Slashdot Mirror


STEREO Spacecraft To Explore Earth's L4 and L5

Hugh Pickens writes "Launched on October 25, 2006, NASA's twin Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory (STEREO) spacecraft are about to enter the L4 and L5 Lagrangian points, special points in our orbit around which spacecraft and other objects can loiter because the gravitational pull of earth and the sun balances the forces from the object's orbital motion. (The spacecraft won't linger at the Lagrangian points; they are just passing through.) 'These places may hold small asteroids, which could be leftovers from a Mars-sized planet that formed billions of years ago,' said NASA Project Scientist Michael Kaiser. STEREO will look for asteroids with a wide-field-of-view telescope. 'If we discover the asteroids have the same composition as the Earth and moon, it will support Belbruno and Gott's version of the giant impact theory. The asteroids themselves could well be left-over from the formation of the solar system.' L4 and L5 are also good places to observe space weather. 'With both the sun and Earth in view, we could track solar storms and watch them evolve as they move toward Earth. Also, since we could see sides of the sun not visible from Earth, we would have a few days warning before stormy regions on the solar surface rotate to become directed at Earth,' says Kaiser."

21 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. May hold? by palindrome · · Score: 2, Interesting

    'These places may hold small asteroids, which could be leftovers from a Mars-sized planet that formed billions of years ago,'

    Can we not confirm the existence of these using telescopes on Earth or in orbit?

    1. Re:May hold? by aicrules · · Score: 2, Informative

      Possibly, but the solar storm monitoring wouldn't be as effective.

    2. Re:May hold? by Bakkster · · Score: 5, Informative

      Since the L4 and L5 points don't move relative to our perspective, any objects we would see there would move very little compared to the background of stars. Movement across a series of telescope images is the usual method for detecting small objects in our solar system, and it can't be used for these locations.

      To detect objects here, you would need to look at images taken over a series of months and centered on the points to find objects that didn't move with the rest of our perspective. This would probably need to be done by a space telescope, since by the time a ground based telescope could see the points, the sun is already rising or still setting. Even then, the objects are only half lit by the sun, due to our angle of viewing, so they would be especially dim. In addition, sending a spacecraft to the area would allow the sattelites to determine the composition of the asteroids to see if they came from an Earth collision or are leftover from the solar system's birth.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    3. Re:May hold? by Hynee · · Score: 4, Informative

      Since the L4 and L5 points don't move relative to our perspective, any objects we would see there would move very little compared to the background of stars.

      They'd move as fast as the sun does through the background stars, for obvious reasons! That's ~1 deg/day.

      --
      Damn, I already moderated this topic. Now I'll have to log in with my sock puppet to comment.
    4. Re:May hold? by Hynee · · Score: 4, Insightful
      OK, I'll continue.

      To detect objects here, you would need to look at images taken over a series of months and centered on the points to find objects that didn't move with the rest of our perspective.

      Months would do it, so too would hours! 2.5 min / hour.

      This would probably need to be done by a space telescope, since by the time a ground based telescope could see the points, the sun is already rising or still setting.

      They would set and rise at most 4 hours after the sun, plenty of time for 1x 1 hour exposure a day.

      Even then, the objects are only half lit by the sun, due to our angle of viewing, so they would be especially dim.

      Half-lit by the sun is no problem, this would only give them +0.75 Magnitudes (dimmer by a factor of 2).

      In addition, sending a spacecraft to the area would allow the sattelites to determine the composition of the asteroids to see if they came from an Earth collision or are leftover from the solar system's birth.

      You can still get composition information from asteroid spectra, they can put them into groups of composition types from that. If the spectra hasn't been observed before, it's best to have a sample.



      I don't know what the problem with observing these points is, maybe the asteroids are likely too small.

      --
      Damn, I already moderated this topic. Now I'll have to log in with my sock puppet to comment.
    5. Re:May hold? by Bakkster · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's a lunar L4 and L5. These satellites are headed to the solar L4 and L5.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    6. Re:May hold? by AaxelB · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I may add, the two points are also really far away. I thought they were somewere within the orbit of the moon, but they're actually just as far away as the sun. (This picture cleared things up nicely.) We could probably tell whether asteroids are there, but for the reasons you mentioned we couldn't find out anything more useful.

    7. Re:May hold? by AaxelB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, the L4 and L5 points would move at the same rate as the moon, since they are the gravitationally stable points created by the moon and Earth (60 degrees ahead and behind the moon on its orbit). And last time I looked at the moon, it does move against the background stars.

      This spacecraft is visiting the Sun-Earth Lagrangian points, not the Earth-Moon ones. The Sun-Earth L4 and L5 are just as far away as the sun, along the earth's orbit, so they'd appear to move just like the sun.

  2. Loiter? by PinkyDead · · Score: 4, Funny

    Get off my Lagrangian points you young hoodlums!

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  3. Russell's teapot by Nick+Fel · · Score: 3, Funny

    If its out there, the atheist community isn't going to be happy.

  4. Blasting Peter Gabriel? by sprior · · Score: 2, Funny

    So your telling me that NASA is parking the worlds most expensive STEREO in the only free parking spots in the solar system? Next you're gonna tell me they used it to blast "In your eyes"...

    1. Re:Blasting Peter Gabriel? by Ioldanach · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe they're rickrolling the solar system?

    2. Re:Blasting Peter Gabriel? by Limburgher · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nah, it's for an upcoming Disaster Area reunion.

      --

      You are not the customer.

  5. L1,2,3 are different from L4,5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    L4 and L5 are stable, means that a force pushes objects back in the direction of those points regardless of the direction, because they are a local potential minimum.

    L1, L2, L3 are indeed unstable, but there exists an orbit around those points, which is stable.

  6. Re:I wonder, how. by hcpxvi · · Score: 5, Informative

    That (the lagrange points being unstable equilibria) is true of L1, L2 and L3 (all on the Earth-Sun line, L1 between Earth and Sun, L2 outside the Earth's orbit and L3 round the other side of the Sun). L4 and L5, OTOH, are stable equilibria and junk can collect there. The equivalent points for Jupiter have observable collections of asteroids in them.

  7. Re:I wonder, how. by fredrik70 · · Score: 2, Informative

    actually 4 and 5 are stable, from wikipedia:
    In contrast to the collinear Lagrangian points, the triangular points (L4 and L5) are stable equilibria (cf. attractor), provided that the ratio of M1/M2 is greater than 24.96.[5][6] This is the case for the Sunâ"Earth and, by a smaller margin, the Earthâ"Moon systems. When a body at these points is perturbed, it moves away from the point, but the Coriolis effect bends the object's path into a stable, kidney beanâshaped orbit around the point (as seen in the rotating frame of reference). However, in the Earthâ"Moon case, the problem of stability is greatly complicated by the appreciable solar gravitational influence.[7]

    source

    --
    if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
  8. Re:I wonder, how. by fredrik70 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    utter rubbish, in an informal environment like this wikipedia is fine. Indeed you should not use it in papers and such, that' splain silly, but for a quick lookup of fact, together with a quick check if the content seems unreasonable or not, it's fine

    --
    if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
  9. Get another acronym by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    In space, no one can hear your STEREO

  10. 'Secrets' in L4/L5 (and risks) by ghostlibrary · · Score: 3, Informative

    As a researching using STEREO data, I wrote a piece on some of the logistics of this, and what we may find.
    http://scientificblogging.com/daytime_astronomer/secrets_l4l5_gravity_wells

    The summary is: we've already seen a bit in an earlier roll so we know there's stuff there, we lose use of the in-situ to explore L4/L5 so we have to balance that with our core science, there's a higher risk to the detectors due to dust, but what the heck, we have to pass through it anyway. We may find any of: dust, the moon's progenitor, and earth-killer, more dust.

    --
    A.
  11. La Grange? by Ranhert · · Score: 2, Funny

    I finally figured out what ZZ Top was singing about. Earth's and the Sun's gravitational limbo land.

  12. Re:No Such Lagranimals by AikonMGB · · Score: 4, Informative

    First: The Earth's relationship with the Moon is such that their barycentre is inside the Earth, about 1700 km below the surface.

    Second: L4 and L5 are potential minima, meaning the gravitational potential field increases as you move away from these points. Although the term "well" is misleading, it is certainly more applicable than "hill". It is this increasing potential that leads to the Lyapunov stability of L4 and L5 in the restricted three-body problem. The definition of this kind of stability is that if you are perturbed from equilibrium some small delta less than epsilon, then you will stay within that epsilon band.

    Third: The Earth-Sun Lagrange points currently occupied by satellites are L1 and L2, for perpetual sunlight and perpetual shadow respectively. L1, L2, and L3 are all unstable, hence the necessity for station-keeping of these satellites. As far as I am aware, there are no satellites currently occupying L4 or L5.

    Fourth: Large Impact Theory is just that, a theory. One of the objectives of this mission is to determine if there are small asteroids at L4 and/or L5, which could either lend support to or detract support from this theory. Regardless of whether this event happened or not, the L4 and L5 points still exist for any restricted three-body problem. Case in point: Jupiter-Sun L4 and L5 are filled with the Trojan asteroids.

    -Aikon