Jupiter's face changes

The face of Jupiter has had some dramatic changes this year and no cosmic plastic surgeon is to blame.

Being in astronomy, many people have expressed how amazing they find the sky, but sometimes they express some incredulity, too. "Really, what's so amazing about it? It's the sky! It doesn't change."

But nothing could be further from the truth! Planets can change features all the time and Jupiter can be the most mercurial of the lot. A planet made of up mostly gas, over 1,000 times more mass than our planet made up almost entirely from hydrogen and helium, heated from within and rotating once every nine hours - it tends to have a lot of weather.

Most prominent of its features are its cloud bands. Alternating light and dark, they represent massive areas of high and low pressure. Ammonia and other chemicals contributes a lot to the colours of the planet that we see.

Girdling Jupiter's equator are two darker "belts," a northern belt and a southern one. And earlier this year, Jupiter appeared in the night sky with it's south equatorial belt faded out of view.

This isn't the first time it's happened. Indeed, I recall at least one incidence in the early '90s when Jupiter's south equatorial belt disappeared.

Most recently, amateur astronomers have noted that the SEB is experiencing a resurgence. What started as a fairly bright spot has been showing signs of bringing back the SEB, much as it has done several times over the last few decades. Astronomers, both professional and amateur alike, have been watching Jupiter in hopes of seeing the re-emergence of the SEB.

Of course, the downside of this is that the famous Great Red Spot is more difficult to spot. Oh well, win some, lose some!

Unfortunately, as is typical for this time of year in Southern Ontario, the weather has been anything but clear! No doubt, the next time I have a chance to view it, the view will be a lot different than this past summer. And who says the skies never change!

Clear skies!



Jupiter before...














And Jupiter after, without it's southern equatorial belt but with a prominent Great Red Spot. But things are changing. Here comes the SEB!

RIP Star Hustler Jack Horkheimer!

I remember the first time I saw him on TV and the first thought I had.

"You're kidding me! Right!?"

But, like all characters, Jack Horkheimer, the 'Star Hustler' seen weekly on Public Broadcasting from the states kind of grew on me and I found myself tuning in as often as possible in the hopes of catching one of his shows. They were fun, they were campy and it was wonderfully informative about all things 'backyard astronomy!'

In case you weren't aware, Horkheimer, the executive director of the Miami Space Transit Planetarium and renowned astronomy "popularizer" passed away in his home in Florida on Aug. 21 from respiratory illness.

He started the show back in the 1970s and what made the show endearing was the absolute enthusiasm Horkheimer brought to his presentation. The show would start with its signature theme Arabesque #1 by Claude Debussy. Horkheimer would appear, sitting on "Saturn's ring" to relay the latest goings-on that were visible to the naked eye in the sky. He then would close out the show with the reminder to "keep looking up!"

Horkheimer started the show with the title "Star Hustler." However, in the age of the Internet and search engines, he had to change the title of his show because, if you typed in "star hustler" in the search field, chances were good you were going to find a site that had little or nothing to do with astronomy of any kind!

He would also challenge many misconceptions about astronomy including a few "doomsday" predictions, and this video where he once again tackles that annoying Mars Hoax that just...won't...die!

Amateur astronomy has certainly lost one of its best ambassadors. He offered the hobby to a wide range of people in a wonderfully light and uncomplicated manner, reminding everyone that, if you have a pair of eyes, you too are an astronomer. And that is perhaps the most important legacy he could leave.

So clear skies...and remember to keep looking up!

Why won't it DIE???!!!!!

Oh crap! It's back!

Maybe recently, an email came across your inbox declaring that this August, Mars would be as big as the full moon in the sky. A friend of mine who works in an astronomy store in Toronto reports that he even recently got a customer inquiry from someone who wanted to look at Mars then.

After seven years, you'd think the Mars Hoax would have run it's course.

Just in case you aren't sure what I'm talking about, let me clarify. The origin of this thing goes back to 2003 when Mars did, in fact, have a remarkably favourable "opposition." This is something that happens with every planet beyond Earth when sun, Earth and planet form something of a line in the sky. Think about watching a race from within the circle. As two runners run in their individual tracks, the inside runner appearing to go faster because he has a smaller circle to run, both are going to appear to 'line up' occasionally.

For us, this simply means that the planet will rise as the sun sets and vice versa. We see the planet for a considerable amount of time either side of this so it only means, for a brief period of time, the planet is at its biggest and brightest in our sky. This year, that happened for Mars on Jan. 29.

For Mars, it's closest approach is about 35 million miles! To give you an idea of distance, the sun is 93 million miles. The moon is about 250,000 miles. You'll see why this is important in a minute.

First, let's talk about Mars's orbit. It's weird! More specifically, it's highly "eccentric." Most orbits are somewhat "egg-shaped" but for Earth, Venus and several others, that eccentricity doesn't amount to more than a few per cent out-of-round. Mars is different. It's eccentricity actually amounts to something like 30 per cent. That means the Earth-Mars distance can vary wildly between 35 million miles - like what happened in August 2003 - and almost 100 million miles. That's a difference of nearly 80 millions miles!

And the variation between most favourable oppositions? Well, between 2003 and the last most favourable when Mars appeared it's largest in a telescope....about 60,000 miles.

Okay, keep that in mind. Here's why...even when Mars is at its closest, it still only appears as a star-like dot in the sky. Granted, in 2003, it was a very bright dot. But still, a dot.

In order to actually cover as much sky as the moon does, Mars would actually have to be considerably closer. Say, about 800,000 miles away! That's close! Scary close! As in, not sitting under the romantic ochre glow. More like "Oh God, Oh God, we're all going to die!" close! If Mars were that close, life on Earth would be a very unpleasant thing. The tidal forces between these two bodies would be considerably larger than they are between the moon and Mars (remember, we're talking not just angular size but volume and mass!)

So now you know why not to take too much stock in the Mars hoax. Of course, if you're still inclined to buy a telescope from my friend, go right ahead! He might even tell you about some interesting things you actually can see!

Oh, and just so you know, on Aug. 23, Mars will be close to the sun and low on the western horizon near Venus.

Clear skies!

What's up with Jupiter!?

I'm resigned to the fact that all the really cool things happening in the sky are going to happen at hours of the night when I'm comfortably and irretrievably ensconsed in my bed.

Interesting asteroid passes, novae...they're all on the list. Now, Jupiter's on it too.

The fifth planet in our solar system is a pretty dynamic body all on a regular basis. Giant storms the size of Earth or larger, psychedelic weather patterns, multiple moons that go round and cast visible shadows across its face. But now, it's got some real wild goings-on that would almost make it worth setting the alarm for the wee hours of the morning.

First, it's south equatorial belt. Because Jupiter is little more than a giant ball of gas, the planet is nothing but weather. And because of its massive size, it gained a lot of angular momentum as it formed from infalling gas. The result is that it also spins very fast - once every nine hours - which stretches out its weather systems.

The result is its iconic cloud bands. However, lately, Jupiter has been missing its south equatorial belt. Jupiter's Great Red Spot is reportedly visible without anything of the belt near it.

It's something of a mystery. Not unknown, it's happened before. Several times, actually including one I recall back in the early '90s. Even in my primitive Tasco reflector, Jupiter's Great Red Spot was quite noticeable without the competition of the dark, expansive southern belt. In fact, Jupiter's northern equatorial belt has expanded and become even darker.

Also recently, an amateur astronomer who recorded a black cloud that mysteriously appeared in Jupiter's south temperate zone last summer also recorded a bright flash in the atmosphere that can only have come from another impact. Amazing! So far, no sign of a black cloud like last summers or, most memorably, the comet impact of Shoemaker-Levy 9 in 1994, but stay tuned.

The problem? Jupiter doesn't rise until much, much too early in the morning for me. As an astronomer, understandably, I'm a bit of a night owl. "So?" you might say. "Suck it up, buttercup!"

Fair enough. Except that I have a little problem...a large two-storey strip mall to my south. So Jupiter doesn't rise high enough to clear the building before the sun rises. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

So, as the season progresses and Jupiter rises higher...so much the better. However, in the meantime, I'm going to enjoy my sleep.

Clear skies!

Is that a 'hand' you're shaking?

By now, everyone's heard of physicist Stephen Hawking's assertion that announcing ourselves to the greater galactic community might be a bad idea.And, not one to miss out on an opining opportunity, here's my two percent of a buck's worth.

Hawking's basic premise, on the surface anyway, seems reasonable. Essentially, by announcing our presence to anyone "out there," we run the risk of finding ourselves much as the Native Americans did with the arrival of the more technologically advanced, hygiene deficient Europeans. Let's bring it down to brass tacks by saying, basically, they were 'boned!'

However, it's fair to say that the aliens won't be 15th century Europeans. They may even take baths.

For one thing, it's highly unlikely they will find anything here that they can't find "out there," James Cameron and 'unobtainium' notwithstanding. Water seems remarkably plentiful in the universe and it's doubtful they would find us very palatable. Hey! If they've mastered the fine art of interstellar travel, chances are pretty good they've managed to eliminate a wide variety of the shortages that ails society today. If not, they're not going to get far looking here for the secrets of the universe here, I suspect.

It also assumes they're even going to travel the distance at all. After all, interstellar travel encompasses a host of technical challenges, not the least of which is time and ultimate speed limits! Our first "alien" visitor might simply be a Voyager-like probe. Perhaps it's already passed, or is on its way.

In fact, Fermi's Paradox - if there are aliens out there, given the age of the universe, how come we haven't met them yet - still holds a certain sway. Remember, Frank Drake's famous equation was never actually meant to be the final word on the likelihood of actually finding aliens, simply an agenda of points for a meeting on Project Ozma, one of the first Search for Extra-terrestrial Intelligence (SETI) efforts. And, Area 51 conspiracists and the tinfoil hat crowd aside, we have yet to find any real evidence for anyone out there! The universe remains distressingly quiet.

One other thing pops to mind...that of the messenger. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of Stephen Hawking. The man is brilliant! But he's not an astronomer, or a part of the SETI team. He's a theoretical physicist. While he has as much to lose by a planet razed to rubble by marauding aliens, he's as much of an authority on it as I am. So why the extra authority given to his voice on a subject out of his normal 9 - 5?

Ultimately, the point is moot. We've already announced our presence to listening...um...'ears' and continue to do so with every radar pulse, flick of a light switch and call on a cell phone. From 50 light years out in space and listening with radio ears, our little blue marble would be the loudest radio source there is in the sky. So the cat's already out of the bag.

So get your tinfoil out and hope for the best. After all, if they're not here now...

Clear - and hopefully unthreatening - skies!

Human space exploration still 'do-able!'

There seems now to be a tendency to view the current state of affairs in space exploration as a major setback. And, in many ways it is. But it's also an opportunity for a renewed and more cooperative approach to space exploration.

In 2004, when former U.S. president George Bush announced his country's plans to return to the moon, it could have been and was viewed by some as a means to divert at least some attention away from a clumsily executed and increasingly unpopular "War on Terror." However, its resultant Constellation program also marked an important step in maintaining a human (and largely American) presence in space in the wake of the retirement of the aging shuttle fleet.

A new administration brings a new set of priorities. And a return to the moon - and even beyond - is sadly not high on that list.

Human exploration isn't popular to many and they do have a point. It is inherently unsafe and inherently expensive, with robotics capable of doing many of the things human beings would be able to do and at a fraction of the cost. But robots can't do everything. They can't move autonomously. They can't make snap decisions. And they can't get themselves out of sticky situations creatively, should they arise.

Ah, but there's that price tag again. About $400 billion by some estimates to get a crew of people to Mars.

Clearly, there is a lot of room for recriminations. A lot of work already completed on the Constellation program will now go into mothballs. Or, does it need to?

Here's the thing...a lot of nations in the world are already "spacefaring" or, at the very least, have their own space agencies and are involved in space exploration technology development. Canada is most definitely one of the latter! Other nations like China, India, Japan, etc., have already shown tremendous prowess at launching satellites, material and even people of their own into space. Russia is already a major player.

So why not make space exploration more of an international effort? I know, I'm hardly coming up with anything new here. This sort of idea has been rattling around for years. But could this new change in American focus be a new opportunity to take what has been learned and "spread the cost?"

Any nation that participates in a united effort to get to space will also be the first to accrue the benefits. And any space exploration development project does lead to new technology development. So already, that is one major incentive.

And it just seems to make sense. For one thing, it's already agreed by international treaty that space, the moon and the planets do not belong to any single nation. Why should their explorations be any different?

There is so little that unites the nations of the world. However, a shared interest is certainly a good place to start. And a truly international success that lands an international crew on the moon or even Mars would benefit from shared success far more than they would from singular resentment and envy.

of course, as this article on Spacedaily.com points out, it is likely to be a difficult row to hoe as many nations continue to look on their neeighbours with suspicion and insist that they can do it on their own. However, it is worth it for nations to start putting such foolishness away. The reasons are far too many to list and none are more important than the other.


If it can be conceived of, it can be done. All it takes is a little will. And a good dash of hope.

Clear skies.

So...NOT the end of the world, then!

On Tuesday, it was announced the Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, had smashed two 3.5 trillion electron volt beams of gold ions together. The combination resulted in record energies never before produced on Earth, almost instantaneously creating conditions similar to the universe in the first milliseconds after the big bang.

Almost just as quick, internet discussion groups were alive with both declarations of praise and predictions of doom.

Of course, you're probably aware of the LHC is. It's the product of the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), a consortium of 20 European states that spent 10 billion Euros to build the LHC, the largest scientific instrument ever built. it is a 17-mile circumference track of superconducting magnets that direct opposing beams of charged particles into collisions of tremendous force! Imagine the kinetic energy of two baseballs colliding into each other at 100 miles per hour each. Doesn't sound like much? Well then, condense that into an atom. That's a big whack for a little atom!

Of course, for the past couple of years, a lot of talk has been heard over "will this create a black hole and destroy the Earth?" It has even spawned lawsuits in order to prevent the switch being thrown. However, in addition to courts rejecting the bid on the grounds that it was out of their jurisdiction, there were also arguments that nature does this kind of thing over our head every day. In fact, the particles that come into our atmosphere from cosmic phenomenon are even stronger and rain all manner of subatomic particle on us.

So here's the thing...the chances of such an occurrence are not zero. But they're also so remote, you might as well be worried about being trampled by a dinosaur in the next 30 seconds. Hasn't happened yet? Not surprising!

And there were those saying "What a waste of money! It could have been spent on 'real' problems here." To me, that's a spurious argument. First of all, it assumes that "throwing money" at a problem is a solution. Frequently, it's only the cause of more problems.

Secondly, it assumes that not enough money is being spent on certain problems already. However, if you listen to actual economists and people on the ground dealing with these issues rather than Bob Geldof and Bono, the real problem is not the amount of money being spent, but the fact that it isn't getting where it's going. In fact, again, a lot of it boils down to the expectation that money somehow solves everything.

Finally,it presumes to be able to predict how discoveries by CERN will actually be used. Indeed, with every experiment of this type, it opens up the possibility for new and better understanding of the fundamental laws of nature. That, in turn, can lead to advancements in technology that can and have been proven to enhance the quality of life.

So, by next year or so, we should be seeing the LHC powering up even higher to it's maximum 14 trillion electron volts. What amazing discoveries can we look forward to?

See you at the bottom of the black hole!