Sunday, June 14, 2009

Fake Astronaut Gets Hit by Artificial Solar Flare

June 3, 2009: In 1972, Apollo astronauts narrowly escaped a potential

catastrophe. On August 2nd of that year, a large and angry sunspot app

eared and began to erupt, over and over again for more than a week,

producing a record-setting fusillade of solar proton radiation. Only pure

luck saved the day. The eruptions took place during the gap between

Apollo 16 and 17 missions, so astronauts missed the storm.

see caption

Researchers still wonder, what would have

happened if the timing had been just a little

different, what if astronauts had been caught

unprotected on the surface of the Moon?

Right: One of the August 1972 solar flares.

Click on the image to launch a movie recorded

at the Big Bear Solar Observatory.

NASA needs to know. The agency is in high

gear preparing to send people to the Moon

to set up a manned outpost, a step toward eventually sending humans

to Mars or elsewhere in the solar system. These missions will take

astronauts outside the protection of Earth's magnetic field for months

or even years at a time, and NASA must know how to keep its explorers

safe from extreme solar storms.

So scientists are creating an artificial solar radiation storm right here on

Earth. And they're testing its effects on an artificial human: Matroshka,

the Phantom Torso.

The European Space Agency's Matroshka and his NASA counterpart
Fred have already flown in experiments aboard the Space Shuttle and
the International Space Station that have shown how other kinds of
space radiation such as cosmic rays penetrate the human body. Now,
scientists at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, New York, are
subjecting an artificial torso to a beam of protons to learn how
astronauts would be affected by the 1972 event.

"We want to know how close it comes to a dangerously acute

exposure," says Francis Cucinotta, the Chief Scientist for NASA's

Radiation Program at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.

In the parlance of radiation experts, "acute exposure" is brief but

intense. Radiation strikes the body over a relatively short period

of time ranging from minutes to hours—just like a solar flare. This

is different from the "chronic exposure" astronauts normally

experience as they travel through space. Cosmic rays hit their

bodies in a slow drizzle spread out over weeks or months. With chronic

exposure, the body has time to repair or replace damaged cells as it

goes along, but an acute exposure gives the body little time to cope

with the damage.

see caption

Above: The radiation beamline at NASA's Space radiation Lab in Brookhaven. [Larger image]

"The biological effects are very sensitive to the dose rate," Cucinotta explains.

"A dose of radiation delivered over a short amount of time is two to three

times more damaging than the same dose over a few days."

At first glance, the 1972 event would seem to fall into the acute category—

it was after all a solar flare. But there's a problem. It was actually a series

of flares producing a radiation storm that was longer and less impulsive

than normal. Radiation exposure would have been neither chronic nor

clearly acute, but somewhere in between. In this gray area, details about

how much of the radiation actually reaches a person’s vital organs —

versus how much is blocked by their spacesuit, skin and muscles —

can make all the difference.

Matroshka is helping scientists understand these details. He's a life-

size plastic replica of a human torso, sans arms and legs. The plastic

closely matches the density of organs and tissues in the human body,

and this Phantom Torso is embedded with hundreds of radiation sensors

throughout his body. He even has real human blood cells.

see captionAlign Center

Right: Matroshka in and out of his white traveling poncho. [Larger image]

"We put blood cells in small tubes in the stomach and in some places in the

bone marrow," some of which are deep within the torso while others are

close to the surface where there's less "tissue" to block radiation. "One

of the questions we have is whether the less shielded parts of the bone

marrow will be [much harder hit]," raising the risks of leukemia and other

cancers.

Using real blood cells lets scientists see how much the radiation damages

the cells' DNA. High-speed particles of proton radiation can smash into

DNA, breaking the string-like molecules. Cells can usually repair these

breaks, but if several breaks occur within a short period of time, the

damage can be irreparable. At best, the cell will then self-destruct. At

worst, it will go haywire and grow out of control, becoming cancerous.

To subject Matroshka to a 1972-style radiation storm, scientists have

devised a way to simulate that event using a high-energy proton beam

at NASA's Space Radiation Lab in Brookhaven. The beam fans out so

that, at the point where Matroshka sits, it's 60 cm across — large

enough to engulf the entire torso. By stepping the energy of the

beam through a series of energy levels, scientists can mimic the

unique energy spectrum of the protons in the 1972 event.

In the upcoming experiment, led by Guenther Reitz of the German

Aerospace Center (DLR) in Cologne, Matroshka's radiation sensors

will reveal how much proton radiation reaches various parts of the

mannequin's body. "With protons, you might have an order of magnitude

(a factor of ten) difference from one part of the body to another," notes

Cucinotta.

The readings will help mission planners figure out how much shielding is

necessary to protect real astronauts from a 72-style storm. The results

will also point researchers in the right direction for medical treatments that

might help mitigate the effects of such an event.

Unlike a real astronaut, Matroshka can withstand multiple flares with no

lasting side effects. A quick transfusion of blood cells and voilĂ --Matroshka

is ready for another blast.

So let the flares begin—and stay tuned for results.

Source:NASA

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Return of the Mars Hoax

For the sixth year in a row, a message about the Red Planet is popping up

in email boxes around the world. It instructs readers to go outside after

dark on August 27th and behold the sky. "Mars will look as large as the full

moon," it says. "No one alive today will ever see this again."

see captionDon't believe it.

Here's what will really happen if you go

outside after dark on August 27th. Nothing.

Mars won't be there. On that date, the red

planet will be nearly 250 million km away

from Earth and completely absent from

the evening sky.

Right: Only in Photoshop does Mars appear

as large as a full Moon.

The Mars Hoax got its start in 2003 when Earth and Mars really did have a

close encounter. On Aug. 27th of that year, Mars was only 56 million km

away, a 60,000-year record for martian close approaches to Earth. Someone

sent an email alerting friends to the event. The message contained some

misunderstandings and omissions—but what email doesn't? A piece of

advanced technology called the "forward button" did the rest.


Tolerant readers may say that the Mars Hoax is not really a hoax, because
it is not an intentional trick. The composer probably believed everything he
or she wrote in the message. If that's true, a better name might be the "Mars
Misunderstanding" or maybe the "Confusing-Email-About-Mars-You-Should-
Delete-and-Not-Forward-to-Anyone-Except-Your-In-Laws."

Another aspect of the Mars Hoax: It says Mars will look as large as the full

Moon if you magnify it 75x using a backyard telescope. The italicized text

is usually omitted from verbal and written summaries of the Hoax. (For

example, see the beginning of this story.) Does this fine print make the

Mars Hoax true? After all, if you magnify the tiny disk of Mars 75x, it does

subtend an angle about the same as the Moon.

No. Even with magnification, Mars does not look the same as a full Moon.

This has more to do with the mysterious inner workings of the human brain

than cold, hard physics. Looking at Mars magnified 75x through a slender

black tube (the eyepiece of a telescope) and looking at the full Moon shining

unfettered in the open sky are two very different experiences.

see caption

Above: Mars in August 2003 during a 60,000-year record close approach.

Even then, the planet resembled a bright star, not a full Moon. Photo credit:

John Nemy & Carol Legate of Whistler, B.C.

A good reference is the Moon Illusion. Moons on the horizon look huge; Moons

directly overhead look smaller. In both cases, it is the same Moon, but the human

mind perceives the size of the Moon differently depending on its surroundings.

Likewise, your perception of Mars is affected by the planet's surroundings. Locate

the planet at the end of a little dark tunnel, and it is going to look tiny regardless

of magnification.

Bummer!

To see Mars as big as a full Moon, you'll need a rocketship, and that may take

some time. Meanwhile, beware the Mars Hoax.

source:NASA