EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

User avatar
MattEU
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:00 am
Contact:

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by MattEU » Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:03 am

Can we merge this topic and the one in planetary science called Lunar Water Content?

Not sure if this article has any new stuff but does mention viewing geometry which i had not heard of and discusses the spectral readings The "Water on the Moon" Hoopla, Part 2: The murkier part of the story

Image

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Lunar Water Content

Unread post by StefanR » Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:26 am

Plasma Acceleration above Martian Magnetic Anomalies

• Aurorae: Caused by accelerated charged particles
precipitating along magnetic field lines into a planetary
atmosphere - the auroral brightness is roughly proportional to
the precipitating particle energy flux.
• The Analyzer of Space Plasma and Energetic Atoms
(ASPERA-3) experiment on the Mars Express spacecraft has
made a detailed study of acceleration processes on the
nightside of Mars.
• We observe accelerated electrons and ions in the deep
nightside high altitude region of Mars that map geographically
to interface/cleft regions associated with Martian crustal
magnetization regions
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... 6971#p6971
The major differences as they relate to oxygen and sulfur species are an increased abundance of S, S2, S3, S4, SO, and S2O and a decreased abundance of O and O2 in the Pele-type volcanic models as compared with frost sublimation models (see Figure 2). One observational test of the significance of active volcanoes in maintaining Io's atmosphere would be the simultaneous monitoring of SO and SO2 at ultraviolet or microwave wavelengths. We predict that the SO/SO2 ratio will be spatially and temporally variable as volcanic activity fluctuates. Many of the interesting volcanic species in our model (e.g., S2, S3, S4, S2O) are short lived and will be rapidly destroyed on Io once volcanic plumes shut off; condensation of these species near the source vent is likely. The diffuse red deposits associated with active volcanic centers on Io may be caused by S4 radicals that are created and temporarily preserved when sulfur vapor (predominantly S2) condenses around the volcanic vent. Condensation of SO across the surface and, in particular, in the polar regions might also affect surface spectral properties. We predict that the S/O ratio in the torus and neutral clouds might be correlated with volcanic activity — during periods when volcanic outgassing of S2 is prevalent, we would expect the escape of sulfur to be enhanced relative to that of oxygen, and the S/O ratio in the torus and neutral clouds would be correspondingly enhanced.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... 8896#p8896
Since dust in such an orbit is expected to be depleted by spiraling away, the rings must be continually replenished with fresh material. Showalter and collaborator Jack Lissauer of the NASA Ames Research Center propose that the outermost ring is replenished by a 12-mile-wide companion satellite, named Mab, which they first saw in 2003 using Hubble. Meteoroid impacts continually blast dust off the surface of Mab, and the dust then spreads out into a ring around Uranus. (Other small moons are linked to rings, including Amalthea at Jupiter, Pan at Saturn, and Galatea at Neptune.) Mab's ring receives a fresh infusion of dust from each impact. In this way, nature "balances the books" by keeping the ring supplied with new dust while older dust spirals away or bangs back into the moon. The results of impacts onto small bodies were dramatically demonstrated on July 4, 2005 when the Deep Impact probe slammed into the nucleus of comet Temple 1. A huge cloud of dust was blasted off the comet's surface.
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archiv ... 5/33/full/
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... 6106#p6106
Laboratory data is needed on electronically-induced desorption from low-temperature solids: ices, organics, hydrated salts, glasses and certain minerals. Many bodies in the outer solar system are bombarded by relatively intense fluxes of fast ions and electrons as well as solar UV photons. This can cause both changes in their optical reflectance as well as desorption of atoms and molecules from their surfaces. Stimulated desorption produces Na and K 'atmospheres' above the 'rocky' surfaces of the moon and Mercury and H2O, H2 and O2 'atmospheres' about icy outer-solar system bodies. Since theses bodies contain other surface materials, direct detection by spacecraft or remote detection by telescopes of the desorbed atoms and molecules can be used, along with laboratory data, to determine the surface composition and geological processes occurring on distant bodies. This paper describes the relevance of stimulated desorption to the ambient neutrals and plasma in Saturn's magnetosphere, in preparation for CASSINI's arrival, and to the production of atmospheres on the moons of Jupiter being studied by the Galileo spacecraft.

