From Science @NASA: Let’s hope it doesn’t taste like chicken or smell like feet.
NASA’s daring plan to visit the sun took a giant leap forward today with the selection of five key science investigations for the Solar Probe+ spacecraft.
Slated to launch no later than 2018, the smart car-sized spacecraft will plunge directly into the atmosphere of the sun, aiming to solve some of the biggest mysteries of solar physics. Today’s announcement means that researchers can begin building sensors for unprecedented in situ measurements of the solar system’s innermost frontier.
“Solar Probe+ is going where no spacecraft has gone before,” says Lika Guhathakurta, Solar Probe+ program scientist at NASA HQ. “For the first time, we’ll be able to ‘touch, taste and smell’ the sun.”
Last year, NASA invited top researchers around the world to submit proposals detailing possible science investigations for the pioneering spacecraft. Thirteen proposals were received and five have been selected:
–SWEAP, the Solar Wind Electrons Alphas and Protons Investigation: The most abundant particles in the solar wind are electrons, protons and helium ions. SWEAP will count these particles and measure their properties, even “sweeping up” some of them in a special Solar Probe Cup for direct analysis. The principal investigator is Justin C. Kasper of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Mass.
–WISPR, the Wide-field Imager for Solar Probe Plus: WISPR is a telescope that will make 3D images of the sun’s atmosphere similar to medical CAT scans. WISPR can actually see the solar wind, allowing it to image clouds and shock waves as they approach and pass the spacecraft. This telescope is an important complement to the spacecraft’s in situ instruments, which sample the plasmas that WISPR images. The principal investigator is Russell Howard of the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC.
–FIELDS, The Fields Investigation for Solar Probe Plus: This instrument will make direct measurements of electric and magnetic fields, radio emissions, and shock waves which course through the sun’s atmospheric plasma. FIELDS also turns Solar Probe Plus into a giant dust detector, registering voltage signatures when specks of space dust hit the spacecraft’s antenna. The principal investigator is Stuart Bale of the University of California in Berkeley.
–ISIS, Integrated Science Investigation of the Sun: The ISIS EPI-Hi and EPI-Lo instruments will monitor electrons, protons and ions which are accelerated to high energies by shock waves in the sun’s atmosphere. These are the very same particles that pose a threat to astronauts in space, disable satellites, and ionize Earth’s upper atmosphere.
–Solar Probe+ Observatory Scientist: This was a proposal not for an instrument, but for a person. The principal investigator, Marco Velli, becomes the mission’s Observatory Scientist. In the years ahead, he will become deeply familiar with the spacecraft and its construction, helping to ensure that adjacent in situ instruments do not interfere with one another as they sample the solar environment. He will also guide the mission’s “big picture” science investigations after Solar Probe+ enters the sun’s atmosphere.
“The sensors we’ve selected to ride aboard Solar Probe+ are designed to solve some of the biggest mysteries of solar physics,” says Dick Fisher, head of NASA’s Heliophysics Division in Washington DC.
Why is the sun’s atmosphere is so much hotter than its surface? And what propels the solar wind?
“We’ve been struggling with these questions for decades,” says Fisher. “Solar Probe+ should finally provide some answers.”
Solar Probe+ will likely discover new mysteries, too, in a realm that no other spacecraft has dared enter. At closest approach, Solar Probe+ will be 7 million km or 9 solar radii from the sun. There, the spacecraft’s carbon-composite heat shield must withstand temperatures as high as 2000 degrees C and survive blasts of radiation that would quickly disable other missions. From these near distances inside the sun’s atmosphere, the solar disk will loom 23 times wider than it does in the skies of Earth.
“What will we find there?” wonders Guhathakurta. “This is truly unexplored territory.” By design, Solar Probe’s winning instruments are sufficiently versatile to investigate many different kinds of phenomena. Whatever comes along–be it electric or magnetic, high- or low-energy, wavy or turbulent–they should be able to measure it.
“The possibilities for discovery,” she says, “are off the charts.”
Author: Dr. Tony Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Enneagram says:
September 3, 2010 at 10:05 am
Hey!, so we can not yet affirm that the Sun’s furnace runs by fusion?
Yes we can. That is not in doubt. We observe the neutrinos resulting from that.
the sun’s atmosphere is so much hotter than its surface (SIC) then it follows that its surface is COLDER. Wow!, this is worst than Climate Gate, this is Sun’s Gate!
No feedbacks up there?
Curb the nonsense a bit, will you?
Leif Svalgaard says: September 3, 2010 at 7:42 am
How come we didn’t see this line in the post?
The principal investigator is Leif Svalgaard of the …………………
Leif Svalgaard, September 3, 2010 at 7:42 am, presented John Silver’s comment, September 3, 2010 at 7:12 am, where Silver quoted the NASA article, “Why is the sun’s atmosphere is so much hotter than its surface? And what propels the solar wind?”:
And, then Silver responded: “Perhaps your theories are wrong?”
Then Dr. Svalgaard commented on Silver’s response: “We have lots of theories that ‘explain’ this, so it is not a mystery. The problem is that we don’t know which one [if any] is the correct one. Perhaps a combination of several, even.”
Having “lots of theories” is not the same as, “so it is not a mystery”.
If there are “lots of theories”, then there is UNCERTAINTY, which is fairly consistent with the descriptive “mystery”. Obviously, the physical relationships, processes, and causes are not well understood — that’s the reason for the in situ satellite probe, in the first place.
“The problem is that we don’t know which one [if any] is the correct one.”
Yes, that is a problem, particularly, for people going around giving the impression that heliophysicists know it all.
Such, simply is not the case — as the NASA article makes clear and even Dr. Svalgaard has to acknowledge.
From the NASA article:
“–SWEAP, the Solar Wind Electrons Alphas and Protons Investigation: The most abundant particles in the solar wind are electrons, protons and helium ions. SWEAP will count these particles and measure their properties, even “sweeping up” some of them in a special Solar Probe Cup for direct analysis.”
“–FIELDS, The Fields Investigation for Solar Probe Plus: This instrument will make direct measurements of electric and magnetic fields, radio emissions, and shock waves which course through the sun’s atmospheric plasma.”
This, in situ observation & measurement of magnetic fields, electric fields, electron & ion configurations and motions, is exactly what I have called for in numerous comments on prior posts.
This is an excellent project to gather observations & measurements that can increase Science’s knowledge & understanding of the physical dynamics surrounding the Sun.
Let me also suggest when the satellite probe observes & measures, “shock waves which course through the sun’s atmospheric plasma”, the satellite should be set up to detect and recognize the physical signature of Electric Double Layers:
Electric Double Layers, per Wikipedia:
“A double layer is a structure in a plasma and consists of two parallel layers with opposite electrical charge. The sheets of charge cause a strong electric field and a correspondingly sharp change in voltage (electrical potential) across the double layer. Ions and electrons which enter the double layer are accelerated, decelerated, or reflected by the electric field.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)
Hannes Alfven, Nobel prize winner in physics, hypothesized, not only that Electric Double layers are a central dynamic of the Sun’s physical processes, but that these Electric Double Layers can also explode initiating additional physical phenomenon.
Perhaps, exploding Electric Double Layers initiate the phenomenon known as, “shock waves which course through the sun’s atmospheric plasma”.
From the Wikipedia entry on (Plasma) Double Layers in the section on “exploding Double Layers”:
“Stability: Double layers in laboratory plasmas may be stable or unstable depending on the parameter regime.[35] Various types of instabilities may occur, often arising due to the formation of beams of ions and electrons. Unstable double layers are noisy in the sense that they produce oscillations across a wide frequency band. A lack of plasma stability may also lead to a dramatic change in configuration often referred to as an explosion (and hence exploding double layer). In one example, the region enclosed in the double layer rapidly expands and evolves.[36] An explosion of this type was first discovered in mercury arc rectifiers used in high-power direct-current transmission lines, where the voltage drop across the device was seen to increase by several orders of magnitude.”
** numerals in brackets are footnoted authority at the bottom of the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer_(plasma)
This in situ satellite probe is an important satellite project, among many, for increasing Man’s understanding of the physical dynamics of Earth’s space environment, including the Sun.
Tim Clark says:
September 3, 2010 at 10:45 am
How come we didn’t see this line in the post?
The principal investigator is Leif Svalgaard of the..
I’m not sure if that is a barb or a lament. Enlighten me.
At closest approach to the Sun, while Solar Probe
Plus’ shield faces searing heat of 2,600° Fahrenheit
(or 2,000° Celsius), the spacecraft’s payload will be
at room temperature.
Thats nonsens (2600 vs 2000)
James F. Evans says:
September 3, 2010 at 11:01 am
If there are “lots of theories”, then there is UNCERTAINTY, which is fairly consistent with the descriptive “mystery”.
Mystery is when there are no theories.
Yes, that is a problem, particularly, for people going around giving the impression that heliophysicists know it all.
It seems that I said we didn’t know which one. For more from people who do claim they know it all: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread330624/pg1
You seem to fall starkly in that category. Perhaps you could tell us what powers the Sun. This is the n’th time I have asked that.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 3, 2010 at 11:16 am
You seem to fall starkly in that category. Perhaps you could tell us what powers the Sun. This is the n’th time I have asked that.
From thousand of years many knew the answer:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00current.htm
A little background on Marco Velli:
“Dr. Marco Velli has developed codes for the simulation of compressible magneto- hydrodynamic flows using spectral and pseudo-spectral (Fast Fourier and Tchebychev) methods”
Research interests: “nonlinear evolution of current sheets and magnetic reconnection”
Publications: Many papers on MHD
Placing this man in a centralizing role for the whole mission tells us that NASA is commited to MHD and magnetic reconnection and will not listen to the evidence as it leads.
This post should never have been created. This is anti-science. Each part of the Solar Probe+ mission should be allowed to report exactly what data they find without it having to pass this theoretical barrier. Each spacecraft investigation team does not need to even communicate with the others, although they should have totally open, realtime access to eachother’s findings.
It looks like NASA will be WISPRing more sweet nothings! 🙁
Myron Mesecke-“Getting that close to the Sun I’m surprised NASA didn’t name it Icarus.”
Myron, I think you’ll find that people rarely give names to their projects which might indicate that they are likely to fail horribly.
Don’t tempt Fate (in this case the literal mythological figure, not the concept).
In study of solar system dynamics, it is essential to consider all electromagnetic dynamics and the processes that are known to be associated with an electromagnetic framework.
The Electric Double Layer is one of those processes:
What has been claimed as so-called “magnetic reconnection” is actually an Electric Double Layer.
The term & concept “magnetic reconnection” is an antiquated, pre-space age (1946), incomplete analytical tool, which did not consider electric fields or electric currents or the motions and configurations of charged particles. The concept of so-called of “magnetic reconnection” was developed in response to observations of coronal mass ejections (CME). This failed analytical tool has been superceded by the full spectrum electromagnetic concept (if not yet term), Electric Double Layer.
NASA’s project detailed in the present post makes a start at gathering the necessary observations & measurements of magnetic fields, electric fields, and electron & ion configurations (structures) & motions to shed light on this question.
The following scientific papers stand for the proposition that so-called “magnetic reconnection” is actually the Electric Double Layer process.
Scientific papers presented:
Filamentary Structures in U-Shaped Double Layers, 2005
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=2005AGUFMSM41C1202D&db_key=AST&data_type=HTML&format=&high=42ca922c9c05019
Quote from the above paper:
“Observations from the Polar and FAST satellites have revealed a host of intriguing features of the auroral accelerations processes in the upward current region (UCR). These features include: (i) large-amplitude parallel and perpendicular fluctuating as well as quasi-static electric fields in density cavities, (ii) fairly large-amplitude unipolar parallel electric fields like in a strong double layer (DL), (iii) variety of wave modes, (iv) counter-streaming of upward going ion beams and downward accelerated electrons, (v) horizontally corrugated bottom region of the potential structures (PS), in which electron and ion accelerations occur, (vi) filamentary ion beams in the corrugated PS, and (vii) both upward and downward moving narrow regions of parallel electric fields, inferred from the frequency drifts of the auroral kilometric radiations.”
