Scientists Say Heck, Just Nuke a Killer Asteroid Heading for Earth

By Victor Tangermann

Plenty of asteroids can survive their fiery plunge through the Earth’s atmosphere. If they’re big enough, they can prove incredibly destructive, like the 60-foot Chelyabinsk meteor that exploded over the southern Ural region in Russia in 2013, releasing a blast equivalent to 30 times the energy of the atomic bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima.

And in case an even larger space rock were to ever threaten humanity, we’d have to get creative to keep it from colliding with our planet. Crashing a spacecraft into it like a pool ball to redirect its path — just like NASA did with its proof of concept Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) mission in 2022 — may not always be on the table, given the many uncertainties involved.

In a new paper published in the journal Nature Communications, an international team of researchers — including scientists from CERN and the University of Oxford — revisited the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid with a nuclear warhead.

There are intuitive concerns. What if the asteroid shattered, turning a cosmic sniper shot into a shotgun blast of debris raining down over our planet?

But the team used CERN’s Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS) to study how asteroid materials react to different levels of physical stress, including large-scale simulations of nuclear deflection, and found that the space rocks are surprisingly resilient.

“Planetary defense represents a scientific challenge,” said Karl-Georg Schlesinger, cofounder of nuclear deflection startup Outer Solar System Company (OuSoCo), which partnered with the scientists, in a statement. “The world must be able to execute a nuclear deflection mission with high confidence, yet cannot conduct a real-world test in advance.”

In an experiment, the team exposed samples of a metal-rich meteorite to 27 short but intense pulses of a proton beam at CERN’s HiRadMat facility. Afterward, the team moved the meteorite to the ISIS Neutron and Muon Source at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in the UK to analyze changes to its internal structure at a microscopic level.

To their surprise, the “material became stronger, exhibiting an increase in yield strength, and displayed a self-stabilizing damping behavior,” explained OuSoCo cofounder Melanie Bochmann.

The finding could have major implications for how we approach future asteroid redirection efforts.

“Our experiments indicate that — at least for metal-rich asteroid material — a larger device than previously thought can be used without catastrophically breaking the asteroid,” Bochmann said. “This keeps open an emergency option for situations involving very large objects or very short warning times, where non-nuclear methods are insufficient and where current models might assume fragmentation would limit the usable device size.”

Fortunately, the researchers could soon have far more data to go by. Both NASA and the European Space Agency are planning to study Apophis, an enormous asteroid somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 feet in width, which is expected to come eerily close to the Earth — closer than many geosynchronous satellites at just 20,000 miles — to Earth in April 2029.

“As a next step, we plan to study more complex and rocky asteroid materials,” the researchers said in a statement. “One example is a class of meteorites called pallasites, which consist of a metal matrix similar to the meteorite material we have already studied, with up to centimeter-sized magnesium-rich crystals embedded inside.”

The upcoming research could have fascinating implications outside of asteroid redirection as well.

“Because these objects are thought to originate from the core–mantle boundary of early planetesimals,” they added, “such experiments could also provide valuable insights into planetary formation processes.”

More on asteroids: 

• Asteroid Behaving Strangely

 

{ https://futurism.com/category/space  }

08-02-2026 om 18:24 geschreven door peter  

From time to time, ice ages occur on Earth, during which the appearance of our planet changes significantly. During these periods, large areas of land are covered with a layer of ice that does not melt even in summer. Scientists do not know all the reasons behind this phenomenon, but they have long been aware of its mechanisms and have several good theories that could explain everything.

Ice on Earth

One of the main features of Earth as a planet in the Solar System is that it changes its appearance significantly as it revolves around our star. In regions where winter prevails at a given moment, water turns into snow and ice, covering vast areas of the surface. This is especially noticeable in the temperate zone of the Northern Hemisphere, as this is where the largest land masses are concentrated.

Earth is not unique in this regard, as Mars experiences the same changes, albeit on a smaller scale. There are areas of land on Earth that are permanently covered with ice regardless of the season, but this mainly applies to Antarctica, Greenland, and some high-altitude regions. However, there were times in the past when snow and ice covered a much larger area throughout the year.

We know them as the Ice Age. This term usually refers to the part of the Pleistocene epoch that began 2.53 million years ago and continues to this day. However, it is neither the only such event in the history of the Earth, nor the longest or the most extensive, but it is the best known to the general public and the best studied by scientists.

It is interesting to note that the idea of a period in our planet’s past when even modern Central Europe had a climate similar to that of northern Siberia today is relatively new. Even in the days of Galileo and Copernicus, no one suspected such a thing. It all began in the 17th century, when researchers turned their attention to so-called erratic boulders – large boulders found far from their parent rock, sometimes in the middle of a forest.

People already knew back then that such boulders often remain on the slopes of the Alps in spring after the ice has receded far into the mountains. But similar stones were found even deep in the valleys, where the ice did not reach in winter.

Subsequently, such rounded boulders began to be found not only in the Alps but also in Scandinavia, and the idea arose that once upon a time the whole continent was covered with ice. Later, the same conclusion was made about most of Europe in general. In the second half of the 19th century, the idea of the Ice Age as part of Earth’s past gained widespread recognition.

What was the last ice age like?

It should be noted that the idea of the last ice age as a period when the Earth froze 2.5 million years ago and then melted almost instantly 10,000 years ago is, in principle, incorrect.

Yes, the climate did become much colder. Glaciers covered Belarus, Scandinavia, and Scotland, but further south, in the place of modern-day London and Paris, there was tundra. This meant that snow lay on the ground for most of the year, but it melted for a few summer months, and then the land was covered with cold-resistant vegetation. Where the climate was slightly wetter and warmer, there were taiga – cold coniferous forests. Roughly the same picture was observed in North America.

Further south, where the warm Mediterranean now stretches, there was a temperate climate, and beyond that were warm and even hot countries. Yes, the average temperature on the planet was significantly lower than it is now, but in tropical and equatorial zones, this effect was not very pronounced. In many regions, precipitation was significantly higher than it is today, although its distribution remained roughly the same as it is now.

At the same time, the entire picture described above refers to the peaks of glaciation, which during the Quaternary period were not constant but were interrupted by interglacial periods. These periods lasted up to several tens of thousands of years, during which the climate was remarkably similar to what it is now. The ice fields retreated to the poles, and the former tundra turned into mixed forests and steppes.

In general, it is worth noting that the Quaternary glaciation has not yet come to an end. The climate that currently prevails on Earth is just another interglacial period. It is quite possible that in a few tens of thousands of years, the glaciers will begin to advance again.

Feedback system

But why is this happening, and why are scientists sure that this is not the end of the ice age, but just a break in it? The answer to this question is pretty complicated, not least because the Quaternary glaciation is not the first in Earth’s history; we know way less about the past ones, and there is no guarantee that they had the same root causes.

However, scientists have a fairly good understanding of the mechanisms that control the course of such an event once it has begun. Direct and reverse feedback mechanisms begin to operate.

Water ice is a material with high heat capacity for heating and melting. No wonder it is used to cool drinks. For a cubic kilometer of ice to melt, it must absorb a huge amount of energy from the surrounding land, water, and air.

In addition, ice has a high albedo. To see this for yourself, just step outside on a sunny winter day. Therefore, even a fraction of a percent increase in the area of glaciers on our planet is enough to significantly increase the amount of solar energy reflected into space. At the same time, the part that remains in the atmosphere and hydrosphere is absorbed by the same ice.

This creates conditions for the formation of even more ice. As a result, the area of glaciers grows from year to year: slowly at first, and then faster and faster as the process of their expansion accelerates.

Why, then, do glaciers not cover the entire Earth, and why does the cold era eventually come to an end? Because, in addition to direct mechanisms, there is also a reverse mechanism at work. Greenhouse gases are present in the Earth’s atmosphere. The strongest of these are carbon dioxide (carbonic acid gas) and water vapor. The former is constantly replenished by volcanoes and forest fires, the latter by evaporation from the surface of the oceans.

Carbon dioxide is absorbed by plants and certain types of rock, while water vapor is converted into precipitation. In the early stages of glaciation, the amount of the former remains unchanged, while the amount of the latter actually decreases due to the overall drop in global temperatures.

But as glaciers spread, temperature fluctuations in the atmosphere decrease, winds weaken, and precipitation decreases. The cold and dry climate prevents plants from growing, and they begin to absorb less carbon dioxide. And volcanoes have no intention of ceasing their activity.

At some point, the content of carbon dioxide, followed by water vapor, in the atmosphere begins to increase, and now they demonstrate a positive correlation. The more there is, the faster it accumulates. The albedo and heat capacity of glaciers become weaker than those of relatively warm and humid air, and they begin to melt faster than they form. Therefore, their area shrinks quite quickly, the planet’s albedo decreases, and an interglacial period begins.

These assumptions are consistent with geological data. Temperature and chemical composition of the air leave many traces in rocks and fossilized trees. It is easy to construct graphs of these traces and see how this works.

Milankovitch cycles

But what is the root cause of these changes, the impetus that causes glaciers to cross the threshold beyond which the above-described processes begin? There is no exact answer to this question, but the most plausible explanation is the observation made by Serbian astronomer Milutin Milankovitch in the 1940s.

The shape of Earth’s orbit can change over time from almost perfectly circular to slightly elliptical. This is due to the influence of other planets, which is described by complex dependencies. At the same time, the axis of rotation of our planet undergoes precession, i.e., a very slow change in its orientation and orbit, i.e., the direction in which it is tilted relative to the Sun.

As a result, over tens of thousands of years, the relative positions of the Earth’s aphelion – the farthest point in its orbit – and the moment of maximum inclination of one of the poles toward the sun change. We call the latter phenomenon the solstice, and depending on which hemisphere we are in, it can be winter or summer.

But it is not only this time that changes, but also the distance between the Earth and the Sun at the moment of aphelion. Milankovitch drew attention to how small the angle at which the sun’s rays fall on the polar regions of our planet becomes. Could it be that at some point it becomes so small that most of them are simply reflected by the atmosphere, and the amount of heat received by polar glaciers becomes minimal, creating conditions for a sharp increase in their amount?

Milankovitch compared graphs of changes in the angle of incidence of rays and temperatures on Earth over the last two million years and saw that they were extremely similar. We still do not know whether the cycles named after the Serbian scientist are only the “trigger” for glaciations or whether they control them all the time, but no one doubts that they played an important role in this process. And it is precisely the repeatability of the Milankovitch cycles that gives us confidence that the last glaciation was not actually the last.

Past ice ages

The combination of Milankovitch cycles and the mechanisms of direct and reverse feedback between ice and the atmosphere provides a good explanation for the last ice age. However, if we look at the entire history of our planet, many more questions arise.

This is because the fluctuations that can be more or less confidently explained by them arose about 35 million years ago. And within these last millions of years, the change of eras did not always occur. Before that, for hundreds of millions of years, the Earth had a warm and stable climate.

And if all this does not seem strange enough to you, there were other ice ages before that, which were followed by equally long warm periods. And the most severe glaciation in Earth’s history, known as Snowball Earth, occurred during the Proterozoic eon. More precisely, there were two of them: the Stertian, 717–660 million years ago, and the Marionian, 650–635 million years ago.

Unfortunately, due to the remoteness of these events, we know nothing about any short-lived interglacial periods that may have existed within them. However, the fact that the glaciers reached the equator at that time suggests that the simple and understandable mechanisms described above did not work or did not work properly.

This is very surprising because the heat capacity and albedo of ice could not have changed during this time. Moreover, there is little convincing evidence that our planet’s orbit has also changed.

Movement of continents

There are many ideas about possible additional mechanisms of glaciation. The most convincing among them is the hypothesis that the degree of influence of Milankovitch cycles and climatic feedback mechanisms is largely determined by the location of the continents.

The fact is that continents act as heat and cold concentrators. Ice melts faster at sea than on land. Just look at Greenland and Antarctica, where most of the ice is concentrated. At the same time, the hottest deserts are located in the interior of the continental masses of Eurasia and Africa.

The continents themselves move very slowly along with the continental plates, compressing and forming bridges between them. That is, if all the land were gathered into a single mass stretching from pole to pole and blocking all ocean currents, it would be the ideal moment for the onset of an ice age. On the other hand, if there are several small continents scattered across the tropical and temperate zones of both hemispheres, and both poles and the equator remain free, ocean currents balance the climate across the planet.

Of course, these are two extreme ideal scenarios, which are extremely difficult to achieve given the chaotic movement of lithospheric plates. But the closer the actual position of the continental plates is to one or the other scenario, the greater the chance that the influence of Milankovitch cycles will or will not be felt. At least, data on the last few million years of our planet’s history can be well explained by this pattern, including the last 35 million years, during which we have had a giant refrigerator at the South Pole in the form of Antarctica.

The formation of mountains

There is another factor related to the movement of tectonic plates that may influence the likelihood of the onset of an ice age. When pieces of the lithosphere collide, it can happen relatively quietly, or it can be accompanied by the formation of massive mountain ranges. The last 65 million years, which we call the Cenozoic era, have been just such an epoch.

The fact is that when lithospheric plates collide, rocks that were previously hidden underground and had no contact with the atmosphere come to the surface. And the most chemically active components of the latter are carbon dioxide and water vapor.

That is, when active hill formation occurs, it should lead to the absorption of greenhouse gases. At least that is how it should happen in theory, but it is still unclear whether the volume of rock released from under the Earth is sufficient to significantly affect the composition of the atmosphere.

Astronomical reasons

Finally, when discussing the root causes that can trigger glaciation processes, it is impossible not to mention purely astronomical reasons. The first thing that comes to mind is the change in the Earth’s orbit over long periods of time. This idea is extremely logical and can explain everything without introducing additional entities.

The only problem is that all generally accepted models show that planetary orbits, except for a short period immediately after their formation, remained stable. Some studies suggest that the Earth’s orbit could indeed have changed more than is commonly believed under the influence of Jupiter and Saturn, but these assumptions remain unconfirmed.

However, one event that could have truly influenced glaciation is that the Sun may have been several tens of percent less bright than it is now during the first billion years of its existence. This is quite normal for stars similar to it.

And a weak Sun is perfect for explaining why glaciation in the Proterozoic was so extensive. But it cannot be the only and exhaustive explanation for all such processes.

There are other, much more exotic assumptions about the causes of glaciation related to space. For example, the Sun encountered a shock wave from a supernova on its way, and that gas and dust somehow affected the amount of heat our planet received. However, such assumptions remain marginal.

Global warming

The onset of an ice age is caused by several very diverse factors. And here a logical question arises: how does human economic activity affect these processes? First of all, this concerns the emission of large amounts of greenhouse gases by our industry and transport.

This fact is usually presented in a negative light. But is it possible that this process could actually delay the onset of a new ice age in the future? If so, then it should be viewed as positive.

In fact, there is no definite answer to this question. The same applies to the question of what role natural processes of transition from glaciation to interglaciation, which are not yet complete, play in global warming.

Scientists can only speculate that the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reduce the impact of Milankovitch cycles on the climate, as was the case during warm periods. However, we will only find out about this in a few thousand years.

• Posted in Articles, Questions

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/articles-en/ }

07-02-2026 om 21:03 geschreven door peter  

At the center of our Milky Way galaxy, there may not be a supermassive black hole, but rather a huge cluster of mysterious dark matter that exerts the same gravitational pull. This is according to the results of a study published in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Mystery of Sagittarius A*

At the center of our galaxy is a compact radio source known as Sagittarius A*. Its mass is 4.3 million times greater than that of the Sun, and it is surrounded by a group of stars (known as S-stars) that move at tremendous speeds of several thousand kilometers per second.

According to most researchers, Sagittarius A* is a supermassive black hole. In 2022, the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) collaboration even managed to obtain an image of its shadow, consistent with theoretical predictions.

However, not everyone agrees with this interpretation. An international group of researchers has put forward an alternative idea, according to which Sagittarius A* is actually a cluster of dark matter — a mysterious substance that does not participate in electromagnetic interactions and manifests its existence through gravitational effects on other bodies.

Alternative hypothesis

According to a new hypothesis, Sagittarius A* consists of a certain type of light subatomic particles called fermions. It has a superdense compact core surrounded by an extensive diffuse halo, which together act as a single entity.

According to scientists, the inner core of dark matter is so compact and massive that it can mimic the gravitational pull of a black hole and explain the orbits of S-stars, as well as the orbits of dust-enveloped objects known as G-sources, which also exist nearby. 

The data from the Gaia mission, which mapped the rotation curve of the outer halo of the Milky Way, showing how stars and gas rotate away from the center, are particularly important for this hypothesis. A slowdown in the rotation curve of our galaxy, known as Keplerian decline, has been observed, which, according to researchers, can be explained by an external halo of dark matter combined with the Milky Way’s disk and bulge, which consist of ordinary matter.

“This is the first time a dark matter model has successfully bridged these vastly different scales and various object orbits, including modern rotation curve and central stars data,” said study co-author Dr. Carlos Argüelles of the La Plata Institute of Astrophysics.

“We are not just replacing the black hole with a dark object; we are proposing that the supermassive central object and the galaxy’s dark matter halo are two manifestations of the same, continuous substance.”

Shadow of Sagittarius A*

It is important to note that the fermion model of dark matter has already undergone rigorous testing. Previous research has shown that a dense core of dark matter would strongly bend light, creating a central darkness surrounded by a bright ring. This way, its image will match the famous image of the shadow of Sagittarius A* obtained by the EHT.

The researchers also statistically compared their fermionic dark matter model with the traditional black hole model. They found that although current data on internal stars does not yet allow these two scenarios to be clearly distinguished, the dark matter model provides a unified framework that explains both the center of the galaxy (central stars and shadow) and the galaxy as a whole.

According to the authors, more accurate data obtained using instruments such as the GRAVITY interferometer on the Very Large Telescope in Chile, as well as the search for the unique signature of photon rings — a key feature of black holes that is absent in the dark matter core scenario — will be crucial for testing the predictions of their model.

• According to Royal Astronomical Society

• Posted in News, Science

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/news-en/science-en/ }

06-02-2026 om 23:24 geschreven door peter  

The idea of having children in space sounds like something out of science fiction. However, scientists argue that the issue of protecting the reproductive health of astronauts is not futuristic, but a pressing reality, without which it is impossible to seriously talk about long-term missions to the Moon or Mars, or even further into the Solar System.

The human body evolved on Earth, so the space environment is hostile to our biology. The two biggest threats are cosmic radiation and microgravity. Radiation can damage the DNA of reproductive cells and increase the risk of cancer, while the absence of gravity disrupts hormonal balance and affects embryo development.

Added to this are toxic dust from other planets, limited resources, stress factors, and disruption of circadian rhythms. In the long term, this poses a risk of cumulative damage to the reproductive system and even epigenetic changes that could affect the health of future generations.

What do we know, and what is unknown?

Scientists currently have too little data to draw definitive conclusions. Only limited animal studies exist. Information from astronauts who have been on long missions is insufficient. It is unknown how exactly prolonged stays outside Earth affect male fertility and female reproductive health.

That is why a group of experts led by clinical embryologist Giles Palmer is calling for a comprehensive research program to be launched immediately. “It is very important to prepare for fertility risks as interest in lunar missions and Mars exploration grows,” explains the scientist.

Towards a secure future

Future research should focus on understanding the impact of space factors on each stage of the reproductive process. This will enable the development of effective protective measures, ranging from special radiation shields to fertility preservation methods and medical countermeasures. 

Advanced reproductive technologies, particularly those utilizing artificial intelligence and automation adapted for use in space, will play a key role.

It’s time to act now

Science does not plan to send pregnant women into space for experiments. Research will be conducted on Earth under simulated conditions. However, it is already necessary to establish international ethical principles to regulate this area. The priorities should be informed consent, transparency, gender equality, and absolute protection of the health of future generations. This is not only a matter of science, but also of responsibility for the future of humanity beyond our planet.

Reproduction in space remains a distant prospect, but planning has to start today. Overcoming reproductive challenges is no less important for colonizing the solar system than developing powerful rockets or life support systems. The future of space civilization depends on how we now move to protect what is most precious — human life in all its potential for continuation.

We previously reported on the dangers of sex in space.

• According to space.com

• Posted in News, Science

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/news-en/science-en/ }

06-02-2026 om 23:05 geschreven door peter  

One of Earth’s deepest secrets has come to light in new University of Liverpool research that identifies how two vast, hot rock structures in the planet’s mantle produce unusual magnetic activity, shaping the planet over hundreds of millions of years.

What lies in the deepest regions beneath the Earth’s surface is fairly well understood, although humans have only directly observed it at a depth of 12 kilometers. Now, researchers have uncovered new evidence about the magnetic influence of two unusual structures where the Earth’s mantle touches the core, as revealed in a recent paper published in Nature Geoscience.

A Mysterious Boundary

A lack of direct access to Earth’s interior leaves room for uncertainty, as well as new discoveries. One such discovery was made recently when University of Liverpool researchers identified two continent-sized rock structures about 2,900 kilometers below Earth’s surface, located beneath Africa and the Pacific Ocean, that influence the planet’s magnetic field. These ultra-hot regions affect the planet’s molten outer core, altering how the magnetic field is generated locally.

According to the new study from the DEEP (Determining Earth Evolution using Palaeomagnetism) research group in the University of Liverpool’s School of Environmental Sciences, working with researchers from the University of Leeds, the rock forming these structures remains solid despite being superheated and is surrounded by a ring of cooler rock that stretches between the poles.

Investigating the Mantle

Similar to how a wind turbine generates electricity, the flow of liquid iron in Earth’s outer core produces the planet’s magnetic field. Inside Earth, the mantle acts as a cold sink for the geodynamo, creating cooler pockets. Although the mantle is relatively uniform seismically, researchers expect significant lateral variations in heat distribution, which could influence how the iron core flows. The DEEP team sought to use paleomagnetic data to better understand this region—a challenging task.

Previous work in this area assumed uniformity or examined relatively short time scales. In this study, the team combined magnetic data with a mathematical model of the geodynamo to investigate its activity over the last 265 million years. Collecting measurements of these magnetic fields and running simulations of the processes that generate them posed major technical challenges.

From the models, the team reconstructed 265 million years of magnetic field activity. The complexity and duration of these simulations pushed the limits of the supercomputers available to the researchers.

Mantle Structures Discovered

The simulations revealed an irregular upper boundary of the outer core. The immense rock structures capped the molten hot spots. Intriguingly, some areas of the magnetic field proved more volatile than others, either changing significantly or remaining relatively stable for hundreds of millions of years.

“These findings suggest that there are strong temperature contrasts in the rocky mantle just above the core and that, beneath the hotter regions, the liquid iron in the core may stagnate rather than participate in the vigorous flow seen beneath the cooler regions,” said lead author Andy Biggin, Professor of Geomagnetism at the University of Liverpool. “Gaining such insights into the deep Earth on very long timescales strengthens the case for using records of the ancient magnetic field to understand both the dynamic evolution of the deep Earth and its more stable properties.”

“These findings also have important implications for questions surrounding ancient continental configurations—such as the formation and breakup of Pangaea—and may help resolve long-standing uncertainties in ancient climate, palaeobiology, and the formation of natural resources,” Biggin added. 

Overall, the team’s work challenges the assumption that the Earth’s magnetic field behaves like a stable bar magnet over long periods. From this new conceptual starting point, the team hopes that going forward, their findings will help the ancient processes that forged our modern planet come into clearer view.

• The paper, “Mantle Heterogeneity Influenced Earth’s Ancient Magnetic Field,” appeared in Nature Geoscience on February 3, 2026.
• Ryan Whalen covers science and technology for The Debrief. He holds an MA in History and a Master of Library and Information Science with a certificate in Data Science. He can be contacted at ryan@thedebrief.org, and follow him on Twitter @mdntwvlf.

{ https://thedebrief.org/category/science/ }

06-02-2026 om 21:47 geschreven door peter  

Milky Way may NOT have a supermassive black hole at its centre: Scientists claim our galaxy may be run by an enormous clump of mysterious dark matter

• READ MORE: NASA reveals one of the most detailed maps of dark matter yet

By WILIAM HUNTER, SENIOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY REPORTER

The Milky may not have a supermassive black hole at its centre, scientists claim. 

Until now, it has been widely believed that our galaxy contains both a supermassive black hole at its core and a diffuse 'halo' of dark matter.

The enormous gravity of a black hole would explain the orbits of so–called S–stars, which spin around the core at speeds of a few thousand kilometres per second.

Meanwhile, the gentle tug from the cloud of dark matter is said to explain why our galaxy's rotation doesn't slow down dramatically towards the outer rim.

Now, scientists from the Institute of Astrophysics La Plata have put forward an alternative theory. 

They suggest our galaxy might actually rotate around an enormous clump of mysterious dark matter.

Dark matter is the invisible substance that can't be seen by our telescopes but is estimated to make up over a quarter of the universe.

According to the experts, a super–dense clump of dark matter would explain both the violent dance of stars near the galactic core and our galaxy's gentle rotation.

There might be black hole at the centre of our galaxy, but rather an enormous clump of mysterious dark matter (artistic impression), according to scientists 

The conventional theory is a supermassive black hole named Sagittarius A* (artist's impression) at the centre of the Milky Way is responsible for the galaxies rotation, but scientists now say dark matter could produce the same effects

Study co–author Dr Carlos Argüelles, of the Institute of Astrophysics La Plata, says: 'We are not just replacing the black hole with a dark object; we are proposing that the supermassive central object and the galaxy's dark matter halo are two manifestations of the same, continuous substance.'

The key to this surprising suggestion lies in a very specific form of dark matter composed of particles called fermions, which are extremely light subatomic particles

In theory, these particles could form a super–dense, compact core, surrounded by a diffuse halo that would act as a single, unified entity.

The dense core would explain the fast movement of the S–stars, while the outer halo could explain the broader movements of the galaxy on the grandest scale.

'This is the first time a dark matter model has successfully bridged these vastly different scales and various object orbits,' says Dr Argüelles.

Crucially, this theory can also explain one of the most important observations we have of the Milky Way's inner core.

In 2022, scientists from the Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration used an Earth–spanning network of telescopes to take the first image of the galactic core.

What they observed was a bright halo of light surrounding something dark, which was believed to be the black hole Sagittarius A*.

The researchers say that their theory is compatible with the image of the galactic centre which is believed to show the supermassive black hole Sagittarius A*

Any theory that suggests there is something other than a black hole at the centre of the galaxy needs to explain how this picture might have come about.

Luckily, a recent study conducted by Dr Argüelles and another group of collaborators found that the light generated by matter swirling around a dense clump of dark matter produces an image strikingly like the Event Horizon Telescope image.

Lead author Valentina Crespi, a PhD student at the Institute of Astrophysics La Plata, says: 'Our model not only explains the orbits of stars and the galaxy's rotation but is also consistent with the famous 'black hole shadow' image.

'The dense dark matter core can mimic the shadow because it bends light so strongly, creating a central darkness surrounded by a bright ring.'

According to the researchers, our current observations of stars surrounding the galactic core are equally compatible with the black hole and fermion dark matter models.

However, they argue that the dark matter theory is preferable because it explains the structure and behaviour of the Milky Way with a single unified object.

In the future, more precise observations will be necessary to determine with certainty what lies at the heart of the galaxy.

For example, extremely sensitive instruments might be able to detect the signature of 'photon rings' – a tell–tale sign of black holes that would be absent in the dark matter scenario.

{ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/index.html }

06-02-2026 om 21:05 geschreven door peter  

Is it possible to save Earth from a deadly asteroid by blowing it up, as in Hollywood blockbusters? Earlier calculations showed that such a scenario would lead to the formation of debris that would only exacerbate the impending catastrophe. But a revolutionary new simulation conducted by an international team of scientists provides an unexpected answer: yes, a nuclear explosion could be a viable plan, and even better than we thought. The scientists described this optimistic future in a publication in Nature Communications.

The key discovery is that space bodies are much more resistant to extreme impact loads than laboratory tests have shown. This is good news for planetary defense. If a nuclear strike is directed at an asteroid, it will most likely remain intact rather than disintegrate into a deadly shower of thousands of fragments that will still fall on the planet.

How to test a meteorite without destroying it

Researchers from Oxford University and Outer Solar System (OuSoCo) have solved a fundamental problem: the inability to observe the reaction of asteroid material in real time under impact. They used a particle accelerator at CERN to irradiate a sample of the Campo del Cielo iron meteorite with high-energy protons.

“This is the first time we have been able to safely observe, in real time, how a real meteorite sample deforms and adapts in extreme conditions without being destroyed,” explains physicist Gianluca Gregori.

The sensors recorded surprising dynamics. Under the influence of a powerful impulse, the meteorite first softened and bent, and then — unexpectedly — hardened again. It also demonstrated the ability to dissipate impact energy more effectively than the stronger the impact itself. This explains why previous estimates of asteroid strength were incorrect.

Consequences for planetary defense

This research is critical for choosing a strategy. Missions such as DART, which deflect asteroids with a kinetic impact, are effective but require high precision. The nuclear option, as simulations have shown, may be safer. 

“The world must be able to execute a nuclear deflection mission with high confidence, yet cannot conduct a real-world test in advance. This places extraordinary demands on material and physics data,” notes Karl-Georg Schlesinger of OuSoCo.

In real life, it’s not like in the movies

In reality, no one is planning to drill into an asteroid and place a bomb inside it. Physicists are proposing a different scenario: conducting a nuclear explosion at a certain distance from the celestial body. The mass vaporized by radiation will create a reactive thrust that will gradually change the asteroid’s orbit, directing it away from Earth.

Thus, humanity’s last argument in the fight against cosmic threats is scientifically justified. Fortunately, in reality, it will not be as dramatic, but much more reliable than in the movies.

• Earlier, we reported on how an asteroid impact caused a 100-meter tsunami.
• According to sciencealert.com

• Posted in News, Science

{ https://universemagazine.com/en/articles-en/ }

05-02-2026 om 17:27 geschreven door peter  

Scientists are baffled by a black hole that's spewing out 100 TRILLION times more energy than the Star Wars Death Star

• READ MORE: Moment a black hole awakens after 100 million years of silence 

By XANTHA LEATHAM, EXECUTIVE SCIENCE EDITOR

A supermassive black hole with a case of 'cosmic indigestion' has been burping out the remains of a shredded star for four years, experts have discovered.

Astronomers say the radio wave jet shooting out of the black hole is a contender for one of the brightest, most energetic things ever detected in the universe.

Calculations suggest the current energy outflow is up to 100 trillion times that of the infamous super–powerful Death Star, from the Star Wars universe.

Astrophysicists have documented plenty of incidents where a star gets too close to a black hole and is shredded by its gravitational field.

But a black hole emitting this much energy so many years after chewing up a star is unprecedented.

The team even predict the stream of radio waves belching from the cosmic entity will keep increasing exponentially before peaking next year.

'This is really unusual', said Yvette Cendes, an astrophysicist at the University of Oregon, who led the work.

'I'd be hard–pressed to think of anything rising like this over such a long period of time.'

An artistic representation of the tidal disruption event, or a black hole shredding a star in a process known as 'spaghettification'

Calculations suggest the current energy outflow is up to 100 trillion times that of the infamous super–powerful Death Star, from the Star Wars universe

The process began in 2018, when a small star was ripped to shreds when it wandered too close to a black hole in a galaxy located 665 million light years from Earth.

The 'tidal disruption event' (TDE) did not come as a surprise to astronomers, who occasionally witness these violent incidents while scanning the night sky.

In this case, the gravitational tug of the black hole shredded the nearby star in a process called 'spaghettification'.

This is the extreme vertical stretching and horizontal compression of objects into long, thin shapes.

But nearly three years after the massacre the black hole began lighting up the skies, emitting large amounts of energy in the form of radio waves.

In the latest paper, Dr Cendes and her colleagues show that the energy emitted from the black hole has continued to rise sharply over the last few years – and it is now 50 times brighter than it was when originally detected.

The celestial event is officially called AT2018hyz, but the team prefer the nickname 'Jetty McJetface'.

They calculated the current energy outflow of the black hole and came up with an astounding number, putting it on a par with a gamma ray burst and potentially placing it among the most powerful single events ever detected in the universe.

The scientists found that energy outflow has increased exponentially over the last few years, as shown by this graph

Death Star, the fictional, moon–sized superweapon and space station from Star Wars, is capable of destroying planets with its kyber crystal–powered laser

To put it in sci fi terms, they worked out that the black hole is emitting at least a trillion – possibly closer to 100 trillion – times the amount of energy the Death Star would emit.

This fictional, moon–sized superweapon and space station from Star Wars is capable of destroying planets with its kyber crystal–powered laser.

The team plan to continue to track the object to see how it continues to behave in the coming years.

Back in 2022, when the team first announced something unusual was happening, co–author Edo Berger, professor of astronomy at Harvard University, said: 'We have been studying TDEs with radio telescopes for more than a decade.

'We sometimes find they shine in radio waves as they spew out material while the star is first being consumed by the black hole.

'But in AT2018hyz there was radio silence for the first three years, and now it's dramatically lit up to become one of the most radio luminous TDEs ever observed.'

Astronomers often describe black holes as 'messy eaters', as some material occasionally gets flung back out into space.

But the emission this creates, known as an outflow, normally develops quickly.

Dr Cendes at the Very Large Array, a large radio telescope facility in New Mexico that detected the phenomenon

'It's as if this black hole started abruptly burping out a bunch of material from the star it ate years ago,' Dr Cendes said.

'This caught us completely by surprise — no one has ever seen anything like this before.'

READ MORE

• Scientists are baffled by a 'never–seen–before' blast from a supermassive black hole 130 million light–years away

Last month, astronomers captured the moment a 'reborn' supermassive black hole awakened after 100 million years of silence.

Incredible images show the black hole erupting like a 'cosmic volcano', with enough force to reshape its entire host galaxy.

The new findings were published in the Astrophysical Journal.  

BLACK HOLES HAVE A GRAVITATIONAL PULL SO STRONG NOT EVEN LIGHT CAN ESCAPE

Black holes are so dense and their gravitational pull is so strong that no form of radiation can escape them - not even light.

They act as intense sources of gravity which hoover up dust and gas around them. Their intense gravitational pull is thought to be what stars in galaxies orbit around.

How they are formed is still poorly understood. Astronomers believe they may form when a large cloud of gas up to 100,000 times bigger than the sun, collapses into a black hole.

Many of these black hole seeds then merge to form much larger supermassive black holes, which are found at the centre of every known massive galaxy.

Alternatively, a supermassive black hole seed could come from a giant star, about 100 times the sun's mass, that ultimately forms into a black hole after it runs out of fuel and collapses.

When these giant stars die, they also go 'supernova', a huge explosion that expels the matter from the outer layers of the star into deep space. 

{ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/index.html }

05-02-2026 om 16:43 geschreven door peter  

Story by Cassian Holt

 

Space junk disaster spirals after Russian satellite shatters in orbit

When a Russian satellite shattered in orbit, the fragments did not simply drift away into the void. They spread into busy traffic lanes of low Earth orbit, forcing astronauts to scramble for shelter and tracking networks to light up with new warnings. The incident turned a long‑running concern about space junk into an immediate operational crisis, underscoring how fragile the infrastructure above our heads has become.

The breakups of multiple Russian spacecraft, from imaging platforms to a high‑profile spy satellite, now form a chain of events that looks less like bad luck and more like a systemic failure to manage aging hardware. I see in this pattern a preview of a more chaotic orbital environment, where every uncontrolled explosion or collision multiplies the risk for the International Space Station, commercial constellations, and future missions.

The Russian satellite that triggered an orbital scare

The most visible shock came when a decommissioned Russian satellite suddenly fragmented, sending a cloud of debris across the paths of crewed spacecraft. U.S. tracking networks reported that the Russian spacecraft broke apart into at least 100 trackable fragments, a number that only counts objects large enough for ground radars to see. Earlier coverage of the same event described nearly 200 pieces, a reminder that the true population of shards, including those too small to track but still lethal at orbital speeds, is almost certainly higher. For the crew of the International Space Station, the numbers were not abstract: astronauts were ordered to shelter in their return vehicle as the swarm passed through their neighborhood.

• Related video: NASA will crash the ISS into the ocean – here’s why (Today In The Space World)

Behind those radar plots sits a formal military apparatus that now treats orbital debris as a strategic concern. U.S. Space Command oversees a global network of sensors that catalog tens of thousands of objects, and it was this system that first confirmed the Russian breakup and began issuing conjunction warnings. In public statements, the same command has stressed that the debris field came from a Russian‑owned object and that analysts are still working to understand the cause, a point echoed in a separate press release from PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo that identified the spacecraft as RESURS‑P1 and Russia as the satellite owner. That combination of operational urgency and diplomatic sensitivity is now standard whenever a major spacefaring nation loses control of hardware in orbit.

A satellite in space.

Photo by WikiImages on Pixabay

Resurs‑P1 and the summer the ISS took cover

The RESURS‑P1 episode over the summer showed how even retired satellites can come back to haunt the orbital ecosystem. The imaging platform, known in Russian sources as Resurs, had been removed from service after exceeding its primary mission by 3.5 years, according to Russian outlet TASS, but it remained in a relatively crowded orbit. When it finally broke apart, U.S. Space Debris tracking indicated that fragments from the Russian Satellite Breakup Forces ISS Astronauts to Take Cover, prompting controllers to move the station into a safer orientation and direct the crew to close hatches. The cause of the RESURS‑P1 breakup remains unclear, but the operational impact was unmistakable.

On the ground, Mission Control teams worked through the night to refine trajectories and assess whether any fragments posed an immediate collision threat. Space Command officials emphasized on Thursday that they observed no immediate danger to the ISS or other spacecraft, even as they acknowledged that the cloud would need to be monitored for years as it slowly dispersed and decayed. For me, that is the most sobering part of the story: a single failure of an aging Russian satellite can create a long‑lived hazard that forces every other operator, from weather agencies to broadband providers, to spend fuel and attention dodging fragments they did not create.

From inspector to wreckage: the Luch / Olymp disaster

The Russian reconnaissance satellite Luch, also known as Olymp, illustrates how the debris problem is no longer confined to low Earth orbit. The Russian spacecraft, identified in tracking catalogs as NORAD 40258, operated in a so‑called graveyard orbit where retired satellites are supposed to pose less risk to active constellations. Yet The Russian Luch, or Olymp, was reported to be completely destroyed after a collision with space debris while still tasked with reconnaissance and signal interception. That outcome turns the very concept of a safe graveyard orbit on its head, showing that even regions set aside for retired hardware are now contaminated by high‑speed shrapnel.

Analysts have tied the Luch incident to a broader pattern of Russian satellites suffering catastrophic failures in under‑monitored orbital regimes. A detailed assessment titled Russian Spy Satellite by Suspected Debris Strike in Graveyard Orbit, By SOFX, argues that the destruction of the platform highlights the contested character of space operations, even in orbits once considered quiet backwaters. A companion report, credited to Feb, SWJ, Staff, notes that The Soyuz MS spacecraft docked to the ISS (Photo Courtesy NASA) was part of the broader context in which Russian assets are increasingly entangled with debris fields. I read these accounts as a warning that the line between active and retired orbits is blurring, and that operators can no longer assume that moving a satellite higher is enough to guarantee safety.

A Russian ‘inspector’ satellite and the mystery of silent breakups

Not all debris‑creating events are as dramatic as a collision in graveyard orbit. In Jan, observers noticed that a Russian spacecraft described as an “inspector” satellite had quietly begun to shed pieces, with no obvious trigger such as a launch failure or anti‑satellite test. Ground‑based observations suggested the Russian vehicle was breaking apart in orbit, raising debris concerns among analysts who track unusual maneuvers and proximity operations. The fact that this satellite was designed to approach and inspect other spacecraft only heightens the unease, since any uncontrolled fragments from such a platform could threaten the very assets it was meant to observe.

From my perspective, the most troubling aspect of the inspector breakup is how little is publicly known about its cause or the exact number of fragments. A follow‑on analysis of the same Jan event, based on Ground observations, underscored that the satellite’s behavior deviated from its previous pattern without any official explanation from Moscow. In an environment where even small fragments can puncture a pressure hull or shred solar arrays, that opacity is not just a diplomatic problem, it is a direct operational risk for every operator sharing the same orbital band.

Tracking the fragments and the race to contain the crisis

As Russian satellites continue to fail in ways that generate debris, the burden of tracking and mitigating the fallout increasingly falls on a mix of military and commercial networks. U.S. Space Command remains the backbone of global surveillance, but it is now joined by private firms that specialize in high‑fidelity mapping of orbital traffic. One of the most prominent, LeoLabs, operates phased‑array radars that can detect small debris in low Earth orbit and provide conjunction warnings to satellite operators who lack their own tracking infrastructure. In the wake of the Russian breakups, such services have become essential for companies flying large constellations of small satellites, which are particularly vulnerable to untracked fragments.

At the same time, scientific and policy communities are sounding louder alarms about the cumulative effect of these incidents. A detailed overview titled Russian Satellite Explosion frames the Luch / Olymp disaster as part of a broader trend in which Space Debris Is Growing Out of Control, and highlights The Rise of Space Debris and How The Luch, Olymp event illustrates the feedback loop between collisions and new fragments. Broadcast coverage has reinforced that message for a wider audience, with one Jun segment noting that a Russian satellite had broken up into more than 100 pieces of debris in orbit, forcing astronauts on the International Space Station, sometimes referred to as the International Space, to take shelter. For me, the throughline is clear: without stricter end‑of‑life rules, active debris removal, and more transparency from operators like Russia, each new breakup will not be an isolated mishap but another turn in a spiraling crisis that affects every nation and every mission that depends on the space above Earth.

{ Morning Overview }

05-02-2026 om 15:27 geschreven door peter  

Dutch researchers have found evidence of approximately 20 mysterious, large-scale structures hidden beneath the sediment of an ancient lost ocean on Mars. The team also reports the discovery of evidence that an active Martian crust is pushing against Olympus Mons, elevating the solar system’s largest volcano.

These formations are hidden beneath thick, smooth sediment layers thought to be remnants of an ancient seabed.

(CREDIT: NASA/MOLA Science Team/O. de Goursac, Adrian Lark)

Previous scientific efforts have found hidden ice deposits and other unexpected structures on the red planet. However, the researchers behind this latest discovery say these mysterious, large-scale structures are particularly perplexing because they appear hidden beneath the sedimentary layers of an ancient ‘lost’ Martian ocean.

“These dense structures could be volcanic in origin or could be compacted material due to ancient impacts,” explained Dr. Bart Root of Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), who presented the team’s findings at the Europlanet Science Congress (EPSC) in Berlin. “There are around 20 features of varying sizes that we have identified dotted around the area surrounding the north polar cap – one of which resembles the shape of a dog.”

Map highlighting the dense gravitational structures in the northern hemisphere. The regions denoted by the black lines are high mass anomalies that do not show any correlation with geology and topography. These hidden subsurface structures are covered by sediments from an old ocean. Their origin is still a mystery and a dedicated gravity mission, like MaQuIs, is needed to reveal their nature.

(CREDIT: Root et al.)

“There seems to be no trace of them at the surface,” the researcher added. “However, through gravity data, we have a tantalizing glimpse into the older history of the northern hemisphere of Mars.”

Mysterious, Large-Scale Structures Revealed by Gravity Map

Dr. Root and colleagues from Utrecht University initially set out to use tiny variations in the orbits of Martian satellites caused by gravitational differences of varying materials within the planet’s crust to make a gravitational map. This data was added to computer models containing data collected by NASA’s Mars Insight mission on the Martian crust’s flexibility and thickness. Combined with data on the dynamics of Mars’ mantle and the planet’s deep interior, the team successfully created a global density map of the entire planet.

When examining their newly created gravity map, the team noticed a group of mysterious structures in the planet’s northern polar regions. According to the researchers, these large-scale mysterious structures are approximately 300-400 kg/m3 denser than their surroundings. The structures are not visible from the surface but instead appear to have been buried in the planet’s ancient past beneath the remnants of a large ocean.

Another mystery revealed by the team’s gravity map involved large structures underneath the huge volcanic region of Tharsis Rise. Known for its preponderance of volcanoes, the area is also home to the solar system’s largest volcano, Olympus Mons

“Although volcanoes are very dense, the Tharsis area is much higher than the average surface of Mars and is ringed by a region of comparatively weak gravity,” according to a statement announcing the study. “This gravity anomaly is hard to explain by looking at differences in the Martian crust and upper mantle alone.”

This colorized image of the surface of Mars was taken by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. The line of three volcanoes is the Tharsis Montes, with Olympus Mons to the northwest. Valles Marineris is to the east.

(NASA/JPL-Caltech/Arizona State University)

According to the researchers, a “light mass” of around 1750 kilometers across and at a depth of 1100 kilometers appears to be actively pushing up on the entire Tharsis region. They suspect this light mass could be a massive plume of lava hidden deep within the Marin interior that is slowly working toward the surface. Root says this information may show that Mars is still active beneath the planet’s outer surface.

An image of Olympus Mons, the solar system’s largest volcano, captured by the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Mars Express Mission. The latest study found evidence that an underground lava plume may be pushing up on the entire area around the volcano.

Photo by ESA/DLR/FUBerlin/AndreaLuck – Olympus Mons – ESA Mars Express, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=130092547

Comparative image showing the height differences between Earth's largest mountains and Olympus Mons.

(CREDIT: CC BY-SA 3.0)

“The NASA InSight mission has given us vital new information about the hard outer layer of Mars,” he explained. “This means we need to rethink how we understand the support for the Olympus Mons volcano and its surroundings.”

Mars Quantum Gravity Mission Could Solve the Mystery

Next, Root has joined a team proposing a Mars Quantum Gravity (MaQuis) mission. In that proposal, the team says that an ideal mission would include similar technology to that used by the GRAIL and GRACE missions, which were designed to map the Moon’s and Earth’s gravity, respectively. The mission could also help the team solve the true nature of the mysterious, large-scale structures hidden beneath the Martian surface.

“Observations with MaQuIs would enable us to better explore the subsurface of Mars,” said Dr. Lisa Wörner of DLR, who presented on the MaQuIs mission at EPSC2024. “This would help us to find out more about these mysterious hidden features and study ongoing mantle convection, as well as understand dynamic surface processes like atmospheric seasonal changes and the detection of ground water reservoirs.”

• Christopher Plain is a Science Fiction and Fantasy novelist and Head Science Writer at The Debrief. Follow and connect with him on X, learn about his books at plainfiction.com, or email him directly at christopher@thedebrief.org.

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://thedebrief.org/category/space/ }

05-02-2026 om 15:01 geschreven door peter  

An unusual dust storm on Mars reveals how the red planet lost some of its water

by Tohoku University - edited by Lisa Lock, reviewed by Robert Egan

The current image of Mars as an arid and hostile desert contrasts sharply with the history revealed by its surface. Channels, minerals altered by water, and other geological traces indicate that the red planet was, in its early days, a much wetter and more dynamic world. Reconstructing how this water-rich environment disappeared remains one of the great challenges of planetary science. Although several processes are known that can explain some of this loss, the fate of much of Martian water remains a mystery.

A new study from an international team of researchers published in Communications Earth & Environment on February 2, 2026, has brought us a significant step closer to solving this puzzle. For the first time, researchers demonstrated that an anomalous, intense, but localized dust storm was able to drive the transport of water to the upper layers of the Martian atmosphere during the Northern Hemisphere summer—a time when this process was previously considered to be irrelevant.

Diagram illustrating the atmospheric response to a localized dust storm in the Northern Hemisphere during the local summer season. High dust concentrations significantly increase the absorption of solar radiation, leading to greater atmospheric warming, especially in the middle atmosphere. Furthermore, the increased atmospheric circulation associated with the dust storm enhances the vertical transport of water vapor from the lower atmosphere, promoting water injection at higher altitudes and increasing hydrogen escape from the exobase.

Credit: Communications Earth & Environment (2026).

DOI: 10.1038/s43247-025-03157-5

"The findings reveal the impact of this type of storm on the planet's climate evolution and opens a new path for understanding how Mars lost much of its water over time," says Adrián Brines, a researcher at the Instituto de Astrofísica de Andalucía (IAA-CSIC) and co-lead author of the study along with Shohei Aoki, a researcher from the Graduate School of Frontier Sciences at the University of Tokyo and the Graduate School of Science at Tohoku University.

While dust storms have long been recognized as important for Mars's water escape, previous discussions have mostly focused on large, planet-wide dust events. In contrast, this study shows that smaller, regional storms can also strongly enhance water transport to high altitudes, where it can be more easily lost to space. Furthermore, previous research has focused on the warm, dynamic summers of the Southern Hemisphere, since it is typically the main period of water loss on Mars.

Daily MRO-MARCI global map images of the initial growth of a rare regional dust storm in northwestern Syrtis Major, observed on August 21, 2023, at Ls = 107.6° (left) and August 22, 2023, at Ls = 108.0° (right), reaching an extent of 1.2 × 10⁶ km².

Credit: Communications Earth & Environment (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s43247-025-03157-5

This study detected an unusual increase in water vapor in the middle atmosphere of Mars during the Northern Hemisphere summer in Martian year 37 (2022–2023 on Earth), caused by an anomalous dust storm. At these altitudes, the amount of water was up to 10 times greater than usual, a phenomenon not observed in previous Martian years and not predicted by current climate models.

Shortly afterward, the amount of hydrogen in the exobase—the region where the atmosphere merges with space—increased significantly to 2.5 times that of the previous years during the same season. One of the keys to understanding how much water Mars has lost is measuring how much hydrogen has escaped into space, since this element is readily released when water breaks down in the atmosphere.

"These results add a vital new piece to the incomplete puzzle of how Mars has been losing its water over billions of years, and show that short but intense episodes can play a relevant role in the climate evolution of the red planet," concludes Aoki.

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://phys.org/space-news/ }

05-02-2026 om 14:24 geschreven door peter  

{ https://www.universetoday.com/ }

04-02-2026 om 23:33 geschreven door peter  

This Photo of Mars at Night Is Straight Up Haunting

By Victor Tangermann

Case in point, a December 6 image recently featured by NASA shows the rover’s lights lighting up a hole it drilled into the surface of the rock, dubbed “Nevado Sajama.” It’s an eerie view of an alien environment, a stark reminder that the lone rover has plenty of almost complete blackness to contend with as it probes Mars for signs of ancient life.

The camera, called the Mars Hand Lens Imager, is one of seventeen cameras attached to the rover, and can take true-color images at a resolution of 1,600 by 1,200 pixels. It features both UV and white LED lights, allowing it to take pictures at night.

The use of the rover’s lights isn’t just for show. Scientists used the LEDs to illuminate areas that are otherwise “deep in shadow during the day,” as NASA explains, “such as the insides of drill holes and the inlet tubes leading to instruments in the rover’s belly.”

The lights have previously been used to examine layering inside rocks to better understand their composition. However, Curiosity changed the way it drilled its holes in 2018 in light of some problems with its drill, making the new holes “too rough and dusty to see any such details” ever since.

However, a hole Curiosity drilled on November 13, its 4,740th Martian day (or sol) on the planet, was deemed “smooth enough to try looking for layers.”

The image, which was taken weeks later, allowed the team to better get a sense of the rock, which was found in a region dotted with “boxwork” geologic formations.

These curious formations also happen to look like massive spiderwebs from space — as if night on Mars didn’t already sound terrifying enough.

More on drilling on Mars: 

• NASA Now Letting Mars Rover Drive Autonomously

{ https://futurism.com/category/space }

04-02-2026 om 23:05 geschreven door peter  

There’s Something Fascinating Hiding Under Jupiter’s Clouds, Scientists Find

NASA

The enormous storms of impenetrable clouds covering Jupiter’s surface make it nearly impossible for us to get a glimpse of what lies below. Any spacecraft attempting to get a closer look would be vaporized, melted, or crushed if it attempted to sail through. NASA’s Galileo spacecraft, for instance, went dark almost immediately when it intentionally plunged into Jupiter’s atmosphere back in 2003.

While Jupiter — a giant ball of swirling gases and liquids — isn’t believed to have a true surface, scientists have been trying to get a better sense of its layers. Now, using data from NASA’s Juno and Galileo missions, a team of scientists at the space agency’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the University of Chicago have created a highly detailed computational model of Jupiter’s atmosphere.

And as detailed in a new paper, published in The Planetary Science Journal last month, they found something surprising down there: Jupiter appears to contain one-and-a-half times as much oxygen as the Sun — far more than previous estimates, which suggested it was only a third as much oxygen.

The findings also support the prevailing theory that Jupiter formed by accreting icy material billions of years ago near or past the “frost line,” as Space.com points out, meaning the distance from the Sun where temperatures are low enough for ammonia, methane, and water ice to form. (Whether the planet formed in its current orbit or much further away from the Sun before migrating to its current position over billions of years remains a topic of debate.)

Much of the oxygen is tied up in water as well, which changes its behavior drastically depending on temperature, further complicating our efforts to map out Jupiter’s layers.

The researchers’ computational model takes into account both the chemical reactions taking place — from extremely hot metal molecules deep inside the core and much cooler regions in its atmosphere — and the movement of gases, clouds and droplets.

“You need both,” said lead author and UChicago postdoctoral researcher Jeehyun Yang in a statement. “Chemistry is important but doesn’t include water droplets or cloud behavior. Hydrodynamics alone simplifies the chemistry too much. So, it’s important to bring them together.”

Their model suggests that gases move far more slowly through Jupiter’s atmosphere than previously thought.

“Our model suggests the diffusion would have to be 35 to 40 times slower compared to what the standard assumption has been,” Yang explained. “Instead of moving through an atmospheric layer in hours, a single molecule might take several weeks.”

It’s only one small part of a much larger mystery surrounding our solar system’s largest planet — and its more-than-intriguing collection of moons. The angry gas giant of swirling gases continues to baffle even top scientists.

“It really shows how much we still have to learn about planets, even in our own solar system,” Yang said.

More on Jupiter’s moons: 

• NASA Says Europa Is Covered by a Thick Icy Shell

RELATED VIDEOS

{ https://futurism.com/category/space }

04-02-2026 om 22:55 geschreven door peter  

The European Space Agency has published a video based on data collected by the Mars Express mission. It shows a flight over the southern highlands of Mars to the Flaugergues Crater.

The video begins with an overview of a section of land surrounded by two steeply sloping and roughly parallel terraces (or slopes) called Scylla Scopulus and Charybdis Scopulus (on the left and right, respectively). This “path” on the surface is called a graben, formed as a result of the separation of tectonic plates. It is about 75 km wide and 1 km deep.

The southern highlands of Mars. Visualization based on data from the Mars Express mission.

Source: ESA/DLR/FU Berlin

To the left of the graben, the Bakhuysen Crater is clearly visible. It may seem small, but in reality its diameter is 150 km, which is comparable to the distance from Kyiv to Zhytomyr.

As we move north, we approach the Flaugergues Crater. The virtual camera moves along the eastern side of the crater, then turns left and ends its movement at its western edge.

Flaugergues Crater is a huge impact basin approximately 240 km wide. Its area is comparable to that of Estonia. Flaugergues is located in the southern highlands of Mars. They represent rugged terrain densely covered with ancient impact formations.

Half of the floor of the Flaugergues Crater has a rugged terrain, with elevations reaching up to 1 km. The video also shows a valley crossing this rocky area. It was probably formed by lava flows and wind erosion.

Earlier, we reported on how Mars Express photographed traces of the Martian ice age.

• Posted in News, Science

{https://universemagazine.com/en/news-en/science-en/ }

04-02-2026 om 21:42 geschreven door peter  

NASA's bosses have been grilled after the Artemis II moon mission was pushed back following a failed wet dress rehearsal.

The decision to delay until March at the earliest was made when ground crews were unable stop the rocket's super–cooled hydrogen fuel leaking.

This same problem has plagued every single hydrogen rocket since the Apollo Era, and was a well–known issue during the launch of Artemis I in 2022.

At a press conference discussing the aborted test, Marcia Dunn, of the Associated Press, pressured NASA to explain: 'How can you still be having the same problem three years later?'

In response, John Honeycutt, Chair of the Artemis II Mission Management Team, admitted: 'This one caught us off guard.'

He added: 'The technical team felt like we either had some misalignment or some deformation or debris on the seal.'

Lori Glaze, NASA's Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate acting associate administrator, added: 'Everyone's aware of some of the challenges with the hydrogen tanking from Artemis 1.

'We really did learn a lot from the Artemis 1 mission, and we implemented a lot of the lessons learned yesterday through wet dress.'

NASA bosses have been grilled after the Artemis II moon mission was pushed back to March following a failed wet dress rehearsal. Pictured: (left to right) Amit Kshatriya, Lori Glaze,  Charlie Blackwell–Thompson, and John Honeycutt

The dress rehearsal failed just five minutes from completion after a hydrogen leak spiked beyond safe levels as ground crews filled the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket with over 2.6 million litres of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen

During the wet dress rehearsal, NASA simulated a launch by filling the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket with over 2.6 million litres of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.

The operation began at 01:13 GMT (20:13 EST) on January 31, and the fuelling operation initially went smoothly.

However, the space agency soon found a major hydrogen leak in a component called the 'tail service mast umbilical quick disconnect'.

These are roughly nine–metre–tall pods which attach to the base of the rocket and route propellant lines up into fuel tanks, before disconnecting during launch.

What is most concerning is that this is the exact same place where the SLS rocket used in Artemis I experienced leaks during its wet dress rehearsal three years ago.

Those leaks ultimately required the SLS to be removed from the launchpad three separate times for repairs, pushing back the eventual launch of Artemis I by six months.

This raises the question of why NASA hadn't managed to fix this well–known issue ahead of the Artemis II wet dress rehearsal.

On social media, space enthusiasts were outraged that the space agency had failed to get a handle on its hydrogen problems.

The leak came from a component called the 'tail service mast umbilical quick disconnect' (pictured), which attaches the rocket to the tower. This is the exact same place that caused hydrogen leaks during Artemis I 

John Honeycutt (pictured), Chair of the Artemis II Mission Management Team, admitted: 'This one caught us off guard'

On social media, space enthusiasts bemoaned the fact that NASA had not fixed an error, which had been well known since Artemis I in 2022

One social media user complained that hydrogen leaks have been an issue since the Apollo era, and NASA still has not managed to get them under control 

Why does NASA use hydrogen fuel?

The SLS rocket uses a mixture of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.

Since hydrogen is such a small molecule, it is extremely prone to leaking.

However, hydrogen is also cheap, naturally abundant, and produces a phenomenal amount of energy.

According to NASA this mix gives the 'highest specific impulse, or efficiency in relation to the amount of propellant consumed, of any known rocket propellant'.

Another important factor is that the SLS rocket inherits a lot of its hardware and systems from the Shuttle era rockets.

These engines were built to run on hydrogen, so NASA can't change fuels without an expensive redesign of the entire rocket and engine system.  

One commenter wrote: 'Couldn't fix it in three years, how can they fix it in three weeks?'

'In essence – the three year issue has no solution in the near future. This is all a sham,' complained another.

Meanwhile, one frustrated commenter added: 'You would think by now they would realize, hydrogen is very difficult to seal plumbing for.'

Mr Honeycutt told reporters the issue stemmed from the fact that NASA hadn't been able to test the entire rocket stack in more realistic conditions.

He said: 'After Artemis I and the challenges we had with the leaks, we took a pretty aggressive approach to do some component–level testing with these valves and the seals.

'But on the ground, we're pretty limited as to how much realism we can put into the test.'

Likewise, Amit Kshatriya, NASA Associate Administrator, pointed to the fact that the SLS rocket is a highly complicated machine that has only been flown a handful of times.

Mr Kshatriya said: 'This is the first time this particular machine has borne witness to cryogens, and how it breathes and how it vents and how it wants to leak is something we're going to have to characterise.'

Amit Kshatriya, NASA Associate Administrator, said the issues came from the fact that the SLS rocket is a very complicated machine that has only been flown a few times 

This is an opinion shared by NASA Administrator Jarred Issacman, who wrote in a post on X that 'the flight rate is the lowest of any NASA–designed vehicle, and that should be a topic of discussion'.

To NASA's credit, the Artemis II rocket performed significantly better than its predecessors.

Hydrogen is such a small molecule that it can pass through the microscopic pores in welds and is, therefore, almost impossible to contain.

However, since liquid hydrogen and oxygen provide so much power, NASA tolerates an acceptable amount of hydrogen leaking on the ground.

These leaks proved debilitating for Artemis I after multiple wet dress rehearsals failed to fill the fuel tanks.

Likewise, during the Space Shuttle era, a particularly bad run of hydrogen leaks in 1990 shut down NASA's launch operations for more than six months.

Even the Apollo 11 mission was nearly scuppered after a massive hydrogen leak sprang in the rocket's second stage, with engineers working to seal it even as the astronauts boarded.

During the Artemis II wet dress rehearsal, ground crews were able to completely fill the SLS's fuel tank while keeping the leak just about within these safe limits.

Unlike during Artemis I, NASA bosses also maintain that these problems can be fixed on the launchpad and won't require bringing the Artemis II rocket (pictured) back to the hangar

It was only with about five minutes left in the countdown, as crews started to pressurise the fuel tanks, that the lead spiked beyond this threshold.

Charlie Blackwell–Thompson, Artemis Launch Director, said: 'As we began that pressurisation, we did see that the leak within the cavity came up pretty quick.'

However, Ms Blackwell–Thompson also insists that: 'If we were within our parameters on launch day and you had not had the issue when you pressurised during terminal count, you would have been within your launch commit criteria and certainly could have been go for launch.'

Unlike during Artemis I, NASA bosses also maintain that these problems can be fixed on the launchpad and won't require bringing the rocket back to the hangar.

Read More

• Sun unleashes FOUR solar flares towards Earth that could wreak havoc on radios and GPS satellites 

If true, this means Artemis II might be able to iron out its hydrogen problems in time for the next scheduled wet dress rehearsal.

NASA officials didn't specify when this next rehearsal would take place, adding that it would take time to go through the data from this week's test.

However, Artemis II is currently targeting its second launch window from March 6 to March 9 and March 11.

If the launch is delayed again, the mission will be pushed back another month to the final proposed window between April 1 and April 6.

Artemis II: Key facts

Launch date: NASA has identified three possible launch windows for Artemis II in the coming months: From February 6 to February 11, from March 6 to March 11, and from April 1 to April 6.

Mission objective: To complete a lunar flyby, passing the 'dark side' of the moon and test systems for a future lunar landing.

Total distance to travel: 620,000 miles (one million km)

Mission duration: 10 days 

Estimated total cost: $44 billion (£32.5 billion)

• NASA Space Launch System rocket: $23.8 billion (£17.6 billion)
• Orion deep–space spacecraft: $20.4 billion (£15 billion)

Crew: 

• Commander Reid Wiseman
• Pilot Victor Glover
• Mission Specialist Christina Koch
• Mission Specialist Jeremy Hansen

Mission Stages:

1. Launch from Kennedy Space Centre Launch Pad 39B
2. Manoeuvre in orbit to raise the perigee using the Cryogenic Propulsion Stage
3. Burn to raise apogee using the Cryogenic Propulsion Stage
4. Detach from Cryogenic Propulsion Stage and perform translunar injection
5. Fly to the moon over four days
6. Complete lunar flyby at a maximum altitude of 5,523 miles (8,889 km) above the moon's surface
7. Return to Earth over four days.
8. Separate the crew module from the European Service Module and the crew module adapter
9. Splashdown in the Pacific Ocean  

{ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/index.html }

04-02-2026 om 21:07 geschreven door peter  

Armageddon was RIGHT! Simulation confirms we really could nuke an asteroid if it was heading for Earth

• READ MORE: Human couples could soon give birth to babies in SPACE

By WILIAM HUNTER, SENIOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY REPORTER

The 1998 sci-fi classic Armageddon might not have a reputation as a scientifically accurate film. 

But scientists now say the Hollywood blockbuster got one thing right – we really could nuke an asteroid out of its deadly collision course if it were heading towards Earth.

This technique is called nuclear deflection and, unlike in the movies, the goal is not to blow the approaching asteroid into smithereens.

Instead, a precisely timed nuclear explosion could give the asteroid just enough of a nudge to sail harmlessly past Earth.

Until now, experts have raised concerns that nuclear deflection would shatter an asteroid into many pieces, which would collectively pose an even greater risk.

However, a new simulation shows that asteroid material is actually far more resilient to extreme forces than previously thought.

Researchers from the University of Oxford found that some asteroid material actually gets stronger when subjected to an intense impact.

This means we could use huge nuclear weapon to deflect an incoming asteroid, without shattering it into deadly shrapnel.

The 1998 sci-fi classic Armageddon (pictured) might not have a reputation as a scientifically accurate film. But scientists now say the Hollywood blockbuster got one thing right – we really could nuke an asteroid out of its deadly collision course if it were heading towards Earth 

The researchers used CERN's 4.3 mile (7km) Super Proton Synchrotron to blast a fragment of a meteor with a stream of high-energy protons – stable positively charged particles found inside atoms

For the study, the researchers teamed up with nuclear deflection startup, the Outer Solar System Company (OuSoCo), to find out what would happen to a metal-rich asteroid if it was nuked.

Unsurprisingly, it isn't possible to let off a nuclear weapon inside a lab, so the scientists turned to the next best thing: a massive particle accelerator.

The researchers used CERN's 4.3 mile (7km) Super Proton Synchrotron to blast a fragment of a meteor with a stream of high-energy protons – stable positively charged particles found inside atoms.

A piece of the Campo del Cielo meteorite, a metal-rich iron-nickel body, was exposed to 27 successive short bursts from the particle accelerator to simulate the impact of a nuclear blast.

Bizarrely, the researchers watched as the asteroid material softened, flexed, and then unexpectedly strengthened without breaking.

Co-lead author Melanie Bochmann, co-founder of OuSoCo, says: 'The material became stronger, exhibiting an increase in yield strength, and displayed a self-stabilising damping behaviour.'

Overall, while being hit with the force of a nuclear blast, the asteroid's strength actually increased by a factor of 2.5.

This new evidence is a strong suggestion that nuclear deflection could be a viable option for planetary defence.

A piece of the Campo del Cielo meteorite (pictured), a metal-rich iron-nickel body, was exposed to 27 successive short bursts from the particle accelerator to simulate the impact of a nuclear blast. Bizarrely, the researchers watched as the asteroid material softened, flexed, and then unexpectedly strengthened without breaking 

Thousands of pieces of space rock hit the Earth every single year, but the vast majority of these are so small that they simply burn up in the Earth's atmosphere.

However, asteroids large enough to cause serious damage do arrive with surprising frequency.

Most recently, the Chelyabinsk explosion injured thousands of people in 2013 when an 18-metre (59ft) asteroid broke up in the atmosphere.

To protect Earth from an even bigger strike, NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) are currently researching a technique called a 'kinetic impactor'.

This very simply involves slamming a spacecraft into the side of an asteroid as fast as physically possible so that the transferred kinetic energy moves it off course.

NASA's 2022 DART mission, which smashed a spaceship into the asteroid Dimorphos, proved that this could move an asteroid enough to save Earth.

However, kinetic impactors only work if astronomers have spotted the asteroid years before its arrival, to give time for the small changes in trajectory to build up.

Ms Bochmann told the Daily Mail: 'Space agencies already recognise the necessity of nuclear deflection.

Nuclear deflection could be a viable alternative to the kinetic impactor technique, tested by NASA during the DART mission (pictured), which involves ramming a spaceship into an asteroid as fast as possible 

'For large objects or scenarios with short warning times, it is widely regarded by space agencies and experts as the only viable deflection option.'

The fact that metal-rich asteroid material is so resilient to high-energy impacts is a good sign for the prospects of nuclear deflection, since it suggests that nuking a space rock won't cause fragmentation.

'The paper shows that significantly more energy can be delivered by a nuclear explosion without causing catastrophic fragmentation of the object than previously assumed,' says Ms Bochmann.

Read More

• Record-breaking asteroid the size of seven football pitches could be nudged towards Earth 

However, before NASA starts launching nuclear warheads into space, a lot more research will be needed.

This paper only looks at one very specific type of asteroid – metal-rich iron-nickel – whereas world-ending threats come in all shapes and sizes.

The researchers now plan to repeat the study with samples from a more complex class of asteroid.

These could include meteorites called pallasites, which are similar to the samples already studied but with centimetre-sized, magnesium-rich crystals embedded inside.

WHAT COULD WE DO TO STOP AN ASTEROID COLLIDING WITH EARTH?

Currently, NASA would not be able to deflect an asteroid if it were heading for Earth but it could mitigate the impact and take measures that would protect lives and property.

This would include evacuating the impact area and moving key infrastructure.

Finding out about the orbit trajectory, size, shape, mass, composition and rotational dynamics would help experts determine the severity of a potential impact.

However, the key to mitigating damage is to find any potential threat as early as possible.

NASA and the European Space Agency completed a test which slammed a refrigerator-sized spacecraft into the asteroid Dimorphos.

The test is to see whether small satellites are capable of preventing asteroids from colliding with Earth.

The Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) used what is known as a kinetic impactor technique—striking the asteroid to shift its orbit.

The impact could change the speed of a threatening asteroid by a small fraction of its total velocity, but by doing so well before the predicted impact, this small nudge will add up over time to a big shift of the asteroid's path away from Earth.

This was the first-ever mission to demonstrate an asteroid deflection technique for planetary defence.

The results of the trial are expected to be confirmed by the Hera mission in December 2026.

{ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/index.html }

04-02-2026 om 20:21 geschreven door peter  

{ Daily Mail }

04-02-2026 om 19:57 geschreven door peter  

Should Halley’s Comet Be Renamed?

Despite interesting historical arguments, the chances of the astronomical community accepting this change remain minimal.

by Ivan Petricevic

A monk believed he recognized Halley’s Comet in the Bayeux Tapestry, but that alone does not justify renaming it.

Credit: Public Domain

Although Halley’s Comet will not return to our vicinity for another 35 years, a new analysis has sparked media attention with the claim that this famous object is wrongly named. Professors Michael Lewis of the British Museum and Simon Zwart of Leiden University have presented evidence that the monk Eilmer of Malmesbury recognized the comet’s cyclic nature six centuries before Edmond Halley. Despite interesting historical arguments, the chances of the astronomical community accepting this change remain minimal.

Eilmer, sometimes called Aethelmaer, was undoubtedly a peculiar historical figure. It is recorded that, long before the Wright brothers, he attached wings to his arms and legs and managed to fly a distance of 200 meters, though he broke both legs upon landing. Nevertheless, his understanding of celestial mechanics was almost certainly far below that of Edmond Halley. Halley followed in the footsteps of Johannes Kepler, whose laws enabled the calculation of planetary orbits, which were later further developed by Isaac Newton.

Using observations of comets from 1531, 1607, and 1682, Halley proved they were the same object and calculated its orbit. In doing so, he confirmed the existence of periodic comets and the ability to predict their return. His successful prediction of the return in 1758 was based not just on noting that the comet appeared every 74.7 years, but on precise calculations of its movement in the interim.

For Eilmer, such a feat would have been nearly impossible. Not only did he lack Kepler’s insights, but he was also unaware of Copernicus’s work; even if he understood that the comet orbited something, he likely would have thought it circled the Earth, not the Sun. We do not know exactly what Eilmer truly grasped because his writings have been lost. We rely on the records of William of Malmesbury, a historian and monk from the same abbey, who wrote about 50 years after Eilmer’s death.

Related Posts

• 

Jupiter doesn’t orbit the center of the Sun and the strange reason why reveals how gravity really works

• 

This repeating space signal is coming from deep space — and no one knows why

According to these records, Eilmer was more interested in what the comet’s return in 1066 meant for English politics than in its actual trajectory. William quotes his predecessor saying: “You’ve come, have you? You source of tears to many mothers. It is long since I saw you; but as I see you now, you are much more terrible, for I see you brandishing the downfall of my mother-country.” It is unclear whether Eilmer truly identified enough similarities between the comet he saw in 989 and the one that watched over King Harold’s demise, depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry, or if he simply got lucky by connecting the two brightest comets of his life.

Naming Rules and Precedents

Today, comets are named after the first person or organization to detect them and recognize them as a comet, rather than a smudge on a lens or an already known object. To achieve this, the orbit must be calculated at least approximately to rule out the return of a known body. Priority is established by reporting to the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams. The fact that someone calculated an orbit earlier but did not report it properly is usually not enough for renaming. What Halley did fits the requirements for naming rights far better than the most optimistic interpretation of Eilmer’s achievement.

A good example is Encke’s Comet, one of the most famous “dirty snowballs” after Halley’s. Although it never reaches the brightness of Halley’s Comet, Encke’s Comet has a very short orbital period around the Sun of just 3.3 years. Johann Encke calculated its orbit in 1819 based on observations from the previous year and successfully predicted its return in 1822. Encke’s role was comparable to Halley’s, even though many had seen the comet before him—Pierre Méchain and Charles Messier recorded it as early as 1786.

Jean-Louis Pons spotted the comet in 1818 and noticed similarities with its appearance in 1805, but he passed the idea to Encke, who performed the complex calculations and gained the fame. Although Pons discovered a record 37 comets, his name is borne by only three, including the recently topical Pons-Brooks comet. If Pons was not credited with that fourth comet, it is hard to see why Eilmer should displace Halley.

From Laws of Physics to Birds

Most other astronomical objects do not bear the names of their finders. Asteroids are named based on the year of discovery, and only later are they assigned names of deserving individuals by decision of the astronomical community. Stars rarely bear the names of individuals, with exceptions like Barnard’s Star. There are also controversies, such as that surrounding the Magellanic Clouds, for which there are strong arguments that they should not bear the name of a slave trader and mass murderer, yet the name remains in use.

A better comparison with comets might be scientific theorems. It often happens that a law bears the name of a person who did not discover it first. For example, l’Hôpital’s rule for calculating limits was actually discovered by Johann Bernoulli, whom l’Hôpital employed under the condition that he retained the rights to his discoveries. Although l’Hôpital later acknowledged Bernoulli’s contribution, the name stuck. Officially, Hubble’s Law is now called the Hubble-Lemaître Law by decision of the International Astronomical Union, but most people still use only Hubble’s name.

The only area of science where renaming is becoming common is biology, specifically ornithology. The American Ornithological Society is changing the popular names of birds named after people, replacing them with descriptive names or those reflecting the names used by indigenous peoples. The goal is to remove names associated with racism or a violent past.

Edmond Halley, on the other hand, enjoys considerably higher standing. Not only was he a great scientist, but he was also a peacemaker who soothed conflicts among the vainer scientists of his day, without which Newton’s “Principia” might never have been published. It is unlikely that such a figure will lose the rights to the name of his comet, regardless of historical speculations about a flying monk.

{ https://curiosmos.com/category/unsolved-mysteries/ }

03-02-2026 om 23:51 geschreven door peter  

{ https://www.universetoday.com/ }

03-02-2026 om 22:52 geschreven door peter