35 Comments
User's avatar
Sparticus's avatar

I thought Jupiter was the 16th, not tomorrow?

TheSentinel's avatar

It's been a long week. You are correct. I'm not sure what happened here to be honest we are juggling a few different things now. The article has been updated with the correct information.

Sparticus's avatar

I get you, it's was John Guy that was confusing me

John Guy's avatar
3dEdited

Here is the question for you and  Nasa, how did the astronauts' backpacks exchange heat in a vacuum ?

https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/188963main_Extravehicular_Mobility_Unit.pdf

The final question is: What happens when there is no final medium for heat transfer when you contact the vacuum of space. 

https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/188963main_Extravehicular_Mobility_Unit.pdf

In an independent space suit, the heat is ultimately transferred to a thin sheet of ice (formed by a separate feed water source). Due to the extremely low pressure in space, the heated ice sublimates directly to water vapor, which is then vented away from the suit.

The first of these mysteries is the Primary Life Support System, or PLSS, which are the bulky backpacks worn by the moon-walking astronauts.  Among the many functions of a PLSS - radio, micro-meteor protection, insulation, humidity control, etc his is a s. - was the removal of internal and external heat and exchange it with the environment.  

One may think of a simple and straightforward process, and inside an atmosphere, one would be right.  We must recall, however, that the Moon has no atmosphere.  We are told repeatedly by NASA and other agencies that the surface is a perfect vacuum in which the entire Universe sucks on any object exposed to it.  

Anyone familiar with the function of a Thermos will instantly appreciate the problem of exchanging heat with a vacuum.  In a Thermos, an inner glass container is held in a vacuum enclosed by an outer container, which prevents heat from being lost to the surrounding environment.  Because there is no medium of transfer, i.e. air, to dissipate heat to the environment, hot liquids inside the Thermos retain heat.  Simple concept, but presents unique challenges for astronauts on the Moon. 

Not only is the astronaut's body generating heat, which gets uncomfortable rather quickly if not vented, the astronaut would quickly cook when exposed to direct sunlight on the Moon.  Any surface on the Moon reaches up to 250F in direct contact with sunlight on the Moon.  The moon suits are not immune to this, even given the bright white reflective materials.  Inside, the astronaut is generating heat, both at rest and especially when working.

For full discussion go here:

https://augenguy.blogspot.com/2019/07/one-small-step-for-man.html

Apetivist's avatar

Wow! This is very interesting information. I did not put this all together yet in my head and it absolutely makes sense.

John Guy's avatar
1dEdited

Start with a vacuum bottle keeping your liquids warm, this is done using a vacuum.

"A vacuum is an exceptional heat blocker, widely considered one of the best thermal insulators because it lacks the air or gas molecules required for heat to travel via conduction and convection. In practical applications, vacuum insulation can be 5 to 10 times more effective than traditional materials like fiberglass or foam."

Heat transfer typically occurs through three methods, and a vacuum manages them differently:

Conduction & Convection: These require a medium (like air or a solid) to move heat. By removing the air, these two methods are virtually eliminated.

Radiation: Some heat will pass thru.

*************

Hitting the nail on the head regarding the physics of it:

Heat is a property of matter, specifically the kinetic energy of its atoms.

Without those atoms (matter), you don't have "heat"—you only have energy in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons). It’s a subtle but crucial distinction.

Only Matter: Can hold and transfer thermal energy (heat).

Vacuum: A literal "nothingness" that cannot hold heat because it has no mass to vibrate.

EM Radiation: The "messenger" that carries energy across that nothingness until it hits more matter.

Heather Hamel's avatar

So, is it a directed “natural” object, then? Might mechanisms (or methods) to manage the trajectory of the nucleus occur in the ghost coma? Maybe that’s plasma? Just thinking out loud…

TheSentinel's avatar

All thoughts are good here.

Pris's avatar

Your contributions to this unfolding transit is exceedingly interesting and vital. Thank you.

Sherry's avatar

Is there any connection between 3I/ATLAS and the missing retired military expert William McCasland? I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist; I'm just a Space Coast resident who is curious, who watches launches from my front yard, and who is curious about NASA going silent on 3I/ATLAS while simultaneously reworking the schedule for Artemis launches.

TheSentinel's avatar

We don't have any evidence connecting the two. There are also a lot of scenarios that seem more likely. That doesn't dismiss it though. We seem to be entering into a very anomalous era.

Julianne's avatar

Wow. Thank you for this fascinating article. Our Universe contains surprises. May we be open to both discovery and surprises. 31/Atlas is a very powerful surprise.

TheSentinel's avatar

Thank you for reading and sharing good vibes. 4 days to Jupiter.

Julianne's avatar

Hmm… please explain “4 days to Jupiter”?

New Right Directions's avatar

He replied elsewhere in the comments. Jupiter on the 16th.

TheSentinel's avatar

Juggling too many things this week. It was the last thing I triple checked too. Won't happen again. Getting more sleep.

Chris Vail's avatar

10,000,000,000+ years old. About as old as our observations of ALESS 073.1, the very old galaxy at the beginning of time. How many problems stem from the Big Bang Hypothesis? Suppose the universe is much older than 14,000,000,000 years?

Apetivist's avatar

The Big blBang hypothesis is primarily dealing with inflation (The evidence for this expansion is undeniable, although it's not fully understood), including the time that it took up to now. However, there are various scientific hypotheses that allow for the universe to be much older than 14 billion years old.

adultfunlive.com's avatar

So, to summarize, the isotope ratios (from 2 different teams looking at 2 different molecules) date it at least 10 billion years old. But it can't be 10 billion years old because enough of what it's made out of wasn't available back then? Am I understanding your post accurately?

TheSentinel's avatar

Almost but flip it. Two teams confirmed the age. That part's settled. The problem is the size. Back when this thing formed, the universe hadn't made much heavy material yet. There just wasn't a lot of stuff floating around to build with. So how did something this big get assembled from almost nothing? The age of the materials checks out based on two teams and peer reviewed science. The math on the mass doesn't. Avi is basically mathematically proving that a natural origin is impossible based on what we know, without stating directly that it is artificial.

Sparticus's avatar

So what are you saying here John Guy? In English for a 15 year old to understand

TheSentinel's avatar

We tried to pack all three months of investigation into the document below. Short answer: It’s not a comet, we believe it’s a probe. Every new paper that comes out adds more anomalies.

https://thesentinelnetwork.substack.com/p/3iatlas-master-object-profile

Steve's avatar

So it’s like the plot of the first Star Trek film.

Upchuck's avatar

“When water freezes in deep space, the ratio between these two gets locked in by the temperature and environment where the ice formed.”

This is not true. H is half as massive as D. The water molecules contain one or two D have lower vapor pressure and slightly stonger bonds than normal H20 so over time the ratio of H to D in the ice will decrease (the water will become slightly enriched with D) especially over the time scales you mention

TheSentinel's avatar

Good chemistry, wrong environment. You're describing vapor-ice fractionation, which absolutely happens when there's enough thermal energy for sublimation and recondensation. That process requires a vapor pressure.

3I's ice has been sitting at near-absolute-zero in interstellar space for 10 billion years. At those temperatures there is no sublimation. No vapor pressure. No exchange mechanism. The ice is thermally inert. That's what makes the D/H ratio a reliable timestamp. It locks during formation in the cold dense cloud and nothing happens to it afterward because nothing can happen to it afterward.

That's not our argument. That's Cordiner et al.'s argument for why the ratio is diagnostic. The formation conditions (~30K, shielded, high-ionization environment) drive preferential deuterium incorporation during the initial freeze. After that, the clock stops.

Appreciate the pushback though. This is exactly the kind of comment we like in our feed.

Upchuck's avatar

And I appreciate the detailed response. I have to assume that the multiple PhD’s with astrophysical backgrounds know more about it than BSME me😭

Nadin Brzezinski's avatar

Been following this carefully. You raise far more questions, as well as Loeb. And it includes as to the origin of life.

Sparticus's avatar

Space isn't real? The moon landing was shoot in Hollywood? Help please

Al Bundy's avatar

Say NASA, flush. Who the hell still believes what nasa has to say????

John Guy's avatar
3dEdited

Have Nasa prove this: “So the question you need to answer is how does the Earth's gas Atmosphere connect to the vacuum of space? “

The simple fact that vacuums cannot exist connected to non-vacuums while maintaining the properties of a vacuum.

NASA vacuum .... High vacuum · 10−7 Torr.

Vacuum

The hard vacuum of space (10-6 to 10-9 torr) will cause outgassing, which is the release of volatiles from materials. The outgassed molecules then deposit on line-of-sight surfaces and are more likely to deposit on cold surfaces. This molecular contamination can affect optical properties of vehicle and payload surfaces and spacecraft performance, particularly for sensitive optics. To mitigate this problem, the ISS has specified in NASA SSP 30426, Space Station External Contamination Control Requirements, what the limits are for molecular deposition, induced molecular column densities and the release of particulates.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/NP-2015-03-015-JSC_Space_Environment-ISS-Mini-Book-2015-508.pdf

There is no data from NASA of how vacuums can connect to non-vacuums.

When NASA does run tests on their Space suits the suits are pressurized or in a swimming pool where the pressure is pushing in.

https://spacenews.com/nasa-share-huge-swimming-pool-oil-firm-houston-chronicle/

"The Space Environments Complex (SEC) houses the world’s largest and most powerful space environment simulation facilities. The Space Simulation Vacuum Chamber is the world’s largest space simulation vacuum and EMI chamber, measuring 30.5 m (100 ft) in diameter by 37.2 m (122 ft) high."

**********************

It was also pointed out by the two experts that pumps and all seals need to be maintained, and there is no footage from NASA or anyone else doing any repairs on a regular basis. Systems under high vacuum need constant attention.

Industrial Valve Expert: The ISS is a LIE - Seals in a vacuum need to be serviced.

Starts at the 35:35 minute mark....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m5QqdEuvec&list=PLltxIX4B8_USzcT-eaGeKajwgx8JLaOur&index=10

Industrial vacuum expert - SW128 - Starts at the 13:13 minute mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EoWNIvBdFw&list=PLltxIX4B8_USzcT-eaGeKajwgx8JLaOur&index=26

Sparticus's avatar

I was referring to John Guy. What does all of this mean in simple terms??

John Guy's avatar
3dEdited

The question is simply, how to you have a nonvacuum of atmosphere touching a vacuum. All test on Earth shows what happens when you open a vacuum next to a atmosphere with pressure, the vacuum disappears as the atmosphere rushes into it. There is a phase that says "Nature abhors a vacuum.?

Apetivist's avatar

I think there's something you're missing here. Gravity pulls molecules closer to the surface of the Earth while lighter gases escape until there is a delineation where the vacuum meets the extremely thin atmosphere. Also, these molecules are being produced upon Earth and a continual manner. Although not at an enormous rate. There are other factors that can also keep the Earth from losing its atmosphere, such as the magnetic effects created by the core of the Earth. We also have the Sun which produces molecules that enter into our atmosphere. It's a very cyclical process and something that is not happening in a closed system. It's not as if the pressure of the gas is released from the Earth is strong enough to cause an implosion/ explosion of the atmosphere outward into the vacuum of space

John Guy's avatar
1dEdited

There is no data from NASA of how vacuums can connect to non-vacuums.

When NASA does run tests on their Space suits the suits are pressurized or in a swimming pool where the pressure is pushing in.

"The Space Environments Complex (SEC) houses the world’s largest and most powerful space environment simulation facilities. The Space Simulation Vacuum Chamber is the world’s largest space simulation vacuum and EMI chamber, measuring 30.5 m (100 ft) in diameter by 37.2 m (122 ft) high. There are no volunteers who want to be placed in this chamber."