiting the Sun with Venus—meaning they share Venus' orbit, but stay far away from the planet, often on the other side of the Sun. Pokorny and Kuchner reasoned a group of asteroids in Venus' orbit could have gone undetected until now because it's difficult to point earthbound telescopes in that direction, so close to the Sun, without light interference from the Sun.

Co-orbiting asteroids are an example of what's called a resonance, an orbital pattern that locks different orbits together, depending on how their gravitational influences meet. Pokorny and Kuchner modeled many potential resonances: asteroids that circle the Sun twice for every three of Venus' orbits, for example, or nine times for Venus' ten, and one for one. Of all the possibilities, one group alone produced a realistic simulation of the Venus dust ring: a pack of asteroids that occupies Venus's orbit, matching Venus' trips around the Sun one for one.

But the scientists couldn't just call it a day after finding a hypothetical solution that worked. "We thought we'd discovered this population of asteroids, but then had to prove it and show it works," Pokorny said. "We got excited, but then you realize, 'Oh, there's so much work to do.'"

They needed to show that the very existence of the asteroids makes sense in the solar system. It would be unlikely, they realized, that asteroids in these special, circular orbits near Venus arrived there from somewhere else like the belt. Their hypothesis would make more sense if the asteroids had been there since the very beginning of the solar system.

The scientists built another model, this time starting with a throng of 10,000 asteroids neighboring Venus. They let the simulation fast forward through 4.5 billion years of solar system history, incorporating all the gravitational effects from each of the planets. When the model reached present-day, about 800 of their test asteroids survived the test of time.

Pokorny considers this an optimistic survival rate. It indicates that asteroids could have formed near Venus' orbit in the chaos of the early solar system, and some could remain there today, feeding the dust nearby.

The next step is actually pinning down and observing the elusive asteroids. "If there's something there, we should be able to find it," Pokorny said. Their existence could be verified with space-based telescopes like Hubble, or perhaps interplanetary space-imagers similar to STEREO's. Then, the scientists will have more questions to answer: How many of them are there, and how big are they? Are they continuously shedding dust, or was there just one break-up event?

Dust Rings Around Other Stars

The dust rings that Mercury and Venus shepherd are just a planet or two away, but scientists have spotted many other dust rings in distant star systems. Vast dust rings can be easier to spot than exoplanets, and could be used to infer the existence of otherwise hidden planets, and even their orbital properties.

But interpreting extrasolar dust rings isn't straightforward. "In order to model and accurately read the dust rings around other stars, we first have to understand the physics of the dust in our own backyard," Kuchner said. By studying neighboring dust rings at Mercury, Venus and Earth, where dust traces out the enduring effects of gravity in the , scientists can develop techniques for reading between the dust rings both near and far.


Explore further

Suspected dust ring in Venus's orbit confirmed

More information: Petr Pokorný et al, Co-orbital Asteroids as the Source of Venus's Zodiacal Dust Ring, The Astrophysical Journal (2019). DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab0827
Citation: What scientists found after sifting through dust in the solar system (2019, March 12) retrieved 22 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-03-scientists-sifting-solar.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
1779 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 12, 2019
"The rings trace the orbits of planets, whose gravity tugs dust into place around the Sun, "

The observation (although the mechanism is up for debate....)

"Vast dust rings can be easier to spot than exoplanets, and could be used to infer the existence of otherwise hidden planets, and even their orbital properties."

Oh look: https://phys.org/...tar.html

From the above link: "Their image revealed three distinct gaps in the disc, which, according to their theoretical modelling, were most likely caused by three additional gas giant planets also orbiting the young star.

LMAO...once again observation demonstrates how utterly inept theoretical astrophysicists are at interpretation. The dust is where the planets are (or will form) not the gaps. Yet another instance where reality shows how utterly wrong the "model" is. Thank you universe.


Mar 12, 2019
So you're claiming the Solar System has as much dust as CI Tau?

Really?

Cranks can't count.

Mar 12, 2019
Red, I have to thank you for that link, or I'd never have seen this absolute gem:

Egghead -
It might be possible that some good scientists had seen my hypothesis that the planets in this solar system came from another system where the Star went supernova and the force of the winds and concussion kicked out those planets...the planets flew out into the Cosmos, eventually slowing down in the vicinity of the disk of dust and gas, where they floated aimlessly until the Sun was formed out of the dust/gas.


