Can a powerful CME cause a comet to fragment?

[Reality Check]

Have a look at these photos of comets. These are not impact craters?

Let see: we have cat photos, insect photos and some images of comets! I do hope that you do not expect anyont to wade through these looking for Temple1 photos.

[Reality Check]

Yes, there was a mainstream theory in 1985 and it was not correct.

Yes, that was what I said - except that there was still a mainstream theory after 1985 which was correct (a modified version of the pre-1985 theory).
Observations have shown us that comets are a lot more complex than the orginal "dirty snowball" pioneered by Fred J. Whipple, Fred L. in 1950. Oddly enough, those 60 years of observations have resulted in updated models of comets!

[Reality Check]

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2005210155.pdf
I'm sure this is purely coincidental.

You have the first event on August 28 1859. Then you have a couple of newpaper reports from Australia during the second event (September 2 1859). The first event encourages a lot of people to observe the skys.
No reports of a comet near the Earth fragmenting as I would expect for meteors arriving on the same day as the comet supposibly fragmented.

So yes - this is purely coincidental!

[tusenfem]

And ofcourse the Carrington event did happen during the Perseid season ...
Next to that a meteor is not a comet ...

[NEOWatcher]

Next to that a meteor is not a comet ...

That was exactly my thought.
Meteors will fragment hitting the atmosphere whether there was a CME or not.

The difference here is that people were looking at the sky because of the CME. Therefore; people who wouldn't normally have seen a meteor saw this one. Coincidence.

[gdaniels99]

That was exactly my thought.
Meteors will fragment hitting the atmosphere whether there was a CME or not.

The difference here is that people were looking at the sky because of the CME. Therefore; people who wouldn't normally have seen a meteor saw this one. Coincidence.

I'm not suggesting a meteor is a comet. I'm suggesting a comet was hit by the initial CME and fragmented. That fragment is what witnesses saw entering the atmosphere and exploding near the horizon when the next CME and associated auroras hit.

This is a testable hypothesis. For this to be true there would have needed to be a comet within four days travel time of earth in order for the fragment to arrive at the time of the second CME on Sept 2, 1859.

I would suspect there would be an increase in such events over the next few months or years if multiple fragments were created. It would take time for earth to run into them all.

[gdaniels99]

Interesting, Walt Whitman wrote a poem entitled "Year of Meteors (1859-1860)". Here's an article in the LA Times:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun...eteor-20100605

A few lines from the poem:

"YEAR of meteors! brooding year!"

"—Nor the comet that came unannounced out of the north, flaring in heaven;
Nor the strange huge meteor procession, dazzling and clear, shooting over our heads,
(A moment, a moment long, it sail’d its balls of unearthly light over our heads,
Then departed, dropt in the night, and was gone;"

"Year of comets and meteors transient and strange"

But again, I'm sure this is all a coincidence.

[tusenfem]

This is a testable hypothesis. For this to be true there would have needed to be a comet within four days travel time of earth in order for the fragment to arrive at the time of the second CME on Sept 2, 1859.

Then TEST it, instead of writing up plattitudes, next you will come that the aurora is caused by the meteor that comes from a CME destroyed comet.

[gdaniels99]

Let see: we have cat photos, insect photos and some images of comets! I do hope that you do not expect anyont to wade through these looking for Temple1 photos.

Hmmm....I see nothing but comet photos. no cats at all. but one insect ( a dragonfly).

[tusenfem]

But again, I'm sure this is all a coincidence.

If you actually read the article you link to then you would know that these were two different events, albeit in the same year.

Please stay on topic, this was about if CMEs can break up comets, now you want apparently to put meteors in the game too. This is becoming a but what if, but what if, but what if thread, and we don't like that.

[gdaniels99]

next you will come that the aurora is caused by the meteor that comes from a CME destroyed comet.

Nowhere in this thread have I argued that auroras are caused by meteors. What I have stated is that CME's and charged particles appear to be able to fragment comets possibly by triggering some sort of extreme outgassing event. That's my position.

Since I'm not an astronomer I'm not in the best position to test this hypothesis which is why I've posted on this board to see what other evidence other's may have on this topic. I believe investigating if there was an increase in meteor sightings during and after the Carrington Event is clearly related to my position. Since the Carrington Event was the biggest known solar event then it follows that if CMEs can fragment a comet,and if any comets were nearby, then this period would be a good time to look for an increase in meteor sightings. Hopefully if others have evidence of such an increase then they can post it here and share with us all.

That is the purpose of this forum, right?

this was about if CMEs can break up comets, now you want apparently to put meteors in the game too.

Please tell me what a comet fragment entering the atmosphere is called? I'll be eagerly awaiting your answer.

If you actually read the article you link to then you would know that these were two different events, albeit in the same year.

The article represents one possible interpretation of the events described in Whitman's poem derived 150 years after the poem was published. It is not the gospel truth or last word. It is one interpretation.

But it at least shows that there was a comet in the vicinity and that there was an significant meteor event in the time period around the Carrington Event. Those are two necessary requirements of the CME-Fragmentation hypothesis. So it's completely relevant to discuss it here. Whether they are related is, of course, unknown.

[NEOWatcher]

CME's and charged particles appear to be able to fragment comments possibly by triggering some sort of extreme outgassing event.

As a friendly joust at your typo in the attempt at humor...
Those CME's are fragmenting your comments and causing an outgassing of your concepts.

Since the Carrington Event was the biggest known solar event then it follows that if CMEs can fragment a comet,and if any comets were nearby...

Here's the problem I see with this idea.
First; the CME was aimed at Earth. For it to fragment a comet, the comet's path would have been in line with the Earth to begin with.
Second; you would have to have that fragment aimed at the Earth.
Third; It would all have to be close enough for the travel time of the comet fragment to reach the Earth within such a short time.

With the speed of Earths orbit, and the highly elliptical nature of the comet's orbit, it would take considerable delta-v to put a fragment in a collision trajectory with Earth. I don't think an outgassing event can change the orbit anywhere near that much.

To me, it seems like it would be highly unlikely for all those conditions to be just right.

[NEOWatcher]

The article represents one possible interpretation of the events described in Whitman's poem derived 150 years after the poem was published. It is not the gospel truth or last word. It is one interpretation.

I have a hard time with someone's interpretation of someone's attempt at describing an event. Trying to interpret poetry is considerably less reliable. You can probably interpret that poem however you want, poetry is not defined as an attempt at being a historical reference or description.

He may have been inspired by a similar event, but it's just as possible that he saw one event, and wrote a poem about other celestial observations he made in his lifetime.

[gdaniels99]

X-rays appear to be the clue connecting charged particles from the sun with comet fragmentations.

"Hot X-Rays from a Cold Comet." NASA.gov

"Comet LINEAR is well-known mainly because it "exploded" when it passed by the Sun in July 2000, but the event was not akin to a stellar flare or a supernova explosion. It simply crumbled into a swarm of chilly "cometesimals" as sunlight vaporized frozen gases that held the comet's lumpy nucleus together. Comet LINEAR's explosion was not a violent x-ray producing event. Nevertheless, Chandra images of Comet LINEAR revealed an x-ray glow surrounding the Sun-facing side of its nucleus. The cold nucleus itself was invisible at x-ray wavelengths, but the gas around it was alive with variable x-ray emission.....Astronomers using ROSAT decided to look at Hyakutake and they were shocked by what they saw. ROSAT images revealed a crescent-shaped region of x-ray emission around the comet 1000 times more intense than anyone had predicted!....The wavelength of radiation produced by an object is usually related to its temperature. The human body is warm enough (about 30 degrees Celsius) to generate infrared radiation, but it takes very high temperatures (millions of degrees Celsius) to produce X-rays. So, how could x-rays come from a frigid comet? "

So, could these same charged particles from the sun enter fissures or cracks in the comet and interact with internal gases in a similar manner as the gases in the coma and produce enough heat energy to create violent outgassing? Comet LINEAR "crumbled"...it didn't send fragments flying off radially at 280mph as did Holmes. Why? Did Holmes have some gas pressures building within it from x-ray heating?

"Mystery of Cometary X-Rays Solved." Harvard.edu

"On July 14, 2000 NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory imaged Comet C/1999 S4 (LINEAR) and detected X-rays from oxygen and nitrogen ions. The details of the X-ray emission, as recorded on Chandra's Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer, show that they are produced by collisions of ions racing away from the Sun with gas in the comet....Soon after astronomers discovered x-rays coming from comet Hyakutake, a team of scientists at the University of Michigan suggested charge exchange reactions between the solar wind and cometary gases as a possible explanation."

So if these interactions between normal solar wind and cometary gases can produce X-rays then could a CME produce a spike of x-rays? Could this be enough to cause rapid expansion of gases that could fragment the comet explosively?

[gdaniels99]

First; the CME was aimed at Earth. For it to fragment a comet, the comet's path would have been in line with the Earth to begin with.

The CME that hit earth was aimed at earth. We have no idea how active the sun was and how many CME's it threw off. There could have been others aimed in different directions. Just a thought.

[tusenfem]

So if these interactions between normal solar wind and cometary gases can produce X-rays then could a CME produce a spike of x-rays? Could this be enough to cause rapid expansion of gases that could fragment the comet explosively?

No

[tusenfem]

The CME that hit earth was aimed at earth. We have no idea how active the sun was and how many CME's it threw off. There could have been others aimed in different directions. Just a thought.

No

[Tensor]

What I have stated is that CME's and charged particles appear to be able to fragment comets possibly by triggering some sort of extreme outgassing event. That's my position.

Well, it was your position when you started. Now it seems to include the fragments becoming meteors. Are you now suggesting that meteors are linked to fragmentation caused by CMEs?

I believe investigating if there was an increase in meteor sightings during and after the Carrington Event is clearly related to my position.

Well, then investigate it. You can't prove a negative, so there isn't much use making a claim with no support other than, "Just a thought".

Since the Carrington Event was the biggest known solar event then it follows that if CMEs can fragment a comet,and if any comets were nearby, then this period would be a good time to look for an increase in meteor sightings.

Only if the comet was on an intersection path with the Earth at the time, or the fragments were blown off with enough force to change their velocity vector toward Earth. You have evidence to support this?

Hopefully if others have evidence of such an increase then they can post it here and share with us all.

That is the purpose of this forum, right?

Well, not quite. You might want to review Swift's Post #56 or Captain Swoop's post #62 for clarification.

Please tell me what a comet fragment entering the atmosphere is called? I'll be eagerly awaiting your answer.

And what does this have to do with your original position? Or are you now adding something else to your position?

The article represents one possible interpretation of the events described in Whitman's poem derived 150 years after the poem was published. It is not the gospel truth or last word. It is one interpretation.

It represents the mainstream position on what happened. Are you suggesting something else?

But it at least shows that there was a comet in the vicinity and that there was an significant meteor event in the time period around the Carrington Event. Those are two necessary requirements of the CME-Fragmentation hypothesis.

But is there any evidence to link the two, other than you believing they are linked?

So it's completely relevant to discuss it here. Whether they are related is, of course, unknown.

Which is why it's not the mainstream position that there is a link (there being no evidence for a link). Are you suggesting this position is wrong?

[gdaniels99]

Well, it was your position when you started. Now it seems to include the fragments becoming meteors. Are you now suggesting that meteors are linked to fragmentation caused by CMEs?

Go read my post #5 on this thread. I explain in detail why I am even interested in the CME-Comet Fragmentation idea. It has to do with comet fragments hitting earth. And what are comet fragments called once they enter earth's atmosphere????? I'll let you think on that for a while and see if you can make the connection yourself.

Only if the comet was on an intersection path with the Earth at the time, or the fragments were blown off with enough force to change their velocity vector toward Earth. You have evidence to support this?

Have you even bothered to actually read this entire thread????? Clearly you haven't. When Comet Holmes had an outburst when it was far away from any gravitational effects of Jupiter or the Sun, astronomers noted large fragments speeding AWAY from the comet at speeds up to 280mph. And this outburst wasn't caused by a CME, just good ole charged particles from the solar wind. So could a CME cause greater effects?

