Followers

Sunday, July 13, 2008

Jupiter's Third Red Spot Destroyed

Jupiter July 10, 2008
This photo by Christopher Go of Cebu City, Philippines, shows that little remains of the Little Red Spot. Click the image to see an animation of the event as photographed by amateurs around the globe.
Christopher Go
As Jupiter reached opposition earlier this week, it put on a spectacular show of cannibalism for anyone viewing with modest telescopes.

Planetary specialists around the world have been watching with baited breath as a cataclysmic encounter between Jupiter's Great Red Spot (GRS), Oval BA (Red, Jr.), and the newly discovered Little Red Spot (LRS) unfolded at the beginning of July. Though encounters such as this are relatively common on the gas giant, this event was greatly anticipated because the LRS was strong enough to dredge up material from deeper within Jupiter's atmosphere, imbuing it with the same reddish color as the GRS and Oval BA.

As the three storms converged on July 1, LRS appeared to be rapidly squeezed between the GRS and Oval BA. Images recorded through methane filters which accentuate upper-atmosphere details showed all three spots as individual features as late as July 7th, leading some to conclude that LRS had survived the encounter.
These two images recorded through a filter sensitive to methane shows the remnants of the LRS on July 7 (top), which had disappeared by July 10 (bottom).
Christopher Go

However, amateur Christopher Go of Cebu City, Philippines, captured high-resolution pictures on July 10 that appear to put an end to the speculation. His image shows no sign of the LRS, and methane images show only the GRS and Oval BA.

Major observatories including the Hubble Space Telescope booked time to capture the happenings this week. Amy Simon-Miller of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center says "Little spots typically appear at the GRS' latitude, and eventually get eaten. Usually, they move faster than the GRS and approach it from the east. What's different with this one is that the GRS caught up with it, it got pulled around the south of the GRS, and then up to the east side. We'll have to model the timing and other aspects of the HST data to see what it can tell us."

Events like this were beyond the reach of all but a small handful of amateurs as recently as a decade ago. With the advent of highly sensitive specialized webcams, more and more amateurs are able to contribute valuable data to the study of our neighboring worlds.

Original here

Mars bake test hastened after oven short circuit

This artist rendition provided by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory shows the Phoenix lander on the arctic plains of Mars digging a trench through the upper soil layer. The Phoenix Mars lander suffered a short circuit several weeks ago to one of ...
This artist rendition provided by NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory shows the Phoenix lander on the arctic plains of Mars digging a trench through the upper soil layer. The Phoenix Mars lander suffered a short circuit several weeks ago to one of its eight tiny test ovens. Scientists fear another outage could render the crucial equipment useless.(AP Photo/NASA-JPL, Cory Waste)

AP) -- Will the Mars lander's next baking test of soil and ice be its last? Scientists worry that it could be, thanks to an electrical glitch that threatens the $420 million quest to find the chemical ingredients for life near the Martian north pole.
The Phoenix Mars lander suffered a short circuit several weeks ago to one of its eight tiny test ovens. Scientists fear another outage could render the crucial equipment useless.
So they've speeded up their mission, skipping plans for a slow, deliberate set of heating experiments and moving ahead for the dramatic conclusion.

The change in game plan is the biggest challenge yet for a mission that got off to an impressive start.

Phoenix survived a 10-month journey through space and nailed a perfect touchdown on May 25 on the polar plains. It has wowed scientists by touching ice and finding Earth-like soil.

But it's a complicated, odd contraption. The lander's equipment includes the eight miniature ovens, two microscopes and a chemistry lab to conduct experiments. It also has a long arm for digging trenches. Plans called for it to take several scoops of Martian dirt and ice at different depths over a period of weeks. Each sample was to be baked in one of the ovens, with tests run on the vapors produced to check for the carbon compounds essential to life.

Scientists wanted to understand how the soil chemistry changed according to depth, an analysis that would help them when they test the Martian ice.

"We really feel we need a slow deliberate process to make sure that when we go for the pay dirt - that icy soil down at the bottom of the trench - that we're fully prepared to do it properly," chief scientist Peter Smith of the University of Arizona in Tucson said last month after confirming the presence of ice at the landing site.
Last week, Smith said in a statement: "We are taking the most conservative approach and treating the next sample to (the oven) as possibly our last."

After the outage that zapped an oven, the science team decided to skip several steps. In recent days, they've been working toward their big ice dig.

This effort too is encountering snags.

Earlier this week, Phoenix used the blade at the end of its robotic arm scoop to chip at the hard ice. None of the ice bits made it into the scoop, forcing scientists to break out a power tool to drill into the ice. The next oven test could happen as early as next week.

Researchers who have no role in the three-month project said they would be saddened if the oven became disabled since it's the only instrument that can detect carbon.

Planetary scientist David Paige of the University of California, Los Angeles, said it makes sense for mission scientists to go after the ice. But he worried that studying frozen water without a full knowledge of the soil could make it difficult to interpret the results.

"It's a tough predicament," said Paige, who is not part of the mission. "The fact that they managed to land in such a promising locale makes the potential loss all that more difficult."

NASA's checklist for "full mission success" requires Phoenix to analyze at least three oven samples. So far, the lander has completed only one - enough to achieve "minimum mission success" last weekend, said project manager Barry Goldstein of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.

Results from the first heating of soil detected water vapor and carbon dioxide, but no signs of carbon.

It was that first oven test that led to the problematic electrical short. The scoop dumped so much soil that it clogged a mesh screen filter over the oven. To break up the dirt, technicians shook the instrument for several days.

Engineers think the shaking caused the short circuit, and an independent engineering group reported that the problem could happen again if an oven is turned on.

Goldstein of JPL said he doesn't expect future problems, but the team did not want to chance it.

"It's not that we expect one to occur," said Goldstein of another possible short. "It's just us being very cautious."

© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Original here

The Brain How Your Brain Can Control Time

by Carl Zimmer

clocksflickr/FABIOLA MEDEIROS

Whenever I lose my watch, I take my sweet time to get a new one. I savor the freedom from my compulsion to carve my days into minute-size fragments. But my liberty has its limits. Even if I get rid of the clock strapped to my wrist, I cannot escape the one in my head. The human brain keeps time, from the flicker of milliseconds to the languorous unfurling of hours and days and years. It’s the product of hundreds of millions of years of evolution.

Keeping track of time is essential for perceiving what’s happening around us and responding to it. In order to tell where a voice is coming from, we time how long it takes for the sound to reach both ears. And when we respond to the voice by speaking ourselves, we need precise timing to make ourselves understood. Our muscles in the mouth, tongue, and throat must all twitch in carefully timed choreography. It’s just a brief pause that makes the difference between “Excuse me while I kiss the sky” and “Excuse me while I kiss this guy.”

Scientists are finding that telling time is also important to animals. At the University of Edinburgh, researchers built fake flowers with sugar inside to reveal how hummingbirds tell time. After hummingbirds drink nectar from real flowers, it takes time for the flowers to replenish their supply. The Scottish researchers refilled some of their fake flowers every 10 minutes and others every 20. Hummingbirds quickly learned just how long they had to wait before coming back to each kind. Scientists at the University of Georgia have discovered that rats do an excellent job of telling time too. They can be conditioned to wait two days after a meal to poke their noses into a trough and be rewarded with food.

For 40 years, psychologists thought that humans and animals kept time with a biological version of a stopwatch. Somewhere in the brain, a regular series of pulses was being generated. When the brain needed to time some event, a gate opened and the pulses moved into some kind of counting device.

One reason this clock model was so compelling: Psychologists could use it to explain how our perception of time changes. Think about how your feeling of time slows down as you see a car crash on the road ahead, how it speeds up when you’re wheeling around a dance floor in love. Psychologists argued that these experiences tweaked the pulse generator, speeding up the flow of pulses or slowing it down.

Staring at an angry face for five seconds feels longer than staring at a neutral one.

But the fact is that the biology of the brain just doesn’t work like the clocks we’re familiar with. Neurons can do a good job of producing a steady series of pulses. They don’t have what it takes to count pulses accurately for seconds or minutes or more. The mistakes we make in telling time also raise doubts about the clock models. If our brains really did work that way, we ought to do a better job of estimating long periods of time than short ones. Any individual pulse from the hypothetical clock would be a little bit slow or fast. Over a short time, the brain would accumulate just a few pulses, and so the error could be significant. The many pulses that pile up over long stretches of time should cancel their errors out. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. As we estimate longer stretches of time, the range of errors gets bigger as well.

CLICK CLOCK
These days, new kinds of experiments using everything from computer simulations to brain scans to genetically engineered mice are helping unlock the nature of mental time. And their results show that the brain does not use a single stopwatch. Instead, it has several ways to tell time, and none of them seems to work like a conventional clock.

Dean Buonomano, a neuroscientist at UCLA, argues that in order to perceive time in fractions of a second, our brains tell time as if they were observing ripples on a pond. Let’s say you are listening to a chirping bird. Two of its chirps are separated by a tenth of a second. The first chirp triggers a spike of voltage in some auditory neurons, which in turn causes some other neurons to fire as well. The signals reverberate among the neurons for about half a second, just as it takes time for the ripples from a rock thrown into a pond to disappear. When the second chirp comes, the neurons have not yet settled down. As a result, the second chirp creates a different pattern of signals. Buonomano argues that our brains can compare the second pattern to the first to tell how much time has passed. The brain needs no clock because time is encoded in the way neurons behave.

If Buonomano turns out to be right, he will have explained only our fastest time telling, because after half a second, the brain’s ripples dissipate. On the scale of seconds to hours, the brain must use some other strategy. Warren Meck of Duke University argues that the brain measures long stretches of time by producing pulses. But the brain does not then count the pulses in the way a clock does. Instead, Meck suspects, it does something more elegant. It listens to the pulses as if they were music.