I can't even... This clown has no idea what a supernova is or what kind of energy is involved if he thinks that's even a remotely viable "hypothesis." Good lord... This puts a lot into context.

Mar 12, 2019
The dusty rings form a torus, which is a flux tube. All planets orbit in flux tubes and even Sun orbiting comets travel in a dusty flux tube, and the dimensions and dust particle size distribution within these tubes have been known for decades.

Mar 12, 2019
a group of never-before-detected asteroids co-orbiting with the planet

LOL! Dark asteroids... The dark ages of astrophysics continues unabated.

Mar 12, 2019
@Bojingles
You forgot to include this:
Surveillance_Egg_Unit2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 25, 2018
-contd-
My theory didn't seem to go over big with the denizens of physorg and the 5 Star Club at the time when I proposed it, perhaps because I am not a scientist and they may think that it is only scientists who have the right to evolve such an idea.
And yet, this article appears to fit quite well onto my theory, which would make a lot of sense, given that the details in the article show that the disk is still quite dusty/dirty, which indicate that there is plenty of room for planets to form - but haven't formed yet.
But then, how did older planets, including a hot Jupiter, form within the disk when the Star in the centre is so young?

https://phys.org/...html#jCp

Mar 12, 2019
...
LMAO...once again observation demonstrates how utterly inept theoretical astrophysicists are at interpretation. The dust is where the planets are (or will form) not the gaps. Yet another instance where reality shows how utterly wrong the "model" is. Thank you universe.

The gaps are not dust free, just dust-low. Ergo, possibly indicating something else has already formed there. Even your own quote included the fact that there 3 gas giants orbiting the planet.

Mar 13, 2019
The dust isn't there due to gravity. Note the concentric rings of density, just like these modeled here;
http://www.electr...xies.pdf
See figure 4, shows why the terrestrial planets and gas planets are where they are.

Mar 13, 2019
Ooh wow! What a surprise, not.

Yes the solar system is filled with dust. Where it came from in the main is our star.

The sun is constantly shedding a stream of material in the solar wind and other expulsion events.... stands to reason.

Mar 13, 2019
Here's a wee tip fur y'all - it's wasn't 100000 asteroids bouncing around in Brownian motion which created all the dust. Look deeper at the sun's cycle and you will see it periodically novas. And expelled lots of dust etc.

Mar 13, 2019
The dust isn't there due to gravity. Note the concentric rings of density, just like these modeled here;
http://www.electr...xies.pdf
See figure 4, shows why the terrestrial planets and gas planets are where they are.


Pseudoscientific nonsense. A complete failure, as per observation. The author is clearly clueless.

Mar 13, 2019
"So you're claiming the Solar System has as much dust as CI Tau?

Really? "

No, and nothing I said indicates that I did... to a rational stable person. Hence your reply.

"Cranks can't count."
Stupid people make stupid conclusions when they read something and then state that is says something totally different than it actually does. Or when they try to win a debate by stating the point the are debating against...idiot.

Mar 13, 2019
"The gaps are not dust free, just dust-low."

All gaps are not dust free...just dust low.
" Ergo, possibly indicating something else has already formed there."
Not if you understand physics.
" Even your own quote included the fact that there 3 gas giants orbiting the planet"
Not my quote, the article stated it and I was clearly disputing the conclusion that planets cause the gaps due to their orbit being in the gaps, directly because of the observation that they don't. As to " The rings trace the orbits of planets, whose gravity tugs dust into place around the Sun" ... all I can do is facepalm at the conclusion this is even physically possible given the nature of the dust and the persistence of the entire ring overlaying the orbital path in the presence of the solar wind. Who'd ever have thought that studying gravity would turn intellectually blessed people into complete dolts....other than the dolts who believe what they say of course.

Mar 13, 2019
"So you're claiming the Solar System has as much dust as CI Tau?

Really? "

No, and nothing I said indicates that I did... to a rational stable person. Hence your reply.

"Cranks can't count."
Stupid people make stupid conclusions when they read something and then state that is says something totally different than it actually does. Or when they try to win a debate by stating the point the are debating against...idiot.


