Why these astronomers now doubt there’s a Planet Nine

An artist’s concept of a hypothetical planet with a distant sun. Image via Shutterstock/ The Conversation.

by Samantha Lawler, University of Regina

Planet Nine is a theoretical, undiscovered giant planet in the mysterious far reaches of our solar system.

The presence of Planet Nine has been hypothesized to explain everything from the tilt of the sun’s spin axis to the apparent clustering in the orbits of small, icy asteroids beyond Neptune.

But does Planet Nine actually exist?

Discoveries at the edge of our solar system

The Kuiper Belt is a collection of small, icy bodies that orbit the sun beyond Neptune, at distances larger than 30 AU (one astronomical unit or AU is the distance between the Earth and the sun). These Kuiper Belt objects (KBOs) range in size from large boulders to 1,200 miles (2,000 km) across. KBOs are leftover small bits of planetary material that were never incorporated into planets, similar to the asteroid belt.

After Pluto, the second Kuiper Belt Object — 1992 QB1 — was discovered in 1992 by American astronomers David Jewitt and Jane Luu using the 2.2-m telescope at Mauna Kea in Hawaii. Image via NASA.

The discoveries from the most successful Kuiper Belt survey to date, the Outer Solar System Origins Survey (OSSOS), suggest a sneakier explanation for the orbits we see. Many of these KBOs have been discovered to have very elliptical and tilted orbits, like Pluto.

Mathematical calculations and detailed computer simulations have shown that the orbits we see in the Kuiper Belt can only have been created if Neptune originally formed a few AU closer to the sun, and migrated outward to its present orbit. Neptune’s migration explains the pervasiveness of highly elliptical orbits in the Kuiper Belt, and can explain all the KBO orbits we’ve observed, except for a handful of KBOs on extreme orbits that always stay at least 10 AU beyond Neptune.

Proof of Planet Nine?

These extreme orbits have provided the strongest evidence for Planet Nine. The first few that were discovered were all confined to one quadrant of the solar system. Astronomers expect to observe orbits at all different orientations, unless there is an outside force confining them. Finding several extreme KBOs on orbits pointed in the same direction was a hint that something was going on. Two separate groups of researchers calculated that only a large, very distant planet could keep all the orbits confined to part of the solar system, and the theory of Planet Nine was born.

Planet Nine is theorized to be five to 10 times as massive as Earth, with an orbit ranging between 300-700 AU. There have been several published predictions for its location in the solar system, but none of the search teams have yet discovered it. After more than four years of searching, there is still only indirect evidence in favour of Planet Nine.

The search for KBOs

Searching for KBOs requires careful planning, precise calculations and meticulous followup. I am part of the OSSOS, a collaboration of 40 astronomers from eight countries. We used the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope over five years to discover and track more than 800 new KBOs, nearly doubling the number of known KBOs with well-measured orbits. The KBOs discovered by OSSOS range in size from a few kilometers to over 100 km, and range in discovery distance from a few AU to over 100 AU, with the majority at 40-42 AU in the main Kuiper Belt.

KBOs do not emit their own light: these small, icy bodies only reflect light from the sun. Thus, the biases against detection at larger distances are extreme: if you move a KBO 10 times farther away, it will become 10,000 times fainter. And because of the laws of physics, KBOs on elliptical orbits will spend most of their time at the most distant parts of their orbits. So, while it is easy to find KBOs on elliptical orbits when they are close to the sun and bright, these KBOs spend most time being much fainter and harder to detect.

This means that the KBOs on elliptical orbits are particularly hard to discover, especially the extreme ones that always stay relatively far from the sun. Only a few of these have been found to date and, with current telescopes, we can only discover them when they are near pericenter — the closest point to the sun in their orbit.

This leads to another observation bias that has historically been ignored by many KBO surveys: KBOs in each part of the solar system can only be discovered at certain times of year. Ground-based telescopes are additionally limited by seasonal weather, with discoveries less likely to happen during when cloudy, rainy or windy conditions are more frequent. Discoveries of KBOs are also much less likely near the plane of the Milky Way galaxy, where countless stars make it difficult to find the faint, icy wanderers in telescopic images.

What makes OSSOS unique is that we are very public about these biases in discoveries. And because we understand our biases so well, we can use computer simulations to reconstruct the true shape of the Kuiper Belt after removing these biases.

Adjusting for biases

OSSOS discovered a handful of new extreme KBOs, half of which are outside the confined region, and are statistically consistent with a uniform distribution. A new study (currently in review) corroborates the non-clustered discoveries of OSSOS. A team of astronomers using data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) found over 300 new KBOs with no clustering of orbits. So now two independent surveys — both of which carefully tracked and reported their observational biases in discovering independent sets of extreme KBOs — have found no evidence for clustered orbits.

All known KBOs with orbits larger than 250 AU. The orbits of KBOs discovered by OSSOS and DES are in many directions; previous surveys with unknown biases discovered them in the same direction. This image was produced using public data from the Minor Planet Center Database. Image via Samantha Lawler/ The Conversation.

All of the extreme KBOs that had been discovered prior to OSSOS and DES were from surveys that did not fully report their directional biases. So we do not know if all these KBOs were discovered in the same quadrant of the solar system because they are actually confined, or because no surveys searched deep enough in the other quadrants. We performed additional simulations that showed that if observations are made only in one season from one telescope, extreme KBOs will naturally only be discovered in one quadrant of the solar system.

Further testing the Planet Nine theory, we looked in detail at the orbits of all known “extreme” KBOs and found that all but the two highest pericentre KBOs can be explained by known physical effects. These two KBOs are outliers, but our previous detailed computer simulations of the Kuiper Belt, which included gravitational effects from Planet Nine, produced a set of “extreme” KBOs with pericenters smoothly ranging from 40 to over 100 AU.

These simulations predict that there should be many KBOs with pericenters as large as the two outliers, but also many KBOs with smaller pericenters, which should be much easier to detect. Why don’t the orbit discoveries match the predictions? The answer may be that the Planet Nine theory does not hold up to detailed observations.

Our observations with a careful survey have discovered KBOs that are not confined by Planet Nine, and our simulations show that the Kuiper Belt should contain different orbits than we observe if Planet Nine exists. Other theories must be invoked to explain the high-pericentre extreme KBOs, but there is no lack of proposed theories in the scientific literature.

Many beautiful and surprising objects remain to be discovered in the mysterious outer solar system, but I don’t believe that Planet Nine is one of them.

Samantha Lawler, Assistant professor of astronomy, University of Regina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bottom line: Astronomers think there might not be a Planet Nine.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2zv27rD

An artist’s concept of a hypothetical planet with a distant sun. Image via Shutterstock/ The Conversation.

by Samantha Lawler, University of Regina

Planet Nine is a theoretical, undiscovered giant planet in the mysterious far reaches of our solar system.

The presence of Planet Nine has been hypothesized to explain everything from the tilt of the sun’s spin axis to the apparent clustering in the orbits of small, icy asteroids beyond Neptune.

But does Planet Nine actually exist?

Discoveries at the edge of our solar system

The Kuiper Belt is a collection of small, icy bodies that orbit the sun beyond Neptune, at distances larger than 30 AU (one astronomical unit or AU is the distance between the Earth and the sun). These Kuiper Belt objects (KBOs) range in size from large boulders to 1,200 miles (2,000 km) across. KBOs are leftover small bits of planetary material that were never incorporated into planets, similar to the asteroid belt.

After Pluto, the second Kuiper Belt Object — 1992 QB1 — was discovered in 1992 by American astronomers David Jewitt and Jane Luu using the 2.2-m telescope at Mauna Kea in Hawaii. Image via NASA.

The discoveries from the most successful Kuiper Belt survey to date, the Outer Solar System Origins Survey (OSSOS), suggest a sneakier explanation for the orbits we see. Many of these KBOs have been discovered to have very elliptical and tilted orbits, like Pluto.

Mathematical calculations and detailed computer simulations have shown that the orbits we see in the Kuiper Belt can only have been created if Neptune originally formed a few AU closer to the sun, and migrated outward to its present orbit. Neptune’s migration explains the pervasiveness of highly elliptical orbits in the Kuiper Belt, and can explain all the KBO orbits we’ve observed, except for a handful of KBOs on extreme orbits that always stay at least 10 AU beyond Neptune.

Proof of Planet Nine?

These extreme orbits have provided the strongest evidence for Planet Nine. The first few that were discovered were all confined to one quadrant of the solar system. Astronomers expect to observe orbits at all different orientations, unless there is an outside force confining them. Finding several extreme KBOs on orbits pointed in the same direction was a hint that something was going on. Two separate groups of researchers calculated that only a large, very distant planet could keep all the orbits confined to part of the solar system, and the theory of Planet Nine was born.

Planet Nine is theorized to be five to 10 times as massive as Earth, with an orbit ranging between 300-700 AU. There have been several published predictions for its location in the solar system, but none of the search teams have yet discovered it. After more than four years of searching, there is still only indirect evidence in favour of Planet Nine.

The search for KBOs

Searching for KBOs requires careful planning, precise calculations and meticulous followup. I am part of the OSSOS, a collaboration of 40 astronomers from eight countries. We used the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope over five years to discover and track more than 800 new KBOs, nearly doubling the number of known KBOs with well-measured orbits. The KBOs discovered by OSSOS range in size from a few kilometers to over 100 km, and range in discovery distance from a few AU to over 100 AU, with the majority at 40-42 AU in the main Kuiper Belt.

KBOs do not emit their own light: these small, icy bodies only reflect light from the sun. Thus, the biases against detection at larger distances are extreme: if you move a KBO 10 times farther away, it will become 10,000 times fainter. And because of the laws of physics, KBOs on elliptical orbits will spend most of their time at the most distant parts of their orbits. So, while it is easy to find KBOs on elliptical orbits when they are close to the sun and bright, these KBOs spend most time being much fainter and harder to detect.

This means that the KBOs on elliptical orbits are particularly hard to discover, especially the extreme ones that always stay relatively far from the sun. Only a few of these have been found to date and, with current telescopes, we can only discover them when they are near pericenter — the closest point to the sun in their orbit.

This leads to another observation bias that has historically been ignored by many KBO surveys: KBOs in each part of the solar system can only be discovered at certain times of year. Ground-based telescopes are additionally limited by seasonal weather, with discoveries less likely to happen during when cloudy, rainy or windy conditions are more frequent. Discoveries of KBOs are also much less likely near the plane of the Milky Way galaxy, where countless stars make it difficult to find the faint, icy wanderers in telescopic images.

What makes OSSOS unique is that we are very public about these biases in discoveries. And because we understand our biases so well, we can use computer simulations to reconstruct the true shape of the Kuiper Belt after removing these biases.

Adjusting for biases

OSSOS discovered a handful of new extreme KBOs, half of which are outside the confined region, and are statistically consistent with a uniform distribution. A new study (currently in review) corroborates the non-clustered discoveries of OSSOS. A team of astronomers using data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) found over 300 new KBOs with no clustering of orbits. So now two independent surveys — both of which carefully tracked and reported their observational biases in discovering independent sets of extreme KBOs — have found no evidence for clustered orbits.

All known KBOs with orbits larger than 250 AU. The orbits of KBOs discovered by OSSOS and DES are in many directions; previous surveys with unknown biases discovered them in the same direction. This image was produced using public data from the Minor Planet Center Database. Image via Samantha Lawler/ The Conversation.

All of the extreme KBOs that had been discovered prior to OSSOS and DES were from surveys that did not fully report their directional biases. So we do not know if all these KBOs were discovered in the same quadrant of the solar system because they are actually confined, or because no surveys searched deep enough in the other quadrants. We performed additional simulations that showed that if observations are made only in one season from one telescope, extreme KBOs will naturally only be discovered in one quadrant of the solar system.

Further testing the Planet Nine theory, we looked in detail at the orbits of all known “extreme” KBOs and found that all but the two highest pericentre KBOs can be explained by known physical effects. These two KBOs are outliers, but our previous detailed computer simulations of the Kuiper Belt, which included gravitational effects from Planet Nine, produced a set of “extreme” KBOs with pericenters smoothly ranging from 40 to over 100 AU.

These simulations predict that there should be many KBOs with pericenters as large as the two outliers, but also many KBOs with smaller pericenters, which should be much easier to detect. Why don’t the orbit discoveries match the predictions? The answer may be that the Planet Nine theory does not hold up to detailed observations.

Our observations with a careful survey have discovered KBOs that are not confined by Planet Nine, and our simulations show that the Kuiper Belt should contain different orbits than we observe if Planet Nine exists. Other theories must be invoked to explain the high-pericentre extreme KBOs, but there is no lack of proposed theories in the scientific literature.

Many beautiful and surprising objects remain to be discovered in the mysterious outer solar system, but I don’t believe that Planet Nine is one of them.

Samantha Lawler, Assistant professor of astronomy, University of Regina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bottom line: Astronomers think there might not be a Planet Nine.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2zv27rD

NVX-CoV2373: Here's How The Coronavirus Vaccine Based On A Flu Shot Works

NVX-CoV2373: Here's How The Coronavirus Vaccine Based On A Flu Shot Works

A new trial has begun in Victoria this week to evaluate a potential vaccine against COVID-19.

The vaccine is called NVX-CoV2373 and is from a US biotech company, Novavax.

The trial will be carried out across Melbourne and Brisbane, and is the first human trial of a vaccine specifically for COVID-19 to take place in Australia.

This vaccine is actually based on a vaccine that was already in development for influenza. But how might it work against SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19?

What’s in the mix?

Vaccines trigger an immune response by introducing the cells of our immune system to a virus in a safe way, without any exposure to the pathogen itself.

All vaccines have to do two things. The first is make our immune cells bind to and “eat up” the vaccine. The second is to activate these immune cells so they’re prepared to fight the current and any subsequent threats from the virus in question.

We often add molecules called adjuvants to vaccines to deliver a danger signal to the immune system, activate immune cells and trigger a strong immune response.

The Novavax vaccine is what we call a “subunit” vaccine because, instead of delivering the whole virus, it delivers only part of it. The element of SARS-CoV-2 in this vaccine is the spike protein, which is found on the surface of the virus.

By targeting a particular protein, a subunit vaccine is a great way to focus the immune response.

However, protein by itself is not very good at binding to and activating the cells of our immune system. Proteins are generally soluble, which doesn’t appeal to immune cells. They like something they can chew on.

So instead of soluble protein, Novavax has assembled the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into very small particles, called nanoparticles. To immune cells, these nanoparticles look like little viruses, so immune cells can bind to these pre-packaged chunks of protein, rapidly engulfing them and becoming activated.

The Novavax vaccine also contains an adjuvant called Matrix-M. While the nanoparticles deliver a modest danger signal, Matrix-M can be added to deliver a much stronger danger signal and really wake up the immune system.

The spike protein is formed into nanoparticles to attract immune cells, and Matrix-M is added as an adjuvant to further activate immune cells. Author provided

Rethinking an influenza vaccine

The Novavax vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 is based on a vaccine the company was already developing for influenza, called NanoFlu.

The NanoFlu vaccine contains similar parts – nanoparticles with the Matrix-M adjuvant. But it uses a different protein in the nanoparticle (hemagglutinin, which is on the outside of the influenza virus).

In October last year, Novavax started testing NanoFlu in a phase III clinical trial, the last level of clinical testing before a vaccine can be licensed. This trial had 2,650 volunteers and researchers were comparing whether NanoFlu performed as well as Fluzone, a standard influenza vaccine.

An important feature of this trial is participants were over the age of 65. Older people tend to have poorer responses to vaccines, because immune cells become more difficult to activate as we age.

This trial is ongoing, with volunteers to be followed until the end of the year. However, early results suggest NanoFlu can generate significantly higher levels of antibodies than Fluzone – even given the older people in the trial.

Antibodies are small proteins made by our immune cells which bind strongly to viruses and can stop them from infecting cells in the nose and lungs. So increased antibodies with NanoFlu should result in lower rates of infection with influenza.

These results were similar to those released after the phase I trial of NanoFlu, and suggest NanoFlu would be the superior vaccine for influenza.

So the big question is – will the same strategy work for SARS-CoV-2?

The Novavax vaccine is one of several potential COVID-19 vaccines being trialed around the world. Shutterstock

The Australian clinical trial

The new phase I/II trial will enrol around 131 healthy volunteers aged between 18 and 59 to assess the vaccine’s safety and measure how it affects the body’s immune response.

Some volunteers will not receive the vaccine, as a placebo control. The rest will receive the vaccine, in a few different forms.

The trial will test two doses of protein nanoparticles – a low (5 microgram) or a high (25 microgram) dose. Both doses will be delivered with Matrix-M adjuvant but the higher dose will also be tested without Matrix-M.

All groups will receive two shots of the vaccine 21 days apart, except one group that will just get one shot.

This design enables researchers to ask four important questions:

1. can the vaccine induce an immune response?

2. if so, what dose of nanoparticle is best?

3. do you need adjuvant or are nanoparticles enough?

4. do you need two shots or is one enough?

While it’s not yet clear how the vaccine will perform for SARS-CoV-2, Novavax has reported it generated strong immune responses in animals.

And we know NanoFlu performed well and had a good safety profile for influenza. NanoFlu also seemed to work well in older adults, which would be essential for a vaccine for COVID-19.

We eagerly await the first set of results, expected in a couple of months – an impressive turnaround time for a clinical trial. If this initial study is successful, the phase II portion of the trial will begin, with more participants.

The Novavax vaccine joins at least nine other vaccine candidates for SARS-CoV-2 currently in clinical testing around the world.

By Kylie Quinn, Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellow, School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University and Kirsty Wilson, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, RMIT University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

sb admin Wed, 05/27/2020 - 10:18

Categories

Medicine

from ScienceBlogs - Where the world discusses science https://ift.tt/2yBQ1MG

NVX-CoV2373: Here's How The Coronavirus Vaccine Based On A Flu Shot Works

A new trial has begun in Victoria this week to evaluate a potential vaccine against COVID-19.

The vaccine is called NVX-CoV2373 and is from a US biotech company, Novavax.

The trial will be carried out across Melbourne and Brisbane, and is the first human trial of a vaccine specifically for COVID-19 to take place in Australia.

This vaccine is actually based on a vaccine that was already in development for influenza. But how might it work against SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19?

What’s in the mix?

Vaccines trigger an immune response by introducing the cells of our immune system to a virus in a safe way, without any exposure to the pathogen itself.

All vaccines have to do two things. The first is make our immune cells bind to and “eat up” the vaccine. The second is to activate these immune cells so they’re prepared to fight the current and any subsequent threats from the virus in question.

We often add molecules called adjuvants to vaccines to deliver a danger signal to the immune system, activate immune cells and trigger a strong immune response.

The Novavax vaccine is what we call a “subunit” vaccine because, instead of delivering the whole virus, it delivers only part of it. The element of SARS-CoV-2 in this vaccine is the spike protein, which is found on the surface of the virus.

By targeting a particular protein, a subunit vaccine is a great way to focus the immune response.

However, protein by itself is not very good at binding to and activating the cells of our immune system. Proteins are generally soluble, which doesn’t appeal to immune cells. They like something they can chew on.

So instead of soluble protein, Novavax has assembled the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into very small particles, called nanoparticles. To immune cells, these nanoparticles look like little viruses, so immune cells can bind to these pre-packaged chunks of protein, rapidly engulfing them and becoming activated.

The Novavax vaccine also contains an adjuvant called Matrix-M. While the nanoparticles deliver a modest danger signal, Matrix-M can be added to deliver a much stronger danger signal and really wake up the immune system.

The spike protein is formed into nanoparticles to attract immune cells, and Matrix-M is added as an adjuvant to further activate immune cells. Author provided

Rethinking an influenza vaccine

The Novavax vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 is based on a vaccine the company was already developing for influenza, called NanoFlu.

The NanoFlu vaccine contains similar parts – nanoparticles with the Matrix-M adjuvant. But it uses a different protein in the nanoparticle (hemagglutinin, which is on the outside of the influenza virus).

In October last year, Novavax started testing NanoFlu in a phase III clinical trial, the last level of clinical testing before a vaccine can be licensed. This trial had 2,650 volunteers and researchers were comparing whether NanoFlu performed as well as Fluzone, a standard influenza vaccine.

An important feature of this trial is participants were over the age of 65. Older people tend to have poorer responses to vaccines, because immune cells become more difficult to activate as we age.

This trial is ongoing, with volunteers to be followed until the end of the year. However, early results suggest NanoFlu can generate significantly higher levels of antibodies than Fluzone – even given the older people in the trial.

Antibodies are small proteins made by our immune cells which bind strongly to viruses and can stop them from infecting cells in the nose and lungs. So increased antibodies with NanoFlu should result in lower rates of infection with influenza.

These results were similar to those released after the phase I trial of NanoFlu, and suggest NanoFlu would be the superior vaccine for influenza.

So the big question is – will the same strategy work for SARS-CoV-2?

The Novavax vaccine is one of several potential COVID-19 vaccines being trialed around the world. Shutterstock

The Australian clinical trial

The new phase I/II trial will enrol around 131 healthy volunteers aged between 18 and 59 to assess the vaccine’s safety and measure how it affects the body’s immune response.

Some volunteers will not receive the vaccine, as a placebo control. The rest will receive the vaccine, in a few different forms.

The trial will test two doses of protein nanoparticles – a low (5 microgram) or a high (25 microgram) dose. Both doses will be delivered with Matrix-M adjuvant but the higher dose will also be tested without Matrix-M.

All groups will receive two shots of the vaccine 21 days apart, except one group that will just get one shot.

This design enables researchers to ask four important questions:

1. can the vaccine induce an immune response?

2. if so, what dose of nanoparticle is best?

3. do you need adjuvant or are nanoparticles enough?

4. do you need two shots or is one enough?

While it’s not yet clear how the vaccine will perform for SARS-CoV-2, Novavax has reported it generated strong immune responses in animals.

And we know NanoFlu performed well and had a good safety profile for influenza. NanoFlu also seemed to work well in older adults, which would be essential for a vaccine for COVID-19.

We eagerly await the first set of results, expected in a couple of months – an impressive turnaround time for a clinical trial. If this initial study is successful, the phase II portion of the trial will begin, with more participants.

The Novavax vaccine joins at least nine other vaccine candidates for SARS-CoV-2 currently in clinical testing around the world.

By Kylie Quinn, Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellow, School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University and Kirsty Wilson, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, RMIT University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

sb admin Wed, 05/27/2020 - 10:18

Categories

Medicine

from ScienceBlogs - Where the world discusses science https://ift.tt/2yBQ1MG

Late May: Moon in Leo the Lion

As darkness falls these next several evenings – May 28, 29, and 30, 2020 – watch the moon as it travels in front of the constellation Leo the Lion. When the moon first enters Leo, it’ll display a rather wide waxing crescent phase. When the moon finally leaves Leo a few days later, it’ll show a waxing gibbous phase. Midway though its trek in Leo, the moon will exhibit its half-illuminated first quarter phase.

By the way, the moon reaches its first quarter phase on May 30, at 3:30 UTC. At United States time zones, that means the first quarter moon comes on May 29, at 11:30 p.m EDT, 10:30 p.m. CDT, 9:30 p.m. MDT and 8:30 p.m. PDT.

On May 28 and 29, 2020, use the moon to find Regulus, the brightest star in the constellation Leo the Lion. This blue-white gem of a star is of 1st-magnitude brightness and is the 21st brightest star to light up the nighttime sky.

The moon is rather close to Regulus for only a few days each month. So when the moon is no longer there to guide you, let the Big Dipper serve as your handy guide to this star. The two bowl stars on the handle side of the Big Dipper faithfully point to Regulus.

Click on Heavens-Above Moon to find out the moon’s present phase and its present position on the zodiac.

Use the Big Dipper to locate the bright stars Arcturus and Regulus.

Regulus is a blue-white gem of a star, its color revealing that this star has a high surface temperature. Considering that Regulus is nearly 80 light-years away, it must be quite luminous (intrinsically bright) to shine at 1st-magnitude brightness in Earth’s sky. Regulus is several hundred times more luminous than our sun, and at Regulus’ distance, our sun would be not even be visible to the naked eye.

Normally, a star’s blue-white color indicates that the star is in the heyday of youth (only 50 to 100 million years old). But Regulus has a very close companion star which cannot be seen through the telescope but only detected with a spectroscope. It’s thought that Regulus’ companion could be a white dwarf star, in which case Regulus and its companion star would have to be at least a billion years old. Possibly, mass transfer of material from one star to the other in this close-knit binary star system acts as a fountain of youth, keeping Regulus young in its old age.

Regulus is the only 1st magnitude star to sit almost squarely on the ecliptic – the sun’s apparent yearly pathway in front of the constellations of the zodiac. Of course, the sun’s apparent motion in front of the stars is really a reflection of our planet Earth’s revolution around the sun.

Looking at the sky chart below, notice that Regulus dots a backwards question mark of stars, called “The Sickle.” The Sickle outlines the Lion’s head and mane, whereas the star Denebola (whose name means “tail of the lion” in Arabic) marks the Lion’s tail.

Chart of the constellation Leo via the IAU. The ecliptic depicts the annual pathway of the sun in front of the constellations of the zodiac. The sun passes in front of the constellation Leo each year from around August 10 to September 17, and has its yearly conjunction with the star Regulus on or near August 23.

Bottom line: These next several nights – May 28, 29 and 30, 2020 – use the moon to locate the constellation Leo and the star Regulus. Once the moon leaves the evening sky, starting around mid-June 2020, try to piece together the starlit figure of the Lion in a dark sky.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/36AGDpc

As darkness falls these next several evenings – May 28, 29, and 30, 2020 – watch the moon as it travels in front of the constellation Leo the Lion. When the moon first enters Leo, it’ll display a rather wide waxing crescent phase. When the moon finally leaves Leo a few days later, it’ll show a waxing gibbous phase. Midway though its trek in Leo, the moon will exhibit its half-illuminated first quarter phase.

By the way, the moon reaches its first quarter phase on May 30, at 3:30 UTC. At United States time zones, that means the first quarter moon comes on May 29, at 11:30 p.m EDT, 10:30 p.m. CDT, 9:30 p.m. MDT and 8:30 p.m. PDT.

On May 28 and 29, 2020, use the moon to find Regulus, the brightest star in the constellation Leo the Lion. This blue-white gem of a star is of 1st-magnitude brightness and is the 21st brightest star to light up the nighttime sky.

The moon is rather close to Regulus for only a few days each month. So when the moon is no longer there to guide you, let the Big Dipper serve as your handy guide to this star. The two bowl stars on the handle side of the Big Dipper faithfully point to Regulus.

Click on Heavens-Above Moon to find out the moon’s present phase and its present position on the zodiac.

Use the Big Dipper to locate the bright stars Arcturus and Regulus.

Regulus is a blue-white gem of a star, its color revealing that this star has a high surface temperature. Considering that Regulus is nearly 80 light-years away, it must be quite luminous (intrinsically bright) to shine at 1st-magnitude brightness in Earth’s sky. Regulus is several hundred times more luminous than our sun, and at Regulus’ distance, our sun would be not even be visible to the naked eye.

Normally, a star’s blue-white color indicates that the star is in the heyday of youth (only 50 to 100 million years old). But Regulus has a very close companion star which cannot be seen through the telescope but only detected with a spectroscope. It’s thought that Regulus’ companion could be a white dwarf star, in which case Regulus and its companion star would have to be at least a billion years old. Possibly, mass transfer of material from one star to the other in this close-knit binary star system acts as a fountain of youth, keeping Regulus young in its old age.

Regulus is the only 1st magnitude star to sit almost squarely on the ecliptic – the sun’s apparent yearly pathway in front of the constellations of the zodiac. Of course, the sun’s apparent motion in front of the stars is really a reflection of our planet Earth’s revolution around the sun.

Looking at the sky chart below, notice that Regulus dots a backwards question mark of stars, called “The Sickle.” The Sickle outlines the Lion’s head and mane, whereas the star Denebola (whose name means “tail of the lion” in Arabic) marks the Lion’s tail.

Chart of the constellation Leo via the IAU. The ecliptic depicts the annual pathway of the sun in front of the constellations of the zodiac. The sun passes in front of the constellation Leo each year from around August 10 to September 17, and has its yearly conjunction with the star Regulus on or near August 23.

Bottom line: These next several nights – May 28, 29 and 30, 2020 – use the moon to locate the constellation Leo and the star Regulus. Once the moon leaves the evening sky, starting around mid-June 2020, try to piece together the starlit figure of the Lion in a dark sky.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/36AGDpc

Bees stab plants to make them flower

A new study has found that when pollen is in short supply, bumblebees damage plant leaves in a way that accelerates flower production.

Bumblebees need pollen from flowers to survive. But in our warming climate, bees are increasingly emerging from hibernation earlier in the year. What happens if they wake up before there are enough flowers in bloom?

Now, a team of Swiss researchers have discovered the bees have a way to order some fast food: They use their mouth parts to pinch into the leaves of plants that haven’t flowered yet, and that the resulting damage stimulates the production of new flowers that bloom weeks ahead of time.

Bumblebee stabbing a leaf. Image via Hannier Pulido/ ETH Zürich.

Biologist Mark Mescher of ETH Zürich is a co-author of the study published May 22, 2020, in the peer-reviewed journal Science. Mescher said in a statement:

Previous work has shown that various kinds of stress can induce plants to flower, but the role of bee-inflicted damage in accelerating flower production was unexpected.

According to a report in Science:

The researchers at ETH Zürich chanced upon the discovery when they noticed curious bite marks on leaves while studying how bees respond to plant odors. They had added bumble bees to a research greenhouse and observed them cutting holes in the shape of half-moons. What was going on? At first, the researchers thought the insects might be feeding on fluid from the leaves, but the bees didn’t stay long enough to get much. Nor did they appear to be taking any part of the leaves back to their colonies.

A bumblebee pierces a leaf with its tongue. Image via Hannier Pulido/ ETH Zürich.

Based on their studies, both in the field and in the lab, the researchers were able to show that the bumblebees’ propensity to damage leaves has a strong correlation with the amount of pollen they can obtain: That is, bees damage leaves much more frequently when there is little or no pollen available to them. They also found that damage inflicted on plant leaves had dramatic effects on flowering time in two different plant species. Tomato plants subjected to bumblebee biting flowered up to 30 days earlier than those that hadn’t been targeted, while mustard plants flowered about 14 days earlier when damaged by the bees.

ETH Zürich biologist Consuelo De Moraes is a study co-author. She said:

The bee damage had a dramatic influence on the flowering of the plants – one that has never been described before … Bumblebees may have found an effective method of mitigating local shortages of pollen. Our open fields are abuzz with other pollinators, too, which may also benefit from the bumblebees’ efforts.

But, the researchers said, it remains to be seen whether this mechanism is sufficient to overcome the challenges of changing climate. Insects and flowering plants have evolved together, sharing a long history that strikes a delicate balance between efflorescence and pollinator development. However, global warming and other anthropogenic environmental changes have the potential to disrupt the timing of these and other ecologically important interactions among species. Such rapid environmental change could result in insects and plants becoming increasingly out of sync in their development, for example. Mescher said:

… And that’s something from which both sides stand to lose.

Bottom line: A new study reveals that when pollen is scarce, bumblebees pierce the leaves of plants in order to force them to produce flowers more quickly.

Source: Bumble bees damage plant leaves and accelerate flower production when pollen is scarce

Via ETH Zürich

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/36A0wgf

A new study has found that when pollen is in short supply, bumblebees damage plant leaves in a way that accelerates flower production.

Bumblebees need pollen from flowers to survive. But in our warming climate, bees are increasingly emerging from hibernation earlier in the year. What happens if they wake up before there are enough flowers in bloom?

Now, a team of Swiss researchers have discovered the bees have a way to order some fast food: They use their mouth parts to pinch into the leaves of plants that haven’t flowered yet, and that the resulting damage stimulates the production of new flowers that bloom weeks ahead of time.

Bumblebee stabbing a leaf. Image via Hannier Pulido/ ETH Zürich.

Biologist Mark Mescher of ETH Zürich is a co-author of the study published May 22, 2020, in the peer-reviewed journal Science. Mescher said in a statement:

Previous work has shown that various kinds of stress can induce plants to flower, but the role of bee-inflicted damage in accelerating flower production was unexpected.

According to a report in Science:

The researchers at ETH Zürich chanced upon the discovery when they noticed curious bite marks on leaves while studying how bees respond to plant odors. They had added bumble bees to a research greenhouse and observed them cutting holes in the shape of half-moons. What was going on? At first, the researchers thought the insects might be feeding on fluid from the leaves, but the bees didn’t stay long enough to get much. Nor did they appear to be taking any part of the leaves back to their colonies.

A bumblebee pierces a leaf with its tongue. Image via Hannier Pulido/ ETH Zürich.

Based on their studies, both in the field and in the lab, the researchers were able to show that the bumblebees’ propensity to damage leaves has a strong correlation with the amount of pollen they can obtain: That is, bees damage leaves much more frequently when there is little or no pollen available to them. They also found that damage inflicted on plant leaves had dramatic effects on flowering time in two different plant species. Tomato plants subjected to bumblebee biting flowered up to 30 days earlier than those that hadn’t been targeted, while mustard plants flowered about 14 days earlier when damaged by the bees.

ETH Zürich biologist Consuelo De Moraes is a study co-author. She said:

The bee damage had a dramatic influence on the flowering of the plants – one that has never been described before … Bumblebees may have found an effective method of mitigating local shortages of pollen. Our open fields are abuzz with other pollinators, too, which may also benefit from the bumblebees’ efforts.

But, the researchers said, it remains to be seen whether this mechanism is sufficient to overcome the challenges of changing climate. Insects and flowering plants have evolved together, sharing a long history that strikes a delicate balance between efflorescence and pollinator development. However, global warming and other anthropogenic environmental changes have the potential to disrupt the timing of these and other ecologically important interactions among species. Such rapid environmental change could result in insects and plants becoming increasingly out of sync in their development, for example. Mescher said:

… And that’s something from which both sides stand to lose.

Bottom line: A new study reveals that when pollen is scarce, bumblebees pierce the leaves of plants in order to force them to produce flowers more quickly.

Source: Bumble bees damage plant leaves and accelerate flower production when pollen is scarce

Via ETH Zürich

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/36A0wgf

1st quarter moon is May 29-30

View at EarthSky Community Photos. | Composite image of a moon nearly at 1st quarter with some of the features you can see on the moon at this phase – captured April 30, 2020 – by our friend Dr Ski in the Philippines. He wrote: “… 10 hours before 1st quarter and the Lunar V and Lunar X are well defined …” More about Lunar V and X below. Thank you, Dr Ski!

A first quarter moon rises around noon and sets around midnight. You’ll likely spot it in late afternoon or early evening, when it’s at its highest in the sky. At this moon phase, the moon is showing us precisely half of its lighted half. Or you might say that – at first quarter moon – we’re seeing half the moon’s day side.

We call this moon a quarter and not a half because it is one quarter of the way around in its orbit of Earth, as measured from one new moon to the next. Also, although a first quarter moon appears half-lit to us, the illuminated portion we see of a first quarter moon truly is just a quarter. We’re now seeing half the moon’s day side, that is. Another lighted quarter of the moon shines just as brightly in the direction opposite Earth!

And what about the term half moon? That’s a beloved term, but not an official one.

Lunar X and Lunar V appear when the moon is near its 1st quarter phase. They aren’t really Xs and Vs on the moon. They’re just high areas, catching sunlight, creating an example of pareidolia on the moon. Aqilla Othman in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia, caught them both in May of 2017. Notice that he caught Lunar X and Lunar V.

Here’s a closer look at Lunar X and Lunar V. Photo by Izaty Liyana in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. What is Lunar X?

Tom Wildoner wrote: “One of my favorite areas to photograph on the moon near the 1st quarter! I captured this view of the sun lighting up the mountain range called Montes Apenninus. The moon was casting a nice shadow on the back side of the mountains. This mountain range is about 370 miles (600 km) long with some of the peaks rising as high as 3.1 miles (5 km).”

Bottom line: The next 1st quarter moon will come on May 30, 2020, at 03:31 UTC. That’s May 29, 10:31 p.m. CDT.

Read more: Top 4 keys to understanding moon phases

Check out EarthSky’s guide to the bright planets.

Help EarthSky keep going! Please donate.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2OIzLvs

View at EarthSky Community Photos. | Composite image of a moon nearly at 1st quarter with some of the features you can see on the moon at this phase – captured April 30, 2020 – by our friend Dr Ski in the Philippines. He wrote: “… 10 hours before 1st quarter and the Lunar V and Lunar X are well defined …” More about Lunar V and X below. Thank you, Dr Ski!

A first quarter moon rises around noon and sets around midnight. You’ll likely spot it in late afternoon or early evening, when it’s at its highest in the sky. At this moon phase, the moon is showing us precisely half of its lighted half. Or you might say that – at first quarter moon – we’re seeing half the moon’s day side.

We call this moon a quarter and not a half because it is one quarter of the way around in its orbit of Earth, as measured from one new moon to the next. Also, although a first quarter moon appears half-lit to us, the illuminated portion we see of a first quarter moon truly is just a quarter. We’re now seeing half the moon’s day side, that is. Another lighted quarter of the moon shines just as brightly in the direction opposite Earth!

And what about the term half moon? That’s a beloved term, but not an official one.

Lunar X and Lunar V appear when the moon is near its 1st quarter phase. They aren’t really Xs and Vs on the moon. They’re just high areas, catching sunlight, creating an example of pareidolia on the moon. Aqilla Othman in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia, caught them both in May of 2017. Notice that he caught Lunar X and Lunar V.

Here’s a closer look at Lunar X and Lunar V. Photo by Izaty Liyana in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. What is Lunar X?

Tom Wildoner wrote: “One of my favorite areas to photograph on the moon near the 1st quarter! I captured this view of the sun lighting up the mountain range called Montes Apenninus. The moon was casting a nice shadow on the back side of the mountains. This mountain range is about 370 miles (600 km) long with some of the peaks rising as high as 3.1 miles (5 km).”

Bottom line: The next 1st quarter moon will come on May 30, 2020, at 03:31 UTC. That’s May 29, 10:31 p.m. CDT.

Read more: Top 4 keys to understanding moon phases

Check out EarthSky’s guide to the bright planets.

Help EarthSky keep going! Please donate.

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2OIzLvs

Behavioral studies in era of COVID-19 raise new concerns about diversity

"The digital divide is undoubtedly going to get worse during this pandemic," says Emory psychologist Stella Lourenco. "The is a huge problem for ensuring equal access to education and to work, not just for ensuring diversity in scientific research."

By Carol Clark

The COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating an ongoing trend in cognitive psychology to conduct human behavioral experiments online.

“The world has been growing increasingly digital for a while,” says Stella Lourenco, a developmental psychologist at Emory University. “The global pandemic has turbo charged the move towards virtual connection in most areas of life, including psychology research.”

While the Internet offers a powerful tool for collecting data during a time of social distancing, it also raises new concerns regarding the diversity of study participants. Trends in Cognitive Sciences published an opinion piece outlining these concerns, authored by Lourenco and Arber Tasimi, a developmental psychologist at Stanford University who will be joining the Emory faculty in August.

The authors warn that as more research moves online, a growing lack of Internet access among low-income and minority communities may reduce the diversity of study samples, which would limit the ability to generalize scientific findings. As unemployment soars, more people may be forced to choose between paying their rent and buying food or paying for Internet service.

“The digital divide is undoubtedly going to get worse during this pandemic,” Lourenco says. “This is a huge problem for ensuring equal access to education and to work, not just for ensuring diversity in scientific research.”

In their opinion piece, Lourenco and Tasimi urge scientists and grant-funding agencies to join lobbying efforts for government subsidies for Internet service, and “perhaps even advocate for universal availability of Internet access, which is essential for living and operating in contemporary times.”

In some ways, the challenges to diversity presented by the pandemic are a new twist on an old problem, Lourenco says. In recent years, concerns were raised that participants in some in-person psychology studies were mainly college students who are younger than the general population and also tend to be better educated and from higher-income backgrounds and industrialized countries.

A move towards online experiments of human subjects, using crowdsourcing tools such as Amazon Mechanical Turk, was helping alleviate this problem. Online experiments can allow researchers to tap large numbers of participants in an efficient and cost-effective way. “With crowdsourcing tools, you can potentially reach adults from all over the United States, and in other countries, as long as they have Internet access,” Lourenco says.

Children present unique research challenges, Lourenco says, so studies involving them have remained largely in-person. For instance, children tend to grow restless more quickly than adults when they are asked to sit in front of a computer to perform tasks for experiments.

The pandemic, however, is driving more child development laboratories to go online for the first time, Lourenco notes. Platforms such as the Parent and Researcher Collaborative, an online crowdsourcing tool where labs can post studies for families to participate in, are providing infrastructure to support this trend.

As more studies go online, the pandemic is likely impacting Internet access among some groups. In the pre-pandemic era, even low-income people without home Internet might be able to visit a library, a coffee shop or even the parking lot of a restaurant with free wireless service to connect to high-speed Internet. The current situation makes those scenarios less likely to occur.

And the current situation may represent the start of “a new normal,” Lourenco and Tasimi write, “in which threats of disease may require long-term social distancing practices and may differentially impact those in low-income and minority communities.”

They recommend that researchers strive to provide temporary Internet connection to low-income participants, by purchasing mobile hotspots that could be mailed to them or dropped off at their homes. They also recommend that more scientific journals require authors to report detailed demographic information of study participants, whether the studies are conducted online or in person.

They further recommend considering the development of more mobile laboratories, equipped with personal protective equipment and disinfection protocols. Portable labs would allow off-site testing to reach participants in low-income and minority communities.

“I hope that the pressure that the pandemic puts on behavioral research will ultimately create positive changes in the field,” Lourenco says. “Ultimately, it highlights the need to become more sensitive about the demographics of participants involved in psychological studies and about any claims that are made about the generalization of data.”

Related:
Skeletal shapes key to rapid recognition of objects
Babies' spatial reasoning predicts later math skills



from eScienceCommons https://ift.tt/2Xpa3lO

"The digital divide is undoubtedly going to get worse during this pandemic," says Emory psychologist Stella Lourenco. "The is a huge problem for ensuring equal access to education and to work, not just for ensuring diversity in scientific research."

By Carol Clark

The COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating an ongoing trend in cognitive psychology to conduct human behavioral experiments online.

“The world has been growing increasingly digital for a while,” says Stella Lourenco, a developmental psychologist at Emory University. “The global pandemic has turbo charged the move towards virtual connection in most areas of life, including psychology research.”

While the Internet offers a powerful tool for collecting data during a time of social distancing, it also raises new concerns regarding the diversity of study participants. Trends in Cognitive Sciences published an opinion piece outlining these concerns, authored by Lourenco and Arber Tasimi, a developmental psychologist at Stanford University who will be joining the Emory faculty in August.

The authors warn that as more research moves online, a growing lack of Internet access among low-income and minority communities may reduce the diversity of study samples, which would limit the ability to generalize scientific findings. As unemployment soars, more people may be forced to choose between paying their rent and buying food or paying for Internet service.

“The digital divide is undoubtedly going to get worse during this pandemic,” Lourenco says. “This is a huge problem for ensuring equal access to education and to work, not just for ensuring diversity in scientific research.”

In their opinion piece, Lourenco and Tasimi urge scientists and grant-funding agencies to join lobbying efforts for government subsidies for Internet service, and “perhaps even advocate for universal availability of Internet access, which is essential for living and operating in contemporary times.”

In some ways, the challenges to diversity presented by the pandemic are a new twist on an old problem, Lourenco says. In recent years, concerns were raised that participants in some in-person psychology studies were mainly college students who are younger than the general population and also tend to be better educated and from higher-income backgrounds and industrialized countries.

A move towards online experiments of human subjects, using crowdsourcing tools such as Amazon Mechanical Turk, was helping alleviate this problem. Online experiments can allow researchers to tap large numbers of participants in an efficient and cost-effective way. “With crowdsourcing tools, you can potentially reach adults from all over the United States, and in other countries, as long as they have Internet access,” Lourenco says.

Children present unique research challenges, Lourenco says, so studies involving them have remained largely in-person. For instance, children tend to grow restless more quickly than adults when they are asked to sit in front of a computer to perform tasks for experiments.

The pandemic, however, is driving more child development laboratories to go online for the first time, Lourenco notes. Platforms such as the Parent and Researcher Collaborative, an online crowdsourcing tool where labs can post studies for families to participate in, are providing infrastructure to support this trend.

As more studies go online, the pandemic is likely impacting Internet access among some groups. In the pre-pandemic era, even low-income people without home Internet might be able to visit a library, a coffee shop or even the parking lot of a restaurant with free wireless service to connect to high-speed Internet. The current situation makes those scenarios less likely to occur.

And the current situation may represent the start of “a new normal,” Lourenco and Tasimi write, “in which threats of disease may require long-term social distancing practices and may differentially impact those in low-income and minority communities.”

They recommend that researchers strive to provide temporary Internet connection to low-income participants, by purchasing mobile hotspots that could be mailed to them or dropped off at their homes. They also recommend that more scientific journals require authors to report detailed demographic information of study participants, whether the studies are conducted online or in person.

They further recommend considering the development of more mobile laboratories, equipped with personal protective equipment and disinfection protocols. Portable labs would allow off-site testing to reach participants in low-income and minority communities.

“I hope that the pressure that the pandemic puts on behavioral research will ultimately create positive changes in the field,” Lourenco says. “Ultimately, it highlights the need to become more sensitive about the demographics of participants involved in psychological studies and about any claims that are made about the generalization of data.”

Related:
Skeletal shapes key to rapid recognition of objects
Babies' spatial reasoning predicts later math skills



from eScienceCommons https://ift.tt/2Xpa3lO

Watch NASA coverage of SpaceX astronaut test flight

On May 27, 2020, for the first time since 2011, NASA’s SpaceX Demo-2 mission will return U.S. human spaceflight to the International Space Station from U.S. soil – on an American rocket and spacecraft – with astronauts Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley. Image via NASA.

Originally published by NASA

NASA will provide coverage of today’s prelaunch and launch activities for the agency’s SpaceX Demo-2 test flight with NASA astronauts Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley to the International Space Station. These activities are a part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, which is working with the U.S. aerospace industry to launch astronauts on American rockets and spacecraft from American soil for the first time since 2011. NASA and SpaceX are targeting 4:33 p.m. EDT Wednesday, May 27, for the launch of the Demo-2 flight. It’ll also be the first time a commercially built and operated American rocket and spacecraft will carry humans to the space station. The launch, as well as other activities leading up to the launch, will air live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

The SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft will launch on a Falcon 9 rocket from historic Launch Complex 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The Crew Dragon is scheduled to dock to the space station at 11:29 a.m. Thursday, May 28.

This will be SpaceX’s final test flight of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program and will provide data on the performance of the Falcon 9 rocket, Crew Dragon spacecraft and ground systems, as well as in-orbit, docking and landing operations.

The test flight also will provide valuable data toward NASA certifying SpaceX’s crew transportation system for regular flights carrying astronauts to and from the space station. SpaceX currently is readying the hardware for the first rotational mission, which would happen after data from this mission is reviewed for NASA’s certification.

NASA’s SpaceX Demo-2 coverage is as follows. All times are EDT [UTC -4; how to translate UTC to your time] and will be updated online:

Wednesday, May 27

12:15 p.m. – NASA TV launch coverage begins for the 4:32 p.m. liftoff

6 p.m. – Administrator postlaunch news conference at Kennedy, with the following representatives:

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine
Kathy Lueders, manager, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program
A SpaceX representative
Kirk Shireman, manager, International Space Station Program
An Astronaut Office representative

A media phone bridge will be available for this event.

Thursday, May 28

11:29 a.m. – Docking (NASA Television will have continuous coverage from launch to docking)

The goal of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program is safe, reliable and cost-effective transportation to and from the International Space Station. This could allow for additional research time and increase the opportunity for discovery aboard humanity’s testbed for exploration, including helping us prepare for human exploration of the moon and Mars.

For launch countdown coverage, NASA’s launch blog, and more information about the mission, visit:

https://www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew

Bottom line: Watch the Demo-2 mission launch on May 27, 2020. It’ll carry astronauts to the International Space station, the first launch of astronauts on American rockets and spacecraft, from American soil, since 2011. The launch, as well as other activities leading up to the launch, will air live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

Robert Behnken’s Twitter feed

Douglas Hurley’s Twitter feed

Via NASA

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2ZGdQhs

On May 27, 2020, for the first time since 2011, NASA’s SpaceX Demo-2 mission will return U.S. human spaceflight to the International Space Station from U.S. soil – on an American rocket and spacecraft – with astronauts Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley. Image via NASA.

Originally published by NASA

NASA will provide coverage of today’s prelaunch and launch activities for the agency’s SpaceX Demo-2 test flight with NASA astronauts Robert Behnken and Douglas Hurley to the International Space Station. These activities are a part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, which is working with the U.S. aerospace industry to launch astronauts on American rockets and spacecraft from American soil for the first time since 2011. NASA and SpaceX are targeting 4:33 p.m. EDT Wednesday, May 27, for the launch of the Demo-2 flight. It’ll also be the first time a commercially built and operated American rocket and spacecraft will carry humans to the space station. The launch, as well as other activities leading up to the launch, will air live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

The SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft will launch on a Falcon 9 rocket from historic Launch Complex 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The Crew Dragon is scheduled to dock to the space station at 11:29 a.m. Thursday, May 28.

This will be SpaceX’s final test flight of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program and will provide data on the performance of the Falcon 9 rocket, Crew Dragon spacecraft and ground systems, as well as in-orbit, docking and landing operations.

The test flight also will provide valuable data toward NASA certifying SpaceX’s crew transportation system for regular flights carrying astronauts to and from the space station. SpaceX currently is readying the hardware for the first rotational mission, which would happen after data from this mission is reviewed for NASA’s certification.

NASA’s SpaceX Demo-2 coverage is as follows. All times are EDT [UTC -4; how to translate UTC to your time] and will be updated online:

Wednesday, May 27

12:15 p.m. – NASA TV launch coverage begins for the 4:32 p.m. liftoff

6 p.m. – Administrator postlaunch news conference at Kennedy, with the following representatives:

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine
Kathy Lueders, manager, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program
A SpaceX representative
Kirk Shireman, manager, International Space Station Program
An Astronaut Office representative

A media phone bridge will be available for this event.

Thursday, May 28

11:29 a.m. – Docking (NASA Television will have continuous coverage from launch to docking)

The goal of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program is safe, reliable and cost-effective transportation to and from the International Space Station. This could allow for additional research time and increase the opportunity for discovery aboard humanity’s testbed for exploration, including helping us prepare for human exploration of the moon and Mars.

For launch countdown coverage, NASA’s launch blog, and more information about the mission, visit:

https://www.nasa.gov/commercialcrew

Bottom line: Watch the Demo-2 mission launch on May 27, 2020. It’ll carry astronauts to the International Space station, the first launch of astronauts on American rockets and spacecraft, from American soil, since 2011. The launch, as well as other activities leading up to the launch, will air live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

Robert Behnken’s Twitter feed

Douglas Hurley’s Twitter feed

Via NASA

from EarthSky https://ift.tt/2ZGdQhs