Carnival of Space #109

June 29, 2009

Welcome to Carnival of Space #109!

First off, Starts With a Bang continues the countdown on his ongoing list of great space-y scientists over the last 100 years; this week's installment names Fred Hoyle as "scientist of the 1950s." Hoyle won the Nobel Prize for his work in nucleosynthesis, yet steadfastly rejected the Big Bang theory even as it gained ground among his colleagues -- and we mean the actual theory, people, not the popular sitcom of the same name.

In other history news, Beyond Apollo delves into NASA's historical archives and finds out that yes, the agency had a backup plan in the 1960s, just in case the Saturn V rocket or Apollo spacecraft got stuck in development. We now know Plan B proved unnecessary, but it's a fascinating glimpse into the lesser-known aspects of NASA history. Meanwhile, Cumbrian Sky bemoans the dearth of photgraphic and video documentation of the Apollo 11 moon landing, pronouncing this lack a major FAIL.

Over at AstroEngine, Ian asks a burning question: How do you directly observe a black hole when it's 26,000 light years away. The answer involves an array of telescopes with "very large baselines," apparently. For details on this "Event Horizon Telescope," check out the full post. Meanwhile, Olaf of Cosmic Web revisits a famous telescope of yesteryear -- Lord Rosse's aptly named "Leviathan of Parsontown" -- which was the first to resolve the spiral structure of the so-called Whirlpool Galaxy (M51).

Our favorite Bad Astronomer, Phil Plait, reports on conflicting findings regarding Saturn: one group reports the presence of sodium in the particles that make up the outermost ring, whereas another team reports a lack of sodium in the geysers of water spewing from the icy moon Enceladus. "Two observations, two good teams, two very different conclusions. That's what it's like on the cutting edge..."

Over at Mang's Bat Page -- I learned this morning that Mang is the name of a bat in The Jungle Book -- there's a fascinating post about the Incredible Shrinking Planet, a.k.a., Mars, debunking the latest rash of emails claiming the Red Planet will appear as large as the full moon.

How did you spend your summer solstice? Ian of Astroblog spent it showing Saturn to a group of guests at a rooftop garden party, complete with a capella vocals. And then they sacrified a goat to the God of the Underworld (okay, not really)...

My pop-culture-loving heart warmed to read Out of the Cradle's killer list of B-movies featuring forward-looking visions of the Moon -- many of which are only available on VHS, having never merited a wide enough audience to justify a DVD release. And for all you hard-core aspiring lunar colonists, Potentia Tenebras Repellendi has created a "fan map" of the moon. On hand with a proposal to foment creative new design ideas for spacecraft of the future -- so we can all travel to the moon and beyond in style -- is John of Open Nasa. He proposes a Wikimedia project to harness some of the knowledge and expertise roiling around out there.

Universe Today has a tantalizing story of possibly solving the Tunguska mystery; a comet may be to blame! Meanwhile, the latest Cheap Astronomy podcast gives an overview of recent theories about the dinosaur extinction 65 million years ago, finding "more smoking guns than a Dallas motorcase." We're just saying, there may have been a second asteroid hanging out on the grassy knoll...

There's good news and bad news on the funding front. First, the good news, which comes to us via Next Big Future: the Canadian government has awarded $13.9 million (in Canadian currency) to General Fusion to demonstrate a workable nuclear fusion power source. Now, the bad news, via Centauri Dreams: the TESS mission -- intended to single out bright nearby stars for an exoplanet search -- didn't make NASA's latest cut for funding. Check out the post to find out which missions were picked instead.

TESS might be grounded in its search for exoplanets, but Bruce at 21st Century Waves reports that "Caltech scientists have recently shown that the presence of biology on a terrestrial planet acts naturally to more than double the lifetime of the planet's biosphere." Bruce explains why this is important for the prospects of extraterrestrial life.

And finally, what carnival would be complete with Space Porn? Offering the prettiest space pictures this past week: Todd at Catholic Sensibility has some stunning images of shadows cast on the rings of Saturn during the planet's equinox. Enjoy!

Photos: (top) A sketch of M51, the "Whirlpool Galaxy." (bottom) Historical photo of aftermath of Tunguska event.

Comments

[Alexander DeClama]

Great post, but I didn't create the map. That honor goes to Mike Fabio of the Xprize Foundation

[gaetano marano - ghostNASA.com]

.

just posted my suggestion #8 for the Human Space Flight Plans Committee and NASA:

"resize the Orion to 4.5 meters and its crew to three astronauts"

http://ow.ly/f3vQ

.

[Don Wilkins]

Unfortunately as was pointed out in the referenced article Hoyle never won the Nobel probably because of his rejection of Big Bang. This has to rank among the top injustices in the award's checkered history.

[CBS Radio]

Ever look at the sky on a warm summer’s eve and wonder what lies beyond the captivating reds and oranges of the sunset? Or, do you ever lie beneath the twinkling stars on a clear night and wonder what it all means? Tomorrow is your chance to have all your questions answered. Neil deGrasse Tyson, world renowned astrophysicist, is doing a live taping of his interactive radio show, Star Talk, tomorrow at 8 PM on Chataboutit.com. Call into the show with your questions and be a part of the answers to the phenomenon of the summer sky.

Star Talk – 8 PM on Thursday 7/2
Call: 877-CHA-T212

Check out Neil on The Colbert Report and Jimmy Fallon

http://chataboutit.com/star-talks-neil-degrasse-tyson-on-the-colbert-report/

http://chataboutit.com/star-talks-neil-degrasse-tyson-on-late-night-with-jimmy-fallon/

[Torbjörn Larsson, OM]

"as was pointed out in the referenced article Hoyle never won the Nobel probably because of his rejection of Big Bang."

A more proximate and so likelier reason would be that Hoyle (rightly) criticized the Nobel committee for their failure to recognize Jocelyn Bell in the discovery of pulsars years earlier.

Also, when Hoyle rejected Big Bang he did so while proposing an alternate theory. But he also rejected evolution biology, which is both a field and a theory, without having a reasonable reason - he had at that time simply become a creationist. If it ever factored in with the Nobel committee decision I concur with them - a scientist with anti-science values and ideas should be excluded from prestigious awards due to the harm to science otherwise.