You do not appear to understand the subject matter. CI Tau is a protostar in the process of becoming a main sequence star. It is known as a T Tauri type star. The dust accretes onto the star and can also form planets. Forming planets have been found in these protoplanetary disks. The amount of dust is colossal, compared to the amounts in the article above. You need to study the subject, and understand it, before commenting upon it.

https://en.wikipe...uri_star

Mar 13, 2019
Who'd ever have thought that studying gravity would turn intellectually blessed people into complete dolts....other than the dolts who believe what they say of course.


And who would have thought that somebody who is quite evidently untutored in the subject would wish to comment upon it?

Discovery of a planetary-mass companion within the gap of the transition disk around PDS 70
Keppler, M. et al.
https://arxiv.org...1568.pdf


Mar 13, 2019
And yet, this article appears to fit quite well onto my theory


Lol. You should browse NASA's website for job openings. They can use a man of your talents.

The dust isn't there due to gravity. Note the concentric rings of density, just like these modeled here;
http://www.electr...xies.pdf
See figure 4, shows why the terrestrial planets and gas planets are where they are.


Ahh yes, the answer to every single question: Birkeland currents and Z-pinch.

Mar 13, 2019
"So you're claiming the Solar System has as much dust as CI Tau?

Really? "

No, and nothing I said indicates that I did...
You mean other than the fact you linked to an article about it and claimed this has anything to do with our current Solar System?

So now you're doing one of the usual troll things, lying about what you said.

OK.

Mar 13, 2019
The dust isn't there due to gravity. Note the concentric rings of density, just like these modeled here;
http://www.electr...xies.pdf
See figure 4, shows why the terrestrial planets and gas planets are where they are.


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigghhhttttt..... so, we have a humongous Birkeland current essentially oriented with the N and S poles of the star. Heading in one direction, it is pinched to form the star? Said star then manages to have a bipolar outflow, with one outflow following the direction of the current, and the other, traveling at the same velocity, heading in the exact opposite direction of the current? Neat trick, is that!

https://arxiv.org...3271.pdf

Mar 13, 2019
"So now you're doing one of the usual troll things, lying about what you said"

LOL, not to anyone who can actually read what I said above. Just because your halfwit interpretation was easily mocked doesn't mean you have to double down hoping people will just ignore the fact that your interpretation of what I said is nothing close to what I said.

"You mean other than the fact you linked to an article about it and claimed this has anything to do with our current Solar System? "

Oh the stupid is coming hard to the net today....my first comment, visible at the top of the section mentions nothing about "how much dust" either system has, just that one group thinks planets form in the gaps while another is observing that visible dust rings overlay orbital paths.

Hence why your extrapolation regarding the quantity of dust merely shows that you are completely fucked in the head....like most of your comments demonstrate.

BTW new Jones, still on ignore..cheers.

Mar 13, 2019
Hey, you linked it. Are you now denying you did, and attempted to use it as an example that's supposed to have something to do with our Solar System? Looks that way to me.

Classic trolling. Yes repeat no.

You are not merely a troll, but a stupid and obvious one.

Mar 13, 2019
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigghhhttttt..... so, we have a humongous Birkeland current essentially oriented with the N and S poles of the star. Heading in one direction, it is pinched to form the star?

Yes, except you clearly don't understand Birkeland currents.
Said star then manages to have a bipolar outflow, with one outflow following the direction of the current, and the other, traveling at the same velocity, heading in the exact opposite direction of the current?

I know you are a simpleton and these complex ideas are beyond your willful ignorance, but other than your skewed understanding you are starting to see the basics.

Mar 13, 2019
@cantthink says "you don't understand Birkeland currents" but can't say exactly how.

Another classic stupid obvious troll.

Mar 13, 2019
"Hey, you linked it. Are you now denying you did,"
No, it is clear I linked the article.
" and attempted to use it as an example that's supposed to have something to do with our Solar System?"
And here's the stupid..so for the third time " ....my first comment, visible at the top of the section mentions nothing about "how much dust" either system has, just that one group thinks planets form in the gaps while another is observing that visible dust rings overlay orbital paths.