http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... 6371#p6371
Sputtering/Implantation

The large satellites of the gaseous giant planets spend all or most of their time in the corotating magnetospheres
of these planets. The interaction of satellite and corotating plasma modifies the satellites’ surfaces and
atmospheres and leads to a net loss of volatile materials to the magnetospheres. At the present time, Io is known
to lose more than a ton per second of volatile material (mostly S and O) to Jupiter’s magnetosphere.51 Similarly,
Europa is losing its icy surface at the rate of ~2 cm per million years (Myr) to Jupiter’s magnetosphere.52
Ganymede’s magnetic field partially shields the equatorial regions from plasma bombardment. However, it is
estimated that the polar regions of Ganymede lose an average of 8 mm/Myr of ice from sputtering.53 Callisto, in
a more benign radiation environment, loses <0.4 mm/Myr of ice to sputtering. The plasma bombardment of icy
surfaces results in the implantation of S derived from Io’s torus into the crusts of icy satellites.54 The irradiation
of icy satellite surfaces also results in the production of H2, O2, H2O2, and other stable oxides that get embedded
in the ices and also form tenuous atmospheres near the surface.55 The irradiation of other ice contaminants such
as C and S produces CO2, SO2, and H2SO4. The radiolysis of the surface by magnetospheric particles continuously
cycles S between SO2, H2SO4, and polymer S forms.56 At Europa, the fast recycling of the crust (believed to occur
over a time scale of 100,000 to 10 million years) may deliver oxidants from the surface to the subsurface ocean.57
These oxidants could fuel life in the absence of sunlight.
http://thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/v ... 6549#p6549
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by junglelord » Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:38 am

Moon-smashing probe aims for new target crater
23:28 28 September 2009 by Rachel Courtland
For similar stories, visit the Solar System Topic Guide
NASA's LCROSS spacecraft, which is set to collide with the moon next week, has switched its targeted impact site to a different crater to boost its chance of finding water ice.

Trace amounts of water may be widespread on the moon, but many suspect significant water deposits – a potential resource for future lunar outposts – may be hidden in permanently shadowed craters at the moon's poles.

NASA's Lunar CRater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) is set to collide with the moon's south pole so that researchers can search for signs of this water in the plume of material it ejects. On 9 October, the spacecraft will shepherd the 2400-kilogram upper stage of its launch rocket into the lunar surface before colliding itself 4 minutes later.

Earlier this month, the team announced that they had picked the spacecraft's target, a 48-kilometre-wide crater called Cabeus A on the moon's south pole. The most promising spot was a smaller crater perched on the rim of Cabeus A, dubbed A1, that seemed to contain high levels of hydrogen, and thus potentially water, according to data collected by NASA's Lunar Prospector, which orbited the moon in 1998 and 1999.

Obstructed view
But new measurements taken with NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) now circling the moon do not show much hydrogen in the smaller crater. Likewise, Cabeus A itself is a less-than-ideal target, since much of the hydrogen it contains does not seem to be in permanent shadow, which would help protect water ice there from the sun's heat.

In light of this data, LCROSS will now target a 98-kilometre-wide crater called Cabeus. Data from both Lunar Prospector and LRO "show a lot of hydrogen" there, says LCROSS principal investigator Anthony Colaprete of NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California.

Cabeus was not the team's first choice because a large ridge obstructs the view of the crater from Earth. "There is a large mountain that's about six kilometres tall or so on the northern side of the crater. So the ejecta has to fly up higher before it becomes visible to Earth observers," Colaprete told New Scientist. Most of the debris in the plume created by LCROSS's launch rocket stage is expected to extend no more than 10 kilometres above the lunar surface.

Sunlit valley
But according to a statement issued on Monday, the team believes that "Cabeus shows, with the greatest level of certainty, the highest hydrogen concentrations at the south pole". LCROSS's thrusters were fired on Friday to put its trajectory in line with its new target.

And the team is expecting the plume created by LCROSS and its rocket stage will still be clearly visible. A small valley in Cabeus's ridge is expected to help boost visibility, allowing sunlight to trickle in and illuminate the ejected debris earlier than previous estimates, the statement says.

LCROSS and LRO will be the only spacecraft capable of observing the plume from the moon, because India's Chandrayaan-1 satellite failed in August. The Hubble Space Telescope, a private imaging satellite called GeoEye, and an assortment of ground-based telescopes will watch the plume from Earth.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... rater.html
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

mharratsc
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by mharratsc » Tue Sep 29, 2009 12:32 pm

Wow... you would think that these guys read up on what other guys in the Space sciences are doing, and put 2+2 together. >.<

Does it not occur to any of these people that it's always the 'South Pole' of any solar body that we look at that has all the wierd activity going on!

And there's only one theory that even potentially explains why that is- EU/PC! 8-)

Mike H.
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington

User avatar
solrey
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by solrey » Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:37 am

Cabeus was not the team's first choice because a large ridge obstructs the view of the crater from Earth. "There is a large mountain that's about six kilometres tall or so on the northern side of the crater. So the ejecta has to fly up higher before it becomes visible to Earth observers," Colaprete told New Scientist. Most of the debris in the plume created by LCROSS's launch rocket stage is expected to extend no more than 10 kilometres above the lunar surface.
:x
Oh well. Even though I think the impact will be a bit more energetic than they predict, I didn't really expect to see anything with my little 60mm refractor. Got some nice views last night of the bright, nearly full moon with partly cloudy skies, though. My new scopes first light. :mrgreen: Even saw the 4 Galilean moons and a couple of cloud bands on Jupiter right next to all that moonlight. But I digress.


I'm gonna watch and still plan on focusing in on that impact area anyways. And just for kicks, I'm gonna setup an antenna array between my, 4 line, clothesline T posts and hook up a multi-band receiver set on the lowest available frequency at ~ 30 Mhz. Don't expect to hear anything, but what the heck. What else is there to do at 4:30 am? :lol:

MikeH. The original impact site was in the south polar region as well. The new site is in the same general region as the old one, I believe. But I hear ya. ;)

Forgot to mention the craters. They won't be circular or flat bottomed. They should be oblate with conical walls.
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla

User avatar
solrey
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by solrey » Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:47 am

A little over an hour prior to impact, it's ~3:30 PDT with perfect viewing conditions, checking out the cosmos while the city sleeps. ;)

A little synopsis before I regain my night vision:

Total Volume for Centaur: ~1200 metric tons (NASA says ~900)
Total Volume for Shepherding Craft: ~ 500 metric tons (NASA says ~350)
Chemical analysis of gases should lie within the range for comets.
They will detect >50% OH,
however direct evidence for H2O should amount to <0.1%. ( 0.1%: EU 1, NASA 0 ) :lol:
They might detect a surprising amount of Na (sodium), perhaps up to 20%
More fine, talcum powder like dust than expected.
Oblate, conical sided craters.
Radio band, piezoelectric discharge signatures should be detected.
The shepherding probe should produce an ion tail as it flies through the debris plume of the impactor.
There might be electrostatic dust layers, or Tansient Lunar Phenomenon, after the debris plumes settle out.
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by junglelord » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:12 am

If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

bdw000
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:06 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by bdw000 » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:23 am

Am I missing something here? Is it true that there is NO plume?

At the NASA TV press conference two hours later, they spent 15 minutes showing their perfect views of the site from ground telescopes, but never showed any picture with any kind of plume. One photo actually had some label that sorta went like "no plume detected yet" with an arrow pointing to where it should have been.

I'm still not sure I'm getting the whole story here.

Also, some sort of graph (spectrograph???) showed a very small spike which was called the "initial flash." Right next to that small spike there was a very large spike that was called a "probable processing error."

bdw000
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:06 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by bdw000 » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:50 am

From the press conference:

A reporter asks the question (paraphrase) "There seems to be some doubt if there is a plume or not?"

The NASA guy says (close to exact) "We haven't been able to see it clearly in our images yet."

User avatar
StevenO
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by StevenO » Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:46 pm

bdw000 wrote:Am I missing something here? Is it true that there is NO plume?