Parallel electric fields in the upward current region of the aurora: Indirect and direct observations, published 2002 Physics of Plasma
http://www.space.irfu.se/exjobb/2003_erik_bergman/articles/PHP03685_ergun.pdf
Quote from the above paper:
“In this article we present electric field, magnetic field, and charged particle observations from the upward current region of the aurora focusing on the structure of electric fields at the boundary between the auroral cavity and the ionosphere…These observations suggest that the parallel electric fields at the
boundary between the auroral cavity and the ionosphere are self-consistently supported as oblique double layers.”
Let’s now compare the above Electric Double Layers papers with the following so-called “magnetic reconnection” scientific papers:
Magnetopause reconnection impact parameters from multiple spacecraft magnetic field measurements published 30 October 2009
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2009GL040228.pdf
Quote from the above paper:
“Discrepancies between the measured components of E [electric field] and the corresponding components of v B [magnetic field] after a careful error analysis signify a nonideal electric field. We intend to show in a subsequent paper that the Cluster electric field and particle flow data for this event satisfy the criteria for a parallel electric field…
With the instantaneous coordinate system and the parallel electric field established, one can place particle moments, such as velocities, pressures, and temperatures, as well as magnetic and electric field measurements…
Sufficiently accurate ion and electron moments and electric field measurements within this coordinate system delineate ion and electron diffusion regions.”
Recent in-situ observations of magnetic reconnection in near-Earth space, published 11 October 2008
http://www.leif.org/EOS/2008GL035297.pdf
Quote from the above paper:
Figure 1. “(bottom [schematic, page 2 of 7] ) : “Zoom-in on the region around the X-line, with the ion and electron diffusion regions indicated by the shading and the rectangular box, respectively. The quadrupolar Hall magnetic field is pointing in and out of the plane of the figure. The Hall electric field [perpendicular electric field] is shown by the red arrows, while the blue arrows mark the oppositely directed jets in the outflow regions. Note that entry and acceleration occur all the way along the current sheet. Figure courtesy of Marit Oieroset.”
The “X” cross section discussed in these “magnetic reconnection” papers are where electric and magnetic fields cross, just as Hannes Alfven described in his empirical laboratory work on Electric Double Layers and, is central to the acceleration of the particles in both sets of papers, Electric Double Layers and “magnetic reconnection”, respectively.
Collisionless Magnetic Field Reconnection From First Principles: What It Can and Cannot Do
http://solarmuri.ssl.berkeley.edu/~welsch/brian/FSL/2006/mozer_reconn_v4.pdf
Quote from the above paper:
“The physics of reconnection [Electric Double Layer] depends on the electric field component out of the plane of Fig. 1 at the center of the figure, which is sometimes called the tangential electric field.
If it is zero [the Electric field], the two plasmas flow around each other into or out of the plane of the figure because there is no ExB/B2 flow in the plane of the figure in this central region.
On the other hand, if the tangential electric field is non-zero, the plasmas continue flowing towards each other into the central region of the figure and magnetic field reconnection occurs as discussed below.”
Readers review & decide.
Zeke the Sneak says:
September 3, 2010 at 11:34 am
This post should never have been created. This is anti-science.
It seems that the Electric Guys are out in force, trying to hijack yet another thread.
And yet, Evans dares not answer my question.
Leif Svalgaard, September 3, 2010 at 11:16 am, commented: “Perhaps you [Evans] could tell us what powers the Sun. This is the n’th time I have asked that.”
I don’t know.
That’s what I’d like to find out.
I repeat, that post should be eliminated in favor of more instrumentation and less centralization. NASA may change this between now and 2015 – it would be a better approach and provide more science for the money.
The post I am speaking of is that of Dr. Marco Velli, as the Observatory Scientist.
James F. Evans says:
September 3, 2010 at 12:22 pm
“Perhaps you [Evans] could tell us what powers the Sun. This is the n’th time I have asked that.”
