PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet 1/2002 - 2 January 2002
-----------------------------
"Ever worry about being hit by an asteroid? How
about being eaten by a
bear? Both awful fates figured in a recent
astronomical debate that
started out scholarly, with one group scaling down
the risks of an
asteroid striking Earth, then another group invoking
the bear scenario
to make fun of the first group's assumptions. To
non-scientists, the
dispute may have seemed like an academic numbers
game set in the
silence of space. But it had some astronomers
shouting mad down here
on Earth, arguing that the stakes involve public
perceptions about the
threat to Earth from asteroids, and perhaps public
funding for efforts
to determine the risk."
--Dan Vergano, USA
TODAY, 1 January 2002
"Dr Alan Fitzsimmons of Queens University,
Belfast, has now completed
the review that PPARC commissioned on possible
telescope facilities
within its sphere of influence that could be
available for NEO related
activities. Some recommendations have been made for
the use, in
particular, of two telescopes on La Palma in the
Canary Islands and
this will be followed up in earnest over the next
few months. While
details of the source of funds to support ongoing
operations still
need to be identified, suitable telescopes will
become available that
could assist the work of tracking NEOs (so that once
found they are
not lost again), finding new NEOs (fainter and
therefore smaller and
more numerous than have been discovered before), and
follow up
observations (to characterise NEOs). The planned use
of the Isaac
Newton telescope on La Palma to find faint NEOs will
be tested during
a pilot run, still to be scheduled but taking place
some time in the
six-month period starting in February 2002. We can
even hope that this
pilot study will itself discover a new faint NEO or
two."
--Lord Sainsbury, 1
January 2002
(1) SCIENTISTS ARGUE OVER ODDS OF ASTEROID HITTING
USA Today, 1 January 2002
(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NEO TASK FORCE
- AN UPDATE
Lord Sainsbury
(3) GOVERNMENT POLICY AND FUTURE PLANS FOR NEOs
Colin Hicks
(4) ASTEROID INFORMATION CENTRE LAUNCHED
The Daily Telegraph, 1 January 2002
(5) SPACECRAFT SWANSONG: DS1'S SURPRISING, PUZZLING FINAL COMET
ENCOUNTER
Space.com, 2 January 2002
(6) HUMPHREY APPELBY MEMORIAL CENTRE
Tony Beresford <aberesford@iprimus.com.au>
(7) NO NEED FOR ANOTHER BRITISH MUSEUM
Larry Robinson <lrobinsn@ix.netcom.com>
(8) SPECULATED IMPACT CRATERS - THE NEED FOR A DATABASE
Michael Paine <mpaine@tpgi.com.au>
===========
(1) SCIENTISTS ARGUE OVER ODDS OF ASTEROID HITTING
>From USA Today, 1 January 2002
http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/astro/2002-01-01-asteroid-danger.htm
By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY
Ever worry about being hit by an asteroid? How about being eaten
by a
bear?
Both awful fates figured in a recent astronomical debate that
started
out scholarly, with one group scaling down the risks of an
asteroid
striking Earth, then another group invoking the bear scenario to
make
fun of the first group's assumptions.
To non-scientists, the dispute may have seemed like an academic
numbers
game set in the silence of space. But it had some astronomers
shouting
mad down here on Earth, arguing that the stakes involve public
perceptions about the threat to Earth from asteroids, and perhaps
public
funding for efforts to determine the risk.
An indication of that ongoing concern surfaced Jan. 1, 2002 in
Great
Britain when a collection of science centers launched the Comet
and
Asteroid Information Network to "provide timely, accurate
and unbiased
information" about potential asteroid strikes.
The current trouble over mixed messages started last month when
Sloan
Digital Sky Survey researchers, led by Princeton's Zeljko Ivezic,
announced that only about 700,000 half-mile-size rocks dwell in
the
asteroid "main belt" between Mars and Jupiter, not the
2 million such
objects they expected to find. The Sloan project usually sets its
sights
on more distant objects: Its main mission is to survey far-off
galaxies.
>From the survey, published last month in the Astronomical
Journal, the
researchers set only 1-in-5,000 odds of a city-size asteroid
smacking
into Earth and killing hundreds of millions of people sometime in
the
next century - down, they said, from the roughly 1-in-1,500 odds
set by
earlier estimates.
Some newspapers responded with stories about the lowered threat
from
above, drawing the ire of astronomers who directly study
"near-Earth"
asteroids, ones that travel outside the main belt closer to the
Sun in
Earth's neighborhood, of which about 1,500 are known. One
scientist
called the Sloan report "BLATHER" on an astronomy
discussion list,
objecting not to its estimate, but to its methods.
Another critic, David Morrison of NASA's Ames Research Center in
Moffett
Field, Calif., says objections to the Sloan study center on:
* Using main-belt asteroids as a surrogate for near-Earth
asteroid
numbers.
* Basing the estimate on the assumption that one massive asteroid
strike
happens every 100 million years. Critics called this an arbitrary
assumption.
* The notion that the estimate lowered the risk. Jet Propulsion
Laboratory estimates have varied from 1 in 4,000 to 1 in 8,800,
Morrison
notes. While some have placed the risk as high as 1 in 1,000,
that
estimate never represented a consensus among near-Earth
astronomers.
Either way, critics note there isn't a huge amount of difference
between
1 in 1,000 and 1 in 5,000 odds, statistically. It's the
appearance of a
falling risk, rather than the reality, that triggered their
dismay.
The critiques climaxed with an anonymous parody of the Sloan
announcement, sent from the "Slone Digital Survey,"
that suggested the
risk of a North American being eaten by bears was way down, based
on a
survey of African hippos. The "Slone 'Digital' Survey,"
noted the
parody, "gets its name from the fact that one of its major
purposes is
giving a middle finger to researchers in other areas."
In response to such objections, Ivezic suggested that critics
"haven't
read our paper very carefully."
Caught somewhat in the middle of the controversy is asteroid
expert
Robert Jedicke of the University of Arizona in Tucson. He was
quoted as
an outside expert in the Sloan announcement, agreeing with the
numeric
value of its risk-impact estimate, part of the study he calls
unimportant.
>From his perspective, the study is most valuable for
providing a uniform
survey of the main-belt asteroids. He says the Sloan
near-Earth-asteroid
threat estimate is right mostly by accident, based on the
assumption of
one massive impact every 100 million years.
The perception that the risk from space has been overstated comes
at a
bad time for near-Earth-asteroid studies. In England, planned
increases
in spending on detecting nearby asteroids seems secure but
somewhat
slowed. In mid-December, NASA briefly threatened to shut down
research
on near-Earth objects at the massive Arecibo radio telescope in
Puerto
Rico, before backing down when complaints rolled in. And planned
budget
cuts threaten the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in
Cambridge,
Mass., a center for studying objects in our solar system.
Despite these potential setbacks, other signs of progress in the
field
exist. After a few false starts, the system for alerting the
public to
possibly dangerous asteroids appears to be working. Over the
Thanksgiving holiday, astronomers first flagged asteroid 2001 VK5
as a
possible troublemaker, then downgraded it to harmless after
further
analysis, without startling the public.
Earlier this year, the spectacular landing of NASA's
NEAR-Shoemaker
space probe on the asteroid Eros brought public awareness of the
proximity of asteroids to a high level.
At the recent American Geophysical Union meeting in San
Francisco,
studies on Eros, a nearby asteroid that never crosses Earth's
orbit,
tackled the question of main-belt asteroids swooping into our
neighborhood. At the meeting, William Bottke of the Southwest
Research
Institute in Boulder, Colo., suggested the potato-shaped asteroid
slipped out of the main belt only 16 million years ago.
Determining how
often asteroids zip into Earth's neighborhood is important, says
astronomers, in understanding the odds of one catastrophically
smacking
into our planet.
Since Sept. 11, "I think that we now better understand what
it means to
have an unthinkable disaster. In a sense, it verifies the notion
that we
should protect ourselves against disasters to the extent we
can," says
astronomer Richard Binzel of MIT.
Protests over Arecibo's called-off closing and critical reaction
to
alternate estimates of the risk from space, Binzel says, reflect
some
frustration among scientists who have long sought support to
understand
the asteroids they've discovered, not merely list them.
And the outlook isn't great. "The current budget for the
Near-Earth
Objects Observations program faces some especially difficult
choices,"
writes Colleen Hartman, who heads solar system exploration at
NASA, in a
recent letter sent to the space community. In a protest of the
initial
Arecibo facility shutdown, the Planetary Society, a space
advocacy
group, calls such efforts vital, saying, "A Near-Earth
Object that
struck the Earth 65 million years ago triggered the extinction of
the
dinosaurs and most species then flourishing. Another such object
could
come our way at any time."
© Copyright 2002 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
===============
(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NEO TASK FORCE
- AN UPDATE
>From the British National Space Agency
http://www.bnsc.gov.uk/downloads/NEOTF_recommendations1f.doc
By Lord Sainsbury
It is now over 9 months since the initial Government response to
the
recommendations of the Task Force that I set up to report on
potentially
hazardous Near Earth Objects - asteroids and comets that pass
close
enough to the Earth to be called 'near'.
In this update I am pleased to announce the choice of the
location for
the UK NEO Information Centre as the National Space Science
Centre
(NSSC) in Leicester supported by the Natural History Museum
(NHM). I
look forward to seeing this Centre developing in harmony with the
ongoing research activities in the UK and internationally.
The UK
Centre will share information with the range of other locations
that are
active in the field. This will include those in the NSSC
Consortium;
Queens University Belfast, Royal Observatory Edinburgh Visitor
Centre,
United Kingdom Astronomy Technology Centre, University of
Edinburgh,
Queen Mary University of London and the University of Leicester
as well
as the recently set up Spaceguard Centre in Wales. It is
hoped that
many other sites will be able to update their information on NEOs
and
make use of the developments at the new information centre.
Dr Alan Fitzsimmons of Queens University, Belfast, has now
completed the
review that PPARC commissioned on possible telescope facilities
within
its sphere of influence that could be available for NEO related
activities. Some recommendations have been made for the
use, in
particular, of two telescopes on La Palma in the Canary Islands
and this
will be followed up in earnest over the next few months.
While details
of the source of funds to support ongoing operations still need
to be
identified, suitable telescopes will become available that could
assist
the work of tracking NEOs (so that once found they are not lost
again),
finding new NEOs (fainter and therefore smaller and more numerous
than
have been discovered before), and follow up observations (to
characterise NEOs). The planned use of the Isaac Newton
telescope on La
Palma to find faint NEOs will be tested during a pilot run, still
to be
scheduled but taking place some time in the six-month period
starting in
February 2002. We can even hope that this pilot study will
itself
discover a new faint NEO or two.
Various groups worldwide are now considering the NEO issue from
an
international perspective and recent meetings such as the
Japanese
International Workshop have helped to develop ideas for better
and more
broadly based collaboration amongst the observation and orbit
calculation groups worldwide. It is also significant that
the European
Space Science Committee (ESSC) of the European Science Foundation
(ESF)
considered the NEO issue, along with other important issues, in
its
general position paper covering recommendations to Ministers of
European
Space Agency (ESA) Member States. On NEOs it reported that
"The
ESSC-ESF endorses the conclusions of the UK Task Force and
believes that
the threat posed to humanity by NEO impacts is real and similar
in
character to other risks of low probability but high consequence
which
governments take very seriously e.g. earthquakes and volcanic
activity."
A great deal has been achieved in 2001 with the success of NASA
missions
such as NEAR and Deep Space 1, which rendezvoused with asteroids
and
comets, but much more is planned from new scientific
missions. The ESA
Rosetta spacecraft to Comet Wirtanen is currently being put
together at
the ESA integration and test facility at ESTEC in the
Netherlands; one
of its scientific instruments was successfully completed in the
UK and
safely delivered to the spacecraft earlier this year. ESA's
work beyond
Rosetta will be focussed in the new Aurora programme for
planetary
exploration that was brought forward to the recent ESA
Ministerial
Council which I hosted in Edinburgh. The definition phase
of the
programme was approved at the meeting, and I committed the UK's
participation.
I will ensure that further progress with implementation of the
recommendations of the Task Force is reported at
www.nearearthobjects.co.uk
and via the UK NEO Information Centre.
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
December 2001
More detail related to specific areas follows.
Update on the Task Force Recommendations
Telescopes applied to NEO activities
(covering recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5)
1. The Fitzsimmons Report to PPARC on the use of telescopes
within the
UK's sphere of influence makes a number of recommendations on the
use of
the telescopes on La Palma, at the European Southern Observatory
(ESO),
and elsewhere. It reiterates the longstanding commitment by
PPARC to
carry out high quality scientific research into NEOs on any of
its
telescopes including its large ones via the peer review
process. The
specific proposals made by Fitzsimmons for the use for large NEO
programmes of the telescopes in the Isaac Newton Group on La
Palma have
been discussed at governing board level with PPARC's Spanish and
Dutch
partners. The Jacobus Kepteyn Telescope (tracking of NEOs
found
elsewhere) and the Isaac Newton Telescope (INT)(search for
fainter NEOs
and characterisation of NEOs) may be available subject to funding
being
identified. The planned use of the INT will be tested for a
few nights
to be scheduled some time during the observing period of 6 months
starting in February 2002, in a pilot run expected to prove the
equipment and software in its planned configuration.
