Slashdot Mirror


NASA's Cassini Captures Photos of Saturn's Rings In Unprecedented Detail (voanews.com)

NASA's Cassini probe has captured news images of Saturn's rings in unprecedented detail. The images were captured by the probe in its penultimate mission phase of its mission that includes "20 orbits that dive past the outer edge of the main ring system" before the spacecraft plunges into the planet itself. Interestingly, the rings include what NASA calls "moonlets" embedded in them. VOA News reports: The images are the closest ever taken of Saturn's rings and, according to NASA âoeresolve details as small as 550 meters, which is on the scale of Earth's tallest buildings.â The"ring-grazing" orbits began last November and will continue until the end of April, and in addition to spotting the moonlets, they have given greater clarity to other structures within the rings such as the so-called propeller-like formations. NASA added that Cassini has also provided the "closest-ever" glimpses of two small moons, Daphnis and Pandora. The report via NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) adds: "Some of the structures seen in recent Cassini images have not been visible at this level of detail since the spacecraft arrived at Saturn in mid-2004. At that time, fine details like straw and propellers -- which are caused by clumping ring particles and small, embedded moonlets, respectively -- had never been seen before. (Although propellers were present in Cassini's arrival images, they were actually discovered in later analysis, the following year.) Cassini came a bit closer to the rings during its arrival at Saturn, but the quality of those arrival images (examples: 1, 2, 3) was not as high as in the new views. Those precious few observations only looked out on the backlit side of the rings, and the team chose short exposure times to minimize smearing due to Cassini's fast motion as it vaulted over the ring plane. This resulted in images that were scientifically stunning, but somewhat dark and noisy.

9 of 43 comments (clear)

  1. Vinyl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    It kinda looks like a vinyl record. Has anyone tried playing it yet?

    1. Re:Vinyl by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      It kinda looks like a vinyl record. Has anyone tried playing it yet?

      I ran it through a digital player, and it said, "All your bases are belong to a blind trust managed by my offspring."

  2. Hmm by joh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would love to see a probe going into an orbit that is synchronized to the rings. And then slowly dives into the rings, between all the small and bigger particles that make up the ring. Must be like a somewhat dense cloud of debris moving along in parallel without much motion between them.

    1. Re:Hmm by wisebabo · · Score: 2

      I once, a long time ago in a place far far away, went to the JPL monthly lecture in Pasadena California. This one was about the Cassini probe then completing its first few months around Saturn.

      After the lecture, under the imposing model of one of the Voyager spacecraft, I met with the Project Scientist (I'm not sure if she is the same one as the current one) and asked her if they could do a "risky" maneuver at the end of Cassini's lifetime. Have Cassini go to the rings (in a synchronized fashion as you say) but stay "just" above them using a continual very low thrust from its main engine(s) or thrusters.

      I had seen the pictures taken edge on of the rings and seen how "razor" thin they were (at least on a cosmic scale). It appeared to (my very unprofessional, untrained eye) that there was no debris or particles immediately above or below the rings. There seems to be some mechanism which causes particles to stay exactly within the rings (collisions and redistribution of momentum?). So, maybe Cassini could just apply a very small amount of thrust, perpendicular to the ring plane, to counteract its orbital trajectory that would normally take it up and down through the ring. It could then hover a few (tens? hundreds?) kilometers above the rings and could get unbelievable closeups of them without getting ground to pieces.

      I think she just laughed and probably knew of a dozen reasons why this wouldn't work (the thrust would be too low, the propellant use too high, there was still probably way too much debris around, they wouldn't be able to navigate that accurately, etc.). Still your comment made me think about this, and that someday maybe with a probe with an (low) thrust long duration ion drive, it would be able to float just above the rings (as close as would be safe), synchronized with them, and be able to take spectacular long duration exposures of the tumbling pebbles, boulders, mountains that make up this spectacle.

    2. Re:Hmm by joh · · Score: 2

      Well, I think there is still some "action" going on in the rings. Even if everything in there would be totally synchronized with no relative motion (especially then) you would get mass clumps of particles slowly being drawn toward each other by their own mass/gravity. Basically the same thing that led to planets forming from rings of particles in the early solar system. But then this would be extremely interesting to research, because it would be the nearest thing to look at for such processes.

      It would be wise to use a somewhat rugged probe with nuclear power (no fragile solar panels) with some shielding, retractable instruments and an ion drive... Anyway, there are lots of cool things to explore left in the solar system and the closer you look the more interesting things you find!

  3. Slight pet peeve of mine-- by wierd_w · · Score: 3, Informative

    NASA seems to really really love using monochrome imaging systems.

    Look, I GET that this is in the outer solar system, and that the sun's light is very pitifully weak out there. I GET that. I understand that they want to gather as much light as is possible in the images.

    However, monochrome CCDs dont care what frequency the photons are. As long as they can pass through the forward optics and focus, they will add to the luminosity of the resulting image. That means that dust could be very reflective of IR, or UV light, and it would have the same whiteness. Sure, you could subtract some of that out using special optics for IR and UV, and create some horrid false-color image that does not reflect reality at all, other than artificially showing where there is UV or IR reflectivity, but visible light absorbtion/emission spectra are also very useful for scientific enquiry into such objects.

    Why does NASA not at least TRY to get true color images with extended exposure times?

    It's been a pet peeve of my for years, and I cant be the only one. I KNOW they can do it, because Voyager took lots of true color images back in the 70s. CCD tech has greatly improved since then.

    1. Re:Slight pet peeve of mine-- by dargaud · · Score: 4, Informative

      Color CCDs have several disadvantages over monochrome ones for science applications: lower sensitivity, bleeding, aliasing, complexity... So normally for color pictures in space, they simply use filters of various frequencies: R, G, B for color pics, but also IR, UV and various peak frequencies of interesting chemicals (very important for science). This way it's not just a camera, but a full on science measurement. Every space camera is used like that. But why wasn't it used here ? Simply because the relative motion was too fast: they already had to use a short exposure time in order not to get a blurry shot, but changing filters take time and the pics wouldn't match in later post-processing. This method only works for subjects that don't move (or if you don't move yourself).

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    2. Re:Slight pet peeve of mine-- by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

      Color cameras are just crippled cameras. Each pixel in the image is made from 4 pixels in the camera. One red, one blue and 2 green. The camera then balances the output to make the output pixel. With a monochrome camera, each pixel provides separate output. That way data is collected 4 times faster. When astronomers, both professional and amateur, create those wonderful color pictures of deep sky objects, they do it with filters and a monochrome camera. They will take many pictures to collect hours of black and white images to get all the detail. Then they may take separate red, green, and blue images to add the color. Or, they may use filters that take in the light of certain elements like hydrogen, oxygen and sulfur. They then use software to combine all that information into the final product.

  4. Why does NASA not at least TRY... by turkeydance · · Score: 4, Funny

    their revised unlimited plan has data caps.