It’s possible that we reverse time in our memories in order to focus our brains on goals.

Meck first began to develop his musical model when he discovered how to rob rats of their perception of time. He had only to destroy certain clumps of neurons deep inside the brain. Some of these neurons, known as medium spiny neurons, are unlike any other neurons in the brain. Each one is linked to as many as 30,000 other neurons. And those linked neurons can be found throughout the cortex, the outer rind of the brain that handles much of the brain’s most sophisticated information processing. Certain neurons come from regions that handle vision, others from areas that apply rules to what we perceive, and so on. By receiving so many signals from all over the brain, Meck believes, the medium spiny neurons give us a sense of time.

Imagine you are listening to a 10-second tone. At the beginning of the tone, neurons around your cortex reset themselves, so that they all begin to fire in sync. But some fire faster than others, and so at any moment some are active and some are quiet. From one moment to the next, a medium spiny neuron receives a unique pattern of signals from the neurons that link to it. The pattern changes like chords on a piano. When the 10 seconds are over, the medium spiny neuron can simply “listen” to the chord to tell how much time has passed.

Meck has found support for his model by recording the electrical activities of neurons and in other researchers’ studies on people with a skewed sense of time. Certain neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, control pulsing neurons. Drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamine alter the brain by flooding it with dopamine, and studies have shown that they also change the second-to-second perception of time. In one experiment at UCLA, reported in 2007, scientists rang a bell after 53 seconds of silence. Healthy people estimated on average that 67 seconds had passed. Stimulant addicts guessed 91 seconds. Other drugs have the opposite effect on dopamine and compress the subjective experience of time.

IN REAL TIME
Even in a healthy brain, time is elastic. Staring at an angry face for five seconds feels longer than staring at a neutral one. It may be no coincidence that the pulse-generating neurons are directly wired into regions of the brain that handle emotionally charged sights and sounds. And recent experiments by Amelia Hunt at Harvard University hint that we may actually backdate our mental time line every time we move our eyes.

Recently, Hunt had people stare straight ahead with a ticking clock off to one side. She asked people to move their eyes over to the clock and make a note of the time when they had done so. On average, they reported seeing the clock about four hundredths of a second before their eyes actually arrived there.

Moving time backward may actually serve us well, by letting us cope with an imperfect nervous system. Each of our retinas has a small patch of densely packed, light-sensitive cells called the fovea. In order to get a detailed picture of our surroundings, we have to jerk our eyes around several times a second so that the fovea can scan them. On its own, this stream of signals from our eyes would produce a jarring series of jump cuts. Our brains manufacture the illusion of a seamless flow of reality. In the course of that editing, we may need to fudge the time line—both in anticipation of an event and after the fact.

But the most radical reworking of time may come as we inscribe it in our memories. We recall not just what happened but when. We can recall how much time has passed since an event occurred by tapping into our memories. Injuries and surgeries that destroy a particular part of the brain can give some hints about how the brain records time in memory. French scientists in 2007 reported their study of a group of patients who had suffered damage to a region known as the left temporal lobe. The patients watched a documentary, and a familiar object appeared on the screen, then reappeared a few minutes later. The patients had to guess how much time had passed. On average, the patients thought an 8-minute period was roughly 13. (Normal subjects were off by only about a minute.)

These experiments are helping scientists zero in on the regions of the brain that store memories of time. Exactly how those regions record time is still mysterious. It’s one thing to listen in on the brain’s music, recognizing chords that mark the passage of five minutes. But how do the brain’s memory-related neurons then archive those five minutes so that they can be recalled later?

FILE-SAVE, FILE-OPEN
At Humboldt University of Berlin in Ger­many, scientists have been building a model of how memory may store time. When neurons produce a regular cycle of signals, some signals come a little sooner and some come a little later. The researchers propose that as neurons pass these signals along, they can add tiny advances, some bigger than others. With these tiny wobbles, the brain can compress memories of time from several seconds down to hundredths of a second—a small enough package to store for later retrieval.

As it stores time in memories, the brain may alter it in another way that is even more radical. It may record time so that our brains recall events in backward order. Scientists at MIT discovered reverse memories in an experiment on rats. They had rats run down a track and then stop to eat food at the end. When rats (and humans) become more familiar with a place, individual neurons start becoming active when the rats reach particular spots. The scientists identified “place cells” that fired when the rats moved to different spots along the track. When the rats stopped to eat, the scientists eavesdropped on their brains again. They heard the place neurons fire again—probably as the memories of the track were becoming stronger in the rat brain. But the place neurons at the end of the track fired first, and the ones at the beginning of the track fired last. It’s possible that we reverse time in our memories in order to focus our brains on goals (for the MIT rats, the goal was the food at the end of the track).

We are not free from time, in other words, but we are not its slaves. We stretch and twist it to serve our own needs. Time, in other words, is just a tool.

Original here