|
13
February 2000
So
NEAR, and yet so far from UNDERSTANDING
On
Valentine's Day, 2000, the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) spacecraft
is is due, on its second attempt, to go into orbit around asteroid 433
Eros. It will be the first spacecraft to orbit an asteroid. NEAR will
examine the odd-shaped rock, about twice the size of Manhattan Island,
for about a year.
What
do we expect to learn from this adventure? Astronomers agree that it is
a chance to examine material left over from the formation of the solar
system. Maybe they are pieces of a failed planet? In any case, the usual
mantra is invoked: it will help us understand the origin of the solar
system. Yet images returned from close fly-bys of asteroids together with
Hubble Space Telescope images of the large asteroid, Vesta, have already
provided more puzzles than answers. That situation will continue while
we remain so far from understanding what we are looking at. The accepted
model for the origin of the solar system is a modern "fairy story", in
the words of one noted astronomer, requiring ad hoc miracles to occur
on every page in order to arrive at a happy ending.
The
biggest puzzle concerns the amazingly large craters on most of the asteroids.
They create severe problems for the impact theory of accretion but astronomers
have no alternative mechanism to offer. In an article in Science of 19
December 1997, titled "New View of Asteroids", Erik Asphaug writes:
"Last
June, NEAR flew by the main belt asteroid 233 Mathilde ... Although the
resolution was 50 times as coarse as expected at Eros, the images of Mathilde
reveal some surprises and provoke an overdue reevaluation of asteroid
geophysics. Mathilde has survived blow after blow with almost farcical
impunity, accommodating five great craters with diameters from 3/4 to
5/4 the asteroids mean radius, and none leaving any hint of global devastation.
Given that one of these great craters was last to form, preexisting craters
ought to bear major scars of seismic degradation, which they do not. Furthermore,
asteroids Gaspra and Ida (encountered by Galileo en-route to Jupiter)
and the small satellite Phobos all exhibit fracture grooves related to
impact, yet fracture grooves are absent on the larger, more battered Mathilde.
.....
Consider
the third largest asteroid, 4 Vesta, a basalt-covered volcanic body 530
km in diameter that resembles the Moon as much as it does Mathilde or
Toutatis. Recent views (36 km per pixel) by the Hubble Space Telescope
show a 460 km crater, with raised rim and central peak, covering the entire
southern hemisphere - an impact scar surpassing (in relative diameter,
but not relative depth) the great chasms of Mathilde.

Such
craters greatly challenge our understanding of impact processes on asteroids,
and on planets in general; evidently, our science must adapt. The study
of asteroids is therefore particularly exciting, as small planets provide
the fulcrum for the growth of planetology, and for an evolution of geophysics
in general. Complex and poorly understood solar system processes - such
as impact cratering, accretion and catastrophic disruption, the evolution
of volcanic structures, and the triggering of differentiation - may reveal
themselves only in a study across the gamut of planets, from the least
significant house-sized rock to the most stately terrestrial world. Like
clockwork miniatures, asteroids demonstrate primary principles governing
planetary evolution at an accessible scale, and thousands await discovery
and exploration in near-Earth space alone."
In
the Electric Universe model, moons, asteroids, comets and meteors are
created in electrical discharges between planetary bodies. They are ripped
from a planet's surface by electrical forces that easily overwhelm the
weak gravitational force. The most well-known, albeit unrecognized, arc
scar from a recent planetary encounter is seen on Mars in the form of
the colossal Valles Marineris canyons.
Two
million cubic kilometers of rock was excavated by the arc and hurled into
space. Some fell back to form the strewn fields of boulders seen by every
Mars lander. Some remained in orbit to become the two moons of Mars, Phobos
and Deimos.
(It is
just possible that there is more rubble in orbit about Mars that has been
the cause of inexplicable failures of spacecraft on arrival there). The
rest formed meteors and a belt of asteroids. This model simply explains
why many meteorites contain minerals whose crystals show that they must
have formed inside a planet. It explains the origin of the Martian meteorites
that are still arriving on Earth. And the electric arc mechanism explains
simply the strange flash-heating of chondrules and other minerals found
in meteorites. So, if EROS' parent was Mars it may show similarities to
Martian rocks.
The
most compelling evidence of their electrical birth is that all asteroids
imaged to date bear scars in the diagnostic form of circular electric
arc cratering. One large crater on asteroid Vesta has an untouched central
peak. Impacts do not form circular craters with sharp rims - they "splatter".
They don't form central peaks. Small secondary craters appear preferentially
on the raised rims of earlier craters while the reverse is never seen
- which also rules out an impact origin.
Crater-filled
grooves, seen clearly on Phobos have nothing to do with impact fracturing
and are merely small sinuous rilles created by surface lightning streaking
toward the main arc.
Sinuous rilles are not collapsed lava tubes. Since electrical cratering
is a slower process than sudden impacts and does not involve mechanical
shock to the same extent, there is little disturbance of pre-existing
craters - as seen dramatically on Mathilde.
It
is worth noting the odd low apparent density of many asteroids. In such
cases, astronomers introduce another ad-hoc assumption that the asteroid
is porous, containing up to 60% free space. But that raises the question
of how, in their model, such an object could sustain any sizeable impact
without shattering. In contrast, the Electric
Universe
model expects that a low level of charge on the surface of an object will
lower its measured gravitational influence. For example, comets display
non-Newtonian behaviour simply because they are visibly discharging and
changing their state of electric charge. So a low density may be due to
the electrical state of an asteroid rather than any porosity. In that
case, the surface minerals will have a higher density, as measured on
Earth, than the gravity of the asteroid would lead us to believe. Certainly,
the asteroids do not give the appearance of being a "rubble pile". If
asteroids maintained their integrity under the intense electrical forces
that removed them from a planet they must have considerable mechanical
strength.
Having
been "born" in a cataclysm created by a powerful electric discharge there
may be strong remanent magnetism in any susceptible minerals on an asteroid.
Strong magnetic remanence has been inferred on the asteroid Gaspra, equaling
the Earth's field strength, and it is a distinguishing feature of most
meteorites. The process of electrical cratering will generate regions
of anomalously strong patterns of magnetism. In addition, nuclear processes
are to be expected. So nucleosynthesis, transmutation of elements and
the formation of isotopes and radionuclides will have had an effect on
the surface of asteroids similar to that seen in meteorites where odd
isotopes occur from short-lived heavy parent radio-nuclides and others
do not match those found in the solar wind.
In order to advance we require much more than that "our science must adapt"
or that understanding of these processes will come about from "an evolution
of geophysics". It will require nothing less than a revolution in science
before understanding is possible. That revolution begins with discarding
the fairy tales about the formation of the solar system and returning
to the laboratory to study the effects of electric discharges on model
planetary surfaces. However that might be difficult for those who believe
unshakably in their childhood stories and for many of the modern "virtual
reality" computer generation.
Image
Credit: Crater
laboratory image by Robert Dunlap.
^ Back
to top
|