March 2004 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Hasting Tiplet Lenses
by Marilyn Smith 05 Mar '04

05 Mar '04

In the Surplus Shed list of new items is a Hastings triplet lens for $8. Their description says they are good magnifiers. Do these have any use as eyepieces, or strictly handheld magnifying lenses? Bob Grant http://www.surplusshed.com/pages/item/l3146.html

2 1

Caption contest
by Chuck Hards 04 Mar '04

04 Mar '04

Folks, I've been just too darned busy to go over all the entries received and pick a winner yet. I'll get to it as soon as possible, thanks for your patience. C. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Mars Water
by Patrick Wiggins 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

This just in from NASA HQ: Donald Savage Headquarters, Washington March 2, 2004 (Phone: 202/358-1547) Guy Webster Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. (Phone: 818/354-5011) RELEASE: 04-077 OPPORTUNITY ROVER FINDS STRONG EVIDENCE MERIDIANI PLANUM WAS WET Scientists have concluded the part of Mars NASA's Opportunity rover is exploring was soaking wet in the past. Evidence the rover found in a rock outcrop led scientists to the conclusion. Clues from the rocks' composition, such as the presence of sulfates, and the rocks' physical appearance, such as niches where crystals grew, helped make the case for a watery history. "Liquid water once flowed through these rocks. It changed their texture, and it changed their chemistry," said Dr. Steve Squyres of Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., principal investigator for the science instruments on Opportunity and its twin, Spirit. "We've been able to read the tell-tale clues the water left behind, giving us confidence in that conclusion," he said. Dr. James Garvin, lead scientist for Mars and lunar exploration at NASA Headquarters, Washington, said, "NASA launched the Mars Exploration Rover mission specifically to check whether at least one part of Mars ever had a persistently wet environment that could possibly have been hospitable to life. Today we have strong evidence for an exciting answer: Yes." Opportunity has more work ahead. It will try to determine whether, besides being exposed to water after they formed, the rocks may have originally been laid down by minerals precipitating out of solution at the bottom of a salty lake or sea. The first views Opportunity sent of its landing site in Mars' Meridiani Planum region five weeks ago delighted researchers at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Pasadena, Calif., because of the good fortune to have the spacecraft arrive next to an exposed slice of bedrock on the inner slope of a small crater. The robotic field geologist has spent most of the past three weeks surveying the whole outcrop, and then turning back for close-up inspection of selected portions. The rover found a very high concentration of sulfur in the outcrop with its alpha particle X-ray spectrometer, which identifies chemical elements in a sample. "The chemical form of this sulfur appears to be in magnesium, iron or other sulfate salts," said Dr. Benton Clark of Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Denver. "Elements that can form chloride or even bromide salts have also been detected." At the same location, the rover's Moessbauer spectrometer, which identifies iron-bearing minerals, detected a hydrated iron sulfate mineral called jarosite. Germany provided both these instruments. Opportunity's miniature thermal emission spectrometer has also provided evidence for sulfates. On Earth, rocks with as much salt as this Mars rock either have formed in water or, after formation, have been highly altered by long exposures to water. Jarosite may point to the rock's wet history having been in an acidic lake or an acidic hot springs environment. The water evidence from the rocks' physical appearance comes in at least three categories, said Dr. John Grotzinger, sedimentary geologist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge: indentations called "vugs," spherules and crossbedding. Pictures from the rover's panoramic camera and microscopic imager reveal the target rock, dubbed "El Capitan," is thoroughly pocked with indentations about a centimeter (0.4 inch) long and one-fourth or less that wide, with apparently random orientations. This distinctive texture is familiar to geologists as the sites where crystals of salt minerals form within rocks that sit in briny water. When the crystals later disappear, either by erosion or by dissolving in less-salty water, the voids left behind are called vugs, and in this case they conform to the geometry of possible former evaporite minerals. Round particles the size of BBs are embedded in the outcrop. >From shape alone, these spherules might be formed from volcanic eruptions, from lofting of molten droplets by a meteor impact, or from accumulation of minerals coming out of solution inside a porous, water-soaked rock. Opportunity's observations that the spherules are not concentrated at particular layers in the outcrop weigh against a volcanic or impact origin, but do not completely rule out those origins. Layers in the rock that lie at an angle to the main layers, a pattern called crossbedding, can result from the action of wind or water. Preliminary views by Opportunity hint the crossbedding bears hallmarks of water action, such as the small scale of the crossbedding and possible concave patterns formed by sinuous crestlines of underwater ridges. The images obtained to date are not adequate for a definitive answer. So scientists plan to maneuver Opportunity closer to the features for a better look. "We have tantalizing clues, and we're planning to evaluate this possibility in the near future," Grotzinger said. JPL, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, manages the Mars Exploration Rover project for NASA's Office of Space Science, Washington.

8 20

Mars rover and "thingy" updates
by Patrick Wiggins 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

A couple of things came up in yesterday's NASA Ambassador training that I thought folks here might be interested in. There was a lot of light hearted talk about the Mars "bunny" but the bottom line (as I think many have speculated here before) is that it was probably part of the air bags. They also commented on the life expectancy of the rovers. As you may know they were "warranted" to last 90 days each. However, things are going so well they are now talking openly about 300+ days. Dust is accumulating on the solar arrays much slower than expected and the ground temperature swings are less than expected. In fact, they're getting so comfortable about such long lifetimes that they are now having to plan around solar conjunction (something they confessed they never thought they'd ever have to worry about). Good news indeed. Patrick

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] More comments to irritate everybody
by Paul Witte 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

During yesterday's press conference they said there is an area in the rock they call the "blueberry bowl" in which many of these sphereoids have collected. They are going to place the spectrometer on them to determine their composition within the next few days. ---------- From: Joe Bauman Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 8:56 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] More comments to irritate everybody You're absolutely right that they should be cautious. But it's NOT cautious to automatically rule out possibilities without investigating them. And NASA has not mentioned it's even mulling any thoughts that these things might involve life. Unless the "blueberries" are so similar to natural material we have on Earth that there's no question about them, NASA scientists could at least admit the possibility they might be something really, really strange. I'm not calling for NASA to make some stupendous announcement based on "it looks odd," but it would be nice if they said, hummmm, wonder if these things could be fossils or present lifeforms. -- Joe >After NASA jumped the gun with the Mars meteorite several years ago >(when they made a big deal about some natural formations looking >like bacteria), the last thing they're going to do is to reach >another premature conclusion. This is also in the context of the >original Viking landers. NASA thought certain chemical processes >were lifelike until they determined that natural processes were much >more likely. > >I want us to find life on Mars every bit as much as anyone here, but >you have to remain skeptical if you're to do good science. If those >little nodules are the result of life processes, they have to be >able to withstand intense scrutiny. You can't use the X-Files >criterion "It looks odd, must be supernatural". You've really got >to beat on the evidence and try every approach to break it. Only >when it stands up to that sort of onslaught can you open the door to >a more radical interpretation. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

3 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] More comments to irritate everybody
by Michael Carnes 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

Hi Joe I'm sure the scientists do have such conversations among themselves, but given how badly almost any scientific news is covered in the media (present company excepted), I'm sure they know a minor comment like that would be tomorrow's headline. Who needs that? I think any good scientist who was looking at these little blobs and thinking life, would be trying to understand the chemistry, looking for energy sources and metabolytes and then comparing those results against other likely scenarios. I'm perfectly comfortable with their taking plenty of time on this. Although it's certainly good to look for analogs in geological processes on earth, there are still going to be big differences. So far, we don't have evidence that Mars ever had the kind of tectonic activity that plunges materials miles into the earth and cooks them up into all sorts of stuff. We don't know if the gravity difference affects the possible sizes of crystals or concretions formed by precipitation from a solution. I'm sure a real geologist could raise many other issues. Carl Sagan still said it best: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Best regards, Michael You're absolutely right that they should be cautious. But it's NOT cautious to automatically rule out possibilities without investigating them. And NASA has not mentioned it's even mulling any thoughts that these things might involve life.