"Looks that way to me. "

When something looks that way to you, but EVERYONE else can see what is actually said and compare it to your interpretation...you look foolish...you are foolish. And now I am having fun with how big of a fool you are....keep em coming moron.

"Classic trolling. Yes repeat no."

Aneurism in progress??

You are not merely a troll, but a stupid and obvious one.

Not if you read what each of us is saying here loser....

Mar 13, 2019
my first comment, visible at the top of the section mentions nothing about "how much dust" either system has, just that one group thinks planets form in the gaps while another is observing that visible dust rings overlay orbital paths.
The situation in a newly formed solar system is very different from the situation in ours. The how much dust thing is essential, and quite important to the dynamics.

Because you can drink from a garden hose, does that mean you can drink from a fire hose? One will fill your belly, the other will blow your head off.

Cranks can't count.

Mar 13, 2019
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigghhhttttt..... so, we have a humongous Birkeland current essentially oriented with the N and S poles of the star. Heading in one direction, it is pinched to form the star?

Yes, except you clearly don't understand Birkeland currents.
Said star then manages to have a bipolar outflow, with one outflow following the direction of the current, and the other, traveling at the same velocity, heading in the exact opposite direction of the current?

I know you are a simpleton and these complex ideas are beyond your willful ignorance, but other than your skewed understanding you are starting to see the basics.


So let's see the explanation You haven't got one, have you? You couldn't tell the difference between a magnetic flux tube and a Birkeland current the other day. So, explain your latest nonsense. Waiting..

Mar 13, 2019
Not if you read what each of us is saying here loser....


Nope, you are clearly in the wrong, and are clearly a troll. Da Schneib is correct.

Mar 13, 2019
"The situation in a newly formed solar system is very different from the situation in ours. The how much dust thing is essential, and quite important to the dynamics."

Yet it is the location of the dust and planets I was commenting on from the standpoint of theoretical interpretation vs. observational evidence , again for the extra thick.

"Because you can drink from a garden hose, does that mean you can drink from a fire hose? One will fill your belly, the other will blow your head off. "

But regardless of the flow capacity, the water is still in the hose. As physics dictates.

"Cranks can't count. "

Idiots confuse quantity with location, and thus confuse themselves by applying a different interpretation to a comment than what it actually says. You are very confused...ergo, you are an idiot.

Hey Jones...thud.

Mar 13, 2019
Who'd ever have thought that studying gravity would turn intellectually blessed people into complete dolts....other than the dolts who believe what they say of course.


And who would have thought that somebody who is quite evidently untutored in the subject would wish to comment upon it?

Discovery of a planetary-mass companion within the gap of the transition disk around PDS 70
Keppler, M. et al.
https://arxiv.org...1568.pdf



Da Schneib may want to copy this, so that it cannot be claimed by the hard of thinking that they haven't seen it due to having me on ignore.

Mar 13, 2019
@Castrogiovanni

I'll copypasta it for ya! but I'm pretty sure I'm also on ignore
Who'd ever have thought that studying gravity would turn intellectually blessed people into complete dolts....other than the dolts who believe what they say of course.


And who would have thought that somebody who is quite evidently untutored in the subject would wish to comment upon it?

Discovery of a planetary-mass companion within the gap of the transition disk around PDS 70
Keppler, M. et al.
https://arxiv.org...1568.pdf


Mar 13, 2019
Hell no, no reason for that. I would say the usual copy and paste the specific text showing the observation of the planet in the gap...but as I have read the paper previously and that text is actually 6 pages of "technique" used to extrapolate that it is there instead....well. No reason for the devout to question anything despite observations that would make anyone of scientific mind question it.

So what do we go with, evidence and observation of where dust rings around stars form...or a combination of previous observation of dust rings light years away and an assumption of why the gaps were there, coupled with 6 pages of complex math, filtering techniques and smoothing to claim they made an observation they cannot show visually.

Also, if gravity from the planets forms the rings, where is the section of the paper where they tell us there is an increase in the dust density around each planet? The artist must have read the other article first as he shows less dust..

Mar 13, 2019
Hell no, no reason for that. I would say the usual copy and paste the specific text showing the observation of the planet in the gap.