I don’t know.
Perhaps this will help: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00current.htm
Or maybe there is a giant Double Layer somewhere that does it…
Zeke the Sneak says:
September 3, 2010 at 12:27 pm
The post I am speaking of is that of Dr. Marco Velli, as the Observatory Scientist.
I know Marco very well. He is a superb scientist with a solid understanding of the science. Perfect man for the job. Once in a blue moon NASA gets it right.
Tim Clark says:
September 3, 2010 at 10:45 am
How come we didn’t see this line in the post?
The principal investigator is Leif Svalgaard of the..
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 3, 2010 at 11:04 am
I’m not sure if that is a barb or a lament. Enlighten me.
Oh come on Leif, I’ve been here quite a while, you should know.
Probably best characterized as a mixture of disgruntlement and disappointment.
Surely you have something to add to the mission.
I’ve been pondering this NASA’s fetish for smelling the suns behind now for a few hours, and what I can’t figure is who’s nose are they going to use? Is it even a human nose rather than the more superbly nose of the dog? Christ just don’t use a dogs nose-is they think pretty much everything smells good enough to eat. Hey just ask me….
It’s the nose of the beast, and the nose is a human nose, the nose of the beast.
Tim Clark says:
September 3, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Oh come on Leif, I’ve been here quite a while, you should know.
I prefer to say things straight as they are or as I see them
Surely you have something to add to the mission.
They don’t consider retired scientists, and I may not be around when the mission flies.
To get back to something else from the general whining, here is the abstract of the talk Dr. Bale will deliver at the upcoming AGU meeting:
Stuart Bale
Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States.
ABSTRACT BODY: Many of our basic ideas on the plasma physics of acceleration, energy flow, and dissipation, and structure of the solar wind have never been rigorously confronted by direct experimental measurements in the region where these processes are actually occurring. Although Alfven waves, shocks, and magnetic reconnection are often invoked as heating mechanisms, there have never been any direct measurements of Alfvenic waves nor the associated Poynting flux nor any measurements of ion or electron kinetic energy flux in the region from 10 R_s to 30 R_s where the final stages of wind acceleration are believed to occur. The radial profiles of both slow and fast solar wind acceleration are based on remote-sensing measurements and have been obtained for only a few selected events. Thus, the spatial radial and perpendicular scales of the acceleration process have been averaged by line-of-sight effects and the possibility of intense localized acceleration cannot be ruled out.
The Solar Probe Plus (SPP) mission calls for the high quality fields and particles measurements required to solve the coronal heating and wind acceleration problem. The SPP ‘FIELDS’ experiment measures the electric and magnetic fields fundamental to the plasma physics of the structured and turbulent solar wind, flux ropes, collisionless shocks, and magnetic reconnection. FIELDS will make the first-ever measurements of the DC/Low-Frequency electric field inside of 1 AU allowing for in situ, high cadence measurements of the Poynting vector, the Elsasser variables, and E/B diagnostics of the wave spectrum to fce in the solar wind. SPP/FIELDS measures the radio wave (type III and II) signatures of microflares, energized electrons, and CME propagation. SPP/ FIELDS measures the plasma electron density to ~2% accuracy and the core electron temperature to ~5-10% accuracy more than 90% of the time at perihelion. FIELDS will also measure the in situ density fluctuation spectrum and structures at a very high cadence (≤ 10 kHz) and provide definitive signatures of the turbulent nature and heating of the solar wind plasma. Furthermore, SPP/FIELDS measures the impact rate and sig- natures of dust from micron- to nano-scales, by measuring the voltage signature of dust impacts on the spacecraft. FIELDS will also measure the floating potential of the SPP spacecraft, which is essential for correcting in situ electron data.