4 4

Re: Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 13, Issue 4
by Wade Starks 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

Brent Watson <brentjwatson(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I believe they are saying that the ones [spheroids]on Mars are volcanic in origin. Actually, if you review the news reports of yesterday, you will discover that the scientist favor the spheriouds being created by water, since they are randomly scattered at various depths. Had they been generated by volcanic/meteorite action, as they say, the spheroids would have been deposited in very narrow layers, corresponding to the time of the events. Also, as I understand, equally important, if not even more important than the amount of surface/sub-surface water is the length of time the water was present in the enviornment. While they still do not have a handle on just how lone water was on the surface. The determination that the outcroppings are sedimentary, indicates the water was around for some significant amount of time to have produced those depositions. So the sedimentary rock indicates both presence of water in large quantities and for significant periods of time, both needed for the kinds of life forms we can imagine. But the question whether the water was around long enough for life, as we know it, to have evolvled has still not been answered, according to what I read. Wade Wade C Starks

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] More comments to irritate everybody
by Michael Carnes 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

After NASA jumped the gun with the Mars meteorite several years ago (when they made a big deal about some natural formations looking like bacteria), the last thing they're going to do is to reach another premature conclusion. This is also in the context of the original Viking landers. NASA thought certain chemical processes were lifelike until they determined that natural processes were much more likely. I want us to find life on Mars every bit as much as anyone here, but you have to remain skeptical if you're to do good science. If those little nodules are the result of life processes, they have to be able to withstand intense scrutiny. You can't use the X-Files criterion "It looks odd, must be supernatural". You've really got to beat on the evidence and try every approach to break it. Only when it stands up to that sort of onslaught can you open the door to a more radical interpretation. Michael >Hi friends, I still can't get over the feeling that NASA is missing >the boat, and that the "blueberries" are some form of life, either >fossil or presently alive, that we don't easily recognize as life >because they are so alien. Look at this closeup:

2 1

Re: Orion 80mm ED apo review
by Naz & David 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

Hi Chuck, Thankyou, I'd like to take you up on the offer. I have a GP-DX mount I can bring along if your mount is still in bits - will your OTA fit or didn't you bother with rings and dovetail? Which star party do you have in mind - I've not been able to be very social re SLAS parties I'm afraid.... Cheers David

2 1

Daguerreotypes anyone?
by Patrick Wiggins 03 Mar '04

03 Mar '04

The current (April) issue of S&T contains an article entitled "Picturing the Heavens, The Rise of Celestial Photography in the 19th Century". I very much enjoyed the article but the Daguerreotype of the first quarter Moon on page 38 really touched me somehow and I've been thinking what an adventure it might be to make a Daguerreotype of the Moon using the refractor out at SPOC once it's in it's new "Refractor House" later this year. As intrigued as I am by the idea I can't help but think there might be others on Utah Astronomy who might like to live this adventure too. Anyone interested? Before you reply I might add that one of the folks here I approached privately thinks I'm nuts. :-) Ok, ok, he didn't actually say that but you get the idea. Also, before you reply, know that from what I've seen on the web, the process is rather time consuming (although no more so that some modern day photographic techniques I've tired) and some of the chemicals can be hazardous if mishandled. Oddly enough, one of the sources for the blank plates is located in SLC... So, have a look at the following links and let me know what you think. http://www.ccsd.ca/charlotte/dagazine/mi/exhibit/index.htm http://www.photography.about.com/library/weekly/aa030402b.htm Clear skies are coming! Patrick :-)

1 0