A picture is worth a 1000 words;

https://www.mpg.d...a-planet

Mar 13, 2019
Also, if gravity from the planets forms the rings, where is the section of the paper where they tell us there is an increase in the dust density around each planet? The artist must have read the other article first as he shows less dust..


Utter stupidity. One system is a few million years old, the solar system is 4.6 billion years old. We are talking two completely different things here, as anybody with any intelligence would see. You really need to stop commenting on things that are quite clearly beyond you.


Mar 13, 2019
A picture is worth a 1000 words;

https://www.mpg.d...a-planet

LMAO!!!!! Had to see what you had to say...you had better look at your picture again dipshit, your blob of light representing a planet is actually attached to one of the arms of "dust" and there are no "rings" in it...2 distinct cavities and the usual filaments and swirls. If ever there was proof you are Jones....

Mar 13, 2019
A picture is worth a 1000 words;

https://www.mpg.d...a-planet

LMAO!!!!! Had to see what you had to say...you had better look at your picture again dipshit, your blob of light representing a planet is actually attached to one of the arms of "dust" and there are no "rings" in it...2 distinct cavities and the usual filaments and swirls. If ever there was proof you are Jones....


Read the papers O clueless one. And then write your uneducated rebuttals. You do not understand the subject. Why are you here?

Orbital and atmospheric characterization of the planet within the gap of the PDS 70 transition disk
Müller, A. et al.
https://www.mpia....t_al.pdf

Mar 13, 2019
For the hard of thinking;

Discovery of a planetary-mass companion ***within the gap*** of the transition disk around PDS 70

Orbital and atmospheric characterization of the planet ***within the gap*** of the PDS 70 transition disk

Mar 13, 2019
Jones you useless tool, the "gap" is not a gap between 2 rings. This is why you were on ignore and are going right back there....you claim I don't understand a subject when you cannot even understand English words. ( or look at a picture and understand what you are seeing for that matter)

Of note, it is hilarious that when one of you who normally fuck up debating science run into trouble another one of you who understand things about as well come in to try to save the day. Funny thing is you have all miscued so many times that it looks like there are just 3 of you and your various socks left. Maybe all of your "other friends" have moved on to a new science reporting site...maybe you should join them so this site can get away from the Jerry Springer guest antics you like to exhibit here. You might be happier at a place where everyone agrees with your POV....you aren't going to like the results of real science/observation being applied to your beliefs.

Mar 13, 2019
Jones you useless tool, the "gap" is not a gap between 2 rings. This is why you were on ignore and are going right back there....you claim I don't understand a subject when you cannot even understand English words. ( or look at a picture and understand what you are seeing for that matter)


I don't need to understand what I'm looking at, you untutored idiot. I have the scientists to tell me, and nobody is gainsaying them. Go on, run away again you clueless fool. It's what you do every time you are shown up on here.

Discovery of a planetary-mass companion ***within the gap*** of the transition disk around PDS 70

Orbital and atmospheric characterization of the planet ***within the gap*** of the PDS 70 transition disk


Mar 13, 2019
Of note, it is hilarious that when one of you who normally fuck up debating science run into trouble another one of you who understand things about as well come in to try to save the day.

This sounds familiar...

Funny thing is you have all miscued so many times that it looks like there are just 3 of you and your various socks left.

Hmmm....

You might be happier at a place where everyone agrees with your POV....you aren't going to like the results of real science/observation being applied to your beliefs.


Wait.... Didn't you just describe B-B-B-B-Benni and the quacks?

Keep science: Include references to the published scientific literature to support your statements. Pseudoscience comments (including non-mainstream theories) will be deleted (see pseudoscience).
•Avoid political and religious discussions: Because of the complexity and ambiguity of this subject matter, political and religious discussions are not allowed.

-Continued-

Mar 13, 2019
-Continued-

Egghead talks about his "Creator" and constantly injects his nonscientific beliefs into a comments sections about actual physics.

Cantthink and the other EU proponents are discussing pseudoscience. Even if EU theory held a drop of water (it doesn't), how does commenting on every article saying "Faerie dust" this and "Plasma ignoramuses" that go towards furthering intellectual discussion?

Or Cantthink commenting on every article in other subforums on this site about Jussie Smollet and espousing his lame political views.

Perhaps if this crowd disagrees with everything published here, then they should heed your advice and find a site full of like-minded ninnies who can agree with them.

The sheer irony....

Mar 13, 2019
This Mysterious Picci

The only dust that is factual
is the dust
that has settled on this artists illustration
seeing as this is an artist's illustration
this presumably
means these artists did not have a Picci
to work from
as that would mean
we would also be looking at the sunlight reflecting, refracting lighting up this dust of this Picci
so
as no one has this Picci
how does any one know for certain this artists illustration
is just another of the many mysterious imaginaries of just yet another struggling artist
because
with no Picci to work from
how does anyone know the dust reflects sun light
because
dust reflecting sunlight
is what digital cameras and telescopes are all about
This digitised 409inch Gran Telescopio Canarias can see a gnat change its mind on Mars
but cannot see dust filtering star light at 100s of miles
and then there's the Hubble space telescope and innumerable telescopes in orbit
As we Admire our Artists Simulation

Mar 13, 2019
"The sheer irony...."

Well Bo, all I can say to you is that to illustrate my initial point I linked a previous article where the current observation was in direct opposition to the theoretical hypothesis in said article. I got to debate a guy with dementia who tried to say I was saying something I wasn't, and a guy who just admitted to not understanding anything because he doesn't have to, and you....now providing your definition of "keep science" where an appeal to authority is considered adequate in lieu of not being able to respond from a position of understanding. Like anyone who thinks responding with "I disagree because ( insert 30 page paper link here) without quoting the specific text from said link to illustrate some level of understanding.

At the end of the day they are just parrots, repeating what they have heard....not really qualified to debate the subject matter.

Mar 13, 2019
"Cantthink and the other EU proponents are discussing pseudoscience. Even if EU theory held a drop of water (it doesn't), how does commenting on every article saying "Faerie dust" this and "Plasma ignoramuses" that go towards furthering intellectual discussion? "

It doesn't, my take on this is that he has been here a very long time, as have all of the cronies whose ire he is trying to arouse by opening with those remarks...hell I just did it another thread for the same purpose. Why? Because as far as I am concerned any money spent, resources wasted, and junk science that comes from notion that you can "math" your way to the answers of how physics works holds us as a race back from our true potential. The people here who support math based junk science vigorously, treat opposing viewpoints with callous ignorance and deserve no better in return.

At least you attempt discussion which is nice.

Mar 13, 2019
You'll note I took no issue with anything you posted in regards to this article, or the one you linked. I don't know anything about the processes of planetary formation, and therefore cannot comment on it without doing some research first.

To clarify: this is not my definition of keep science. This is what is stated in the comment guidelines of the website. There's an importance in appealing to authority, e.g. taking SR/GR as given since it is so heavily supported by experimental observation. If we cannot take that as given, then it quickly becomes very difficult to have productive discussion. What powers our sun is another example of something well established in mainstream theory that EU proponents have argued against. If that's the debate EU folks want to have, take it to an EU website, or one that welcomes "alternative" explanations.

In order to have meaningful productive discussion, there needs to be a foundation upon which everything is built. -ctd

Mar 13, 2019
- ctd

The rest of what I wrote got deleted and I don't want to retype it all, but the gist is that the guidelines of the website are to discuss the articles within the context of established and accepted theories. It doesn't mean those theories are 100% correct, nor does it mean that science should be a closed book. Scientists are still out there right now trying to prove and disprove aspects of GR/SR for example. It means that within this website, in order to have meaningful and productive discussion, a foundation is necessary, and that foundation is the established mainstream.

Mar 13, 2019
- ctd

The rest of what I wrote got deleted and I don't want to retype it all, but the gist is that the guidelines of the website are to discuss the articles within the context of established and accepted theories. It doesn't mean those theories are 100% correct, nor does it mean that science should be a closed book. Scientists are still out there right now trying to prove and disprove aspects of GR/SR for example. It means that within this website, in order to have meaningful and productive discussion, a foundation is necessary, and that foundation is the established mainstream.


Well said. If somebody is offering up a viable scientific alternative, then they should be prepared to spell it out, with backing from actual scientific research. From actual scientists. It seems to me that a lot of the posters here are purely anti-science, but have little to no scientific knowledge.

Mar 13, 2019
LOL, @Bojangles, now I have a "Benni and the Jets" earworm running. I'm gonna listen to some Seal and some Yes to get rid of it.

Mar 13, 2019
Hypothetical population of Venus co-orbital asteroids

Photometry from the Helios and STEREO spacecraft revealed regions of enhanced sky surface-brightness
suggesting a narrow circumsolar ring of dust associated with Venus's orbit.
We model this phenomenon by integrating the orbits of 10,000,000+ dust particles subject to gravitational and non-gravitational forces
considering several different kinds of plausible dust sources
We find that only particles from a hypothetical population of Venus co-orbital asteroids can produce enough signal in a narrow ring to match the observations

Photometry is the science of the measurement of light of its perceived brightness to the human eye
So no Picci, as this is perceived brightness of hypothetical population of Venus co-orbital asteroids

Mar 13, 2019
LOL, @Bojangles, now I have a "Benni and the Jets" earworm running. I'm gonna listen to some Seal and some Yes to get rid of it.


How apropos, the last stanza of Crazy almost reads like granville:
And then you see things
The size of which you've never known before
They'll break it
Someday
Only child know
Them things
The size
Of which you've never known before
Someday

Mar 13, 2019
I just started "Close to the Edge"

Mar 13, 2019
Calm down! There are TWO very DISTINCT stages involved: one stage is early star/planets formation; other stage is later 'resonance' evolution. The two stages have very distinctly different interaction/effects 'environmental outcomes' from the two very distinctly different 'dominance status' between the active/effective 'components' of the hybrid factors/forces (gravitational and em) involved at the respective stages. In the early stage it is the incoming dust/plasma 'cloud' that dominates what happens in interaction to accreting/swirling plasma/grav 'protostar feature'. Later, it's the sun-planetary interactions via gravity, solar winds, and MAGNETIC FIELDS forming around star/planets, and threading through remaining dust/plasma cloud material. It's a complex interplay at all stages, but it's obvious that once the majority of cloud content is subsumed into star/planets, the remaining material is THEN 'ordered' further into dust/plasma cloud material 'nodes' and 'flows'. :)

Mar 14, 2019
... from the formation of the solar system, some 4.6 billion years ago

This is pure science fiction. Not observed, not verifiable, not repeatable, not falsifiable because there's always some new kind of rescuing scenario that gets invented to accommodate any contradictions.
scientists seek clues to understanding the birth of planets and the composition of all that we see in the solar system.

it suggests a new population of asteroids that probably holds clues to how the solar system formed," Kuchner said

As long as mankind depends only on naturalistic explanations for the existence of everything, so long they will dwell in the dark regarding the origin of not only our solar system but the rest of the universe as well.
Trying to explain our origins by observations in the present is a fertile ground for some beautiful and highly imaginative science fiction.

Mar 14, 2019
These Hypothetical orbital populations

Helios has revealed regions of enhanced sky surface-brightness
asteroids do not orbit planets
like planets, asteroids orbit this Sun
this region of enhanced sky surface-brightness
is a phenomena that is orbiting this Sun
these 10,000,000 orbital dust particles
as they are described as asteroids, are orbiting this Sun
as these are integrated into this computer model
is reasonable to assume these dust particle sized asteroids are Real
so why are we considering several different kinds of plausible dust source
as we have these 10,000,000 orbital dust particles
these 10,000,000 orbital dust particles are our source
as how do we detect these 10,000,000 orbital dust particles with Helios
if we are looking for a possible source
that has become
this Hypothetical populations of Venus co-orbital asteroids
how does 10,000,000 VISIBLE orbital dust particles
become
Hypothetical orbital populations?

Mar 14, 2019
@FreddyJoe is back with the Babble by the drunken stone age sheep herders about the super magic daddy in the sky, and meanwhile accuses the entire world of promoting science fiction.

Oh, well, I always did like scifi better than fantasy.

Snicker.

Back to your sister-wife and the barrel fire in the trailer park again, @FreddyJoe.

Mar 14, 2019
@Da Sch

The herders weren't drunk, It was neurosyphilis. It gets lonely at night while tending your flock. Or heavy metal poisoning? In that time frame didn't they add lead or mercury to their wine to flavor it? Drink of thy blood, etc.

Mad as a hatter.

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