At the NASA TV press conference two hours later, they spent 15 minutes showing their perfect views of the site from ground telescopes, but never showed any picture with any kind of plume. One photo actually had some label that sorta went like "no plume detected yet" with an arrow pointing to where it should have been.

I'm still not sure I'm getting the whole story here.

Also, some sort of graph (spectrograph???) showed a very small spike which was called the "initial flash." Right next to that small spike there was a very large spike that was called a "probable processing error."
Since the E/M field of the moon is about 40% in relative strenght compared to the gravity of the moon I would expect some (unexpected) electrical effects, like extra flashes or something. You tell me since I'm no plasma expert.
First, God decided he was lonely. Then it got out of hand. Now we have this mess called life...
The past is out of date. Start living your future. Align with your dreams. Now execute.

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by Lloyd » Fri Oct 09, 2009 4:32 pm

An electrical flash would occur only if there's enough difference in charge between the moon and the probe. If the charges are about the same, there should be little or no arcing.

Osmosis
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:52 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by Osmosis » Fri Oct 09, 2009 11:40 pm

Maybe it was exploding dark matter? ;)

keeha
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 5:20 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by keeha » Sat Oct 10, 2009 2:42 am

The video of the event does not include images from ~1 minute before impact till at least 10 seconds after impact. During 'Flash mode.' :?: LCROSS Moon Impact (Centaur)

User avatar
solrey
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by solrey » Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:58 pm

I had a blast spending the night checking out the cosmos, even if the moon impact as viewed from Earth was anti-climactic to say the least.

There are many reasons why the debris plume did not clear the high ridge in front of the crater blocking the view of the plume from Earth, but the shepherding craft did collect spectrographic data indicating it flew through some kind of vapor/debris plume as well as an IR signature of an impact flash and a "smoking" crater.

Here are the links to the post impact NASA press conference:
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
Part VII
Part VIII

Some interesting information was briefly discussed:

At 1:26 in Part II, they talk about the impact flash covering several pixels being "interesting, we don't know what that means yet".
Does that mean that it was much larger than expected? Or could it just be "smear" from the 30fps camera?
My analysis:
Possibly an indication of a piezoelectric discharge/triboluminesence.

The UV/Visible spectrum graph indicates a possible post impact, short lived, "St. Elmo's Fire" coronal cathode glow likely triggered by the piezoelectric discharge, described as a shallow curve in the time-lapse spectrum.

There is a sudden spike that trails off then suddenly drops again immediately following a small "bump" indicating a quick rise/slow dissipation. They call the spike a possible artifact/anomaly. I believe the small "bump" was a pre-impact electrostatic discharge and the spike was the impact triggered piezoelectric discharge. That would seem to be in agreement with the "interestingly" large area of the impact flash covering several pixels.

The most exciting information revealed in the press conference, which I feel is solid confirmation of my prediction of electro-chemically produced sodium, was the announcement @ 1:20 in Part IV, of a brief and strong sodium flash.

They also talk about the moons "hydration cycle" at around 9:00 of Part IV.

The detection of a strong sodium signature was mentioned several times. Near the end of the Q&A that closed the press conference, sodium was yet again discussed and chemical reactions were a likely culprit.

I predicted:
Most, if not all, of the gases detected will be the by-products of electro-chemical/thermatic reaction chains.
They might detect a surprising amount of Na (sodium), perhaps up to 20%
Holding off on confirmation of the impacts discharge activity (among other predictions), but sodium has been confirmed.
Added to the successfully predicted hydration level of <0.1% and the process producing it, the score now stands:
EU 2, NASA 0 ;)


I have to get it off my chest.
Those "journalists" questions were, mostly, annoyingly stupid! All they cared about was the lack of visible "fireworks", proving they were more concerned with infotainment than any real scientific information. :roll:
“Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality"
Nikola Tesla

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: EU Theory predictions for LCROSS moon impact mission?

Unread post by junglelord » Sat Oct 10, 2009 2:59 pm

Great call on the sodium, I really like the pizoelectric explanation.
Thanks.
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests