PDA

View Full Version : Why I don't want to be an astronaut



John Kierein
2002-Apr-15, 09:36 PM
Coronal mass ejection. 50-50 chance it's heading our way!
http://www.spaceweather.com/

Silas
2002-Apr-15, 11:48 PM
Might be the first time I've ever agreed with you (friendly grin, and the hoist of a drink of your choice.)

Myself, I'm a modern Antaeus; my feet shall never leave the nurturing soil of the earth (modulo occasional business flights...)

I have the greatest admiration for the real astronauts, as I also do for deep-sea divers, and fire-fighters, and air-sea rescue personnel, and mountain-rescue personnel, and.... Even our own mother earth has no few environments that are wholly hostile to us, and yet we, as an adventurous species, will go there anyway.

From Jason to Magellan to Armstrong, the best and bravest have gone out into the heaving main to bring back knowledge. I couldn't survive ten minutes in their world, and that's only a small part of why they are my heroes.

Silas

Space Bandito
2002-Apr-16, 12:07 AM
Iím the opposite of Silas.

I would gladly go up there (or anywhere) for adventure. Giant Planet Devouring Space Goats be dammed!

Jigsaw
2002-Apr-16, 12:28 AM
To my mind, the biggest drawback to being an astronaut would be the journalists who compose dorky headlines like, "Astronauts test drive first railroad in space", hyuk hyuk hyuk.

:: rolleyes ::

Can't get NO respect.

Compared to media headline writers, a super-duper solar flare would be a Sunday School picnic, I'm thinking. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

Chip
2002-Apr-16, 02:43 AM
On 2002-04-15 20:07, Space Bandito wrote:
Iím the opposite of Silas.

I would gladly go up there (or anywhere) for adventure. Giant Planet Devouring Space Goats be dammed!


The world needs both you guys - The "Silases" to dream up the missions and get the science done -- and the "Space Banditos" to go there, and lead the way! (Occasionally in history you'll find someone who was also a combination of both.) /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

But - I do have some serious "Bad Astronomy" questions pertaining to solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and Astronauts in space. (Sorry, I know this was covered before, somewhere.)

How hazardous is this really? If they're in orbit, and a mass ejection is headed their way, what can they do? Is there a real threat to their lives, or not? If there is a threat, does NASA have contingency plans? (Some Russian Cosmonauts have been on very long orbital missions during periods of strong solar activity -- I think they survived.) I've heard that pilots who regularly fly at high altitude get the equivalent of an extra chest x-ray a year. Is that incorrect? (Maybe more "x rays", but not detrimental to health?)

Chip

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chip on 2002-04-16 00:33 ]</font>

4-Lom
2002-Apr-16, 07:47 AM
Is a CME a Coronal Mass Ejection (as in some mass is ejected) or is it a Coronal Mass-Ejection? (as in there is a huge amount of 'stuff' ejected)

John Kierein
2002-Apr-16, 12:29 PM
It's unhyphenated and the update says it's definitely headed for us and will cause aurora April 17th! The same link works for the update: http://www.spaceweather.com/

Firefox
2002-Apr-16, 12:34 PM
April 17th? Great, now I know what day we're having a thunderstorm...


-Adam

John Kierein
2002-Apr-16, 01:29 PM
These people don't worry about an X-class solar flare or a CME.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=18&cid=676&u=/usatoday/20020416/ts_usatoday/4029890

SiriMurthy
2002-Apr-16, 03:51 PM
On 2002-04-16 08:29, John Kierein wrote:
It's unhyphenated and the update says it's definitely headed for us and will cause aurora April 17th! The same link works for the update: http://www.spaceweather.com/


I have some questions:
1. what is the streak we see in the lower right of the animated SOHO image?

2. There is a bright point of light in the lower left moving in (relatively speaking) NW direction. Is that a planet?

3. Because of the CME, is Sun losing mass? If yes, by how much per year?

John Kierein
2002-Apr-16, 04:01 PM
I'm not sure what the streak is, but it seems to be in just one frame. It may possibly be some contamination from the spacecraft (thruster firing?)? It seems to be moving too fast to be stuff coming directly from the sun??
The bright light is the comet discussed on the website and the other posting. It'll get closest to the sun tomorrow (4/17)

John Kierein
2002-Apr-16, 04:20 PM
Oh. This says the streak could well be a cosmic ray. But it's interesting that it points ALMOST directly in line with the sun!
http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/s218061.htm

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: John Kierein on 2002-04-16 12:26 ]</font>

ToSeek
2002-Apr-16, 04:37 PM
On 2002-04-16 11:51, SiriMurthy wrote:
3. Because of the CME, is Sun losing mass? If yes, by how much per year?


Yes, but it's losing even more from the fusion process that's generating the light it's emanating, at least according to this utterly trustworthy astronomer. (http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/massloss.html)

ToSeek
2002-Apr-16, 04:41 PM
On 2002-04-16 11:51, SiriMurthy wrote:

I have some questions:
1. what is the streak we see in the lower right of the animated SOHO image?


The streak could easily be from radiation, as this image (http://galvin.sr.unh.edu/SOHO/SWT98/soho-swt-images/lasco-Nov97SEP.gif) indicates.

(from http://galvin.sr.unh.edu/SOHO/SWT98/index.html )



_________________
"... to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson, [i]Ulysses


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ToSeek on 2002-04-16 12:43 ]</font>

SiriMurthy
2002-Apr-16, 04:45 PM
On 2002-04-16 12:37, ToSeek wrote:

Yes, but it's losing even more from the fusion process that's generating the light it's emanating, at least according to this utterly trustworthy astronomer. (http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/massloss.html)


So, is CME the same as solar wind?

ToSeek
2002-Apr-16, 04:48 PM
On 2002-04-16 11:51, SiriMurthy wrote:

2. There is a bright point of light in the lower left moving in (relatively speaking) NW direction. Is that a planet?


Planets are usually marked with a horizontal line, as in this example (http://sungrazer.nascom.nasa.gov/images/planets.gif). Maybe you've discovered a comet! (Though according to this page (http://www.ph.u-net.com/comets/c2paths.htm), it's not going in the right direction for that. So I'm not sure.

ToSeek
2002-Apr-16, 04:56 PM
On 2002-04-16 12:45, SiriMurthy wrote:
[quote]

So, is CME the same as solar wind?


I think it's fair to say that the material in a CME becomes part of the solar wind. Meanwhile, I'm trying to get a number on how massive a CME really is. So far I've gotten three contradictory figures for the high end:

10^11 kg - http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~bfite/Spac_project.htm
10^13 kg - http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/cmes.html&edu=high
10^14-10^17 kg - http://edmall.gsfc.nasa.gov/inv99Project.Site/Pages/cme.abstract.html

These are big numbers, but then CMEs don't happen that often.

John Kierein
2002-Apr-16, 05:11 PM
The streak is apparently a "solar energetic particle" that is associated with solar flares and CMEs. Much more energetic that the solar wind, so it is travelling faster than the CME. The CME won't get here until tomorrow, but the SEPs may be hitting the astronauts who are doing EVA now - unless the Earth's magnetic field deflects them.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: John Kierein on 2002-04-16 13:16 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: John Kierein on 2002-04-16 13:17 ]</font>

SiriMurthy
2002-Apr-16, 05:28 PM
On 2002-04-16 12:56, ToSeek wrote:


On 2002-04-16 12:45, SiriMurthy wrote:
[quote]

So, is CME the same as solar wind?


I think it's fair to say that the material in a CME becomes part of the solar wind. Meanwhile, I'm trying to get a number on how massive a CME really is. So far I've gotten three contradictory figures for the high end:

10^11 kg - http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~bfite/Spac_project.htm
10^13 kg - http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/cmes.html&edu=high
10^14-10^17 kg - http://edmall.gsfc.nasa.gov/inv99Project.Site/Pages/cme.abstract.html

These are big numbers, but then CMEs don't happen that often.



I don't understand. According to our BA's page on Mass Loss (http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/massloss.html) the Sun has a total mass of 2 x 10<sup>30</sup> Kilograms. The links above say that the CME is (perhaps) in the order of 10<sup>11</sup> to 10<sup>17</sup> Kilograms???!! /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif

(I have just taken the minimum and the maximum values from the above links.)

SiriMurthy
2002-Apr-16, 05:32 PM
On 2002-04-16 12:48, ToSeek wrote:


On 2002-04-16 11:51, SiriMurthy wrote:

2. There is a bright point of light in the lower left moving in (relatively speaking) NW direction. Is that a planet?


Planets are usually marked with a horizontal line, as in this example (http://sungrazer.nascom.nasa.gov/images/planets.gif). Maybe you've discovered a comet! (Though according to this page (http://www.ph.u-net.com/comets/c2paths.htm), it's not going in the right direction for that. So I'm not sure.



I see. So, generally, the comets go towards the Sun, and it makes sense.

So in this page (http://www.ph.u-net.com/comets/c2paths.htm), am I right in understanding that each single line is a comet? If I am, then what does the "bunch" of black lines represent?

ToSeek
2002-Apr-16, 06:21 PM
On 2002-04-16 13:32, SiriMurthy wrote:
I see. So, generally, the comets go towards the Sun, and it makes sense.

So in this page (http://www.ph.u-net.com/comets/c2paths.htm), am I right in understanding that each single line is a comet? If I am, then what does the "bunch" of black lines represent?


Each black line represents a comet, specifically a Kreutz sungrazer. (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast10feb_1.htm) The other colored lines are different sorts of comets (except the blue ones, which are still Kreutzes except SOHO was tilted in an unusual way).

Azpod
2002-Apr-16, 09:50 PM
On 2002-04-16 13:28, SiriMurthy wrote:

I don't understand. According to our BA's page on Mass Loss (http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/massloss.html) the Sun has a total mass of 2 x 10<sup>30</sup> Kilograms. The links above say that the CME is (perhaps) in the order of 10<sup>11</sup> to 10<sup>17</sup> Kilograms???!! /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif

(I have just taken the minimum and the maximum values from the above links.)


I think you're underestimating exactly how massive 10<sup>30</sup> kilograms is! If the Sun had a CME the mass of 10<sup>17</sup> kilograms every second, it would take 316,880 years before the Sun would run out of mass!

I think that a CME every few months poses no danger to the Sun's longevity.

_________________
That is all.

--Azpod... Formerly known as James Justin

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Azpod on 2002-04-16 17:51 ]</font>

David Hall
2002-Apr-17, 04:58 AM
On 2002-04-16 17:50, Azpod wrote:

I think you're underestimating exactly how massive 10<sup>30</sup> kilograms is!


It's sometimes pretty hard for the layman to grasp the numbers used in scientific notation. 10<sup>15</sup> and 10<sup>17</sup> don't look that different, being only 2 digits apart, but if you stop to think about it, 10<sup>17</sup> is 100 times larger! And 10<sup>30</sup> is TEN TRILLION times 10<sup>17</sup>!

Exponential numbers go up dramatically very quickly. You really have to LEARN to think in them, because it's not very intuitive. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

SiriMurthy
2002-Apr-17, 11:39 AM
On 2002-04-17 00:58, David Hall wrote:


On 2002-04-16 17:50, Azpod wrote:

I think you're underestimating exactly how massive 10<sup>30</sup> kilograms is!


It's sometimes pretty hard for the layman to grasp the numbers used in scientific notation. 10<sup>15</sup> and 10<sup>17</sup> don't look that different, being only 2 digits apart, but if you stop to think about it, 10<sup>17</sup> is 100 times larger! And 10<sup>30</sup> is TEN TRILLION times 10<sup>17</sup>!

Exponential numbers go up dramatically very quickly. You really have to LEARN to think in them, because it's not very intuitive. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif



Yes, that was my problem - understanding the exponents. Thanks for all the explanation. One thing about this board I like is that you all go to any length to make a layman like me understand the concept.

But still, 10<sup>17</sup> did seem to me like a very high number and indeed, 10<sup>17</sup> IS 100 times larger than 10<sup>15</sup>. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

David Hall
2002-Apr-17, 11:54 AM
On 2002-04-17 07:39, SiriMurthy wrote:
But still, 10<sup>17</sup> did seem to me like a very high number and indeed, 10<sup>17</sup> IS 100 times larger than 10<sup>15</sup>. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


Hey, of course 10<sup>17</sup> IS a very huge number. Seventeen zeros isn't small. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif It's just that it's peanuts compared to the mass of the Sun itself.

Wally
2002-Apr-17, 12:17 PM
Drats! We missed it! (at least here in the USA. . .). See update on http://www.spaceweather.com.

How long does it take for the CME to completely pass by? Is there still a chance for Auroras tonight?

John Kierein
2002-Apr-21, 11:31 AM
Today's (4-21-02) X-class solar flare is another reason I don't want to be an astronaut. At least it waited until after the Shuttle crew was back and not on EVA. A little unusual time for these since we are past the peak of the solar cycle. The ISS crew is up there still for another couple of months.

Chip
2002-Apr-22, 08:57 AM
Early in this thread I asked how hazardous are CMEs and solar flares to astronauts. (I've found little reference to space missions or concerns, and no history of anyone in space at risk or hurt from CMEs, though I know they do produce dangerous bursts of radiation that can head our way.)

No one seems to have an idea or interest there, so I did a Google search on "CME astronauts hazard" and found fleeting references to "health hazards to astronauts" in addition to disrupting communications and electric power on earth, but little more. There probably are several studies done on this subject.

Anyway, I'll pose the question to the "Mad Scientists" and if this thread is still around when they answer, I'll share it. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Chip

brownelvis54
2009-Oct-02, 10:30 PM
I couldn't be an Astronaut..............Im too claustrophobic. I beleive solar flares can cause a higher percentage of cataracts to astronauts

Neverfly
2009-Oct-02, 11:40 PM
I couldn't be an Astronaut..............Im too claustrophobic. I beleive solar flares can cause a higher percentage of cataracts to astronauts

Oldies but goodies, aye? 2002...

I'd risk dying in orbit to be an astronaut.


Just bury me where I make the crater.

Nicolas
2009-Oct-03, 07:52 AM
I read the first post as "cranial mass ejections". In that case, I wouldn't want to be an astronaut either! :D

Neverfly
2009-Oct-03, 08:16 AM
I read the first post as "cranial mass ejections". In that case, I wouldn't want to be an astronaut either! :D

Yeah, but some of us got nothin' to lose.

Nicolas
2009-Oct-03, 08:22 AM
Point taken. :D

KaiYeves
2009-Oct-03, 03:22 PM
If I didn't want to be an archeologist and I wasn't psychologically all wrong (Too excitable, prone to panic attacks), I probably would want to be an astronaut.

mugaliens
2009-Oct-04, 04:10 AM
I couldn't be an Astronaut..............Im too claustrophobic. I beleive solar flares can cause a higher percentage of cataracts to astronauts

Thread necromancy alert!!!

Ah, no worries, actually. I just wanted to beat the other one who usually sounds the alarm. :lol:

Ilya
2009-Oct-08, 08:49 PM
I couldn't be an Astronaut..............Im too claustrophobic. I beleive solar flares can cause a higher percentage of cataracts to astronauts
I am afraid of heights, which probably disqualifies me from being an astronaut -- or even "space tourist". Claustrophobia, OTOH, is as alien to me as fear of number 13 or fear of fluffy bunnies. Yet it seems to be a very common phobia -- I met quite a few people (mostly women) who would go into full-blown panic attack if they were in a room with a stuck door. To me it is just crazy.

KaiYeves
2009-Oct-09, 01:16 AM
Well, I don't like being near the edge when I'm high up, but I feel no fear in a plane, so I guess acrophobia is not a problem for me.

Antice
2009-Oct-09, 09:19 PM
being cautious when close to the edge of a high cliff is just survival instincts doing the thing they are supposed to do. keep you from doing stupid stuff.
i think Agoraphobia might be a tad worse when in space tho. the worst part there is that it's double edged. being on a space walk wont help to ease the fear at all. since you fear both being crowded by others and the openness. oh and the openness is infinite so you might call it Apeirophobia. or even Kenophobia since it's so empty. (not totally empty tho)

mugaliens
2009-Oct-10, 01:14 AM
being cautious when close to the edge of a high cliff is just survival instincts doing the thing they are supposed to do. keep you from doing stupid stuff.

Like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phFgCLguSNI)(note - it's merely a 9-sec animated public service announcement)

Neverfly
2009-Oct-10, 05:23 PM
Like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phFgCLguSNI)(note - it's merely a 9-sec animated public service announcement)

The sound effects were excellent.

nyeeahh...

mugaliens
2009-Oct-11, 06:11 AM
You'll note, of course, from the beginning frame, he was only about 12 feet up...

And over water, no less.

Yes, it's true. I'm all about the benign.