NEOs and scientific research
(covering aspects of recommendations 3, 6 & 8)
2. No specific further action has been taken in the area of
broadening
the inclusion of NEO activities in scientific mission planning
but it is
becoming clear that this approach is becoming more widely
accepted. The
UK supported, and, from PPARC funds subscribed its share to the
definition phase of the new Aurora planetary exploration
programme
approved at the recent ESA Ministerial Council. The
programme
objectives include the possibility that space missions to NEOs
will be
one tangible way that such activity can be funded in the
future. Other
possibilities will also be addressed in the future.
3. As to mounting further space rendezvous missions, recent
successes
should increase the interest and improve the chances for such
missions.
A number of proposals in this area are under development and will
be
considered for funding within the US and Europe.
4. There is no new activity to report in the area of
multi-disciplinary
studies beyond the ongoing work on the IMPACT project of the
European
Science Foundation where the UK Open University is
involved.
Coordination of astronomical observations
(recommendation 7)
5. Work is progressing to place the funding of the Minor Planet
Center
(MPC) on a firm financial footing and the International
Astronomical
Union (IAU) has signed a formal contract regarding the
organisation of
the IAU MPC, ensuring that its operation and data access policies
will
allow it to continue its key role as the global clearing-house
for data
and orbit computations for NEOs.
Studies into mitigation measures
(recommendation 9)
6. A workshop, "International Space Cooperation: Addressing
Challenges
of the New Millennium" was organised in March 2001 under the
auspices of
the international activities committee of the American Institute
of
Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). It addressed this area
and made
some suggestions. The workshop included a working
group which
considered "An international approach to detecting
Earth-threatening
asteroids and comets and responding to the threat they
pose". The group
explored the issues surrounding Earth-threatening asteroids and
comets
and made recommendations on how the international community
should
approach the issues posed by these objects. More details can be
found at
http://www.aiaa.org/information/international.html
.
Increasing international understanding of the issues
(recommendation 10 & 11)
7. The OECD Global Science Forum will consider a
coordinated proposal
on an NEO activity at its January 2002 meeting. A workshop
with the
specific aim of producing recommendations to the Global Science
Forum
(GSF) of the OECD for action by Member States is planned.
The UK will
help to carry forward the recommendation from the UN World Space
Conference (UNISPACE III) "...to improve the
international coordination
of activities related to NEOs". To this end the UK is
working with the
US and other countries to consider the role of the UN in
this area.
Most importantly support has been offered by relevant
international
organisations such as the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR),
the
International Astronomical Union (IAU), The Spaceguard Foundation
and
the European Space Science Committee (ESSC) of the European
Science
Foundation (ESF) as well as the European Space Agency.
National coordination and information dissemination
(recommendations 12, 13 & 14)
8. The BNSC is continuing its lead role in Whitehall on policy in
the
NEO area. In carrying out this task it has been well supported by
its
partners from PPARC, OST, FCO and MOD. The Emergency
Planning Division
of the Cabinet Office will continue to lead in their area of
expertise.
9. The newly launched NEO Information Centre will address
significant
aspects of recommendation 14 and has the potential to assist with
parts
of recommendation 13. More details will follow as the centre
becomes
operational.
BNSC January 2002
================
(3) GOVERNMENT POLICY AND FUTURE PLANS FOR NEOs
By Colin Hicks, Director General of the British National Space
Agency
Paper presented at the RAS Meeting on 14 December 2001
NEOs are dangerous. Their impact can change your life. We all
know that,
and none more so than Harry Atkinson whose hair has faded over
the past
two years as he has led the UK Task Force on NEOs.
I expect avid students of Hansard will already know that
yesterday a
written Parliamentary Question was asked as follows:
Question (Ann Keen):
What is the current position with regard to the Government
Response of
24 February 2001, to the Recommendations contained in the Report
of the
Near Earth Object Task Force, which was set up by the Minister
for
Science?
Answer (Patricia Hewitt):
An updated Response is nearing completion and will be published
shortly.
Copies will be put with the Report and the Government Response
which
were placed in the Libraries of both Houses. A copy
of this Response
and press release will also be found at www.nearearthobjects.co.uk.
So, when it is published, the updated response will be appearing
roughly
two years after the establishment of the NEO Task Force.
That is a good
time to take stock of progress - and we will be very happy to be
judged
on what has been achieved in those two years.
How far have we come? I well remember that when I wrote in
January 1999
to a number of governments around the world seeking their
assistance and
input into the Task Force, I was met with incredulity and
amusement.
Some thought that this might be the personal crusade - or
harmless
eccentricity - of a new DG of BNSC? I was even asked by one
international delegation whether my letter was a clever English
joke
which they could not understand.
Two years later the mention of NEOs may still sometimes be the
subject
of humour in the press but we are securing serious global
attention for
the issue. For that we owe a great deal of gratitude to the
members of
the Task Force (Harry Atkinson, Crispin Tickell and David
Williams).
The initial government response in February 2001 to the NEO Task
Force
Report made it clear that the UK government's intention was to
pursue,
above all, international support for any programme related to
NEOs.
That remains the priority. We have said throughout that
this is an
issue which should be addressed internationally. Like climate
change it
merits proper international coordination rather than simply being
addressed on a national scale. I will return to
international
activity, and what we expect to happen, towards the end of this
talk.
But first let me address other aspects.
Scientific research
A great deal has been achieved in the field of scientific
research
during 2001 with the success of NASA missions such as NEAR and
Deep
Space 1, which went to intercept asteroids and comets.
As has been clear from the programme of talks today, the
scientific and
space communities are now fully engaged in considering how
existing
instruments and future missions could be applied, an example of
that is
what was done with re-examining and reanalysing results from SOHO
to
identified comets grazing and falling into the sun.
But much more is planned from new scientific missions. The
ESA Rosetta
spacecraft to Comet Wirtanen is currently being put together at
the ESA
integration and test facility at ESTEC in the Netherlands; one of
its
scientific instruments was successfully completed in the UK and
safely
delivered to the spacecraft earlier this year.
As to mounting further space rendezvous missions, recent
successes
should increase the interest and improve the chances for such
missions.
A number of proposals in this area are under development and will
be
considered for funding within the US and Europe.
Earlier presentations
have emphasised the range of options which are being
considered.
The changing mood in the scientific community towards work on
NEOs is
well illustrated by the recent views which have come from the
European
Science Foundation (ESF). The European Space Science Committee
(ECSS) of
the ESF considered the NEO issue, along with other important
issues, in
its general position paper covering recommendations to Ministers
of
European Space Agency (ESA) Member States. On NEOs it
reported that
"The ESSC-ESF endorses the conclusions of the UK Task Force
and believes
that the threat posed to humanity by NEO impacts is real and
similar in
character to other risks of low probability but high consequence
which
governments take very seriously e.g. earthquakes and volcanic
activity."
At the Ministerial the UK supported, and, from PPARC funds
subscribed
its share to, the definition phase of the new Aurora planetary
exploration programme. The programme objectives include the
possibility
that space missions to NEOs will be one tangible way that such
activity
can be funded in the future. Other science programme
mission like Gaia
and Bepie-Columbo may also be able to contribute to our
understanding as
may the new small mission plans from ESA. We will hear this
evening
from Marcello Coradini about the positive approach being adopted
by ESA
although the possibilities may, as ever, be limited by the
availability
of funding - even though imaginations have now been stimulated to
consider new options and new ways of using old instruments.
In the area of multi-disciplinary studies we have just heard from
Ian
Gilmour about the IMPACT project of the European Science
Foundation
where the UK Open University is involved.
Telescopes
Some months ago, Dr Alan Fitzsimmons of Queens University,
Belfast,
completed the review that PPARC commissioned of possible
telescope
facilities within its sphere of influence that could be available
for
NEO related activities. Since that report was produced,
PPARC has been
in discussion with our Spanish and Danish partners in the La
Palma
Governing Board. I hope that we will soon see good progress on
his
recommendations for use of the Isaac Newton Telescope (INT) and
the
Jacobus Kapteyn Telescope (JKT).
Mitigation measures
A workshop, "International Space Cooperation: Addressing
Challenges of
the New Millennium" was organised in March 2001 under the
auspices of
the international activities committee of the American Institute
of
Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). It addressed this area
and made
some suggestions. The workshop included a working
group which
considered "An international approach to detecting
Earth-threatening
asteroids and comets and responding to the threat they
pose". The group
explored the issues surrounding Earth-threatening asteroids and
comets
and made recommendations on how the international community
should
approach the issues posed by these objects. More details can be
found at
http://www.aiaa.org/information/international.html
.
National coordination
The BNSC is continuing in its role as the lead Government Dept.
on the
NEO issues and has been well supported by its partners from
PPARC, OST
and MOD. The Emergency Planning Division of the Cabinet
Office will
continue to lead in their area of expertise.
Everyone here will know that a competitive process has been
running this
autumn to select a UK NEO Information Centre. I expect that
when the
updated response is published it will include an
announcement of the
result of that competition. You will understand, of
course, that as I
am a Trustee of one of the bidders I have been excluded from the
decision making process by Chinese walls.
International activity
As I said earlier, this has been for me the priority area.
And since
January 1999, attitudes towards NEOs as a policy issue have been
revolutionised, largely as a result of the NEO Task Force
Report. We
have found ourselves pushing at a series of open doors and
various
international groups are now considering the NEO issue from a
truly
international perspective.
Recent meetings such as the Japanese International Workshop have
helped
to develop ideas for better and more broadly based collaboration
amongst
the observation and orbit calculation groups worldwide.
Most importantly support to the NEO area has been offered, or is
being
increased, by relevant international organisations such as the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the
UN
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UN COPUOS), the
Committee
on Space Research (COSPAR), the International Astronomical Union
(IAU),
the Spaceguard Foundation and the European Space Science
Committee
(ESSC) of the European Science Foundation (ESF) as well as the
European
Space Agency (ESA).
Soon after publication of the NEO Task Force Report we were
approach by
the OECD to see what part they might play in taking forward its
recommendations. As a result, the UK made an outline
proposal to the
OECD Global Science Forum (GSF) in June 2001 for the
establishment of a
working group. It was agreed that we should prepare a more
detailed
proposal. Since June a UK coordinated group has been
preparing that
detailed proposal which is due to go back to the OCED GSF early
next
year. We have had good input to the paper which is being
prepared from
countries like Denmark, Italy, Japan, and the USA as well as from
the UK
itself.
The UK coordinator expects to recommend the formation of a
working group
with terms of reference which require it to hold meetings and a
work
shop, and to report back by December 2002 with options for
action. The
January 2003 meeting of the OECD GSF might then decide how to
take this
forward as an international effort.
Alongside this OECD work, and consistent with it, the UK has
worked with
the UN COPUOS to take forward its recommendation that work should
be
established "...to improve the international coordination of
activities
related to NEOs". To this end the UK is working with
the US and other
European countries to consider the role of the UN in this
area. Again
the UK is coordinating this work and the present plan is to take
the
output from the OECD working group when it appears and to use UN
COPUOS
as one of the implementation bodies.
The Future
The Progress Report which should shortly be published will not be
the
last one. We will continue to pursue all these lines of
work and to
report progress.
==============
(4) ASTEROID INFORMATION CENTRE LAUNCHED
>From The Daily Telegraph, 1 January 2002
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/01/01/unews.xml&sSheet=/portal/2002/01/01/ixport.html
A NEW centre is to provide the public with information on the
likelihood
of Earth being hit by an asteroid or comet, the Government has
announced.
The Information Centre on Near Earth Objects (NEOs) will also
analyse
the potential threat to humankind, Science Minister Lord
Sainsbury says.
It is set to open in Easter 2002 and will cost £300,000 over the
next
three years.
It will operate out of the National Space Science Centre in
Leicester.
The centre will feature exhibitions and inter-active facilities
giving
details about asteroids and comets, the effects of impact and the
chances of collision.
Lord Sainsbury said: "The potential threat from NEOs to our
planet has
been an issue of increased international interest and concern
over
recent years. By setting up an information centre we are helping
the UK
play a full and prominent role in an area that requires
international
action."
Astronomer Sir Patrick Moore believed the centre would give
people
"useful" information for people on an important issue.
"There is always
a small chance we could be hit by one of these asteroids and the
more
people know the more we can do to make plans," he said.
"Don't forget
the cost is extremely small."
Scientists recently reported humans have a one in 5,000 chance of
being
wiped out by an asteroid impact over the next century. The odds
are more
comforting than a previous estimate of one in 1,500 over a
100-year
period.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2001.
=============
(5) SPACECRAFT SWANSONG: DS1'S SURPRISING, PUZZLING FINAL COMET
ENCOUNTER
>From Space.com, 2 January 2002
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ds1_swansong_020102.html
By Robert Roy Britt
Senior Science Writer
As NASA engineers waved an ethereal goodbye to the Deep Space 1
spacecraft
Dec. 18, communicating with the scrappy robot for the final time
across 10
light-minutes of space, astronomers back home were just saying
hello to the
spacecraft's prized catch, the crazy comet Borrelly.
Data and imagery sent back by Deep Space 1 after a Sept. 22 flyby
of the
comet show mysterious jets of material shooting into space with
unexpected
force in strange directions, like the shocks of white emanating
from a mad
scientist's head.
Borrelly's head, meanwhile, is not screwed on straight.
While the comet isn't quite driving scientists mad, it's
certainly got them
scratching their own noggins.
Off kilter
As a comet approaches the Sun, water ice and other chemicals,
along with
dust, boil off its rock-hard nucleus, generating a cloud of
debris called a
coma, or head. The head is what sometimes makes a comet visible
from Earth,
when sunlight reflects off the material.
During the flyby, Deep Space 1 measured interaction of all this
comet stuff
with the solar wind -- charged particles that race outward from
the Sun. As
expected, the solar wind flowed around the comet.
But the nucleus was not at the center of the flow. It was like
watching the
wake of a boat spread farther and faster on one side than on the
other.
"The formation of the coma is not the simple process we once
thought it
was," said David Young of the University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor. Young led a
team that measured the wake.
Another instrument on the spacecraft, called PEPE (Plasma
Experiment for
Planetary Exploration), also examined the coma. Beth Nordholt, a
researcher
at the Los Alamos National Lab, which helped build the
instrument, said the
PEPE data have yet to be fully analyzed. But already, she said,
it confirms
the offset coma.
Answers may come
PEPE data may also show a relationship between the distorted head
and the
comet's crazy jets.
"It appears as if there's a jet that is driving a tremendous
amount of mass
away from the nucleus of the comet," Nordholt said in a
telephone interview.
Simple enough. But there's a big problem: The jet that would be
needed to
create the offset does not match the jet seen in Deep Space 1
pictures,
Nordholt said.
The visible jet shoots out about 37 miles (60 kilometers) from
the
5-mile-long (8 kilometers), potato-shaped comet. Oddly, material
emanates
mostly from the middle of the comet, whereas scientists had
expected a more
even distribution. Adding to the perplexity, the primary jet does
not point
toward the Sun, as expected based on observations of other
comets.
The comet's activity may come with a price.
Borrelly dishes out so much material from its midsection -- some
2 tons
every minute -- that it will likely break in half within 10,000
years, says
Laurence Soderblom, U.S. Geological Survey researcher who led the
imaging
team.
There are other Borrelly enigmas to ponder.
Researchers announced earlier this month that Borrelly is darker
than any
other known object in the solar system, reflecting less than 3
percent of
the sunlight that hits it and absorbing the rest.
As black as photocopier toner, they say. Yet the brightest minds
don't fully
understand how anything in space can be so dark. The finding
points to a
surface made of carbon and iron, but experts say they aren't sure
of this.
And no one yet knows what's inside a comet.
Like Halley
While Deep Space 1 has generated many puzzles, it has also
contributed to a
new level of confidence among comet researchers.
Until the flyby, a huge chunk of knowledge about these frozen
relics of the
solar system's earliest years relied on what was known of comet
Halley,
which was examined in a 1986 flyby.
Since then, scientists have observed comets through telescopes
using
assumptions and constraints based on their knowledge of Halley.
No one knew
for sure if these baselines were correct, and thus how accurate
various
studies of other comets have been.
Nordholt says that while Halley and Borrelly are quite different
in terms of
their exact composition and behavior, they are all-in-all very
much alike,
confirming suspicions that most comets likely formed in a similar
manner and
at a similar time -- back when the solar system was gathering
itself
together some 4.6 billion years ago.
"Borrelly seems to come from the same primordial stuff that
Halley comes
from," she said.
Deep Space 1 findings therefore help confirm a host of other
studies.
"The observational work that has been done telescopically
has led us to the
correct conclusions," said Nordholt.
So while Deep Space 1 has laid down an abundant foundation of
data for comet
researchers, future missions will have plenty of glory to claim
as they seek
to determine the contents of comets and help unravel their
strange behavior.
Copyright 2002, Space.com
============================
* LETTERS TO THE MODERATOR *
============================
(6) HUMPHREY APPELBY MEMORIAL CENTRE
>From Tony Beresford <aberesford@iprimus.com.au>
Benny,
My feeling about the UK Government's NEO Centre is summed up in
the
suggestion that it would most appropiately be named the
"Humphrey
Appelby Memorial Centre", after the character done so well
in that old
British TV comedy series "Yes, Minister" by the
recently deceased Sir
Nigel Hawthorne.