The SPP/FIELDS experiment combines four (4) deployable electric antennas, fluxgate and search coil magnetometers and the associated signal processing electronics into a scientifically and technically integrated package. SPP/FIELDS makes very high cadence measurements of fields and density and employs an internal burst memory for intelligent data selection. FIELDS is required to measure very large plasma potentials and electric fields (~10V) and uses floating ground (+/- 100V) power preamplifiers. The SPP/FIELDS team has performed 3D plasma simulations of the SPP spacecraft plasma environ- ment, which reveal enormous voltage fluctuation levels in the plasma wake behind the spacecraft. This voltage noise dominates the true signal by orders of magnitude in the critical DC/LF frequency range. Therefore, we are proposing a design which places the four (4) electric antennas in front of the spacecraft ahead of the heat shield.
More on Solar Probe [AGU again]:
Simon P Plunkett, et al.
ABSTRACT BODY: The Wide Field Imager for Solar PRobe (WISPR) will image the Thomson-scattered light from the coronal plasma in the inner corona, with unprecedented spatial resolution, cadence, and sensitivity. WISPR follows on the SECCHI Heliospheric Imager (HI) aboard the STEREO mission, and addresses all four key objectives in the Solar Probe Plus: Report of the STDT (2008): (1) Determine the structure and dynamics of the magnetic fields at the sources of the fast and slow solar wind, (2) Trace the flow of energy that heats the solar corona and accelerates the SW, (3) explore the mechanisms that accelerate and transport energetic particles, (4) explore dusty plasma phenomena and their influence on the solar wind and energetic particle formation. Situated in the ram direction of the Solar Probe Plus (SPP) spacecraft (S/C), WISPR will have the unique ability to image the coronal structures when they are close to the Sun, as they approach, and as they pass over the spacecraft. As a remote sensor, WISPR will connect the structures close to the Sun to the spacecraft and provide important spatial and temporal information; measuring, for example, the properties of the structures generating the shocks and SEPs that will be measured in a few minutes at the S/C. Since the S/C is embedded in the corona, WISPR and the in situ instruments will measure for the first time the same plasma. Also as the SPP transits through the corona, the rapidly-varying viewpoint and high spatial resolution of WISPR will enable tomographic imaging of the corona, and lead to higher fidelity and finer scale 3D reconstructions than are possible with the STEREO mission or single-view rotational tomography. The wide field of view will include at times other inner heliospheric probes (e.g. Solar Orbiter) and will image the outflowing wind that is impinging on that probe. In addition to this standard imaging mode, WISPR opens a new capability for imaging instruments, the measurement of pressure turbulence by employing a high cadence mode (~1 sec) to image a small region in the corona. For the first time, the slopes of the power spectral density from images can be compared directly to the density and magnetic field fluctuations seen in situ as a function of coronal spatial structure and heliocentric distance. In addition, the 1 sec cadence can be generated anywhere within the WISPR field, enabling the study of the transition of the solar wind injected at the tops of the helmet streamers to inertial dissipation scales.
AGU and SPP continued:
Marco M C Velli
ABSTRACT BODY: The magnetic field is fundamental to solar activity and shapes the interplanetary environment, as clearly shown by the full three dimensional monitoring of the heliosphere provided by the measurements of the Helios, Ulysses, SOHO, ACE, Wind, STEREO and Voyager spacecraft. Magnetic fields are also the source for coronal heating and the very existence of the solar wind; produced by the sun’s dynamo and emerging into the corona magnetic fields become a conduit for waves, act to store energy, and then propel plasma into the heliosphere in the form of Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs). Transformation of magnetic energy is also the source solar energetic particle events.
The way in which solar convective energy couples to magnetic fields to produce the multifaceted heliosphere is at the heart of the Solar Probe Plus exploration. This contribution highlights the exciting perspectives for discovery provided by the SPP investigation of the sub-Alfvénic corona.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 3, 2010 at 12:49 pm They don’t consider retired scientists, and I may not be around when the mission flies.
That’s only in 5 years. Are you alright Dr S.
Well I expect at one point it will start to smell like burning rubber; or maybe burning PC board fiberglass.
Maybe they should use carbon fiber PC boards so they can get a little closer and get a good whiff of the sun.
This spacecraft program will be dead on arrival is my projection.
“touch, sense and smell”….mmm hearing lacking.