TRAPPIST-1 b Measured by Webb: Hot, Airless

Posted on April 1, 2023 by Brian H. Gill
NASA/JPL-Caltech/M. Gillon (Univ. of Lige, Belgium), Animator Amy Moran (GST) [Lead]'s image: TRAPPIST-1 planetary system and infrared observations from the Spitzer Space Telescope IRAC. (released March 22, 2017)
TRAPPIST-1 exoplanets: (left) infrared observations from the Spitzer Space Telescope IRAC’
(right) illustration of the TRAPPIST-1 planetary system’s orbits. (NASA/JPL-Caltech/et al. 2017)

The TRAPPIST-1 planetary system is news again, this time because we’ve taken the innermost planet’s temperature.

That, by itself, isn’t newsworthy. We’ve been using infrared observations to learn how hot exoplanets are at least since 2006.1

What makes the latest observations special is that they’re the first time scientists have measured a comparatively small, cool exoplanet’s temperature.

That’s what I’ll be talking about this week, along with whatever else comes to mind.

Top Three Multiplanetary Systems

NASA/JPL-Caltech's illustration: TRAPPIST-1 and Solar planetary systems, TRAPPIST-1 system enlarged 25x. The green areas are the two stars' habitable zones, where liquid water could exist on an Earth-like planet. (2017)
TRAPPIST-1 planetary system, enlarged 25x, and inner Solar System.
Green areas are the two star’s habitable zones, where liquid water could exist on an Earth-like planet.

This week’s news is a big deal partly because it involves the TRAPPIST-1 planetary system. Only two planetary systems have more planets than TRAPPIST-1.2

Solar System

ESO/O. Furtak's illustration: comparing the orbits TRAPPIST-1's planets with the Galilean moons of Jupiter and the inner Solar System. (February 22, 2017) see https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1706b/One of them is our Solar System, with eight confirmed planets. We’ve got 10, if you count Ceres and Pluto.

Ceres was called a planet after its discovery in 1801, partly because it was where Johann Bode said a planet should be.

By the 1860s, astronomers had spotted Pallas and other asteroids — Herschell coined “asteroid”, “star-like”, as a generic term — and they’d decided that asteroids weren’t like the other planets.

Then the IAU (International Astronomical Union) defined “planet” as something that orbits the Sun, is massive enough to be nearly round, and has “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit.

That was in 2006. The IAU definition reclassified Ceres and Pluto as dwarf planets.

The IAU’s definition intentionally doesn’t include exoplanets, but the IUGS (International Union of Geological Sciences) definitions do. There’s no IUGS official definition of planet. They’ve got several unofficial ones, plus the IAU definition.

Complicated? Yes. And I’m pretty sure we’re nowhere near the end of these discussions.

Now, back to TRAPPIST-1’s planetary system. Three or four of TRAPPIST-1’s planets lie in its habitable zone: e, f and g; or maybe d, e, f and g.

I’ve read that using very optimistic definitions, and applying them to limited parts of the planets, all seven might have liquid water and air somewhere on or near their surfaces.

The Solar System’s habitable zone includes one to four planets, depending on which definitions are in play: Earth, or Venus, Earth, Mars and Ceres.3

Kepler-90 Planetary System, Upsilon Andromedae d and back to TRAPPIST-1

NASA/Ames Research Center/Wendy Stenzel's illustration: 'Kepler-90 Planets Orbit Close to Their Star'. Kepler=90 and Solar System orbits compared. (December 14, 2017)
Wendy Stenzel’s illustration, comparing Kepler-90 and Solar System orbits. (2017)
NASA/Ames Research Center/Wendy Stenzel's illustration, comparing sizes of Kepler-90 and Solar System planets. (December 14, 2017)
Wendy Stenzel’s illustration, comparing Kepler-90 and Solar System planet sizes. (2017)

The other planetary system with eight confirmed planets is Kepler-90’s.

Kepler-90 is a main-sequence G or F star that’s about 2,550 or 2,800 light-years out, in the general direction of Gamma Draconis and Kappa Cygni.

Its distance depends on who’s talking, which may account for some sources saying it’s spectral class G and others class F. Kepler-90’s surface temperature is just over 6,000 K, the dividing line between spectral class G and F stars.

The Kepler-90 planetary system is just like the Solar System, except for how it’s different. The inner Kepler-90 worlds are small and presumably rocky, with gas giants farther out. On the other hand, all eight Kepler-90 planets have orbits smaller than Earth’s.

The star’s outermost known planet, Kepler-90 h, is in the system’s habitable zone. But since it’s a gas giant, with a mass and diameter a bit bigger than Jupiter’s, it’s not a place where we’ll be looking for life.

If Kepler-90 h has a large, rocky moon; that’s another story. Some scientists figure an exomoon might share a magnetic field with its planet, like Earth’s moon did at one point.

Then there’s Upsilon Andromedae d, a super-Jupiter in an odd-but-maybe-habitable orbit. And that’s another topic.

Getting back to TRAPPIST-1 and its planets, the inner worlds (b, c and d) may not be as habitable as they seemed at first glance.

In 2017, some scientists said that TRAPPIST-1’s magnetic field might set up induction heating in the three innermost worlds.4

In any case, they’re on the starside of the the habitable zone, and that finally brings me back to TRAPPIST-1 and this week’s news.

Taking TRAPPIST-1 b’s Temperature With Webb’s MIRI

NASA/ESA/CSA/Joseph Olmsted (STScI)'s illustration (Science by Thomas P. Greene (NASA Ames), Taylor Bell (BAERI), Elsa Ducrot (CEA), Pierre-Olivier Lagage (CEA)): comparing TRAPPIST-1b's dayside temperature (measured using JWST Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI)) to computer models. This illustration shows what the temperature would be under various conditions. The temperature of the dayside of Mercury is also shown for reference. (March 27, 2023) see https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2023/110/01GW5FWF39VDAZH7MNDEZM1EQV
J. Olmsted (STScI)’s illustration, showing TRAPPIST-1b’s dayside temperature. (2023)

Calling TRAPPIST-1b “small and … cool” is accurate, since they’re both comparative terms.

TRAPPIST-1b is smaller and cooler than hot gas giants like KELT-9b and WASP-39b, and much cooler than WD 1145+017 b, a planet that’s being vaporized by its star.5

“NASA’s Webb Measures the Temperature of a Rocky Exoplanet“
Laura Betz, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center; Margaret Carruthers, Christine Pulliam, Space Telescope Science Institute(STSI); Solar System and Beyond, NASA (March 27, 2023)

“An international team of researchers has used NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope to measure the temperature of the rocky exoplanet TRAPPIST-1 b. The measurement is based on the planet’s thermal emission: heat energy given off in the form of infrared light detected by Webb’s Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI). The result indicates that the planet’s dayside has a temperature of about 500 kelvins (roughly 450 degrees Fahrenheit) and suggests that it has no significant atmosphere.

This is the first detection of any form of light emitted by an exoplanet as small and as cool as the rocky planets in our own solar system. The result marks an important step in determining whether planets orbiting small active stars like TRAPPIST-1 can sustain atmospheres needed to support life. It also bodes well for Webb’s ability to characterize temperate, Earth-sized exoplanets using MIRI….
[emphasis mine]

“…The team used a technique called secondary eclipse photometry, in which MIRI measured the change in brightness from the system as the planet moved behind the star….”

TRAPPIST-1 b is the system’s innermost planet: orbiting only 1,726,000 kilometers 1,072,500 miles, from TRAPPIST-1. Although TRAPPIST-1 is a very cool star, nobody expected the inner planet to be Earth-like in terms of temperature.

It’s quite Earth-like in other ways, though. Its diameter is around 1⅛ times our world’s, with a mass of about 1.37 Earths and about 110% Earth’s surface gravity.

But even before the new Webb data, we knew TRAPPIST-1 b wasn’t going to be Earth 2.0. An old equilibrium temperature estimate for the planet was 397 kelvins, 256° Fahrenheit.

I’m not sure how the newly-measured dayside temperature, around 500 kelvins, 227° Centigrade, 450° Fahrenheit, fits with the 2017 induction heating model. It’s hot, but not as hot as Mercury’s high temperature: 700 kelvins, 427° Centigrade, 800° F.

A couple more points before I start talking about stars, art and traffic lights.

① This phrase, “…as cool as the rocky planets in our own solar system…”, jumped out at me as an example of how much we’ve learned in the last few decades. It hasn’t been all that long since Mercury and Venus ranked as very hot planets.

② If TRAPPIST-1 b had a significant atmosphere, more than the wisp that Mercury has, it’d have winds: which would carry heat to its nightside, cooling the daylight part. Since that’s not (apparently) happening, the odds are very good that TRAPPIST-1 b is airless.6

Blackbody Radiation, Red Stars and Astronomical Art

NASA/ESA/CSA/J. Olmsted (STScI)'s illustration: TRAPPIST-1 b, innermost of seven known planets in the TRAPPIST-1 system, orbiting at a distance of 0.011 AU, completing one circuit in just 1.51 Earth-days. (March 27, 2023)
Artist’s illustration of TRAPPIST-1 b, orbiting an ultra-cool red dwarf star.

“Blackbody radiation” shows up pretty often when scientists talk about something that’s very hot.

The term makes sense, sort of, since it’s the spectral radiance curve of thermal radiation emitted by a black body. A black body, in this context, is an ideal object that perfectly absorbs all electromagnetic radiation.

And this makes sense???

Look, it’s Friday as I write this: it’s getting late, and here’s a sample of the academese I’m trying to translate into English:

“…The specific (radiative) intensity is a quantity that describes the rate of radiative transfer of energy at P1, a point of space with coordinates x, at time t. It is a scalar-valued function of four variables, customarily written as
I (x, t ; r1, ν)…”
(Spectral radiance, Wikipedia)

Please bear with me. This actually does relate to TRAPPIST-1 and space art.

Thermal Radiation and the Ultraviolet Catastrophe!

Darth Kule's illustration: 'Black body spectral radiance curves for various temperatures after Planck, and comparison with the classical theory of Rayleigh-Jeans'. (June 10, 2010)Blackbody radiation and black bodies, the sort physicists talk about, don’t really exist.

A black body perfectly absorbs all electromagnetic radiation.

Electromagnetic radiation is what physics buffs call waves in an electromagnetic field: from low-end radio wavelengths measured in megameters to gamma rays with wavelengths of about a picometer. I’ll call it Em radiation to save space.

A helium atom is about 62 picometers across, a megameter is a thousand kilometers. We’re talking about extremes here.

Thermal radiation is Em radiation that stuff emits when it’s above absolute zero.

The hotter something is, the more thermal radiation it emits; and the shorter the peak of its spectral radiance curve.

Knew I forgot something. A spectral radiance curve is what you get when you put a continuous spectrum on a graph with intensity along one axis and wavelength on another.

Back in 1900, someone using classical physics crunched numbers for thermal radiation. The numbers showed that something that’s as hot as the sun would emit an infinite amount of energy in the shorter wavelengths.

We’re still here, so obviously there was something off about classical physics.

Theoretical physicist Paul Ehrenfest called this doesn’t-match-observations thing the “ultraviolet catastrophe” in 1911.

“Ultraviolet Catastrophe” might make a dandy title for a disaster film, if more folks knew their history and science. And that’s yet another topic.

Classical physics is still a pretty close fit with reality for many everyday phenomena.

Folks like Ehrenfest, Plank and others you don’t hear about every day developed quantum mechanics,7 and I’d better start talking about heat, colors and stars.

Star Light, Star Not-So-Bright

NASA/JPL-Caltech/T. Pyle (IPAC)'s illustration: a possible surface of Trappist-1f (February 22, 2017) see https://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/image/ssc2017-01c-surface-of-trappist-1f ssc2017-01c
T. Pyle (IPAC)’s illustration, showing what TRAPPIST-1f’s surface might look like. (2017)
Bhutajata's illustration: 'Color emitted by a black body on a linear scale from 800 kelvins to 12200 kelvins, given by Planck's Law, assuming a monitor properly calibrated to sRGB color space - D65 white point - 2.2 gamma. Colors are out of gamut below 1934 K, so those have been desaturated to fit in sRGB color space (relative mapping)....' (October 11, 2015)
Bhutajata’s illustration: colors emitted by a black body, from 800 to 12,200 kelvins. (2015)

Darth Kule's illustration: 'Black body spectral radiance curves for various temperatures after Planck, and comparison with the classical theory of Rayleigh-Jeans'. (June 10, 2010)Red dwarf stars are main sequence stars with surface temperatures between 2,400 and 3,700 kelvins.

That’s a lot cooler than our star’s 5,770 kelvins, so red dwarfs emit much of their energy in the infrared.

And they would look redder than our sun. Redder? More reddish? Never mind.

But I’m not convinced that even an ultra-cool red dwarf like TRAPPIST-1 — 2,566 kelvins at its surface, give or take 26 — would have the stoplight-red color its given in some astronomical art.

Some illustrations of TRAPPIST-1’s planetary system have the star looking like a traffic light, while others give it the color of a low-watt incandescent light bulb. Why? That, I don’t know.

Maybe the ‘cosmic traffic light’ illustrations happened because someone told the artist to make sure that the star looks red: so that viewers will realize it’s a “red” dwarf star.

Given a choice, I’d show TRAPPIST-1 the way it would look to someone standing on one of its planets, or in a visiting ship. Something like T. Pyle’s 2017 illustration.

We don’t know whether there’s an atmosphere or water on any of the planets. But we do know that TRAPPIST-1 is about as hot as a slightly-dim incandescent bulb’s filament.8

I figure it’d have about the same color.

Coming Next Week: Possible Interiors of TRAPPIST-1’s Planets

From ESO/M. Kornmesser/spaceengine.org, via Space.com, used w/o permission: 'An artist's impression of the view from a planet in the TRAPPIST-1 system.'And that’s all I have time for this week.

One thing I’d meant to cover was informed speculation about what TRAPPIST-1’s planets are made of.

So unless something major comes up (yes, I have been reading headlines: but don’t have anything new to say about the usual mess), I’ll probably have another ‘TRAPPIST-1’ post ready for next week.

That’s the plan, anyway. Meanwhile, here’s the usual set of links:

1 Infrared astronomy:

2 Pluralities of planets:

3 Planets, asteroids and definitions:

NASA, ESA, and A. Feild (STScI). Artist's depiction of Upsilon Andromedae planetary system. (2010)4 Moons, magnetic fields and more:

5 Comparative syntax (I’m a recovering English teacher), and planetary extremes:

6 James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), infrared astronomy and planets:

7 More than you need or may want to know about:

8 Colors, temperatures and stars:

Posted in Science News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Active Volcano on Venus: Before and After Images

Posted on March 25, 2023 by Brian H. Gill
European Space Agency's infographic: 'Evidence for active volcanoes on Venus' (June 18, 2015)
European Space Agency’s 2015 infographic: “Evidence for active volcanoes on Venus”.

Venus is dead as a doornail as far as life is concerned. Life as we know it, at any rate, and already I’m drifting off-topic.

Geologically, though, we’ve known that there’s still metaphorical life in Venus. Or was, until very recently.

Orbiters have sent back evidence of geologically-recent volcanic activity, including images of shield volcanoes and lava flows.

But we had no direct evidence of a volcano that’s active now. Until scientists sifted through data recorded and stored in the early 1990s.

Observing Venus: Five Millennia in About 700 Words.

Schematic diagram of Peter Apian's (Petrus Apianus) cosmology, largely reflecting Aristotelian physics and cosmology. From Peter Apian's 'Cosmographia,' annotated by Gemma Frisius. (1524) Reproduced in Edward Grant's 'Celestial Orbs in the Latin Middle Ages.' (1987)We’ve known about the planet Venus for a very long time.

Most of the lights in Earth’s sky stay put, relative to each other, and they all spin around the celestial sphere’s poles.

Seven — Venus, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, the moon and the sun — don’t.

Venus never gets very far from the sun, so it’s only seen in the morning or evening sky.

Some folks, like the ancient Greeks, had one name for Venus when it was a morning star and another for the evening star.

Those names go back at least to Hesiod’s day, two and three quarters millennia back.

But before that, around the time construction started on Stonehenge, folks in what we call Mesopotamia had a single name for Venus: Inanna. That was around 3000 B.C., during what archaeology buffs call the Jemdet Nasr period.

We know about the 3000 B.C. Venus observations, thanks to a cylinder seal found near today’s Jalibah, Iraq.

The next Venus-related record I know of is what we call the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa.

Ammisaduqa was Babylon’s king around the time Egypt’s Thirteenth Dynasty was winding down, when the Late Bronze Age Collapse was still four centuries in the future.

The last I heard, academics still haven’t decided whether Homer’s epics were based on actual events, but for some reason there’s a consensus that the Late Bronze Age Collapse was real.1 And that’s another topic.

Telescopic Views

Frank R. Paul's 'The Man From Venus', Fantastic Adventures back cover. (July 1939) via David S. Zondy's Tales of Future Past [http://davidszondy.com/futurepast/man-from-venus.html], used w/o permissionNext — skipping lightly over Aristotle, Gan De, Ptolemy, Abd al-Rahman al Sufi and Copernicus — in 1761, Mikhail Lomonosov noticed that Venus has an atmosphere.

I gather that he saw a fuzzy arc during the 1761 transit of Venus, and that academics were debating what he actually saw until at least 2012.

Lomonosov used a telescope. So did Giovanni Domenico Cassini, Johann Hieronymus Schröter and Chester Lyman. Not the same telescope, of course.

Cassini and Schröter figured that a day on Venus lasted about 24 hours, based on markings they saw. Or thought they saw.

Until the mid to late 19th century, when John Draper and others began taking photographs through telescopes, astronomers made observations by patiently looking through their telescopes, sometimes for hours.

The human brain is very good at pattern recognition. So good that sometimes it shows us patterns that aren’t really there. Pareidolia is a five-dollar word for the sort of perception that lets us see the Man in the Moon, happy electrical outlets and Martian canals.

Although I haven’t confirmed it, I’m guessing that Cassini and Schröter observed something akin to Schiaparelli’s canali. All we can see of Venus in visible light is a nearly-featureless crescent or disk, depending on where it is in its orbit.

Starting in the 1920s, we could pick up a few cloud features by observing with ultraviolet-sensitive cameras.2

Pulp Fiction and the Radar Astronomers

Frank R. Paul's 'A City on Venus', Amazing Stories back cover. (January 1941) via David S. Zondy's Tales of Future Past [davidszondy.com/futurepast/venus.html], used w/o permissionMeanwhile, pulp science fiction magazines were entertaining and inspiring America’s youth with tales that I’d call reality-based. But not realistic.

“…About the only thing that astronomers knew about Venus in the ’30s was that it was smaller than Earth, had a a bit more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and a heck of a lot of clouds. In pure run-with-it logic the clouds meant lot of water and the CO2 meant an atmosphere like prehistoric Earth. Conclusion: Carboniferous swamps over the whole planet inhabited by dinosaurs.
Also Munchkin villages….”
(Venus, Tales of Future Past, David S. Zondy)

Getting back to the non-fiction planet, Schiaparelli said he’d seen a few features on Venus. His best estimate was that it rotated once every 224.7 days, same as its orbital period.

Percival Lowell said pretty much the same thing. Then, from November 1902 to March 1903, Vesto Slipher collected spectrograms of Venus, looking for Doppler shift. He’d been working at the Lowell Observatory.

Lowell said that Slipher’s analysis confirmed his and Schiaparelli’s conclusion. Slipher was more cautious. He said he found “no evidence that Venus has a short period of rotation,” and that “so fast a spin as 24 hours could not have escaped detection.”3

Another big step in Venus studies was radar astronomy. It’s like radio astronomy, except that it bounces radio waves off places like the moon and Venus.

In 1944, Zoltán Lajos Bay started testing a radar telescope at the Research Laboratory of the United Incandescent Lamp and Electrical Co. Ltd., (“Tungsram”), Ujpest.

Ujpest is a district in Budapest. But more to the point, World War II was in progress. So it wasn’t until 1946 that they bounced a signal off the moon. By the 1960s, we’d learned that Venus turns on its axis more slowly than it goes around the sun.

Scientists got radar images of Venus in the 1970s, using the Arecibo Observatory’s thousand-foot dish. They found three bright patches: Alpha and Beta Regio in 1964 and Maxwell Montes in 1967.4

Missions to Venus

The first successful interplanetary mission, Mariner 2, flew by Venus in 1962.

The Venera 4 lander stopped transmitting when atmospheric pressure rose to 22 times Earth’s. That was in 1967. Venera 7’s lander made it all the way to the surface in 1970.

Mariner 4 did a flyby of Venus on its way to Mercury, the Venera 9 lander sent back the first pictures from the surface of Venus. In 1978, the Pioneer Venus Orbiter began mapping the Venusian surface.5

SAR, Science and Magellan

NASA SAR Handbook's illustration: 'Strong scattering in HH indicates a predominance of double-bounce scattering (e.g., stemmy vegetation, manmade structures), while strong VV relates to rough surface scattering (e.g., bare ground, water), and spatial variations in dual polarization indicate the distribution of volume scatterers (e.g., vegetation and high-penetration soil types such as sand or other dry porous soils).' (2019)
Cool SAR stuff: using polarized microwaves to ‘see’ what’s on a surface. (NASA)

NASA SAR Handbook's illustration: 'Geometry of observations used to form the synthetic aperture for target P at along-track position x = 0.' (2019)And that, finally, brings me to the Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar mission.

A 1978 study said that Synthetic Aperture Radar, SAR, would give resolution down to 200 meters.

Then budget problems and the Challenger disaster happened. Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar became Magellan, and was carried to low Earth orbit on the Space Shuttle Atlantis in 1989.

When I showed my oldest daughter an illustration of how SAR works, she said “MATH!“, so I’ll skip the “Synthetic Aperture LSA=BetaR0” stuff. Besides, I’m better with words than with numbers.

Basically, radar resolution depends on the ratio of the wavelength used to the length of the radar’s antenna.

For example, to get 10 meter resolution with a wavelength of around 5 centimeters, you’d need a radar antenna about 4,250 meters long. That’s just shy of two and two thirds miles, which isn’t even close to being practical. Not for a spacecraft.

Magellan’s SAR used 12.6 centimeter radar pulses, but — MATH!

The point is that by collecting several signals as a satellite moves — say, from point X1 to point X2 on that diagram — SAR radar gets resolution that’s as good as it would be if it was using one antenna that’s as long as X1-X2.

From September 1990 to October 1994, Magellan gathered data and sent it back to Earth.6 That’s a whole mess of data, and scientists are still sifting through it.

Active(?) Volcano on Venus: Maat Mons

NASA/JPL-Caltech's computer-simulated global map of Venus, showing location of Maat Mons. (March 17, 2023)
One hemisphere of Venus, with Maat Mons area outlined. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)

One big plus of data from orbiters, Magellan included, is that they can show what an area looks like at different times.

They’ve also let scientists know that the amount of sulfur dioxide and methane in the Venusian atmosphere varies considerably. That’s been a metaphorical smoking gun, evidence that volcanoes might be active on Venus.

But there’s considerable distance between “might be” and “is”.

It took three decades for someone to notice Magellan’s ‘before and after’ SAR snapshots of volcanic vents on Maat Mons.

That seems like a long time. But Magellan sent back a lot of data. Plus, Venus is nearly as large as Earth: so I figure it’s small wonder spotting the two images took time.

Maat Mons is the second-highest mountain and highest volcano on Venus.7 It’s also one of the planet’s volcanoes that scientists thought might still be active. And now we have what looks like solid evidence of a recent eruption.

