Sometimes planetary exploration is drama and new vistas: Seeing the
most distant planet for the first time, a harrowing landing on Mars, the fight
for survival of a probe lost on a comet.
Much of planetary science, though, builds up from many quiet
measurements that provide crucial insights that can change our understanding of
the solar system and our world’s place in it.
Today’s post is a about a group of proposed missions that fall into that
latter category.
(Oh, and before anyone reminds me that Pluto is no longer a “planet”,
there are scientific classifications and personal ones. Pluto emotionally will always be the planet
on the distant edge of the solar system for me.)
One of the knottier problems in planetary science is understanding the
origins of Earth’s water. In the infant
solar system, a temperature gradient existed extending from our star to the
outer solar system. Close to the sun,
rocky materials with high melting points could have condensed. Somewhere, possibly in the region of the
mid-asteroid belt, it became cool enough for water ice to condense. In the far outer solar system, even materials
that are gases on our world would have frozen out to create, among other
features, the plains of frozen nitrogen found on Pluto by the New Horizon’s
spacecraft.
In this model, our early planet fell on the wrong side of the dividing
line – referred as the snow line – for water to have condensed and become part
of our world. In one sense the Earth remained
a dry world with much less than 1% of its mass as water. By comparison, the asteroid Ceres on the
other side of the snow line may have as much as 50% of its mass in water,
liquid or frozen.
Yet on the Earth’s surface, water is abundant in our atmosphere, soils,
and oceans with perhaps several times as much water again contained in the
rocks of our planet’s crust and mantel. How
was this critical substance delivered to our world?
Scientists have long suspected that the Earth’s water was delivered
from somewhere in the outer solar system by icy bodies colliding with the
proto-Earth. But from which region of
the outer solar system? And what dynamic
processes perturbed those bodies into collision courses with our rocky inner
world?
Karen Meech from the University of Hawaii puts the
importance of this science this way.
“The compelling question to learning how Earth got its water isn’t just
about the Earth. If our solar system was
somehow special and required a special architecture to deliver water to our
world, what does that say about the thousands of worlds around other
stars? Would planets in the habitable
zones around these stars have water to support life? This question impacts the big question of ‘is
there anybody else out there?’”
We won’t be able to answer this question until we have
analyzed the chemistry at bodies that represent several potential sources of
water and volatiles for our own solar system.
At least three teams of scientists are proposing missions to explore these
bodies.
Water is abundant in our solar system especially in the worlds that
formed beyond the snow line. Ceres is
one example of asteroids on the far side of the line with substantial water. Many of the moons of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus,
and Neptune have vast quantities of water.
Comets and the worlds beyond Neptune, of which Pluto is the largest
example, have substantial water. The
Earth’s water could have come from any of these regions, or perhaps a
mixture. There’s also the possibility
that the rocky grains that condensed to form the Earth absorbed some of the
water vapor surrounding them, or that water was made on Earth’s surface when hydrogen
in our planet forming disk combined with molten rocks on Earth’s surface.
If this sounds like a messy problem, it is. The solution to finding the sources of the
Earth’s water lies in chemistry. Water
itself varies in its isotope composition between normal water with hydrogen atoms
containing no neutrons and the much rarer tone neutron hydrogen, deuterium. The
ratio of these two water types, abbreviated to D/H, varies among the bodies of
the solar system. (You can read about
D/H ratios in two Wikepedia articles here
and here.) The
smallest ratios are found at Jupiter and Saturn, followed by Uranus and
Neptune, and then primitive meteorites.
The Earth, Mars, a few comets, and interestingly Saturn’s moon Titan
have similar D/H ratios. Saturn’s moon
Enceladus, however, has a higher ratio.
Some comets have D/H ratios similar to Earth while others have higher
ratios.
Examples of D/H ratios in water for a number of solar system bodies. References to the Oort cloud and Jupiter family refer to different groups of comets. Credit: ESA. |
Finding an icy body with D/H ratio similar to Earth’s suggests that it
could have formed in the same region as the bodies that supplied water to Earth
because the amount of deuterium that gets captured in molecules is a sensitive
function of temperature. That, though,
is just the beginning of the detective work. Early in the solar system, the
orbits of the giant planets migrated in and then out again. In the process, they scattered many of the
smaller bodies around the solar system (and ejected many from the solar system
altogether). The goal is not just to
find bodies with similar chemistry to the Earth’s water but to also look for
clues as to where these bodies might have originally formed before they were
scattered.
Chemistry again should provide the critical clues. Isotope ratios such as those of 17,18O/16O[xygen]
and 15N/14N[itrogen] along with the amounts of noble
gases such a krypton and argon can reveal clues such as the temperature at
which a body formed or the distance from
the sun where it formed. Comparing
different groups of isotopes and elements will allow scientists to explore
multiple lines of evidence.
To explore the origins of Earth’s water, scientists need to deliver a
capable chemistry lab to different worlds that are the remaining
representatives of early reservoirs of water and volatiles. Three teams, two American and one European
are proposing missions to do this to their respective low cost planetary
programs (the Discovery program for NASA and the Medium class program for ESA).
The core instrument for all three proposed missions would be a mass
spectrometer. These instruments sniff in
gases or vaporized grains of ice and then “weigh” the distribution of their molecules
and isotopes. The two NASA missions
propose to use a cutting edge advanced mass spectrometer, MASPEX, that is both
highly sensitive to trace amounts of material and can measure large complex molecules. MASPEX has been selected for NASA’s Europa
mission and is proposed to be used by at least three Discovery missions (the
two discussed in this post plus one that would study the gasses emitted by
Saturn’s moon Enceladus). The specific
mass spectrometer for the European mission isn’t specified. (For a brief and easy to read overview of
mass spectrometers, check out this
document from JOEL USA, which manufactures commercial instruments. You can read a technical overview of the
MASPEX instrument here.)
Comet Harley 2 as imaged during a flyby by the Deep Imact/EPOXI spacecraft. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech |
The Primitive Materials Explorer (PriME) Discovery mission would return
to comet Hartley 2, which was briefly studied during a flyby with the Deep
Impact/EPOXI spacecraft, for an extended study.
Measurements by a European space telescope, Herschel, measured the D/H
ratio for this comet and found that it is similar to Earth’s oceans.
The other two proposed missions would travel to an entirely different
potential source of Earth’s water. Several
asteroids, including Ceres where Dawn is now exploring, have been observed by
telescopes to emit dust and water vapor.
Five asteroids emit so much dust,
forming a comet-like tail, that they are called main belt comets (MBCs). Because the dust comes off the MBCs every
time they make their closest approach to the sun, it is clear that heat is
causing water to escape, pushing dust from the surface.
Artist conception of asteroid 24 Themis and two small fragments of this dynamical family, which resulted from a large impact more than one billion years ago. Note that one of the small fragments is inert (as most asteroids are) and the other has a comet-like tail, produced by the sublimation of water ice from its surface. Credit: Gabriel Pérez, Servicio Multimedia/IAC |
Telescope measurements of one of the larger (~200 km diameter) and more
distant main belt asteroids, 24
Themis, suggest that there may be water ice with some organic compounds on
its surface (see the press release here). Conveniently, past collisions have chipped
off pieces of the parent asteroid, potentially allowing scientists to examine
material that potentially previously lay beneath the surface. One of those chips, tiny (estimated 0.6 km
diameter) asteroid 238P/Read has been observed to have strong,
comet-like outgassing, suggesting that a recent impact may have uncovered
an ice layer or pocket.
The proposed Discovery Proteus mission would explore the 24 Themis
asteroid family to study it as a source of Earth’s water. The spacecraft would first flyby Themis
itself, studying its surface composition and structure with copies of the Dawn
mission’s cameras. It would also measure
the composition of any gases being emitted from the comet with its MASPEX mass
spectrometer. Later during a months-long
rendezvous with Read, the Proteus spacecraft would measure the composition of emitted
water vapor and any organics with its MASPEX mass spectrometer in exquisite
detail.
The third proposed mission that would search for the
origins of Earth’s water, Castalia, was proposed for Europe’s fourth medium-class mission,
but not selected. The mission may be re-proposed
for the upcoming fifth mission competition.
In its original form, the proposed mission would have visited a
different main belt comet, asteroid 133P/Elst-Pizarro. If the mission goes forward, it may change
its target to another main belt comet.
Dr. Meech, who is also the Principal Investigator for the
team proposing Proteus, makes the case that flying to a main belt comet rather
than to a standard comet would better help us understand how Earth got its
water. Scientists develop dynamical models to understand the process of
planetary growth. Many models predict
that as the giant planets formed, they moved, tossing the smaller icy
planetesimals that would become comets and water-rich asteroids and main belt
comets both inward and outward. “These models make specific predictions about
where asteroids with ices formed and where comets formed. The distances over which the icy asteroids
formed are much better constrained; comets on the other hand could have formed
over a wide range of distances making them less diagnostic of a formation
location.” The models suggest that it would have been easier for asteroids to
have delivered the quantity of water on the Earth than standard comets.
Reading through the summaries of the missions reminded me of the
incredible discipline scientists proposing Discovery missions must
exhibit. The Castalia mission was
proposed to fly with ten instruments. In
the European system, the ESA budget doesn’t cover the costs of instruments,
which are instead paid for separately by the nations that develop them. As a result, low-cost European planetary
mission proposals tend to be instrument rich.
In the NASA system, instruments developed by US teams must be paid for
out of the mission’s budget (although any instruments contributed by another
nation are paid by that nation’s government).
As a result, the Proteus mission would carry just its multi-color
cameras and the MASPEX instrument. The
PriME mission would carry these two instruments plus a duplicate copy of the
JIRAM imaging infrared spectrometer developed originally for the Juno Jupiter
mission and contributed by Italy. Compared
to the imaging infrared spectrometer that the OSIRIS-REx asteroid mission will
carry (as an example of an optimized instrument for a small body mission), the
JIRAM instrument is both lower resolution (for the technically minded, an
instantaneous field of view of 240 mrad
versus 4 mrad)
with a narrower spectral range (2.0-5.0 mm
versus 0.4 – 4.3 µm). For the PriME
mission team, however, the JIRAM copy is free.
An imaging infrared spectrometer would also be useful
on the Proteus mission, especially to study the surface of asteroid Themis
during the flyby. I asked Dr. Meech why
her team didn’t add this instrument. “We
are putting state of the art technology into the mission with the mass
spectrometer, and that means it is expensive. Also because of the long
transit times for solar electric propulsion missions the mission operations are
very long compared to other comet missions - which increases cost. The
key science requires the mass spectrometer. An imaging spectrometer would
be very nice but that would not make the breakthrough science we hope to
achieve.”
However, NASA does allow some leeway on instruments,
and teams can propose optional instruments that NASA could chose fund to add to
enhance the mission’s science and also demonstrate technologies or educate
students. The PriME mission could also
carry a student-led plasma instrument.
For the Proteus mission, JPL is proposing a mission enhancement that
would use a CubeSat to make infrared spectral measurements at Themis. (Cubesats are spacecraft that for planetary
missions can be as small as a loaf of bread.)
The scientific measurements would be valuable in their own right, but
this enhancement would also demonstrate the use of a CubeSat to work with a
mother craft and the design of the spectrometer sized for these tiny
spacecraft.
As I said at the beginning of this post, the question
of how water was delivered to the Earth is one of the most important in
planetary science, both to understand the history of our world and to
understand the mixing bowl that was the earliest solar system. Eventually, we will fly missions to comets
that have D/H ratios similar to Earth’s such as Hartley 2 and to main belt
comets to see if they could be the sources of our water and to explore these
bodies as fascinating objects in their own right.
However, if either PriME or Proteus is selected, we
won’t see millions of people flooding the internet to learn what the D/H and
other isotope ratios are. These are
examples of the less media-star missions that perform critical science to help
us understand our world and the solar system.
Given 28 Discovery proposals, the odds of any one have
the right match of compelling science, low engineering risk, and low budget
risk and being the one selected is small.
If it came down to these two and I had a vote (not that NASA would ever
be crazy enough to do such a thing), I’d lean towards Proteus because I’d like
to see a new class of world. However,
the scientific case for both are compelling to me.
If you are interested, an article
from the March 2015 Scientific American magazine discusses the science behind the
questions of the origins of the Earth’s water in more detail.
Credit: Proteus Team |
Nice information from you blog....Thanks for this blog to give such a information... Unbelievable Pictures by NASA
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete...a possible solution... INCREASING ITS SPEED, gives it a shove, TOWARDS A SIDE IF THERE ARE LITTLE TIME, to what speed gives it thrust towards a side for deflecting it?...speed = space/time...so if want that it passing "close shaving" to 1,000 kms from Earth = 1 million mts, and having approx. 11 days = 1 million seconds, the correction speed will be of: 6,000 kms approx. Earth radius + 1,000 kms = 7,000 kms; 7 million mts/1 million seconds = 7 mts/second (25 kms/hour). If it increases forwards speed, it climbs to a higher orbit, and vice versa: orbit circular radius = (mass*speed²)/force (centripetal) from Sun gravitational attraction.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete...a possible solution (2)...for gives it impulse: a hole in its surface (escavated by astronauts, or by successive nuclear impacts in the same place) and within a nuclear charge: the superficial material of the asteroid, volatilized by nuclear radiations, gamma rays, etc (at Space, on having not air, there is not expansive wave) go out ejected as in a rocket´s nozzle. Also can to impulses a slight asteroid for doing it collides, using it as a missile, against other asteroid or comet very much more massive. War ballistic missiles that there are, they are not useful, are designed for go away from continent to continent... Only can be useful a rocket that can to put the charge at inteplanetary orbit, as the multi-phase which put satellites in geostationary orbit (is necessary have them already prepared in a Spatial-Command with all the nuclear weapons that there are in the World controlled and preserved by an International Organism, only for that)...("Doomsday asteroid": W. Cox and H. Chestek).
ReplyDelete...a possible solution (3)...or less drastic for give them thrust: to install on asteroid a nuclear electric generator. A spatial-catapult, as the aircraft´s carrier deck but with a linear electric motor, some over rails tip cars, or fastened to an endless belt, launching rocks. A spatial-sling, a revolving tube at high revolutions, rocks entering by the gyration axis and go out by the tube sent away at big speed towards the Space... Thrust by action/reaction for deflecting it with time. With each rock that it launches "makes thin" to asteroid and thus increases its orbital radius because "searches" a stable higher new orbit in accords with that speed it has too large on that radius for its new and decreased mass and gravity: circular orbit radius = (mass*speed²)/force (centripetal) fron Sun gravitational attraction.
ReplyDelete...spatial-catapults and spatial-slings launching rocks and/or plastic bags filled with ground...thrust = linear momentum (mass*speed).
ReplyDelete...Not only will can deflecting them from their trajectories of collision with Earth, but besides...they will be placed in geostationary orbit for to exploit their wealth of minerals, water, oxygen, nitrogen for the air and agriculture of Vital Support Gardens, etc. They will be utilized as ships, for to travel in them to the Solar System boundaries...as a "buses" fleet, going over there in one and if want to return or go away to other direction await the approaching of suitable asteroid for transferring..."ladies and gentlemen your attention please, we are entering in the asteroids belt, if alarm rings everybody going to the survival bunkers"... Drilling them by the center, as a gyratory without bone olive, with a fusion reactor in the center which it will give the light and heat as an artificial sun... Immense subterranean Gardens which will produce the air and food... At to look over there at high...will see to those other cities "downwards head"...
ReplyDelete...or...decreasing its mass. Is that perhaps the asteroid orbit will continue equal whether its mass increases at double or decreases at half?. No. (By the Angular Momentum, mass*speed*radius, Conservation Law, when mass changes and linear speed continues equal without motor thrust: if mass decreases...radius increases, angular speed decreases, period increases, and vice versa, till it reaches the new stable orbit). If mass increases, bad...it brings near in its radius minimum (perihelion) it "falls" towards the Sun, because with its major mass also there is a new major Sun gravitational attraction and now it would need major centrifugal force, major speed, for remaining in the same stable orbit (equal angular speed and different linear speed = different centrifugal force, as in Earth poles or equator...equal linear speed and different angular speed = also different centrifugal force, as in "whip" fairground attraction)...and it brings far in its radius maximum (aphelion), it doing a more elliptic new orbit, radius medium decreases... And vice versa: if MASS DECREASES, good...it brings far in its perihelion from Sun, and from Earth, because still conserves speed that it had with the major mass before and at same time decreases the Sun gravitational attraction, it doing a more circular new orbit, radius medium increases. Formulas: for circular orbit...radius = (mass*speed²)/force (centripetal) from Sun gravitational attraction... For elliptic orbit, besides...the Newton´s Universal Gravitation Law: F = G((m1*m2)/distance²)...the Kepler´s Laws...2nd: line Sun------→asteroid sweeps equal areas in equal times...3th: radius medium³(AU)/period²(years) = Constant... Taking into account besides its changes of speed: it brings near accelerates, it brings far decelerates...orbital perturbations from planets, etc...also can colliding among them when go across the asteroids belt, etc. For exact calculation really a complex field...
ReplyDelete