It represents the mainstream position on what happened. Are you suggesting something else?

It represents ONE mainstream position. Put five astronomers in a room and you'll get five different positions.


But funny how you completely ignored all the X-Ray evidence I posted. Care to take a shot at that? Someone previously mentioned that charged particles would have no influence on a comet's gasses when I asked that question a day or so ago. Now it looks like they have a TREMENDOUS impact on those gases, heating them up to the point where they emit x-rays. So just because someone on this forum says something is the mainstream position doesn't make it so. It may mean they simply don't know about more recent research.

[gdaniels99]

No

And the research that shows there were no other CMEs associated with the Carrington Event is........? Please post a link to that research. Thanks.

[gdaniels99]

From Wikipedia:

The Stardust spacecraft, launched in February 1999, collected particles from the coma of Comet Wild 2 in January 2004, and returned the samples to Earth in a capsule in January 2006. Claudia Alexander, a program scientist for Rosetta from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who has modeled comets for years, reported to space.com about her astonishment at the number of jets, their appearance on the dark side of the comet as well as on the light side, their ability to lift large chunks of rock from the surface of the comet and the fact that comet Wild 2 is not a loosely cemented rubble pile.[78]
More recent data from the Stardust mission show that materials retrieved from the tail of Wild 2 were crystalline and could only have been "born in fire".[79][80] Although comets formed in the outer Solar System, radial mixing of material during the early formation of the Solar System is thought to have redistributed material throughout the proto-planetary disk,[81] so comets also contain crystalline grains that formed in the hot inner Solar System. This is seen in comet spectra as well as in sample return missions. More recent still, the materials retrieved demonstrate that the "comet dust resembles asteroid materials".[82] These new results have forced scientists to rethink the nature of comets and their distinction from asteroids.[83] In April 2011, scientists from the University of Arizona discovered evidence for the presence of liquid water in a Comet Wild 2. They have found iron and copper sulfide minerals that must have formed in the presence of water. The discovery shatters the existing paradigm that comets never get warm enough to melt their icy bulk.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet

Apparently the mainstream position on comets doesn't fit with the actual data being collected from comets and thus the mainstream position is having to be rethought. Comets may simply be asteroids with gas jets. Certainly not "dust and ices" as a previous "mainstream" position noted in this forum. But, of course, those assertions weren't flagged for being "against the mainstream." So moderators, I think any post which asserts categorically what a comet is or isn't, is actually against the mainstream because the current mainstream thoughts on comets is "we don't know what they are."

Cheers.

[Van Rijn]

Only if the comet was on an intersection path with the Earth at the time, or the fragments were blown off with enough force to change their velocity vector toward Earth. You have evidence to support this?

Have you even bothered to actually read this entire thread????? Clearly you haven't. When Comet Holmes had an outburst when it was far away from any gravitational effects of Jupiter or the Sun, astronomers noted large fragments speeding AWAY from the comet at speeds up to 280mph. And this outburst wasn't caused by a CME, just good ole charged particles from the solar wind.

Have you researched Comet Holmes' orbit details? From here:

http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=17p&orb=1

You can see the comet's orbit is very different from Earth's. And note the "Earth MOID" (Minimum Orbit Intersection Distance) is over 1 AU. In other words, it is always more distant from Earth than Earth is from the sun. Its orbital velocity around the sun would be over 20,000 mph. So the fragments would end up in similar orbits to the main body, really not a concern for Earth.

And on another note, you have not established that the outburst was caused by "good ole charged particles from the solar wind."

[Van Rijn]

Comets may simply be asteroids with gas jets. Certainly not "dust and ices" as a previous "mainstream" position noted in this forum.

(Emphasis added) Oh really? Based on what?

By the way, there is no absolute distinction between asteroids and comets.

[quotation]

I'm not even sure it would take a CME to "light up" a comet/asteroid. Apparently there are localized "hot spots" of high energy where solar wind interactions magetically re-connect to produce intermittant heating: http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6921
Intermittent Dissipation and Local Heating in the Solar Wind
Authors: K. T. Osman, W. H. Matthaeus, M. Wan, A. F. Rappazzo
It seems much more likely to me that a comet might interact with one of these regions than take a direct hit from a CME. Upon encountering enough energy to say break hydrogen away from oxygen, wouldn't that create a highly volatile "micro-environment" that could produce some interesting results as it is swept back toward the snappin', cracklin' and poppin' magnetically reconnecting magneto-tail? If we were watching closely we might even be able to map some of these "hot spots" by noting the variable brightness as a comet first enters then exits them, and frankly, under right the cricumstances (amount of energy, composition of comet, duration, etc) I can't see why once in a great while they might even explode. If you've ever seen thermite poured over ice, you'll get the idea.

[Hornblower]

I remain confident that my idea in which normal wear and tear from everyday solar heating could lead to occasional fragmentation at weak spots on the crust of a nucleus that still has volatile materials bottled up under its surface. I remain open to the idea that a brief spell of additional heating from the impact of CME particles could be a minor contribution to hastening such an event. Does gdaniels99 have any quantitative thermodynamic argument against my line of thought?

[gdaniels99]

I remain confident that my idea in which normal wear and tear from everyday solar heating could lead to occasional fragmentation at weak spots on the crust of a nucleus that still has volatile materials bottled up under its surface. I remain open to the idea that a brief spell of additional heating from the impact of CME particles could be a minor contribution to hastening such an event. Does gdaniels99 have any quantitative thermodynamic argument against my line of thought?

I actually think yours is one of the more realistic propositions. I'm writing a paper now and I'll probably go with this as the likely explanation for how a CME can contribute to the fragmentation of a comet. I suspect that just as the solar wind can heat the gases in the coma to temperatures hot enough to produce x-rays, this same solar wind and/or a CME can do the same for other gases in the comet. The sudden application of energy to any system can have unpredictable results. The sudden application of energy to an already weakened comet may be the straw that breaks the comet's back.

[gdaniels99]

It seems much more likely to me that a comet might interact with one of these regions than take a direct hit from a CME.

Comet Elenin took a direct hit and exploded. It may be a low probability event but given enough time low probability events are inevitable.

and frankly, under right the cricumstances (amount of energy, composition of comet, duration, etc) I can't see why once in a great while they might even explode. If you've ever seen thermite poured over ice, you'll get the idea.

I agree. I'm surprised some people have such a hard time accepting this concept.

[antoniseb]

... you guys are starting to remind me of my sunday school teachers who scolded me for asking too many of the wrong questions which challenged their mainstream ideas...

You've stepped over the line here arguing moderation. You've also included religion in your comment.

You are quoting Brownlee out of context. It is NOT a complete mystery why comets do what they do, but sometimes scientists say things like that to encourage young people to think. There are clearly details we do not know, but your premise seems to be that there is some mystery that only weird new physics can explain. It's good that you are interested in comets, and want to study them. Keep it up, but please don't dismiss people who give evidence that things are less wide open to mystery than you hope/think.

[gdaniels99]

So the fragments would end up in similar orbits to the main body, really not a concern for Earth.

I was only using Comet Holmes to demonstrate that fragmentation events can happen far from the gravitational influences of the sun or Jupiter which others have said are the primary forces capable of fragmenting a comet. This fragmentation also showed pieces travelling radially away from the comet after fragmentation. The comet didn't simply crumble in place and the pieces all just continued in the same direction.

And on another note, you have not established that the outburst was caused by "good ole charged particles from the solar wind."

That's the mainstream theory, that the solar wind is producing these outbursts that occur far from any solar heating. Another theory is it was smacked by a meteoroid. Based on the fragments flying AWAY from the comet, I suspect the meteoroid theory is more likely....or some kind of internal explosion.

[gdaniels99]

By the way, there is no absolute distinction between asteroids and comets.

I've never heard an asteroid called 'a loose conglomeration of ice and rock'. Or 'nothing more than dust and ice.' Clearly the powers that be see a distinction between the composition of asteroids and comets.

But based on all the latest info from actual probes that have ground-truthed the theories, I suspect you are exactly right: there is no distinction between asteroids and comets. Some asteroids may just be extinct comets.