Anthony C. Beresford FBIS FRAS
=============
(7) NO NEED FOR ANOTHER BRITISH MUSEUM
>From Larry Robinson <lrobinsn@ix.netcom.com>
Dear Benny:
I have enjoyed your postings of news on the British government's
NEO
effort. The dialog has been going on for months now, years even.
The
latest announcement of the new NEO Information Centre is
reflective of
what has appeared to many of us to be a great deal of talk and
very
little action on the part of the British government. I am not
sure we
need another British museum. It is obvious that what is needed is
a
southern hemisphere survey similar in capabilities to the many
northern
hemisphere efforts that have been underway for some time now.
Even
another energetic and capable NEO FOLLOW UP station in the
northern
hemisphere would be a welcome addition.
At 2AM January 1, there was a rather strong plea for follow up
observations of the recently discovered NEO, 2001 YB5, posted by
Andrea
Milani, at NEODys, which is worth repeating:
"Asteroid 2001 YB5 is coming to a close approach to the
Earth, which
should take place on 7 January. However, the 7 (and
probably the 6
already) it will move so fast, and the ephemerides will be so
uncertain
(unless it is observed before), that it might be very difficult
to
observe. After the closest approach it goes in the direction of
the sun
and becomes invisible.
...yes, the column P_RE in the .risk file means probability of an
impact
with the Earth for the date specified in the first column.
Of course the risk in this case is very minor, never above 1 in
10
millions in the list of Virtual Impactors we have obtained (not
only it
is Torino Scale 0, it is always less than -4 in the Palermo
Technical
Scale). Nevertheless, to lose track of an asteroid for which we
cannot
exclude the possibility of an impact on our planet is a proof of
the
stupidity of mankind, and I would be grateful if some of you out
there
observing in such a cold night can do something about this."
Is the British NEO telescope slewing to follow this object? This
small
band of amateurs in Kansas is. Over 139 observations were made
early
Monday morning. The full moon was in the way last night. We were
even
able to get a preliminary estimate of the rotational period of
this
asteroid.
What is amazing to me is how a group of unpaid, unschooled
amateurs
operating on donated equipment and a modest grant from NASA OSS
can
contribute more to NEO follow up than one of the greatest
government's
on earth. I guess that is the price of democracy. It seems that
debate
and public relations take on lives of their own and become more
important
than the real work at hand. We have similar problems in this
country.
You must look no further back than a couple of weeks to the near
tragic
decision to shut down Arecibo's minor planet efforts to see
parallels.
I wish you and your countrymen Godspeed in getting something
meaningful
working soon.
Larry Robinson
Sunflower Observatory 739
14680 W 144th Street
Olathe KS 66062
http://btboar.tripod.com
lrobinsn@ix.netcom.com
=================
(8) SPECULATED IMPACT CRATERS - THE NEED FOR A DATABASE
>From Michael Paine <mpaine@tpgi.com.au>
Dear Benny
CCNet subscribers might be able to help me with an enquiry (with
apologies to Rob Grant and Doug Naylor, the brilliant writers of
the
sci-fi comedy Red Dwarf for the opening sentence).
Is there a repository for information about speculated impact
craters on
the Earth and if not, why not?
Natural Resources Canada maintains a database of CONFIRMED impact
craters but there does not seem to be a similar list for
speculated
impact craters. Over the last few years I have been corresponding
with
several scientists who are working on possible impact craters - a
dozen
or so. Although these people sometimes exchange information with
fellow
researchers at conferences and by email, and sometimes publish
their
speculations, it seems that there is a need for a more formal
record of
possible/speculated craters. This could include the contact
details of
people working on a particular geological feature and the nature
of that
work so they could contact fellow researchers. Importantly it
should
also include cases where further research establishes that some
speculation was incorrect and the evidence that led to this
conclusion.
Perhaps NRC could consider expanding its existing database to
cover this
need. Any takers?
regards
Michael Paine
PS Yes Sydney has a serious bushfire crisis but, by the time
reports
make it overseas, it sounds like half of the city is burning. In
reality
several hundred homes on the edge of bushland are under possible
threat
and a few dozen have been lost. The biggest danger may well be
the smoke
and related photo-chemical smog that is causing breathing
difficulties
for many Sydneysiders.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational
use only. The attached information may not be copied or
reproduced for
any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright
holders.
The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from February 1997 on,
can be
found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not
necessarily
reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the moderator of
this
network.