Comments and questions about the
APOD on the main view screen.
-
APOD Robot
- Otto Posterman
- Posts: 5029
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:27 am
Post
by APOD Robot » Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:10 am
62 Kilometers above Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko
Explanation: Spacecraft Rosetta continues to approach, circle, and map Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko. Crossing the inner Solar System for ten years to reach the vicinity of the comet last month, the robotic spacecraft continues to
image the unusual
double-lobed comet nucleus. The
reconstructed-color image featured, taken about 10 days ago, indicates how dark this comet nucleus is. On the average, the comet's
surface reflects only about four percent of
impinging visible light, making it as
dark as coal. Comet
67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko spans about four kilometers in length and has a
surface gravity so low that an astronaut could
jump off of it. In about two months,
Rosetta is scheduled to release the first
probe ever to attempt a
controlled landing on a comet's nucleus.
[/b]
-
geckzilla
- Ocular Digitator
- Posts: 9173
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
- Location: Modesto, CA
Post
by geckzilla » Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:12 am
Does anyone have any idea what "reconstructed-color" means? Does that mean it was essentially guessed at based on the texture and known color properties of other objects?
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
-
Nitpicker
- Inverse Square
- Posts: 2692
- Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:39 am
- Location: S27 E153
Post
by Nitpicker » Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:18 am
Fantastic APOD. And the "dark as coal" image of LA is excellent (and a bit Hollywood.)
-
Boomer12k
- :---[===] *
- Posts: 2691
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:07 am
Post
by Boomer12k » Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:37 am
Now THAT is just an awesome picture. Ummmm....where is the ICE????? I see what looks like sand....I see dark rock....
:---[===] *
-
Guest
Post
by Guest » Mon Sep 15, 2014 4:44 am
geckzilla wrote:Does anyone have any idea what "reconstructed-color" means? Does that mean it was essentially guessed at based on the texture and known color properties of other objects?
I'd also like to know how they arrived at the colors used.
-
alter-ego
- Serendipitous Sleuthhound
- Posts: 1074
- Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
- Location: Redmond, WA
Post
by alter-ego » Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:04 am
Guest wrote:geckzilla wrote:Does anyone have any idea what "reconstructed-color" means? Does that mean it was essentially guessed at based on the texture and known color properties of other objects?
I'd also like to know how they arrived at the colors used.
A detailed description of the cameras and filters can be found
here. Since I don't think Rosetta has a built-in subject palette to compare colors, a set of images using a suitable set of filters must be used to create RGB reconstruction. Varying degrees of true color reproduction are affected by filter characteristics(wavelength, bandwidth), and how they are combined. I didn't see a specific press release for this image that describes the filters and image combination algorithm.
Regarding the cameras, the article states:
There are two overlapping filter wheels on each camera. For true-color NAC images, look for RGB combinations made with images ending with 12/13/14 or 82/83/84.
And specifically for narrow band filter use:
The combination of narrowband filters that is closest to the RGB combinations in the narrow-angle camera is OI/NH2/CN (17/15/14), but proceed with caution.
Edit:
As a separate example of
Mars Viking Lander color reproduction:
The Viking cameras have six spectrally narrow band detectors, three in the visible and three in the near infrared. The use of all six channels has been shown (Huck et al., 1977) to provide the most accurate color rendition. Because many of the images in our study had not been taken in six channels, three component color reconstruction was used. The three components correspond approximately to Blue, Green, and Red. The color reconstruction of these images was performed in a "radiometric" sense, meaning that the components were each linearly amplified to effect an equal average sensitivity over the spectral bandpass. Therefore, the reconstructed triplet, while possessing the same general color characteristics, is not intended to be an exact photometric reproduction of the actual sense as perceived by a human observer.
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist
-
Ann
- 4725 Å
- Posts: 12751
- Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am
Post
by Ann » Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:50 am
Those bright patches sure look like snow.
Ann
Color Commentator
-
geckzilla
- Ocular Digitator
- Posts: 9173
- Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
- Location: Modesto, CA
Post
by geckzilla » Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:55 am
alter-ego: I know how color images are created from multiple images taken with different filters. However, as far as I know, all of Rosetta's release images have all been black and white with no filter data included.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
-
madtom1999
- Ensign
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:21 am
Post
by madtom1999 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:50 am
Is there a coma and or tail yet and if so is it just so tenuous close up its not visible?
-
APODFORIST
- Ensign
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 4:31 pm
Post
by APODFORIST » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:21 pm
Fantastic.
It looks like a piece of the alps floating in space.
-
CURRAHEE CHRIS
- Science Officer
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:04 pm
- Location: Mechanicsburg Pa.
Post
by CURRAHEE CHRIS » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:43 pm
Really an exciting picture. Such a historic bit of work being done. Very exciting times.
-
Lanulos
- Asternaut
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:12 pm
Post
by Lanulos » Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:14 pm
Archive page is not loading.
-
Guest
Post
by Guest » Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:32 pm
An interesting comment in the text of the photo description. Specifically, "... the unusual double-lobed comet nucleus.". I'm wondering what the author was referring to, given that we have a miniscule & negligible sample size with which to compare and evaluate. Perhaps it is just an assumption that all comet cores are round(ed) objects, making this one unusual??? Assumptions make for questionable science. Notwithstanding that, it is an amazing photo; and impressive that mankind could get a camera that close. Waiting for the landing attempt, and hope the lander does not bounce off. I hope the landing position and orbit selected can provide a scenic view as the comet dives toward the sun, tho science must take priority here (or out there...).
-
MadCat-75
- Ensign
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 5:19 am
- Location: Germany (Koblenz, RLP)
Post
by MadCat-75 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:02 pm
APODFORIST wrote:Fantastic.
It looks like a piece of the alps floating in space.
this was my first guess, too!

-
Psnarf
- Science Officer
- Posts: 317
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:19 pm
Post
by Psnarf » Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:19 pm
I'd keep the lander away from the snow. An undisturbed bit of charcoal may be safe from geysers. Can't tell if the holes are sleeping geysers or collisions. Depending upon where the geysers appear, this comet could start tumbling. Hope the harpoon is strong enough to account for the changes in acceleration from centripetal forces.
-
Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 17391
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Post
by Chris Peterson » Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:21 pm
Guest wrote:An interesting comment in the text of the photo description. Specifically, "... the unusual double-lobed comet nucleus.". I'm wondering what the author was referring to, given that we have a miniscule & negligible sample size with which to compare and evaluate.
Well, dozens of comets have been mapped with radar, of which I believe two are almost certainly contact binaries, and two have elongated shapes that may or may not actually be described as "double-lobed". So while it would be a stretch to call this rare, I don't think "unusual" is an unreasonable assessment.
-
LocalColor
- Science Officer
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:11 pm
- Location: Central Idaho, USA
Post
by LocalColor » Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:29 pm
Mountains in space! Go Rosetta!
-
HunterofPhotons
- Ensign
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:04 pm
Post
by HunterofPhotons » Mon Sep 15, 2014 3:41 pm
Can Rosetta orbit the comet utilizing just the low gravity of the comet or does it have to use its thrusters to maintain the orbit?
dan k.
-
BMAONE23
- Commentator Model 1.23
- Posts: 4076
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:55 pm
- Location: California
Post
by BMAONE23 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:05 pm
madtom1999 wrote:Is there a coma and or tail yet and if so is it just so tenuous close up its not visible?
This thread has a post with an image of the tail in August
-
Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 17391
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Post
by Chris Peterson » Mon Sep 15, 2014 6:04 pm
HunterofPhotons wrote:Can Rosetta orbit the comet utilizing just the low gravity of the comet or does it have to use its thrusters to maintain the orbit?
Since August the spacecraft has been in orbit. Initially, it was in a series of hyperbolic (open) orbits, and the thrusters were used to define subsequent orbits. For a few days now it's been in a closed elliptical orbit. The thrusters are not required to maintain this orbit, outside of minor corrections to compensate for tidal effects, non-homogenous mass, and other secondary effects.
-
HunterofPhotons
- Ensign
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:04 pm
Post
by HunterofPhotons » Mon Sep 15, 2014 6:19 pm
Chris Peterson wrote:
.... The thrusters are not required to maintain this orbit....
Thanks for the information, Chris.
I wouldn't have thought that a body that size would have enough 'pull' to hold Rosetta in orbit.
dan k.
-
madtom1999
- Ensign
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:21 am
Post
by madtom1999 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:51 pm
Thanks DMAONE23
Well Cool!
-
Yoduh99
Post
by Yoduh99 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:51 pm
has a surface gravity so low that an astronaut could jump off of it
that sounds pretty scary when you think about how gentle you'll need the rover to land to not accidentally bounce off back into space!
-
Chris Peterson
- Abominable Snowman
- Posts: 17391
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
- Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA
Post
by Chris Peterson » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:07 pm
HunterofPhotons wrote:I wouldn't have thought that a body that size would have enough 'pull' to hold Rosetta in orbit.
No body is too small to be unable to hold another body in orbit. For any pair of bodies, there is a simple equation relating orbital period, radius, and the mass of the bodies (simplest when the central body is much more massive than the orbiting body, as in the case of Rosetta). An orbital speed on the order of a meter per second at a distance of a few tens of kilometers works out just fine.