Somewhere, once upon a distant memory, I read that dark energy or somesuch was being looked for in deep mines....
Today I was considering how you might tell the composition of a planet either in the solar system or an extra-terrestrial planet....
I know that it is possible through light wavelengths to tell the composition of an extraterrestrial planet's atmosphere however what else passes through more dense material?.... Are there any monitorable cosmic rays which would hint at the densities of material/materials they passed through in a planet ie earth? Or are planets suffiently large and dense that little if anything passes through them?
I wonder not only if something we could monitor however also something theoretically monitorable....
neutrinos pass through soliid matter
not sure how you'd ever see the reflection, though, as they tend to keep on going - lol
we look at reflected light to tell what objects in space are made of (spectroscopy)
that does not apply to the star, itself - we see the generated light generated by the star :P
notice - you can't really "see" planets from systems that are far off
what we do see is the "wobble" of the star that tells us that it is being orbited by reasonably heavy objects
They are shooting neutrinos from FermiLab, a mile from me, to a mine in North Dakota. I thought there was one in Minnesota too, perhaps that was a different one. They kept having to scale down the project because of the cost of buying/preparing the mineral oil used in the detector.
http://lbne.fnal.gov/
i remember seeing somewhere that they bury large pools of
water underground to measure the neutrinos from the sun
i don't remember how it all works - i think there is more to it than a pool of water - lol
i seem to recall it is the effect of the neutrino passing that is measured - not collected neutrinos
Here's the Minnesota one
http://www-numi.fnal.gov/
And the mineral oil used in the liquid scintillator detector
http://nova-docdb.fnal.gov/0002/000234/001/Miller%20All_scintillator_installation.pdf
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070410174108.htm
Nutrinos sound promising.... However if they have no mass then their trajectory would not be influenced maybe.... Can they pass all the way through the earth, blocked based on density of materials.... ie could you have a satelitte the other side of the planet that you could analyse data for?....
I appreciate, even if you could this is not a simple measurement however I would assume it would yield interesting data for the computer models....
Non destructive forensic analysis of space bodies etc
Hi,
Check out the Ice Cube neutrino detector in Antarctica.
http://icecube.wisc.edu/
As to penetrating power, would you believe light years of lead?
When first postulated, they thought that they would never be
detected. Luckily there are a lot of them around.
Cheers,
Steve N.
PETER,
Dave is right about the neutrinos. I remember reading somewhere that the reason scientists were setting up those neutrino detectors in abandoned deep mines is to verify the current models of stellar physics. It seems that they detected significantly less neutrinos from the sun than they were expecting.
Here is an explanation of the solar neutrino detection experiments: Neutrinos and Nuclear Chemistry (http://www.chemistry.bnl.gov/sciandtech/sn/default.htm)
Why do I get the feeling you've got a major crackpot theory up your sleeve ???
How were you ever able to escape the Trilobite conundrum ???
Quote from: baltoro on August 03, 2011, 10:14:42 PM
Why do I get the feeling you've got a major crackpot theory up your sleeve ???
Aha.... funny you should say that.... As I read this it is 4am and I am not wearing a shirt....
this is some really interesting information on nutrinos.... My main consideration was a 'Star Trek' ::) style satellite system capable of detecting composition of space bodies.... ie Was it possible.... However this also lead me to wonder about the detection of the composition of exoplanets or other bodies in space (ie maybe alien space craft :lol)....
By knowing where for example stars are and knowing expected readings , statistically you could know what passed between the star and your observation point (I guess a little like ray-tracing with transparency....
Anyways.... All completely useless and juvenille thoughts.... For me just simple thought experiments to better understand the abstract world we live in and gain some better insights from more experienced (note I did not say old) forum members :wink
the biggest problem with all that stuff is time
and, of course, the overwhelming amount of data
if you enjoyed watching Captain Picard toss about the universe like me.....
you get the impression that everything is within reach
in truth, it takes forever to go someplace, or to study it
the light that we see from most other stars is very old news :P
even the light from the nearsest star (other than the sun) took ~4 years to get here
and light is hauling ass :bg
Very true.... I do not expect this in my lifetime.... Only however by knowing the possibilities you know what extra-terrestrial life forms must know....
I am a firm believer that we are like bees in a hive manipulated beyond our understanding by superior life forms....
It just does not seem logical to me that we just happen to be 'at the top of the food chain' with intelligent thought....
Maybe on this planet, yeah ok, maybe.... Though I have some further theories on that also and indeed some limited evidence and thought experiments that proves not :lol.... However to travel the 'vast distances' to another solar system would take us under 100 years I think currently.... Our race thinks in terms of millenia 1000s of years.... ie Western civilisation 2,000 years, Chinese civilisation 4,000 years.... However consider a race that *thinks* in terms of 10,000s or 100,000s of years in a nearby solar system....
These are not unbelieveable timescales.... Life has existed on earth what? 400 million years.... For such a race, even bound by our technological weaknesses 100 years is a drop in the ocean....
lifespan is the key
100 years IS a long time, if that's longer than you might live
traveling faster means little in the expanse of space
living longer is where it's at
Ah I have theories on this also.... Living longer? Define life.... My thoughts will far surpass my existance and be implanted into the minds of future generations....
To define life as coporeal is to remove the existance of intelligence....
To remove the idea of coporeal is to remove the generation of new thought and understanding born of 'perspective'....
So we remain.... Bees in a hive.... 'Doomed' to a corporeal and limited existance to provide the honey of perspective :wink
Whilst.... There is no reason, in theory, why in the future we could not transcend our bodies, save our minds to 'hard drives'.... And further explore the universe in non coporeal form....
Well possibly not in my lifetime.... Without the help of our alien friends.... Maybe at the moment of death.... I will become part of the non corporeal sea of thought, that whispers to me in my dreams at night....
Quote from: PETER...My main consideration was a 'Star Trek' style satellite system capable of detecting composition of space bodies.... ie Was it possible.... However this also lead me to wonder about the detection of the composition of exoplanets or other bodies in space (ie maybe alien space craft)....
You know, geologists do not even know the composition of the Earth, below what is exposed at the surface. The densities, heat and pressure, and the assumed mineralogies are inferred from what we know about surface rocks and what high-thermal, high-pressure experiments predict about the state of abundant minerals of appropraite density.
Cool, huh ??? What we really need is a new and improved theory about how how gravity governs the structure of planets when they are evolving out of cosmic dust,..
I have a crackpot theory,...but, it's strill kind of nebulous,.. :eek
i have a crackpot theory related to the center of the earth :bg
must be a lot of gold down there
think about it - very dense - low melting point - noncorroding
Quote from: dedndave on August 04, 2011, 06:13:54 PM
i have a crackpot theory related to the center of the earth :bg
must be a lot of gold down there
think about it - very dense - low melting point - noncorroding
http://www.universetoday.com/9295/astronomers-find-a-huge-diamond-in-space/
Quote10 billion trillion trillion carats
that'll feed a lot of rabbits :bg
There are many crackpot theories about what's at the center of the Earth.
In fact,...I read ON THE INTERNET, that there is a group of serious people who think the Earth is full of petroleum,...instead of, extremely hot rock under immense pressure, that has differentiated over 4.5 billion years into the mantle, outer core, and inner core.
My insanely wild, Uber-crackpot theory is that: WE'LL NEVER KNOW !!!
Quote from: dedndave on August 04, 2011, 06:13:54 PM
i have a crackpot theory related to the ... :bg
:dazzled:
You have one.... wait till you hear mine... actually I won't talk about this, it's..
(http://www.mobilemarketingwatch.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Top-Secret-Tip-To-Pick-SMS-Keyword.jpeg)
:bg :U
The inner core of the Earth, its innermost hottest part as detected by seismological studies, is a primarily solid sphere about 1,216 km (760 mi) in radius, or about 70% that of the Moon. It is believed to consist of an iron-nickel alloy, and may have a temperature similar to the Sun's surface, approximately 5778 K (5505 °C).
Since there is magma, the core can't be petroleum. :-)
not petrol - that's for sure
personally, i doubt it''s quite that hot
the iron-nickel theory is a very old one
there is little information to prove or disprove it :P
i am sure it contains a mixture of several heavy metals - the percentages may never be known
they can estimate the mass, according to the movement of earth in orbit
and, of course the volume, but that's as far as it goes
so - they have a figure for density
Quote from: MAGNUMThe inner core of the Earth, its innermost hottest part as detected by seismological studies, is a primarily solid sphere about 1,216 km (760 mi) in radius, or about 70% that of the Moon. It is believed to consist of an iron-nickel alloy, and may have a temperature similar to the Sun's surface, approximately 5778 K (5505 °C).
Since there is magma, the core can't be petroleum. :bg)
This is an inference based on current estimates of mineralogical abundances in the crust and meteorites. Geophysical models of the Earth's interior are based on estimated density gradients and temperature gradients. The resulting structure seems reasonable considering the known physical constraints as determined by studies of gravitation and high-pressure, high-temperature experiments on common mineral states.
My crackpot theory is that the Earth's interior is alot more heterogeneous than the current geophysical models would indicate. I find it difficult visualizing mantle convection (that supposedly drives the plate tectonic process). Also, I find it difficult to believe that molten 'rock' of a specific density is able to migrate through a matrix of unimaginably high pressure and temperature. But,...it's just a feeling,... :eek
Quote from: DAVEthe iron-nickel theory is a very old one
there is little information to prove or disprove it
Dave's right here (for once !!!). The geomagnetic field of the Earth cannot be adequately explained,...and the Iron/Nickel alloy core was initially proposed to provide a plausible mechanism for generating a magnetic field (and, of course, Iron is abunant and fairly dense).
Excellent review paper: Origin of the Core (http://www.es.ucsc.edu/~fnimmo/website/nimmo_core.pdf)
I personelly think the inner core is more like a smores..... :toothy..Marshmello he said.... :eek
they seem to think the core has a lot of iron in it
but i don't think that's necessary for the earth to have a magnetic field
seems to me that if the core was largely iron, you wouldn't be able to pick up your car keys :lol
Venus doesn't have a magnetic field,...and it has a comparable mass and, presumably composition.
Here's a highly technical scientific paper: Why Does Venus Lack a Magnetic Field? (http://quake.mit.edu/hilstgroup/MIT-HRVD2005/010305/Nimmo2002.pdf)
yes - i recall reading somewhere that venus also lacks a system of plate-tectonics