查看: 9105|回复: 6


发表于 2005-7-12 10:04 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Deep comet impact was a dust-up, not a gusher
Posted: July 11, 2005
Smithsonian astronomers watched as the "Impactor" probe from NASA';s Deep Impact spacecraft hit Comet Tempel 1 last week. They monitored the impact using the ground-based Submillimeter Array (SMA) in Hawaii and NASA';s orbiting Submillimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite (SWAS). Results are still coming in, but so far the scientists report seeing only weak emission from water vapor and a host of other gases that were expected to erupt from the impact site. The most conspicuous feature of the blast was brightening due to sunlight scattered by the ejected dust.

An artist';s concept shows SWAS'; ringside seat for the comet impact on July 4. Artwork Credit: NASA, B. Scott Kahler, David Aguilar
"It';s pretty clear that this event did not produce a gusher," said SWAS principal investigator Gary Melnick of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA). "The more optimistic predictions for water output from the impact haven';t materialized, at least not yet."
Astronomer Charlie Qi (CfA) expressed surprise at these results. He explained that short-period comets like Tempel 1 have been baked repeatedly by the sun during their passages through the inner solar system. The effects of that heat are estimated to extend more than three feet beneath the surface of the nucleus. But the Deep Impact indicates that these effects could be much deeper.
"Theories about the volatile layers below the surface of short-period comets are going to have to be revised," Qi said.
As seen from Earth, a comet typically displays a fuzzy round head and a glowing tail. Both the head and tail consist of gases and dust ejected from the comet';s nucleus - a frozen chunk of rock and ice about half the size of Manhattan Island.
Five decades ago, Harvard astronomer Fred Whipple developed a model of comet nuclei as "dirty snowballs." He hypothesized that comets consist of mostly ice with some dirt and rock mixed in. Modern astronomers often refer to comets as "icy dirtballs" instead, reflecting the prevailing view that comets contain more dust and less ice than previously believed.
Deep Impact was intended to test these theories by excavating material from the comet';s interior, giving scientists clues to its composition and structure. The mission succeeded admirably, pulverizing a section of the comet larger than a house and releasing tons of material into space.
SWAS operators were puzzled by the lack of increased water vapor from Tempel 1. Post-impact measurements showed the comet was releasing only about 550 pounds of water per second - an emission rate very similar to pre-impact values, and less than seen by SWAS during natural outbursts in the weeks before the impact.
SMA measurements corroborate the SWAS findings. Although the SMA wasn';t tuned to frequencies of water emission, which are difficult to observe from the ground due to atmospheric water vapor, it watched for other chemicals such as hydrogen cyanide. SMA astronomers saw little increase in production of gases following the impact. Gas production rates remained so low that they could set only an upper limit on the total.
"All we needed was a factor of three boost from the impact to get a definite detection," said Qi. "We didn';t see that."
Qi added that the comet might become more active over the following days and weeks. "We';re still hoping for a big outgassing from the new active area created by Deep Impact. If we see any signs of that, we';ll make more observations."
The researchers will continue their careful and detailed analysis in order to interpret the SMA and SWAS measurements and what they indicate about the comet';s composition.
"The big picture will emerge once astronomers meld data from different observatories at different wavelengths," said Melnick.
Headquartered in Cambridge, Mass., the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) is a joint collaboration between the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the Harvard College Observatory. CfA scientists, organized into six research divisions, study the origin, evolution and ultimate fate of the universe.
发表于 2005-7-12 10:31 | 显示全部楼层


 楼主| 发表于 2005-7-12 10:33 | 显示全部楼层


SWAS首席研究员Gary Melnick说,“很明显,这一事件没未产生出一个喷口。对水份输出的乐观预言并没有成为现实,至少目前还没有。”
天文学家Charlie Qi对这些结果表达了惊讶。他解释说,类似坦普尔1号这样的短周期彗星已经在穿越内太阳系时受到了太阳的反复烘烤。这些热量的作用范围被估计为向彗核表面以下延伸达3英尺以上(约1米)。但深度撞击暗示,热量作用范围可能要深得多。“关于短周期彗星表面以下易挥发层的理论必须要修正,”Qi说。
从地球上看,典型的彗星展示出一个模糊的圆形彗头和一条发亮的彗尾。它们都是由彗核喷发出来的气体和尘埃所组成的。50年前,哈佛天文学家Fred Whipple发展出了彗核的“脏雪球”模型。他假设彗星是由大量冰块和一些尘埃岩石所组成的。现代天文学家们称之为“冰脏雪球”模型,因为现在的流行观测认为,彗星是由更多的尘埃和更少的冰块所组成的。深度撞击试图从彗星内部撞出物质,来检验这些理论。
 楼主| 发表于 2005-7-12 10:36 | 显示全部楼层


下面引用由汤海明2005/07/12 10:31am 发表的内容:
发表于 2005-7-12 14:18 | 显示全部楼层


就是像大绿豆棒冰一样,豆多冰少。 :P
发表于 2005-7-12 14:49 | 显示全部楼层


[这个贴子最后由月下美丽的梦在 2005/07/12 02:50pm 第 1 次编辑]

发表于 2008-1-25 22:03 | 显示全部楼层


小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|中国天文科普网-天之文天文论坛-中国科学院优秀科普网站 ( 沪ICP备05005481号-2   点击这里加入此群

GMT+8, 2020-2-20 12:22 , Processed in 0.089536 second(s), 13 queries , Xcache On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2 Licensed

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表