“Volcanic activity on Venus spotted in radar images, scientists say“
Ari Daniel, NPR (March 17, 2023)

“Researchers scouring decades-old spacecraft data have found clear signs of recent volcanic activity on Venus. The findings, published in the journal Science, reveal not only that the planet’s surface is currently a turbulent place, but offer insights into its geological past and future.

“By any measure, Venus is a hellscape: crushing pressures, a toxic atmosphere, and surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead. It’s like a scene lifted straight from Dante’s Inferno.

“It’s ‘my favorite planet,’ says Robert Herrick, a planetary scientist at the University of Alaska Fairbanks….”

From the Magellan Archives: a Changing Volcanic Vent —

Robert R. Herrick, Scott Hensley; Science's image: 'Fig. 1. Topography and SAR image of the study area on Venus. The colors indicate elevations, which are measured relative to the mean planetary radius from gridded Magellan altimetry. The x and y axes indicate planetary longitude and latitude, respectively. The background grayscale images are from cycle 1 east-looking SAR. The black rectangle indicates the area shown in Fig. 2.' (March 15, 2023)
Figure 1: the study area in Alta Regio, Venus. The black rectangle shows Figure 2’s area. (March 2023)
Robert R. Herrick, Scott Hensley; Science's image: 'Fig. 2. Radar images of a vent that has changed shape. (A) East-looking cycle 1 image and (B) west-looking cycle 2 image of the changed vent and its surroundings. In the cycle 1 image, the vent appears nearly circular and deep with steep walls. In the cycle 2 image, the vent appears larger, irregular in outline, shallower, and nearly filled. The dashed yellow line outlines radar-bright lava flows visible in the cycle 2 image that were not apparent in the cycle 1 image. (C and D) The same images indicating the manually selected match points (purple dots) that were used to generate relative elevations (overlain in color) and to orthorectify the images. The black box in (C) indicates the extent of the unrectified images shown in (A) and (B). All images are shown in a sinusoidal projection with a projection longitude of 165.359°W.' (March 15, 2023)
Figure 2: Close look at Maat Mons, scanned by Magellan: first (A) from the east, then (B) from the west.
Dotted yellow lines in (B) are new, bright lava flows.
Black box in (C) shows extent of images (A) and (B).
(C) and (D) show match points (purple dots) used to get elevations (overlaid in color) (March 2023)

“I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.“
Blaise Pascal, Provincial Letters: Letter XVI (4 December 1656)
via Wikiquote, unknown translator

I’m not in Pascal’s class, which is why I skipped over Synthetic Aperture LSA=BetaR0 and talked about wavelengths and distance.

But I’ve got the same issue with time and writing. Ideally, I’d boil down the following “…differences in imaging geometry…posteruptive vent…” excerpt. But I spent more time than I might have on that five-millennia ‘watching Venus’ summary.

So give this excerpt from the “Surface changes…” article in the Science journal, I’ll show a couple more “before and after” images, taken eight months apart in 1991, and move along.

“Surface changes observed on a Venusian volcano during the Magellan mission“
Robert R. Herrick, Scott Hensley; Science (March 15, 2023)

Abstract
“Venus has a geologically young surface, but it is unknown whether it has ongoing active volcanism. From 1990 to 1992, the Magellan spacecraft imaged the planet’s surface, using synthetic aperture radar. We examined volcanic areas on Venus that were imaged two or three times by Magellan and identified an ~2.2-square-kilometer volcanic vent that changed shape in the 8-month interval between two radar images. Additional volcanic flows downhill from the vent are visible in the second-epoch images, although we cannot rule out that they were present but invisible in the first epoch because of differences in imaging geometry. We interpret these results as evidence of ongoing volcanic activity on Venus.”

“…An active vent in Atla Regio
“Figure 1 shows gridded Magellan altimetry overlain on Magellan cycle 1 SAR images of an area in Atla Regio, Venus, which extends from 9°S, 170°W to 6.25°N, 151°W, covering ~3.2 × 106 km2. This area contains two of the planet’s largest volcanoes, Ozza Mons and Maat Mons, which have previously been hypothesized to be locations of active volcanism). Magellan observed this area with east-looking images in cycle 1 (incidence angle 45°) and west-looking images in cycle 2 (incidence angle 25°). This area has not been imaged by Earth-based radar, nor was it imaged during the earlier Venera 15 and Venera 16 missions to Venus….”

“We identified a volcanic vent at 1.363°N, 165.359°W that changed shape and expanded ([Figure 2]) in the 8-month interval between the Magellan imaging in cycle 1 and 2 (February to October 1991). The vent is located on the north side of a domed shield volcano that is part of the larger Maat Mons volcano. In the east-looking cycle 1 image, the vent appears near-circular (1.5 × 1.8 km, area 2.2 km2) with steep interior slopes. We speculate that it was a drained posteruptive vent. In the west-looking cycle 2 image, the vent has become larger (4.0 km2) and irregular in shape. In cycle 2, the vent wall, identifiable as bright pixels on the vent’s west side (an east-facing slope) and dark pixels on its east side (west-facing slope), is narrow, so the vent interior and exterior are separated by only a few pixels in the 75 m/pixel radar mosaic. We interpret this narrowness as being due to short vent walls, perhaps only tens of meters high, which implies that the vent is nearly filled to its rim in the cycle 2 image. We speculate that a lava lake formed in the vent interior during the 8-month gap between images….”
(Figure 1, 2: emphasis mine)

— And New Lava Flows, Maybe

Nasa/JPL's Magellan radar images of Maat Mons, showing changing landscape in 1991. Maat Mons is a shield volcano on Venus: the planet's second-highest mountain and highest volcano. (February and October 1991)
Maat Mons: possible new lava flows and a volcanic crater’s growth. (February and October 1991)

That pair of NASA/JPL Magellan SAR radar images, from an article in The Conversation, look a bit like part of Herrick and Hensley’s Figure 3, but I haven’t managed to find the NASA/JPL document they’re from.

The scientists figured that, since the February 1991 image was taken from a different angle than the October 1991 one, differences between the two in how the one crater looks might come from something in the image processing.

So they ran simulated SAR data of a virtual crater, seen from east and west, and came up with a crater that looked round, both ways.

Odds are very good that the crater on Maat Mons grew during those eight months, and was bean-shaped in late 1991. If follow-up work confirms what they’ve said, Herrick and Hensley have spotted the first known active volcano on Venus.

On the other hand, we’ve had other ‘firsts’ in the search for Venusian volcanoes.

Hot Spots, Sulfur Dioxide, Venusian Volcanoes and Acronyms

NASA, JPL-Caltech, ESA, Venus Express: VIRTIS, USRA, LPI's image: Idunn Mons, infrared glow observed by ESA's Venus Express shown in red.
Idun Mons: image showing infrared glow (red) detected by VIRTIS, Venus Express. (2020)

The ESA’s Venus Express orbited Venus from 2006 to 2015.

The spacecraft’s main job was studying the Venusian atmosphere. Its Venus Monitoring Camera, VMC, worked in ultraviolet, visible and near-infrared.

And it carried three spectrometers: including the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer, VIRTIS and SPectroscopy for Investigation of Characteristics of the Atmosphere of Venus, SPICAV.

In 2010, scientists published a study that connected hot spots with areas on Venus that looked like fresh lava flows.

Two years later, another study tracked a spike in sulfur dioxide in the planet’s upper atmosphere, followed by a slower decline. The decline looked like a similar drop in sulfur dioxide seen by Pioneer when it arrived at Venus.

Hot spots on ground that look like lava flows strongly suggests recent volcanic activity, but I’m guessing someone came up with another possible explanation.

Sulfur dioxide in the upper atmosphere must have come up from below: recently. It breaks down in a matter of days when exposed to sunlight.

Was that poof that volcanoes were erupting? Maybe not.8

“…’A volcanic eruption could act like a piston to blast sulphur dioxide up to these levels, but peculiarities in the circulation of the planet that we don’t yet fully understand could also mix the gas to reproduce the same result,’ adds co-author Dr Jean-Loup Bertaux, Principal Investigator for the instrument on Venus Express [SPICAV] that made the detections….”
“Have Venusian volcanoes been caught in the act?“, Venus Express, ESA (March 12, 2021) [emphasis mine]

Maps, Missions, Maat Mons and More

NASA Ames Research Center, U.S Geological Survey, Massachusetts Institute of Technology's map of Venus, from Pioneer data. (March 1981)
NASA-Ames/USGS/MIT Venus map, from Pioneer data. (March 1981)

Two more excessively-wordy excerpts, and I’ll talk about Venusian maps and mountains.

First, what got this month’s study started:

“…Scientists study active volcanoes to understand how a planet’s interior can shape its crust, drive its evolution, and affect its habitability. One of NASA’s new missions to Venus will do just that. Led by the agency’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California, VERITAS – short for Venus Emissivity, Radio science, InSAR, Topography, And Spectroscopy – will launch within a decade. The orbiter will study Venus from surface to core to understand how a rocky planet about the same size as Earth took a very different path, developing into a world covered in volcanic plains and deformed terrain hidden beneath a thick, hot, toxic atmosphere.

“‘NASA’s selection of the VERITAS mission inspired me to look for recent volcanic activity in Magellan data,’ said Robert Herrick, a research professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and member of the VERITAS science team, who led the search of the archival data. ‘I didn’t really expect to be successful, but after about 200 hours of manually comparing the images of different Magellan orbits, I saw two images of the same region taken eight months apart exhibiting telltale geological changes caused by an eruption.’…”
“NASA’s Magellan Data Reveals Volcanic Activity on Venus “‘ Ian J. O’Neill (JPL), Karen Fox/Alana Johnson (NASA), Rod Boyce (University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute); Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Caltech (March 15, 2023) [emphasis mine]

Next, what Herrick and Hensley have shown, and what they figure they haven’t:

“…On the basis of only one changed feature, we cannot determine how common currently active volcanism is on Venus. We draw a distinction between identifying recent volcanism on a planet and demonstrating that it is currently volcanically active. For example, Mars has lava flows with estimated ages of less than a few million years, but no volcanic activity has been identified over multiple decades of continuous observation. Only one changed feature has been identified in our survey of the Magellan data, and none have been found in kilometer-scale radar observations from Earth that covered ~25% of Venus’ surface. The low detection rate indicates that Venus is less volcanically active than Jupiter’s moon Io, for which over 100 active spots have been imaged. We estimate that our search of the Magellan data has examined ~1.5% of Venus’ surface area….”
“Surface changes observed on a Venusian volcano during the Magellan mission“; Robert R. Herrick, Scott Hensley; Science (March 15, 2023) [emphasis mine]

Now, about maps of Venus.

I found a good set of high-resolution maps here:

(Acronym time: LPI is the Lunar and Planetary Institute, USRA stands for Universities Space Research Association.)

Those maps were high-resolution, detailed, and included text in sidebars. But they were a tad too high-resolution for this blog. When I scaled the global projection down to something that would fit on this screen, most of the lettering was blurry. At best.

So I got the “Altimetry of Venus” map, designed for low-resolution displays, here:

Then I downloaded the LPI | Resources “Altimetric and Shaded Relief Map of Venus” and clipped out the east end of Aphrodite Terra and marked Maat Mons’ location. It’s under “Greater Admiration”, the next heading.

Again, Maat Mons is the mountain Herrick and Hensley studied.

Now, about those names. Briefly, for me.

A terra is a landmass, or would be if Venus had an ocean. More than one terra are terrae.

A mons is a mountain, more than one are montes.

Montes and terrae are words from Latin, which we use because today’s naming conventions got started when Latin was a common language for European scholars.

One more thing: Maat Mons is at 0.5°N 194.6°E.9

“Greater Admiration”

Detail, USGS Altimetric and Shaded Map of Venus from Lunar and Planetary Institute, Universities Space Research Association Venus Map Catalog. (1981) location of Maat Mons marked with a red +. Used w/o permission.
Detail, USGS Altimetric and Shaded Map of Venus. (1981) Maat Mons marked with red “+”.

I had, and still have, more to say about Venus.

But I’ve run out of time this week, so that’ll wait.

NASA/ESA's image: Galaxy UGC 9391, which contains two types of stars astronomers use to calculate distances: Cepheid variables and a Type Ia supernova, 2003du. (2016) via BBC News, used w/o permission.I’ll wrap this up by repeating something I haven’t said in a while.

We live in a universe that’s packed with wonders, beauty and harmony.

These wonders and beauty include, I think, places like Venus: which aren’t obviously beautiful in the picture-postcard sense.

Maybe it’s the nerd in me, but I see a sort of beauty in the way physical laws produce so many different — yet similar — landscapes and weather on other worlds.

That strikes me as a reason for “greater admiration” of God’s work. And since I see reflections of God’s beauty — and might — in this world, learning more about God’s creation inspires greater respect for God. It also reminds me that God’s God and I’m not. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 268ff, 283, 341)

More-or-less related posts:

1 History and a little science:

Giuseppe Arcimboldo's 'Porträtt, karikatyr:' portrait of Wolfgang Lazius. (1562) Photo by Samuel Uhrdin, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.2 Ptolemy, pareidolia and pulp fiction:

3 Scanning Venus:

4 Mapping Venus:

5 Missions to Venus:

6 More-or-less about Magellan:

7 Maat Mons and Magellan images:

8 Venusian volcanoes, indirect evidence and recent developments:

9 Naming conventions and Venusian features:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Science News | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Peril in Orion! Beware Betelgeuse?

Posted on March 18, 2023 by Brian H. Gill
H. Raab's photos: the constellation Orion, showing changing brightness of Betelgeuse (Orion's right shoulder), (February 22, 2012 (left); February 21, 2020 (right). via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
H. Raab’s photos of Orion: February 22, 2012 (left); February 21, 2020 (right)

IAU, Sky and Telescope magazine; Roger Sinnott, Rick Fienberg's sky chart: the constellation Orion.Betelgeuse, the bright red star in Orion’s right shoulder, is a semiregular variable star, with small periods of 185 days and 2,100 days and a main period of around 400 days.

It will explode at any moment, and we’re right next door.

If I had any sense, from one viewpoint, I’d talk about the ozone hole, denounce forever chemicals and promote a ‘Save the Panda’ fund I’d set up.

Or maybe indulge in free association inspired by Revelation and Gematria, and slip in hints that your only hope is to give me money.

Yeah. That kind of trouble I don’t need. Besides, I suspect the weird mix of numerology and Bible trivia that infested ‘Christian’ radio during my youth is no longer in vogue.1

So instead, I’ll look at the last two times Betelgeuse was newsworthy. Then I’ll talk about cosmic scale, stars and whatever else comes to mind.

Headlines!

Brian H. Gill's 'Totally Depressing News Network' logo. (2018)News media can serve useful purposes.

But I wouldn’t mind if journalists could dial the angst back a bit. And convince their editors that wasting time on a quick Google search wasn’t really wasted time.

That said, coverage of the last two times Betelgeuse threatened our fair planet could have been worse.2 Some was downright informative.

Science

ESO, P. Kervella's image: Betelgeuse, seen in near-infrared; showing stellar disk and asymmetric extended atmosphere. (July 2009)
Betelgeuse in near-infrared, stellar disk and asymmetric extended atmosphere. ESO, P. Kervella (July 2009)

NASA Space Place's illustration: 'What holds stars together?' (2017)The 2009-2012 headlines got started when Townes, Wishnow, Hale and Walp said that they’d observed a change in Betelgeuse’s apparent diameter.

At one wavelength — 11.15 microns — the visible disk of Betelgeuse had shrunk by 15% in 15 years: 1993-2009. They were right about that.

But other scientists, measuring the star’s diameter at other wavelengths, found that Betelgeuse had gotten a tad bigger.

The last I checked, the consensus is that Betelgeuse’s envelope — a sort of extended atmosphere around the star — has changed.

Someone, I don’t know who, apparently mentioned that Betelgeuse will eventually become a supernova; and that stars shrink before exploding.

I only found one Betelgeuse-Mayan Apocalypse article, with Star Wars for extra flavor. And that one was comparatively low-key. Maybe the more creative journalistic outfits don’t regard their online content as evergreen, and that’s another topic.

Now, assuming that current models of how stars work are somewhat accurate, Betelgeuse will explode very soon. On a cosmic scale.

Estimates, based on various criteria, say that the the Betelgeuse supernova will happen somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000 years from now.

Compared to the 13,780,000,000 years, give or take, that this universe has been around; that’s very soon. Measured against the 24-hour news cycle, not so much.

As for being close, Betelgeuse isn’t in our back yard. But it’s arguably in our neighborhood.

Betelgeuse is between about 500 and 600 light-years away. Stepping back a little, it’s about 26,000 light-years to our galaxy’s center — in the general direction of Delta Sagittarii — and 2,500,000 light-years to the next Milky Way-sized galaxy.3

So on a cosmic scale, I’d say Betelgeuse is several doors down the block.

Distances, Safe and Otherwise
NASA, ESA, J. Hester and A. Loll (Arizona State University)'s image: the Crab Nebula, a supernova remnant ca. 6,500 light-years away, in the constellation Taurus. (1999, 2000 for optical images)
The Crab Nebula in optical, radio, infrared, ultraviolet, and X-ray wavelengths.

Light from a supernova that was roughly 6,400 light-years away reached Earth in the year 1054, when Edmund the Old was king of Sweden.

We know about it because Chinese astronomers recorded it as a “guest star”.

An English astronomer spotted the supernova’s remnant in 1731. In 1921, an American astronomer noticed that the Crab Nebula is expanding. Eventually, that let scientists work out when it had started billowing out; and that lined up with the 1054 guest star.

Right now, the Crab Nebula is about five and a half light-years across. If we’d been as close to it as we are to Alpha Centuari, it’d be more than an astronomical object of interest.4

Estimates and an Example

NASA/CXC/M. Weiss' illustration: SN 2006gy. (2007)If Betelgeuse was closer, say 50 light-years away, and reached the supernova point in its development this year, then folks who’d invested in sun block could celebrate.

Seems that 50 light-years is where a supernova’s particles and radiation would start seriously affecting our ozone layer. That could be bad news for phytoplankton: and, indirectly, us.

Bad news, but not necessarily catastrophic. Supernovae happen. Some have happened near Earth. Most recently, very likely, about 2,600,000 years back. Give or take a few hundred thousand.

That’s right around the end-of-Pliocene mass extinction.

At the time, Oldowan tools were standard equipment for many folks.

Acheulean tech was around 900 millennia in the future, and the data storage technology we call writing was uncounted ages beyond that. So we don’t know what folks thought about the bright new star in their sky.

Now, about the mass extinction. By journalistic standards, it was an “unprecedented” catastrophe. Some plankton and mollusks died. So did megalodons. But for the most part, life went on.

The supernova may have been part of the Scorpius-Centaurus association of stars. That’s the nearest bunch of huge stars that haven’t exploded yet.

At the moment, the Scorpius-Centaurus association is about 420 light-years out, roughly in the direction of Alpha Lupi and Theta Centauri. Back when the supernova went off, it was closer: about 130 light-years.

That’s well outside the 50 light-year danger zone.

Or maybe it’s 25 light-years. Some scientists say that a supernova closer than that could do serious damage to Earth’s upper atmosphere. But we aren’t sure about the safe distance.5 Not yet.

Looking Ahead, Looking Back

Oldowan tools found in Kenya: 'The analysis of wear patterns on 30 of the stone tools found at the site showed that they had been used to cut, scrape and pound both animals and plants' (February 10, 2023) Text, BBC News; photo, ReutersSooner or later, there’ll be another uncomfortably-close supernova.

Based on past experience, life will go on after that. So, I think, will we.

Partly because the end-of-Pliocene mass extinction didn’t end us.

Granted, we looked a bit different then.

Or, from another viewpoint, we look different now: taller, with too much forehead and not nearly enough face.6 And that’s yet another topic.

Betelgeuse, The Great Dimming and After
ESO/M. Montargès et al, Center for Astrophysics Harvard and Smithsonian, SPHERE instrument on the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope's photos: Betelgeuse (January 2019, December 2019, January 2020, March 2020)
ESO’s SPHERE photos: Betelgeuse (January 2019, December 2019, January 2020, March 2020)

Studio Foglio's Mr. Squibbs, used w/o permission.Maybe it’s just as well that news media was in full cry with the COVID-19 pandemic and political pandemonium in 2020.

It wouldn’t have taken a great leap of imagination to transform this expression of scientific interest into a shocking revelation. Maybe something like ‘mad scientists seek to doom us all!’

“The scientists who are hoping for a supernova“
If star on Orion’s shoulder goes supernova, Fermilab experiment will collect data bonanza
uchicago news, adapted from a story by Scott Hershberger originally posted by Fermilab (October 14, 2020)

“In late 2019, Betelgeuse, the star that forms the left shoulder of the constellation Orion, began to noticeably dim, prompting speculation of an imminent supernova. If it exploded, this cosmic neighbor a mere 700 light-years from Earth would be visible in the daytime for weeks. Yet 99% of the energy of the explosion would be carried not by light, but by neutrinos, ghost-like particles that rarely interact with other matter.

“If Betelgeuse does go supernova soon, detecting the emitted neutrinos would ‘dramatically enhance our understanding of what’s going on deep inside the core of a supernova,’ said Sam McDermott, a theorist with the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory….”

Then again, maybe not.

I like to think that even the most desperate news editor, having received his science education during late-night mad scientist marathons, would realize that we can’t make stars go boom.

I’d also like to say that they don’t make films like these any more:

  • Terror of Mechagodzilla (1975)
  • Frankenstein Meets the Spacemonster (1965)
  • X: The Man with the X-Ray Eyes (1963)

But cultural content, including film reviews, shows up in my news feeds, and that’s yet again another topic.

As it turned out, the 2019-2020 dimming of Betelgeuse wasn’t the prelude to a supernova.7 Probably.

“Betelgeuse’s Great Dimming: The Aftermath“
Colin Stuart, Sky & Telescope (August 25, 2022)

“…By piecing together data from a slew of telescopes, including the Hubble Space Telescope, [Center for Astrophysics, Harvard & Smithsonian’s Andrea] Dupree is pointing the finger at an event called a Surface Mass Ejection (SME). Our own Sun regularly burps material from its corona, ejecting a billion tonnes of solar material — about the mass of Mount Everest. But Betelgeuse’s SME spit out 400 billion times more material, equivalent to several times more mass than the Moon. As the ejected material cooled, it formed a cloud of dust that partially blocked, and thus dimmed, our view of Betelgeuse….

“…The event seems to have had a profound effect on Betelgeuse’s more regular pulsations. Astronomers have observed the star for centuries and noticed that it goes through cycles of brightness variations with a period of 400 days. This pattern seems to have completely disappeared since The Great Dimming, perhaps as result of a reshuffling of material in the star’s interior. ‘Betelgeuse continues doing some very unusual things right now,’ Dupree says….”

On the other hand, maybe that stellar megaburp was but a prelude to a nearby supernova. My guess is that it’s not.

But if it is, then scientists around the world are going to be scrambling to get as much data as they can.

And the rest of us can either ignore the new light in our sky, fill the pockets of ‘Sam’s SuperSafe Supernova SuperShelter’ hucksters — or, if it’s summer, set up the lawn chairs, get popcorn and lemonade; and enjoy the show.

A Variable’s Variable Etymology

Frederik de Wit's 'Planisphaerium coeleste' star chart. (1670) Frederik de Wit, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.Like a great many other stars, Betelgeuse got its name from Arabic: bat al-jawzā’ or maybe Yad al-Jauzā’, or something else.

Between transliterating from one writing system into another, a misreading, and maybe more glitches; by the time the star’s name got to my language it was Betelgeuse.

But we do know what it means: Giant’s Shoulder, or Hand of the Central One, or maybe Armpit of the Central One.

Me? I’ll stick with calling it Betelgeuse.

Now, finally, the usual links:

1 Science, psychology and silliness:

Anonymous(?) French(?) artist's cartoon of a destructive comet. (1857)2 Comets, climate and me:

3 Perspectives and scale:

4 Crab Nebula, a famous supernova remnant:

5 Archaeology, astronomy and palentology:

6 Ancestors and attitudes:

7 Science, mostly:

8 Naming Betelgeuse:

Posted in Science News | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Edited Twins, Genetic Engineering and Bioethics

Posted on March 11, 2023 by Brian H. Gill
SPL (Science Photo Library)'s image: In vitrio fertilization light microscope. (2015) via BBC News, used w/o permission.

Gene-editing rules showed up in my news feed last Monday. So, indirectly, did genetically-edited twins who, as far as I know, are still alive.

If I’d known how little I’d be able to verify about Dr. He Jiankui’s famous (or infamous) twins, maybe I’d have picked another topic.

But I did find a fair amount of information about genetic editing technology, and a hint at why Dr. He’s science project produced twins:

Gene-Edited Twins

SPL (Science Photo Library)'s image: 'Gene editing has the potential to treat numerous inherited disorders.' (2023) via BBC News, used w/o permission.
Gene editing could treat many inherited disorders.

“China’s new human gene-editing rules worry experts“
Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (March 6, 2023)

“New rules in China to regulate gene editing in humans don’t go far enough, a leading expert has warned scientists.

Dr Joy Zhang of Kent University, a global expert on the governance of gene editing in China, said authorities are susceptible to ‘regulatory negligence’….

“…China says the new laws are in line with international rules.

“They set requirements for ethical approval, supervision and inspection, but experts worry that they may not apply to the private sector.

“Dr Zhang, one of the main speakers at an international human genome-editing summit in London, told BBC News: ‘My biggest concern is that the new measures fail to cover a chronic and increasing problem in trying to deal with private ventures that are taking place outside of conventional scientific institutes.

“‘The new rules may struggle to keep up with the burgeoning innovation that is happening in China.’…”

On the ‘up’ side, China’s government says their new laws are up to international standards.

They may be right about that. There was a major stink back in 2018, when Professor He Jiankui told the world, in a series of YouTube videos, that he’d made two twin girls. And that, thanks to his genetic engineering, HIV couldn’t infect them.

Since HIV viruses are the ones that cause HIV/AID, Professor He’s engineered immunity sounded like a good idea.

A remarkable number of scientists didn’t agree.

I can see why, but suspect that the professor’s ‘YouTube first, published paper later’ strategy encouraged their “significant doubts”.

On the other hand, Professor He’s videos may have been a matter of making the best of a bad situation. Seems that the MIT Technology Review worked out what he’d been doing, based on a Chinese clinical trials registry.1

At Least Two “World’s First”

SPL (Science Photo Library)'s image: IVF embryo. (2015) via BBC News, used w/o permission.I gather that Professor He’s problems stem mainly from his tweaking the genes of healthy babies.

But his claim that he’d made “the world’s first genetically edited babies” arguably needs clarification.

For example, differences between his edited babies and the ones back in 2017. Aside from terminology, that is.

“China baby gene editing claim ‘dubious’“
Michelle Roberts, BBC News (November 26, 2018)

“Significant doubts have emerged about claims from a Chinese scientist that he has helped make the world’s first genetically edited babies.

“Prof He Jiankui says the twin girls, born a few weeks ago, had their DNA altered as embryos to prevent them from contracting HIV.

“His claims, filmed by Associated Press, are unverified and have sparked outrage from other scientists, who have called the idea monstrous.

“Such work is banned in most countries….”

“Human embryos edited to stop disease“
James Gallagher, BBC News (August 2, 2017)

“Scientists have, for the first time, successfully freed embryos of a piece of faulty DNA that causes deadly heart disease to run in families.

“It potentially opens the door to preventing 10,000 disorders that are passed down the generations.

“The US and South Korean team allowed the embryos to develop for five days before stopping the experiment.

“The study hints at the future of medicine, but also provokes deep questions about what is morally right….”

I think curing and preventing disease is a good idea, for reasons I’ll get into later.

Defining “First”

OHSU's image: genetically modified embryos. (2017) via BBC News, used w/o permission.At first glance, the BBC News articles of 2018 (first genetically edited babies) and 2017 (first human embryos freed of a disease) seem contradictory.

But, given my culture’s assumptions, they’re both right. The 2017 announcement involved genetically editing human “embryos”. He’s 2018 experiment was about the first human “babies”.

An ‘up’ side of the 2017 announcement was that the “embryos” were identified as human. But that didn’t keep the scientists from treating them as disposable lab materials:

“…The US and South Korean team allowed the embryos to develop for five days before stopping the experiment….”
(James Gallagher, BBC News (August 2, 2017) [emphasis mine]

My hat’s off to Professor He. For whatever reason, he didn’t kill his edited kids after demonstrating that he’d done something nifty.

Instead, he apparently worked with a couple: and allowed his experimental subjects to stay alive, at least for nine months or so. Given current values, and the trouble he got into later, that’s praiseworthy.2

That’s good news.

Not-So-Good News

He JiankuiLab / Image's photo: 'Dr He Jiankui served a three-year prison sentence following claims that he created the world's first gene-edited children five years ago'. (March 6, 2023) BBC News)
Dr. He Jiankui: genetics pioneer, sentenced to three years in prison for improper pioneering.

I don’t know why so many “experts” have aimed so much ill will at Dr. He’s experiment. Although there’s enough dubiously-proper procedure in the professor’s activities to warrant a raised eyebrow or two:

“New technologies may have already introduced genetic errors to the human gene pool. How long will they last? And how could they affect us?“, Zaria Gorvett, BBC Future (April 12, 2021)

“…He had broken laws, forged documents, misled the babies’ parents about any risks and failed to do adequate safety testing. The whole endeavour left many experts aghast — it was described as ‘monstrous’, ‘amateurish’ and ‘profoundly disturbing’ ….

“…However, arguably the biggest twist were the mistakes. It turns out that the babies involved, Lulu and Nana, have not been gifted with neatly edited genes after all. Not only are they not necessarily immune to HIV, they have been accidentally endowed with versions of CCR5 that are entirely made up – they likely do not exist in any other human genome on the planet. And yet, such changes are heritable – they could be passed on to their children, and children’s children, and so on….”
[emphasis mine]

An ‘up’ side in the current mess is that apparently misleading the parents of an experimental child is now regarded as not entirely proper.

That’s a big step forward from the good old days of 1977, when Louisa Joy Brown’s parents had been told that in vitro fertilization (IVF) was experimental.

But not that, if it worked, they’d have the first surviving IVF baby. And even then, there was talk of informed consent being important.

And a really big step or two from 1951, when a doctor noticed that I was defective. But didn’t tell my parents, since letting my glitch go untreated would give him grist he could grind into a learned paper. And that’s almost another topic. Which, again, I’ll go into later.

Under the circumstances, and granting that it’s still early days for Lulu and Nana, the edited babies seem to have been rather lucky. Not only are they apparently still alive, but they don’t seem to have been gifted with any spectacularly obvious surprises.3

CRISPR Technology and Surprisingly Long-Tongued Rabbits

Alamy's photo: a rabbit after gene editing, with an unexpectedly long tongue. via BBC Future, used w/o permission.There’s much more in that BBC Future article, but if I don’t move along I won’t get this thing ready by Saturday.

So I’ll settle for sharing this bit:

“…there have been no shortage of surprises in the field. From the rabbits altered to be leaner that inexplicably ended up with much longer tongues to the cattle tweaked to lack horns that were inadvertently endowed with a long stretch of bacterial DNA in their genomes (including some genes that confer antibiotic resistance, no less) — its past is riddled with errors and misunderstandings….”
“New technologies may have already introduced genetic errors to the human gene pool. How long will they last? And how could they affect us?“, Zaria Gorvett, BBC Future (April 12, 2021) [emphasis mine]

Next, here’s an excerpt from another discussion of genetic editing:

“…It is rapidly becoming apparent that a wide variety of cardiovascular diseases may one day be curable using CRISPR-Cas9 or similar technology, including many that heretofore have been entirely untreatable. Germline genome editing promises to permanently resolve monogenic cardiovascular disorders for the offspring and subsequent generations of affected individuals. … this approach remains ethically controversial. … In addition, further technical matters will need to be more fully resolved, including those of long-term risks, off-target effects, mosaicism, and applicability to a wider variety of mutations and cardiovascular conditions….”
(“Therapeutic Genome Editing in Cardiovascular Diseases“, David M. German, MD, MPH; et al.; Journal of the American College of Cardiology/Basic to Translational Science (published online February 25, 2019) [emphasis mine]

I gather that “off-target effects” are surprises like long-tongued rabbits and possibly-antibiotic-resistant cattle.

Mosaicism, in this context, is what happens when some of an embryo’s cells get edited, while others don’t. As an adult, the “embryo” has one set of genetic instructions in some cells, another set in others.

We’ve known about mosaicism at least since 1929. Apart from recent experiments, it’s the result of natural phenomena, along with mutation and horizontal gene transfer.4

Procedures, Perspectives and People

MeloneGuru's diagram of the primary sequence of CCR5, a seven membrane spanning G protein, on the cell membrane. (July 5, 2016) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
MeloneGuru’s diagram of CCR5 on a cell membrane.

As I said before, there’s enough dubiously-proper behavior on Dr. He Jiankui’s part to warrant sanctions of some sort.

Seems that he forged ethical review papers, which helped him talk eight couples into going along with his experiment; raised his own funds instead of going through official channels; and even had foreigners working with him.

Small wonder Shenzhen’s Southern University of Science and Technology fired him.

I don’t know whether I’m impressed that his sentence included fines amounting to nearly a half-million U. S. dollars, plus three years in prison; or that his sentence was so comparatively light.

Getting back to the eight couples, two pregnancies, and twin girls: as I see it, that means there is at least one dead baby in the mix. Unless the twins spent their gestation in two separate individuals.

But I’m not an expert, so the powers that be in China and others have different perspectives on Dr. He Jiankui’s actions:

“…He had ‘deliberately evaded oversight’ with the intent of creating a gene-edited baby ‘for the purpose of reproduction’, according to the initial findings of an investigating team set up by the Health Commission of China in southern Guangdong province, Xinhua news agency reported….”

“…Many scholars pointed to a 2003 guideline that bans altered human embryos from being implanted for the purpose of reproduction, and says altered embryos cannot be developed for more than 14 days.…”
(“Chinese scientist who gene-edited babies fired by university” … Reuters (January 21, 2019)) [emphasis mine]

I figure that helps explain why 2017’s genetically edited kids were killed.

Keeping them alive for another nine days would likely have gotten the U. S./South Korea research team into trouble. Might even have raised suspicions that the researchers thought their “embryos” were people.5

CCR5Δ32, Recent History and Speculation
. Strickland Constable's illustration of 'low types'. (1899)
“Low types”, left and right; a person of the “superior races”, center (1899)

An angle to the ‘edited twins’ issue I haven’t seen discussed is the particular gene Dr He had been trying to add to their chromosomes: CCR5Δ32/CCR5 Delta32.

CCR5 is a protein that’s on the walls of white blood cells. It acts as a receptor for a particular sort of molecule, and is part of our immune system.

CCR5 genes come in several varieties, alleles in geek-speak. CCR5Δ32 is an allele of CCR5 that’s in maybe 1% of the genetic code of folks who are northwestern Europeans. Or, in my case, whose ancestors are from northwestern Europe. And those are pretty much the only folks who have it.

Now, I wouldn’t have a problem with someone who looks a bit like me having genes that are more common among folks whose ancestors are, say, Chinese.

But then, I wouldn’t.

By some standards, I’m a second-generation result of miscegenation.6 Or, as one of my ancestors said of an Irishman who’d taken an interest in the daughter of a decent American family, “He doesn’t have family: he’s Irish.”

Again, Dr. He Jiankui’s failure to fill out paperwork and generally play ball with a government bureaucracy would be sufficient to account for his fines and imprisonment.

But I could imagine that both working with foreigners, and knowingly polluting Chinese chromosomes with foreign genes, pretty much guaranteed that he’d land in the hoosegow.

Under the circumstances, I could be mildly surprised that he didn’t simply disappear.

Chromosomes, Science and Twins

National Institutes of Health's diagram: 'Epigenetic mechanisms are affected by several factors and processes....' (2015) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
Epigenetic Mechanisms: regulating gene expression, switching genes on or off.

Another aspect of the Chinese twins brouhaha was that the kids are twins. This is speculation, but I think maybe Dr. He’s team wanted twins — and kept the kids alive — so that they could see how their epigentic mechanisms developed.

Here’s where I’d like to geek out, but I’m running out of time. So you’re in luck, I’m keeping this short.

Chromosomes aren’t just DNA. Among other things, the DNA is wound around histones: which pack the DNA more compactly.

Histones also have molecular mechanisms that turn individual genes on or off. Identical twins have identical epigenetic mechanisms when they start out. But if they keep on being alive, their epigenetic mechanisms generally stop being identical.

So I figure Dr. He and company wanted to see how their edited twins changed as they grew.

About epigenetics and all that, I put links to ‘for more information’ stuff near the end of this post.7

TALEN and CRISPR: Repurposing Prokaryotic Molecules

Kazi1111's illustration: showing how TALE proteins are used for epigenome editing. (2014) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission
Epigenome editing, using TALE proteins.

A fair number of articles about Dr. He and the edited twins mention that the researchers used CRISPR gene editing tech.

Again, I’m running short on time: so I’ll keep this short(ish).

CRISPR stands for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats. It’s part of the prokaryotic molecular tool kit. Prokaryotes are single-celled critters that don’t have nuclei.

CRISPR gene editing tech is a simplified version of the prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas9 antiviral defense system.

TALEN, which stands for transcription activator-like effector nuclease. A TALEN is what we get when we fuse a TAL effector DNA-binding domain to a DNA cleavage domain. What can I say? It’s complicated.

TALEN isn’t in the news much these days. It’s not the hot item that CRISPR is, at any rate.

But TALEN is in today’s gene-editing toolbox. And we got these molecules from prokaryotes, too.8

A Genomic Revolution: New(ish) Territory

Francesco Veronesi from Italy's photo: a red junglefowl, Kaeng Krachan National Park, Thailand. (2013) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
A red junglefowl: one of the birds we used to make chickens.

If I look at where CRISPR and TALEN gene editing molecules come from, I could see them as natural. Or as natural as any part of this world that we’ve modified.

Or I could go all apocalyptic prophet of doom, denounce all technology developed after some arbitrary date, and hope that nobody remembers where chickens come from.9

Lobby card for Cahn and Siodmak's 'Creature with the Atom Brain.' (1955)But that strikes me as being right up there with warning against atomic Nazi zombies.

So I’ll note that we’re dealing with new technology, quote what someone said, and move on.

“…The births of Lulu and Nana have pushed the boundary of genomic revolution to include generation of genetically engineered babies. This act has been widely condemned as premature, dangerous, alarming and unethical. Given this development, we likely will be hearing of an increasing number of reports on genetically engineered babies in the future. Yet, another woman in China is expecting the birth of a child with genetic modifications. This is new territory.

“Like it or not, this development forces us to ask, where do we go from here?…”
(“Lulu and Nana open Pandora’s box far beyond Louise Brown“; Shiva M. Singh, PhD; Canadian Medical Association Journal (June 10, 2019) via PubMed Central, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health)

Louise Joy Brown, HEK 293 and Me

An HEK 293 variant: 293FT cells.On the one hand, I’m glad that we’ve got rules about using people as lab animals. And that there’s even some discussion regarding reviewing the rules.

Like the one that says using very young humans is okay, as long as they don’t live more than 14 days.

“…The adoption of the 14-day rule in public policy is generally attributed to two major points of origin: in the USA, the 1979 report of the Ethics Advisory Board to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) on embryo research and, in the UK, the report of the Warnock Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology. From these foundations, the rule has acquired widespread influence elsewhere: almost every country in which embryo research is specifically permitted by regulation, soft or hard, employs a version of the 14-day rule….”
“How and Why to Replace the 14-Day Rule“, Sarah Chan, Current Stem Cell Reports (published online July 16, 2018) via PubMed Central, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health

The 14-day rule makes sense, from some viewpoints, since very young humans lack the abilities many of us develop if we’re not killed.

But I can’t say that I’m okay with killing someone who’s too young to matter. That may take a bit of explaining.

Because I’m Catholic, I must see every human being as a real person.

The divine image is in each of us. We’re all people: no matter who we are, who our ancestors are, or what we’ve done. (Genesis 1:26–27, 2:7; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 355-357, 361, 369-370, 1700, 1730, 2268-2269, 1929, 2273-2274, 2276-2279)

That means I think the girl whose designation was cell line HEK 293, the first person to survive in vitro fertilization, a convicted murderer, and someone who’s mentally ill are all people: each with a share in humanity’s transcendent dignity. (Catechism, 1928, 1934-1938)

Thinking that human beings — all human beings — are real people, and that we all matter, puts me at odds with assorted political positions. But it’s something I’m stuck with, if I’m going to take my faith seriously.

Responses to the first person to survive in vitro vertilization, Louise Joy Brown, ranged from all-too-familiar malignant virtue to Cardinal Albino Luciani’s “unexpected” application of Catholic beliefs to everyday life. And that’s another topic.10 Topics.

“…in August 1978, Cardinal Albino Luciani — shortly to become Pope John Paul I — unexpectedly refused to criticise Louise’s parents for using IVF, saying they had simply wanted to have a baby.

“‘It helped to counteract some of the negative things people were saying,’ Louise says.

“‘My mum got loads of letters from people. They were mostly positive, but there was some hate mail.

“‘They got an awful box from America which had a broken test-tube, fake blood and a pretend foetus inside. It came with a threat that the people who sent it were coming to see them.’…”
(“How has IVF developed since the first ‘test-tube baby’?“, Adam Eley, BBC News (July 23, 2015))

Making Sense: It’s an Option

'At the Sign of the UNHOLY THREE' cartoon, warning against fluoridated water, polio serum and mental hygiene. And 'communistic world government.' (1955)Maybe life would be easier for Catholics if we were told that any technology developed after 1928 was Satanic. That’s when polyester was patented, and that’s yet another topic.

Like I said, maybe life would be easier if being Catholic meant blindly believing nonsense like ‘polyester is Satanic’ or ‘QR codes are the mark of the beast’.

But that’s not how we work.

Okay. I’ve gone through this before, and will again, but here goes.

Starting with that time someone asked Jesus what the top commandment was —

“He said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.
“This is the greatest and the first commandment.
“The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
“The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.'”
(Matthew 22:37–40)

That’s simple enough. I should love God and my neighbor. And see everybody as my neighbor. Everybody. No exceptions. (Matthew 5:43–44, 22:36–40; Mark 12:28–31; Luke 10:25–37; Catechism, 1706, 1776, 1789, 1825, 1849-1851, 1955)

But “simple” isn’t “easy”, and we’ve needed reminders about what terms like “love” and “neighbor” mean. And why we should treat folks like people: all folks.

Human life is sacred, because it involves God from the get-go. That’s all human life: no matter how young or old, healthy or sick we are. (Catechism, 2258, 2261, 2268-2283)

We are rational creatures, able to think and decide how we act. And we can think about whether what we do is a good idea: or not. God gives us brains. Using them is a good idea. (Genesis 1:26–27, 2:7; Catechism, 1730, 1778, 1950-1960, 2292-2295)

Science and technology, studying this universe and using what we learn, is part of being human. It’s what we’re supposed to do. (Catechism, 2292-2296)

Getting and staying healthy is a good idea. Within reason. (Catechism, 2288-2291)

But putting science, technology, health — anything or anyone that’s not God — at the top of my priorities is a bad idea and I shouldn’t do it. (Catechism, 2112-2114)

Bioethics, From a Former Lab Rat’s Perspective

Willowbrook State School.It’s late Friday afternoon now, and I still haven’t said why I think curing and preventing disease is a good idea.

Sure, ‘because the Church says so’ is a reason. But I’ve got personal reasons for how I see medical practices and bioethics. I’ve talked about this before.

A doctor my parents initially trusted correctly diagnosed my congenital hip dysplasia almost immediately after I was born.

This was 1951. Options were limited back then, so maybe he figured I was a hopeless case, doomed to a defective life. Either way, he didn’t tell my parents.

USAF Staff Sgt Eric T. Sheler's photo: A two week-old's Phenylketonuria, or PKU, screening. (2007) via Wikipedia, use w/o permission.“…Instead, he had them bring me in at intervals to see what my hips were doing.

“He made notes about what happens when hip dysplasia isn’t treated. Then he wrote a learned paper on the subject. His paper was published in a medical journal. A copy of the journal wound up in a college library’s collection.

“That’s where my father read the doctor’s learned paper.

“My mother intercepted him before he reached the doctor. She said, ‘no, I will speak with him.’ Which she did. And never shared what they discussed.

“The doctor disappeared a few days later. Maybe it would have been more humane to have let an enraged Irishman conduct the interview….”
(“COVID-19, Cells, Viruses and mRNA Vaccines”, Trust and Prudence, (December 5, 2020))

Attempted non-surgical interventions including a body cast didn’t fix my defective hips, but an operation put me on my feet. And a second operation fixed an issue that’d cropped up after the first one.

Several decades later, swapping out both joints for metal-and-plastic replacements made walking without pain an option: so I’m a happy camper.

But knowing that I’d been used as a lab rat arguably accounts for me not being overly shocked and surprised at incidents like the Willowbrook State School, Tuskeegee, Auschwitz, Dachau and Unit 731 experiments.11

On the other hand, knowing that being healthy and using our brains is okay lets me think that research can be a good idea. And that ethics matter, whether we’re using old or new tech.

One more overly-long excerpt, and then the usual links:

“…As with all medical interventions on patients, one must uphold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it but are directed towards its healing, the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival. Whatever the type of medical, surgical or other therapy, the free and informed consent of the parents is required, according to the deontological rules followed in the case of children. The application of this moral principle may call for delicate and particular precautions in the case of embryonic or foetal life. The legitimacy and criteria of such procedures have been clearly stated by Pope John Paul II: ‘A strictly therapeutic intervention whose explicit objective is the healing of various maladies such as those stemming from chromosomal defects will, in principle, be considered desirable, provided it is directed to the true promotion of the personal well-being of the individual without doing harm to his integrity or worsening his conditions of life. Such an intervention would indeed fall within the logic of the Christian moral tradition’….”
“Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation“, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; quote from “Discourse to the Participants in the 35th General Assembly of the World Medical Association”, Pope St. John Paul II (October 29, 1983)) [emphasis mine]

I’ve talked about bioethics before, and probably will again:

1 Outing a research project:

2 Genetic and legal issues:

3 One of these times I’ll talk about the Hippocratic Oath, but not this week:

4 And one of these days I’ll probably talk about this:

5 Life, death and rules:

6 Science and reasons I don’t miss the ‘good old days’:

7 Genetics, it’s complicated:

8 You’re lucky; I didn’t have time to go over most of this stuff:

9 Artificial organisms, AKA domesticated plants and animals:

'I'd force peace right down their bloodthirsty throats.' Deacon Mushrat in Walk Kelly's Pogo. (1952)10 Modern medicine, making sense, malignant virtue and more:

11 Bad ideas, (some) lessons learned:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Journal, Science News | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Snow Cruiser, Moon Buggies, Mars Tractors

Posted on March 4, 2023 by Brian H. Gill
NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS's image: a Perseverance Mars rover selfie made from 62 individual images taken by a camera at the end of the rover's robotic arm, later stitched together. (April 6, 2021) from NASA, used w/o permission.
Perseverance on Mars. (April 6, 2021)

I started writing about the Antarctic Snow Cruiser, “one of the colossal engineering flops of history”. Or, my opinion, a basically good design that was rushed into service.

The Snow Cruiser and Little America III reminded me of imperial ambitions and a massive attitude adjustment, the Collier’s “Man Will Conquer Space Soon!” series, Moon buggies and Elon Musk.

Make that Moon buggies and looking ahead to permanent bases on the Moon and Mars. And why I think living in Minnesota is okay, even if humans aren’t “perfectly adapted” to my home state’s environment.

Designing for Antarctica, and a Little History

National Land Imaging Program 's (ca. 2014) From USGS, United States Geological Survey, used w/o permission.
Antarctica, the coldest place on Earth.)

Antarctica’s winters are colder than Minnesota’s. And its summers aren’t much better, with temperatures staying below freezing. Which is why Byrd’s Third Antarctic Expedition, or the Antarctic Service Expedition, took along the Snow Cruiser.

The Antarctic Snow Cruiser's crew. Left to right: diesel mechanic C. W. Griffith, commander Dr. Franklin Alton Wade, radio operator Felix L. Ferranto, Snow Cruiser airplane pilot Theodore Argyres Petras. (September 20, 1940) From United States Antarctic Program, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
Antarctic Snow Cruiser and its crew. (September 20, 1940)

The Snow Cruiser had been designed by the Armour Institute of Technology’s scientific research director, Dr. Thomas Poulter.

Poulter’s plans for a self-contained — and mobile — Antarctic base arguably began when he and two others rescued Richard Byrd during a 1934 Antarctic expedition.

By the time Poulter and the others got to Byrd, at a meteorological station a few hours from their base camp, he needed medical attention. More than the base camp could give.

Carbon monoxide was Byrd’s problem. Fixing the meteorological station’s heater didn’t take long, but airlifting Byrd out meant waiting two months.

I gather that Poulter started designing the Snow Cruiser shortly after he got back to Iowa.

Byrd’s Third Antarctic Expedition, AKA United States Antarctic Service Expedition, had the Snow Cruiser as part of its equipment. But the U. S. government didn’t earmark money for building the thing until six months before the departure date.

Departure for Little America III on the Ross Ice Shelf was in November of 1939, so by the time the Snow Cruiser was ready for testing, it was summer in North America. Poulter and the Armour Institute of Technology had no snow available for testing their Snow Cruiser

They did, however, have access to sandy land. They figured that sand might act like snow. Which it does, sort of. But sand is also a great deal denser than snow, and doesn’t act just like the stuff that’s about a foot and a half deep outside my window.1

Antarctic Snow Cruiser: Whipped Together in Six Months

Thomas Poulter's Snow Cruiser: a mobile research center, built near Chicago in 1939. AP image, via The Drive, used w/o permission.
The Snow Cruiser; built at the Pullman Company, Chicago. (1939)

I can see why someone called the Snow Cruiser “one of the colossal engineering flops of history”, since it slid off the road at least once on its way to Boston.

But I see it as a basically good design: and a case in point for not rushing through a new technology’s testing phase.

Although outfitting an Antarctic transport with treadless tires strikes me as daft, I also remember when we stopped using tire chains and started using snow tires. I checked, by the way: folks in Iowa, where Dr. Poulter was born, do get snow in the winter.

Tire chains, a sort of chain mesh wrapped around a tire, have been around at least since Harry D. Weed’s 1904 “grip-tread for pneumatic tires” patent. I haven’t tracked down who invented snow tires, or when that happened, and that’s another topic.

I suspect that the Snow Cruiser wouldn’t have been nearly so spectacularly unsuitable for its intended purpose, if Poulter and all had been given more than six months to turn a good idea into a service-ready Antarctic vehicle.2

Little America III and the Snow Cruiser, Briefly

Radio operator Sergeant Felix Ferranto thawing out the Antarctic Cruiser's wheelhub motors with a Primus blowtorch. (August 23, 1940) From United States Antarctic Program, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.
Radio operator Sergeant Felix Ferranto thawing out the Antarctic Cruiser’s wheelhub. (August 23, 1940)

The Snow Cruiser’s story isn’t all bad news. It was loaded on the USCGC North Star, and only destroyed part of the ramp built by the United States Antarctic Service Expedition (USASE) while offloading the thing in Antarctica.

Nobody got killed while demonstrating that, even with extra tires and jury-rigged tire chains, the Snow Cruiser wouldn’t cruise. But it would back up. Slowly.

Despite the Snow Cruiser’s performance deficit — and learning that the expedition’s M2 Light Tank and T3E4 Carrier sank in snow — USASE got most of their jobs done.

There wasn’t a relief crew when they pulled out of Little America III in 1941, since World War II had started. But they did leave equipment and supplies behind, in case the two bases they’d set up could be used again.

Since then, the Snow Cruiser has been spotted twice: once in 1946, and again in 1958.

The ice sheet Little America III was on has cracked, forming several massive icebergs. Poulter’s Snow Cruiser might still be buried in ice and snow, but it’s probably now at the ocean’s bottom.

There’s more to the Snow Cruiser’s story, although I suspect many records are still in Chicago-area archives and scrapbooks. I recommend these resources:3

Learning From the Past: Halley VI

BAS/M.Krzysztofowicz's photo: Moving Halley Base (2016)
Moving one of Halley Research Station’s eight modules. (2007)
BAS/P.Bucktrout's photo: Halley Base's hydraulic leg and ski system. (2016)
Fitting sheets under one of Halley Research Station’s hydraulic leg-and-ski system. (2007)
PAS photo: moving Halley Base central red module. (2016)
Moving Halley Research Station’s central module. (2007)

Poulter had a good idea with his Snow Cruiser. Working in Antarctica is less dangerous when you can bring your shelter along. That’s partly why the current British Antarctic Survey (BAS)’s Halley Research Station, Halley VI, is mobile and modular.

Like Halley I through V, it’s on the Brunt Ice Shelf.

Since the ice shelf is slowly moving toward the ocean, buildings set on the ice would eventually go adrift as debris on icebergs.

The buildings for Halley V had hydraulic legs that kept them above the snow. Halley VI’s design added skis to its modules’ hydraulic legs. The modules aren’t self-propelled, but tractors can pull them to new locations.

Halley VI and its tractors aren’t as fast as the Snow Cruiser. But the design works, and has been moved successfully since its official opening in 2013.4

Natural Resources, Naval Bases and Empires

Walter Crane's Map of the British Empire. (1886) Map of the British Empire, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.
The British Empire in 1886, allegory and all.

Before moving along, a little about why the USASE went to Antarctica. And what happened to Poulter’s idea of a mobile Antarctic base.

Ishvara7 at English Wikipedia's map: Empires of the world, 1910. (2007) via Wikipedia, used w/o permission.I haven’t verified it, but I’m pretty sure that the United States federal government wanted a slice of Antarctic territory.

Aside from abstract benefits, like status, folks had good reason for thinking that Antarctica had significant natural resources. Buried under a continent-wide glacier, but still valuable.

And there were strategic benefits to having naval bases in the far southern hemisphere.

Memorial service at Urakami Cathedral.So how come we’re not hearing political hissy fits over whether the Territory of Byrdland in Antarctica should be the State of Byrdland?

Basically, being imperial was what cool nations did when the 20th century began.

By 1945, when survivors were digging out from occasionally-radioactive rubble, a remarkable number of national leaders decided that maybe we should try something new.

And that’s yet another topic.5

Tractors Ho! The Moon and Mars

Detail, Chesley Bonestell's illustration: 'At end of two-week-long Lunar day, convoy of tractors....' Collier's, page 45 (October 25, 1952)
Chesley Bonestell’s illustration for ‘The Exploration’, Collier’s, page 45 (October 25, 1952)

From 1952 to 1954, Collier’s published their “Man Will Conquer Space Soon!” series: including Dr. Fred L. Whipple and Dr. Wernher von Braun’s “Man on the Moon: The Exploration” (October 25, 1952).

With their caterpillar tracks, the tractor-trailer rigs look more like today’s Antarctic vehicles than the 1939 Snow Cruiser. Apart from having pressurized cabins.

Maybe I should capitalize “caterpillar”, although I suspect that name has gone the way of the Zipper. And I’m wandering off-topic again.

Anyway, the Whipple/von Braun article’s moon tractors used cutting-edge-and-beyond technology: of the early 1950s.

“…tanklike cars equipped with caterpillar treads for mobility over the moon’s rough surface. The pressurize, cylindrical cabins hold seven men, two-way radio equipment, radar for measuring distances and depths, and a 12-hour hour supply of oxygen, food, water and fuel. Power is supplied by an enclosed turbine driven by a combination of hydrogen peroxide and fuel oil (oxygen escaping from the hydrogen peroxide enables the fuel oil to ignite)….”
(“Man on the Moon: The Exploration”; Dr. Fred L. Whipple, Dr. Wernher von Braun; illustration by Chesley Bonestell; Collier’s (October 25, 1952))

Seven decades later, I could make fun of the article’s hydrogen peroxide and fuel oil tractors rumbling across a craggy landscape lit by green Earthlight. But I won’t.

Shadows cast by Lunar mountains have sharp, crisp edges, and look rugged. Since there’s no air or liquid water on the moon, thinking that Lunar landscapes would have lots of sharp edges made sense.

Apollo 11's photo: Earth. (1969) via NASA Johnson Space Center, used w/o permission.Luna 2 didn’t reach the moon until 1959.

We didn’t get the first up-close images of Luna until Ranger 7 in 1964.

In 20-20 hindsight, maybe more scientists could have predicted that micrometeorite impacts will, given time, erode jagged peaks into the now-familiar undulating and undramatic Lunar landscapes.6 But they didn’t.

We didn’t realize how blue Earth looks, either.

Collier’s, 1954: Martian Tractors

Fred Freeman's illustration: 'Advance party, after landing on Martian in ski-equipped plane, prepares for trip to equator....' Collier's, page 28 (October 25, 1952)
Fred Freeman’s illustration for “Can We Get to Mars?”, Collier’s, page 45. (April 30, 1954)

NASA/JPL-Caltech/Perseverance: annotated image, showing the mission's first sample depot location: where the Mars rover will deposit a group of sample tubes for possible future return to Earth. The depot location is 'Three Forks' in Jezero Crater. (August 29, 2022)Fred Freeman’s illustrations for the Collier’s “Can We Get to Mars?” article were a pretty good match to pictures our robot explorers have been sending back.

That’s not terribly surprising, since Martian surface conditions aren’t quite as unearthly as Luna’s. Both planets have obvious atmospheres, for starters.

What the advance party in “Can We Get to Mars?” was doing is another matter.

“…The landing of the first plane will be made on the planet’s snow-covered polar cap — the only spot where there is any reasonable certainty of finding a smooth surface. Once down, the pioneer landing party will unload its tractors and supplies, inflate its balloonlike living quarters, and start on a 4,000-mile overland journey to the Martian equator, where the expedition’s main base will be set up. … At the equator, the advance party will construct a landing strip for the other two rocket planes. (The first landing craft will be abandoned at the pole.)…”
(“Can We Get to Mars?”, p. 28; Dr. Wernher von Braun, Cornelius Ryan; Colliers (April 30, 1954))

Again, I could make fun of von Braun and Ryan’s armada of 10 ships and three landers. But I won’t.

Back in the 1950s, assuming that the first folks landing on Mars would have limited or no information based on orbital surveys or robotic landers made sense.

Given extrapolations of that era’s technology, we could have sent a scouting mission to orbit Mars, collect data and return to Earth. And then send an expedition like the one described in Collier’s.

But that didn’t happen. And probably won’t.

JPL/NASA's Figure 6. Mars 2020 flight system in the Launch / Cruise Configuration. (2014-2017) used w/o permission.Maybe von Braun, Ryan and most of the other scientists realized that semi-autonomous robots could be exploring Mars within seven decades.

If so, they may also have seen convincing non-scientists that exploring Mars was possible — as a sufficiently massive job.

And that transitioning perceptions of robots from pulp magazine mechanical minions to real technology was a task best left untried.7

Luna, 1971-1972: Moon Buggies

Commander Dave Scott's photo: Apollo 15's Lunar Roving Vehicle after EVA 3. Near Hadley Rille and Montes Apenninus at the edge of the Mare Imbrium. (August 1, 1971)
Apollo 15’s moon buggy. (August 1, 1971)

About 19 years after the Collier’s “Man Will Conquer Space Soon!” series began, the Apollo 15 mission’s equipment included a Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV). Which arguably sounds cooler that Moon buggy.

I’ll freely admit that Poulter’s Snow Cruiser and Collier’s pressurized tractors looked more impressive than the LRVs.

Apollo’s Moon buggies looked like a couple of lawn chairs strapped to a golf cart.

But — and I think this is an important point — the Moon buggies worked.8

Next Stop: Mars?

NASA/Pat Rawlings' artist's concept: 'long-range exploration on the surface of Mars using pressurized rovers.' (2007)
“Mobile Home”: pressurized Mars rover, imagined by NASA/Pat Rawlings. (2007)

Eugene A. Cernan's photo at the Taurus–Littrow landing site on the Moon. Harrison H. Schmitt standing near a boulder during Apollo 17's third extravehicular activity (EVA-3). (December 13, 1972) NASA Photo ID: AS17-140-21496Apollo 17’s Moon buggy carried Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt around the Taurus-Littrow valley in 1972.

Nobody’s gone to Luna since, although it looks like the Artemis program will get the ball rolling again.

Within a few years we may, finally, have a permanent base on another world.

That, in turn, will make sending crewed expeditions to Mars easier. I’d be astounded if we don’t establish permanent bases on Mars. And, eventually, spare folks the long Earth-Mars commute by letting them settle there. Maybe within the next century.

I think that makes sense. But some folks don’t.

“Colonization Of Mars Practically Impossible, Says Greek-American Space Expert“
Paula Tsoni, Greek Reporter (February 11, 2023)

“Greek-American space exploration scientist Dr Stamatios Krimigis told a TV interview on Thursday that the colonization of Mars is practically impossible, at least for the next 200 years.

“Speaking to journalist Nikos Chatzinikolaou on Greek private network Ant1 TV, Dr Krimigis opined that Elon Musk, a passionate advocate of the colonization of Mars, hasn’t realized the actual difficulties of such a venture….”

I think Dr. Krimigis has a point. Right now, we haven’t developed all the technology we’ll need for living on Mars.

The Mars 2020 mission’s MOXIE oxygen generator, for example, is just a prototype. It works, but must be scaled up: a lot.9

And there are other practical issues involved with living on Mars.

“…If they were to colonize Mars, humans would need shelters dug at least one metre underground to protect themselves from such events [solar flares and coronal mass ejections], he added. And while that could perhaps be feasible in 200 years from today, it will not be so ‘in Elon Musk’s era.’

“He does believe though that a manned mission to Mars could materialize in the next decade….”
(Paula Tsoni, Greek Reporter (February 11, 2023))

On the other hand, going underground isn’t the only option for protection from radiation.

“Actual Difficulties” and the Mars Ice Home

NASA/Clouds AO/SEArch's: Mars Ice Home concept; by NASA's Langley Research Center, Space Exploration Architecture, Clouds Architecture Office. (2017)
Mars Ice Home concept: Langley, Space Exploration Architecture and Clouds Architecture Office. (2017)

The Mars Ice Home would provide a “cozy” living area inside what’s essentially an ice/carbon dioxide tank.

“…after a hard day of work and back to their cozy (and highly shielded) Ice Home bunks…”
(“Ice Home Mars Habitat“, Document No. MIH.ConOps.001, Revision 1.20; Updated for the FY17 LaRC CIF Risk Reduction Study (December 21, 2017))

The design’s interior would probably feel “cozy”. Which reminds me of real estate agent descriptions like “fixer-upper” and “secluded”.

But I think it, or something like it, could work as a home on Mars.

I also think Dr. Krimigis’ assertion that Elon Musk “…hasn’t realized the actual difficulties…” is accurate.

The technology we’ll need to live on Mars is still being developed and tested.

The ‘Musk’ team has already found at least one “actual difficulty”, something that looked like a good idea — but wasn’t.

The SpaceX Starship design started with a very cool carbon composite fuel tank. Now it’s stainless steel. Because that’s more cost-effective, I gather. Stainless steel is also less apt to get damaged by radiation.10

Realizing that part of a new design doesn’t work, and making changes before heading out makes sense. Dithering over budget and then telling developers to rush a vehicle into operation six months before ‘go time’? Not so much.

Opinions, Attitudes and Constants

NASA/Clouds AO/SEArch's illustratinon: Mars Ice Home vertical cross-section. (2017)
Langley, SEA and Clouds Architecture Office’s Mars Ice Home cross-section. (2017)

Dr. Krimigis earned a Ph.D. in physics, studied under James Van Allen and was principle investigator for the Cassini-Huygens mission’s Magnetospheric Imaging Instrument (MIMI).11

I figure he’s right about folks living on Mars needing a meter of Martian soil or its equivalent between themselves and the worst of solar storms. And my hat’s off to him for realizing that it’s a technical issue, which can be dealt with.

Folks with, ah, philosophical objections to rich people and folks living where we aren’t “perfectly adapted “? Here’s an example from last year.

“Human Beings Will Never Permanently Colonize Mars or Even the Moon“
Billionaires are destroying Earth for a childish fantasy
Jared A. Brock, Surviving Tomorrow (August 8, 2022)

“Billionaires are the worst.

“They destroy jobs.

“They prey on the poor.

“They evade taxation.

“And the most delusional ones think human beings belong in uninhabitable space….

“…Humans don’t belong in uninhabitable space

“There, I said it.

“And I’ll say it again:

“Humans don’t belong in uninhabitable space.

“I believe in this outrageous notion that homo sapiens are perfectly adapted for the planet we affectionately call Earth. Homo sapiens are simply not adapted for lifelong space living, and never will be….”

There’s a lot going on here. I’ll start by admitting that, although not a billionaire myself, I lack a proper revulsion with regard to folks with more money than I’ll ever see.

And I’ve always wanted my boss to be at least wealthy enough to cover my paycheck.

Some Things Don’t Change

Jadrienc's digital matte painting 'across the park'.About money being “the root of all evils”, it’s love of money that’s a problem. (1 Timothy 6:10; Hebrews 13:5)

As for wealth and poverty, sickness and health? Stuff happens.

How much I own isn’t a sure sign of virtue or sin. Neither is being healthy or sick. What I do with what I’ve got: that’s what matters. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 828, 1509, 2211, 2288-2291, 2292-2296, 2448, 2540, 2544)

And what I should do is the same, whether I live in Minnesota, on the Moon or Mars.

I should love God and my neighbor, and see everyone as my neighbor. Everyone. No exceptions. (Matthew 5:43–44, 22:36–40; Mark 12:28–31; Luke 10:25–37; Catechism, 1706, 1776, 1789, 1825, 1849-1851, 1955)

We’re not all alike. We’re not supposed to be. But we each have equal dignity. (Catechism, 361, 369-370, 1929, 1934-1938, 2393)

Wealthy individuals and nations can and should help folks dealing with poverty. Giving food and other resources can be a good idea. So is fixing economic and social problems. (Catechism, 1883, 1932, 2439-2441, 2449)

Loving God and neighbors was important two millennia back, it’s important now, and will be important when Sargon of Akkad, Julius Caesar and Dag Hammarskjöld seem like contemporaries.

“A Severe Strain on Credulity”

The New York Times editorial, 'His Plan is Not Original;' insisting that rockets need air to push against, so they can't possibly work in space. (January 13, 1920) via timesmachine.nytimes.comThe “Humans Will Never…” op-ed reminded me of other sage advice, from 1920:

“…His Plan Is Not Original

That Professor Goddard, with his ‘chair’ in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution, does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react — to say that would be absurd. Of course he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools.

But there are such things as intentional mistakes or oversights, and, as it happens, Jules Verne, who also knew a thing or two in assorted sciences — and had, besides, a surprising amount of prophetic power — deliberately seems to make the same mistake that Professor Goddard seems to make. For the Frenchman, having got his travelers to or toward the moon into the desperate fix riding a tiny satellite of the satellite, saved them from circling it forever by means of an explosion, rocket fashion, where an explosion would not have had in the slightest degree the effect of releasing them from their dreadful slavery. That was one of Verne’s few scientific slips, or else it was a deliberate step aside from scientific accuracy, pardonable enough of him in a romancer, but its like is not so easily explained when made by a savant who isn’t writing a novel of adventure.

All the same, if Professor Goddard’s rocket attains a sufficient speed before it passes out of our atmosphere–which is a thinkable possibility — and if its aiming takes into account all of the many deflective forces that will affect its flight, it may reach the moon. That the rocket could carry enough explosive to make on impact a flash large and bright enough to be seen from earth by the biggest of our telescope — that will be believed when it is done.”
(“A Severe Strain on Credulity”, The New York Times; page 12, column 5 (January 13, 1920) via Wikisource)

“…Humans Don’t Belong…”

Brian H. Gill's photo: South Ninth Street in Sauk Centre, Minnesota. (March 2, 2023)
The view from my front door, Thursday afternoon. (March 2, 2023)

The author of that “Human Beings Will Never…” op-ed has a point. We’re not “perfectly adapted” to living on Mars.

For that matter, we’re not “perfectly adapted” to living in Minnesota.

Right now, Friday afternoon, the temperature next to my skin is about 85° Fahrenheit.

That’s close to the current temperature in Nairobi, Kenya: 70° Fahrenheit. It’s midnight there, so conditions there were closer to my personal micro-environment during the equatorial day.

My ancestors left humanity’s homeland a very, very long time ago, but we’re still adapted to that part of Earth’s equatorial region.12 Apart from a congenital melanin deficiency we picked up relatively recently, and that’s yet again another topic.

I keep my immediate environment comfortable, and survivable, with tech we call clothing, a house and a furnace.

Outside, water is a mineral.

An unprotected human wouldn’t survive more than maybe a few hours. During Minnesota winters, we need — at a minimum — clothing and fire or its equivalent.

Mars isn’t just like Minnesota, but Minnesota isn’t just like equatorial Africa. I don’t see a point in fussing about humans living where we’re not “perfectly adapted” now. And I don’t see a point in declaring that Mars is off limits because it’s not just like Minnesota.

Then there’s the matter of wealthy folks having options I don’t have.

Take William Penn, for example. England’s king gave him development rights to a swath of land in North America: which even then was worth quite a bit.

This was a few centuries back, so Mr. Penn’s property was already in the possession of part of the Delaware tribe. Credit where credit is due, though. Penn seems to have negotiated with the folks.12 And that’s still more topics.

More of my stuff, mostly space exploration and Mars:

1 Climate and technology:

2 Snow Cruiser background:

Wikipedia 'This article needs additional citations for verification...' banner.3 More background, incluidng a Wikipedia page that “needs additional citations”:

4 Hello, Halley VI — or — lessons learned:

5 History and geology:

6 Technology, science and scientists:

7 Mars, mostly:

8 A little Lunar exploration:

9 The Moon and Mars:

10 Looking ahead:

11 Physics:

12 Science, history and being human:

Posted in Back to the Moon, Onward to Mars, Discursive Detours, Series | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment