Archive for July 17th, 2007

Cracking a scientific nut

Iapetus is weird. It’s a moon of Saturn, and it’s always been known to be weird. One of Iapetus’s hemispheres is much brighter than the other, for one thing (probably due to collecting material as it orbits the planet). For another, it’s got a pretty big equatorial bulge; it’s not even close to being a sphere. And third, right around its equator, there is this vast ridge of material that’s something like 20 kilometers high!

Yup. It is the walnut of the solar system.

Those two features — the bulge and the ridge — are just crying out that they are related somehow. And now it looks like it may be understood why.

New results just released state that when it was very young, Iapetus rotated very rapidly - something between 5 and 16 hours per rotation. This is what formed the equatorial bulge. But its spin rate now is much longer, about 80 days. Obviously, something in its past slowed the spin.

That something is the immense tidal force of Saturn. This force (really, a product of the gravitational force) can slow the rotation rates of objects. But for Saturn to slow Iapetus, it turns out that there must have been something warming the interior of the little moon when it was very young, and that was found to be radioactive heat. Aluminum-26 and iron-60 are radioactive, and their decay can heat up the surrounding material. Furthermore, they have such short half-lives — meaning they decay away rapidly — that in geological terms it’s as if the heat source switches off.

Now follow this logic: Iapetus spun quickly when it was young, and got the bulge. Its interior was heated by radioactivity. But then that heat source shut down. The moon started to cool, and simultaneously its rotation slowed due to tides from Saturn. When the rotation slowed, the centrifugal force at its equator dropped, and it tried to shrink and resume a spherical shape. But by then the outer crust had frozen. Instead of flowing smoothly into a sphere, the equatorial crust piled up as the Moon shrank, forming the ridge.

Voila. Walnut moon.

Incidentally, because radioactive materials decay at a known rate, and the amount of heating needed to make the theory work implied how much radioactive material Iapetus had, the scientists were able to calculate the age of the moon. The answer? 4.564 billion years, pretty much the known age of the solar system.

Swallow that nut, young Earth creationists!

Speaking of garbage science, I have to mention — regular readers know I can’t help myself sometimes — that Iapetus has long been the target of some, um, nutty ideas. The king of these is of course one Richard Hoagland, who claims that the ridge around Iapetus is artificial. Yes, built by intelligent beings (though as usual he never says who he thinks they are).

You can’t make this stuff up.. oh wait, duh, of course you can. Here’s what he has to say:

[…] it could really be a “wall” … a vast, planet spanning, artificial construct!!

Man, you know this is serious if he uses two exclamation points. I mean, "exclamation points!!" To drive the artificiality point home, he compares the moon to the Death Star from Star Wars in a side-by-side picture — not just once, but twice!

I mean, "twice!!"

He goes on to say:

There is no viable geological model to explain a sixty thousand-foot-high, sixty thousand-foot-wide, four million-foot-long “wall” … spanning an entire planetary hemisphere … let alone, located in the precise plane of its equator!

It’s unclear when Hoagland wrote that page, though it’s dated 2005 and there are clues it was in February or March of that year, but at the same time he was feverishly banging away at his keyboard producing that goofiness, a real scientist by the name of Paulo CC Freiere was finishing up an actual paper on the ridge around Iapetus (and you can read a popular-level synopsis of his findings over at Universe Today). In a nutshell (ha! a double pun!) the idea was that Iapetus could have formed that ridge when it slammed into one of Saturn’s rings. The material piled up on the equator, forming that vast range of mountains. That also could explain the difference in brightness of the two hemispheres.

This new idea about Iapetus getting its bulge and ridge by the freezing out and piling up of matter seems more plausible than having the Moon plow into a ring and gathering up matter, but still, we now have two theories on how that structure could have formed. Either or both may turn out to be wrong, but I think the extraterrestrial alien pyramid builders can be dismissed.

Of course, Hoagland continues on his pages to bark on about artificial constructs, doing his usual sleight of hand with over-magnifying images and claiming JPG artifacts are buildings or some such nonsense. And I’ll admit, it’s rather fun to read his stuff, in a schadenfreude kind of way. But in the end, I prefer actual, y’know, science. Speculation is fun, but real science will be more interesting, more exciting, and more satisfying every time.

July 17th, 2007 6:53 PM by Phil Plait in Antiscience, Astronomy, Cool stuff, Debunking, NASA, Pretty pictures, Science, Skepticism | 55 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Congrats to Saul, Brian, and about a zillion others

My email box is flooded with news that the Gruber Prize (not named, unfortunately, for Hans Gruber — who would have been a good astronomer, since he spent quite a bit of time on the roof) was awarded to the two teams who, in 1998, discovered that the expansion of the Universe has been set on overdrive: a mysterious dark energy is accelerating the expansion. I’ll spare the details here and send you off to read an earlier blog entry I wrote explaining it (and a Bitesize piece I wrote at the time, and a followup).

The Prize is for a cool half million bucks, which will be divided up among the two teams. They’ve won many prizes in the past, too. It’s deserved. This was phenomenally tough work, and it’s looking like it’ll hold up. It changed the way we looked at the Universe, and may still have many surprises waiting for us.

I know a whole passel of the folks on those teams; I was tangentially involved at the time with Brian Schmidt’s team, and later wound up working for Saul Perlmutter on the education and public outreach for his SNAP experiment, which will follow up on the dark energy observations. I’ve promised to do this before, but someday I’ll write up my personal involvement; it’s a bit silly but a funny story. Someday.

Oh– Science Blogs’s Rob Knop gets a piece of this as well!

So congrats all around!

July 17th, 2007 5:50 PM by Phil Plait in Astronomy, Cool stuff, Science | 7 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Moon Hoax talk in Boulder.. but not by me!

In a singular twist of fate, a public talk debunking the Moon Hoax will be given at the Fiske Planetarium here in Boulder… and it won’t be by me!

The speaker is Stuart Robbins, a Bad Astronomy & Universe Today bulletin board regular (which is where I heard about this). The talk will be given this Thursday and Friday nights at 8:00, and you can get more info at the Fiske website.

I’ll be there, grading Stu on performance, poise, and the inevitable swimsuit competition (which is worth a suprprising amount of the final score). Any BABlogees in the area, come along!

July 17th, 2007 3:03 PM by Phil Plait in Antiscience, Astronomy, Cool stuff, NASA, Skepticism | 25 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Doomed

I love LOLcats. I really do, and I am not yet tired of them. But this one in particular will come in handy on this blog. Yes.

<img src=”http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2007/doomed.jpg” alt=”LOLcat: Doomed”

For example:

Creationism.

<img src=”http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2007/doomed.jpg” alt=”LOLcat: Doomed”

See?

July 17th, 2007 1:42 PM by Phil Plait in Humor | 21 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

Skeptic Minority Report

An interesting aspect of skepticism is the apparent lack of diversity in skeptical circles. I love skeptic meetings, but it’s hard not to notice that I blend in like a chameleon there; I am white, 42, bearded, have a receding hairline, and I’m a man. There are lots of women at the meetings, which is great– in American society, it’s a common prejudice that women are less skeptical than men. It’s wonderful to see more younger people attending too.

But Blacks, Asians, Hispanics? Very few. I’m not sure why that is, and that’s because I’m white, 42, and an astronomer, and not a social psychologist or historian. But it seems logical that one place to start looking would be the broad cultural differences. In very general terms, cultures that are more religious may be less supportive of skeptical thinking. There are probably factors due to differences in educational opportunities, economics, and even population locations.

I don’t know, but I’m interested. Happily, there are some avenues of inquiry and discovery for people like me (White & Nerdy), like Masala Skeptic, a blog for Indian skeptics. It loosely focuses on that culture (which is in as dire a need of critical thinking as American culture), and, not surprisingly, religion, but there are other topics there too. It’s as group blog, so you can see different styles and opinions on Indian skepticism. It’s worth a look.

Are there other, similar blogs out there dealing with critical thinking among minorities? Pipe up! I bet you could attract the attention of a few other big skeptical blogs.

Skepticism is not the due of just one race, just one group. It is a critical, fundamental need across all cultures, all people. Let’s see if we can help achieve that goal of inclusiveness.

July 17th, 2007 9:49 AM by Phil Plait in Antiscience, Religion, Skepticism | 40 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >