Monthly Archives: May 2017

AccuWeather.com (blog)

Astronomy Guide to the rest of the Memorial Day Weekend AccuWeather.com (blog) Memorial Day weekend is here! If you have plans to relax outside this weekend, there are some cool things to check out in the night sky. We've been talking ... and more »

Continue reading here:

Astronomy Guide to the rest of the Memorial Day Weekend - AccuWeather.com (blog)

The citations found at the end of research papers serve several purposes, like providing background on the current work and giving proper credit where its due. They can also, according to a new study, reveal decades worth of trends in whole fields of science.

A trio of researchers have waded though more than half a century of research published in astronomy journals and found that studies authored by women receive 10 percent fewer citations than similar studies written by men.

Neven Caplar of the Swiss university ETH Zurich and his colleagues analyzed more than 149,700 papers published between 1950 and 2015 in five journals: Astronomy & Astrophysics, The Astrophysical Journal, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Nature and Science. They made sure that the papers being cited matched up in variables unrelated to gender, like the lead authors seniority in the field, the institutions they wrote from, the total number of authors on the paper, the number of references, the year and journal in which it was published, and the specific field of study. They say their findings, published Friday in Nature Astronomy, quantify the effect of gender bias in citations within astronomy research.

If there were no gender bias in astronomy research and only these factors mattered, the researchers analysis predicts that men would actually receive 4 percent fewer citations than women would. So their actual results were surprisingto the algorithms, at least. In the context of history, their findings are not surprising at all.

Since the late 1990s, women in the United States have earned nearly 60 percent of all bachelors degrees, but about half of all degrees in science and engineering fields, according to the National Science Foundation. The number of women receiving degrees in science is on the rise, but women remain outnumbered in many of these fields, particularly in physics, engineering, and computer science. In 2013, an analysis of more than 8 million papers in the fields of natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities showed that men are more likely to be listed as lead authors. So it follows that with fewer women getting degrees, becoming researchers and professors, contributing to papers, and then leading papers, there are fewer women to cite.

Some of the gender disparity can be attributed to the nature of the workforce. Most science professionals got their degrees in the last 40 years, and those people tend to be disproportionately male and white, National Science Foundation statistics show. A 2014 report on an annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society found that although the gender ratio of speakers matched that of the audience, more men than women asked questions of the participants. The researchers in this study interpreted this observation to be a product of the workforce. More senior scientists may be more likely to ask questions, they wrote, and senior scientists are usually men. Another survey of participants at a National Astronomy Meeting, organized by Britains Royal Astronomical Society, made similar observations about question-askers. A 2016 survey of more than 13,000 requests for use of the European Southern Observatory over eight years found that female applicants had significantly lower chances of getting telescope time. The study attributed this result to the effects of seniority; only 34 percent of the women applying were professionally employed astronomers, compared to 53 percent of the men.

Critics of the effect described in the Nature Astronomy study could argue that researchers seek to use the best sources in their work, regardless of gender. Any perceived preference for male-led work surely must be unintentional. But research has shown that when gender is taken out of consideration, potential implicit biases fade away and the scales balance. In 2001, the journal Behavioral Ecology started using a double-blind review that masked the genders of the applicants being evaluated. This led to a significant increase in female first-authored papers, a pattern not observed in a very similar journal that provides reviewers with author information, according to a paper that examined the policy. No negative effects could be identified. A similar effect has been found in hiring. In a 2012 study, researchers simulated an application process for a laboratory manager job, randomly assigning applicants either a male or female name. The applicants, members of faculty at a research university, were given identical credentials for the applicants. Yet the participantsboth male and female facultyrated the male applicant as significantly more competent than his female counterpart. Even scientists, some of the loudest advocates for objectivity, are not immune to deeply rooted differences in the perception of men and women.

The Nature Astronomy study does have some encouraging findings. The number of astronomy papers authored by women has increased over the last 50 years, and the difference between the number of female-led and male-led papers in citations has shrunk, the researchers write. They found that back in the 1950s and 1960s, men received between 50 percent and 100 percent more citations than women did.

The average number of citations in a paper has also increased, from about 10 in the 1960s to about 60 today, providing room for more authors to be recognized and credited, male or female. But the disparity persists, in astronomy and likely elsewhere, and even in the very study that examined it. Of the 19 authors cited in the paper, just six are women.

See the rest here:

Study: Female Astronomers are Cited Less Frequently - The Atlantic - The Atlantic

Researchers also studied the planets immense magnetic field and found that close to the planet it was much stronger than expected, clocking in at 7.766 Gauss about ten times stronger than Earths. Their measurements also found lots of magnetic complexity near Jupiters outermost layers, which supports the hypothesis that the worlds magnetic field is being driven by the swirling liquid hydrogen layer beneath the clouds. A full mapping of the magnetic field awaits data from further Juno orbits.

Juno is giving us a view of the magnetic field close to Jupiter that weve never had before, said Jack Connerney, Junos deputy principal investigator. Already, we see that the magnetic field looks lumpy: It is stronger in some places and weaker in others. This uneven distribution suggests that the field might be generated by dynamo action closer to the surface, above the layer of metallic hydrogen. Every flyby we execute gets us closer to determining where and how Jupiters dynamo works.

Understanding its magnetic field will add another piece to the puzzle of Jupiters interior. While planetary scientists assume it to be mostly hydrogen, the true composition, density and structure remain unknown. Scientists assume that the crushing pressures create a large layer of metallic hydrogen in the planets interior with a rocky core beneath, but definitive evidence is still lacking. Juno is also taking gravitational measurements as it orbits, which should give us more information about the interior as additional data becomes available.

In addition to looking below Jupiters clouds, the researchers wanted to see what happens above them, where charged particles from both the sun and within Jupiter interact with its magnetic field, creating huge auroras. Juno first encountered the shroud of particles last summer when it passed through the bow shock, a sort of shock wave created when Jupiters magnetic field shunts particles from the solar wind aside.The bow shock seems to have been moving outward as Juno passed through it, the researchers say.

Continued here:

Juno results offer tantalizing hints of Jupiter's secrets - Astronomy Magazine

This image shows Jupiters south pole, as seen by NASAs Juno spacecraft from an altitude of 32,000 miles (52,000 kilometres). Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SwRI/MSSS/Betsy Asher Hall/Gervasio Robles

The first months of observations of the solar systems biggest planet from NASAs Juno spacecraft have revealed huge swirling polar cyclones, previously-undetected structures and motions beneath Jupiters distinctive clouds, and the first evidence for what lies at the core of the gas giant, scientists said Thursday.

There was plenty scientists did not know about the planet when the Juno spacecraft left Earth in 2011, and the probe has sought answers to questions about Jupiters interior, magnetic field, auroras and radiation belts, and used a visible light camera to capture the first direct views of the poles.

The general theme of our discoveries is really how different Jupiter looks from what we expected, said Scott Bolton, Junos principal investigator at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio. Juno, in many ways, is looking inside Jupiter for the first time, close-up and personal.

Since Juno arrived at its destination July 4, 2016, to wrap up a five-year interplanetary trip, the spacecraft, built and operated by Lockheed Martin, has circled Jupiter six times in an oval-shaped loop that extends a few million miles at its farthest point. Each lap takes more than 53 days, and Juno speedily skirts within 3,000 miles (5,000 kilometres) Jupiters cloud tops at closest approach.

Junos science instruments collect most of their data when the orbiter is near Jupiter, taking pictures, measuring plasma and electrons, and probing deep inside the planet to find out what is hidden under its cloudy veneer.

Many scientists thought Jupiter was relatively boring and uniform inside before Juno arrived, Bolton said.

For decades, scientists have assumed this, that if we drop below the cloud tops, below where the sunlight reaches, that pretty much Jupiter was all uniform inside, and it really didnt matter where you looked, it would all look the same, Bolton said Thursday. And what were finding is anything but that is the truth. Its very different and very complex.

Junos microwave radiometer, an instrumentsimilar to those aboard climate satellites looking down on Earth, gathers sounding measurements to peer below the red-orange tapestry of Jupiters cloud tops.

The radiometer is tuned to six wavelengths, detecting thermal radiation emitted from different layers of the atmosphere from the storm clouds and jet streams to as deep as 300 miles, or about 500 kilometers.

Going into Junos mission, scientists anticipated Jupiters atmosphere to be relatively consistent deeper than 60 miles, or 100 kilometers. Instead, Junos microwave radiometer discovered a belt of ammonia around Jupiters equator, and variations in ammonia abundances at other latitudes extending deep into the planets atmosphere.

This was completely unexpected, Bolton said. You have a deep band of ammonia that goes from the top of Jupiter as deep as we can see. It goes down to 350 kilometres (217 miles) because thats the limit of where were looking.

The ammonia band may penetrate even deeper inside Jupiter, Bolton said.

What this is telling us is that Jupiter is not very well-mixed, Bolton said. Its not all uniform inside. The idea of, once you drop below the sunlight, that everything would all be uniform, boring and mixed up was completely wrong. Its actually very different depending on where you look.

The findings suggest more ammonia farther down in Jupiters atmosphere, and the ammonia detections appear to have no relationship with the zones and belts of clouds visible in pictures from space.

Thats really going to force us to rethink not only how Jupiter works, but how do we explore Saturn, Uranus and Neptune if they are highly variable like this? Bolton said.

Other parts of Junos scientific sensor suite are mapping Jupiters gravity field to learn about the heart of the planet.

When we went to go measure the gravity field, what we were really looking for was the core whether there was a compact core or no core, Bolton said. Instead, what we found was that it really looks fuzzy. There may be a core there, but its very big, and it may be partially dissolved. Were studying that, but that came as a big surprise to us that there was no core.

Theories about Jupiters core before Juno arrived predominately predicted the planet either had a small, dense rocky core between one and 10 times as massive as Earth, or no core at all, scientists said.

Most scientists were in one camp or the other, and what we found was really neither was true, Bolton said. There may be a little bit of a compact core, but there may be layers there, and there seems to be a fuzzy core that may be much larger than anybody had anticipated.

The gravity data that weve gotten thus far is not really consistent with just a small compact core or zero core, but it is somewhat consistent with a large fuzzy core that may be partially dissolved, Bolton said. Its also consistent, maybe, with some deep motions, or zonal winds and things like that dictating the interior of Jupiters dynamics, which are very different than historically models have assumed.

Jupiters intense magnetic field, the strongest of any planet in the solar system, has also been interrogated by Juno, which has a magnetometer mounted at the end of one of the crafts three solar array wings.

Jack Connerney, Junos deputy principal investigator at NASAs Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, described the magnetometer as like a fancy compass that can measure the direction and strength of Jupiters magnetic field.

Juno has come closer to Jupiter than any mission before, and proximity yields better magnetic field measurements, Connerney said.

What we found in our first few passes is that the magnetic field was both stronger than we expected where we expected it to be strong, and it was weaker than we expected where we expected it to be weak, Connerney said. In other words, it evidenced a dramatic spatial variation that we were not quite aware of previously.

The fluctuations detected by Juno suggest the spacecraft is unexpectedly close to the magnetic fields source, or dynamo.

Scientists thought the magnetic field might be generated in a global pool of liquid metallic hydrogen in Jupiters middle layer somewhere between the center of the planet and the atmosphere. Squeezed at extreme pressure, the deep layer of hydrogen is liquified and conducts electricity.

The magnetic field expands outward from Jupiter and is blown back by the solar wind like a comets tail. The magnetic field bubble, called a magnetosphere, is similar to one around Earth, but Jupiters is so immense it would be the size of the full moon in the sky, if it was visible with the naked eye.

Junos observations might mean that the dynamo is above that metallic hydrogen region, Connerney said, perhaps in an envelope of molecular hydrogen.

An infrared camera and ultraviolet spectrometer aboard the Juno spacecraft have been looking at Jupiters powerful polar auroras, producing another set of observations that surprised scientists.

It turns out some of the auroral light emissions seem to be produced by electrons streaming out of Jupiters atmosphere, not by charged particles riding field lines into the planet, as is the case with Earths auroras. One of Junos instruments, an electron detector, found particles moving upward as the orbiter soared over Jupiters south pole.

According to Connerney, the electrons are probably drawn out of the planet along the same field lines scientists thought would see the particles into Jupiter.

As theyre leaving, they collide with hydrogen molecules and excite ultraviolet emissions, Connerney said. Itsa 180-degree turnabout from the way we were thinking about those emissions prior to the Juno observations.

NASAs Cassini spacecraft, in the final months of its mission, is now orbiting Saturn on a trajectory similar to Junos. Bolton said scientists are eager to compare observations from the two craft to compare the solar systems two largest planets.

Cassini doesnt have the exact same kind of instruments we have, and of course, were tuned to do this interior research, but it has a lot of great instruments that can learn a lot about the interior and other things that it can do close-up, said Bolton, who is also a member of the Cassini science team.

Were both trying to figure out our data from our own planets at the moment, but eventually we will compare, and of course, thats the key to scientific advancement comparative study, Bolton said. So being able to compare Cassinis measurements at Saturn and Jupiters measurements by Juno, we will reallybe able to advance our understanding how these giant planets work.

Junos camera has scanned Jupiter during each pass over the planets poles, catching dozens of swirling storms in the act, some the size of Earth.

The Juno team relies on amateur observers and image processors logged in to the missions website to crunch raw views from JunoCam and create colorful mosaics.

What you see are incredible, complex features, Bolton said. These cyclones and anticyclones all over the poles. That wasnt really expected.

The bluish hue is probably real, he said of one south pole mosaic. And the biggest feature is that Jupiter, from the poles, doesnt look anything like it does from the equator.

Our usual picture of Jupiter has zones and belts, the Great Red Spot, and you see these stripes, and thats the Jupiter weve all known and grown to love, Bolton said. When you look from the pole, it looks totally different. If you looked at this picture, and somebody had shown it to you a few years ago, I dont think anybody would have guessed this is Jupiter.

Mission managers tacked on the JunoCam imager to the spacecrafts instrument package after NASA selected Juno for development in 2005. JunoCam was not originally part of the Juno mission, but officials added the camera as a public outreach tool.

Scientists said JunoCams imagery adds context to their data analysis work, but it also engages a broader community of professional and amateur scientists, space enthusiasts and artists.

The contributions of the amateurs are essential, said Candy Hansen, Juno co-investigator at the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona. I cannot understate how important the contributions are. We dont have a way to plan our data without the contributions of the amateur astronomers.

We dont have a big image processing team, so we are completely relying on the help of our citizen scientists, Hansen said.

JunoCam collects images in strips as the spacecraft spins on its main axis, and contributors stitch the strips together to make pictures.

What I find the most phenomenal of all is that this takes real work, Hansen said. When you download a JunoCam image and process it, its not something you do in five minutes. The pictures that we get that people upload back onto our site, theyve invested hours and hours of their own time, and then generously returned that to us.

Hansen said JunoCam has spotted tiny features suspended above Jupiters main cloud deck that look like squall lines on Earth. The clouds are dwarfed by Jupiters enormous scale, but they actually stretch around 30 miles, or 50 kilometers, across, she said.

I keep saying (theyre tiny), but theyre really not tiny at all, Hansen said. Theyre up above the cloud deck at a pressure level where the temperature is going to be very cold, so what youre seeing is most likely ice crystals of water ice and ammonia ice.

Junos next close-up encounter with Jupiter is set for July 11, when the orbiter will pass above the Great Red Spot for the first time.

The discoveries made by Juno so far are making us rethink how giant planets work, not just in our own solar system, but giant planets are really important throughout the galaxy and the Universe, Bolton said.

Were getting the first really close-up and personal look at Jupiter, and were seeing that a lot of our ideas were incorrect, and maybe naive, that its very complex, and there are a lot of deep motions going on, he added.

NASA decided in February to forego an engine burn to move Juno into a 14-day orbit with a tighter path around Jupiter after engineers detected a problem with check valves inside the crafts propulsion system last year.

Junos mission will last until at least February 2018, enough time to make 11 science orbits around Jupiter, instead of the 32 laps originally planned. But NASA could extend the mission another three years to give Juno more flybys near Jupiter.

Theres a theme here. There are motions going on just beneath the clouds that we see with the microwaves, and there may be very deep winds and deep motions going on that we see with the gravity field (sensors), Bolton said. Its hard to say yet, but more data will tell us how deep those really go. Were just at the beginning of this mission, where eventually were going to map out that planet.

Email the author.

Follow Stephen Clark on Twitter: @StephenClark1.

Read this article:

[ 27 May 2017 ] Jupiter surprises in first trove of data from NASA's Juno mission News - Astronomy Now Online