Re: Stardust matter predictions


<jgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1137874955.074107.155040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > <snip>
> >
> > > [Figure 2:
> > > http://www.ing.iac.es/PR/press/spectrum2005FY9.gif (28KB)]
> > > The spectrum of 2005 FY9 compared with the spectrum of Pluto and that
> > > of
> > > pure methane ice. Notice the strong methan ice absorption bands
> > > present
> > > in the spectrum of both TNOs.
> > >
> > > [Figure 3:
> > > http://www.ing.iac.es/PR/press/img19.gif (29KB)]
> > > Near infrared spectrum of 2005 FY9 obtained by Licandro et al. (2006)
> > > compared with that of TNO 2003 UB313 from Brown et al. (2005). The
> > > similarity of both spectra shows that the surface composition of both
> > > objects must be also similar.

> OK. A reasonable assumption.
> I guess our deep underground hydrocarbons are NOT of biological origin
> after all (As I recall was the theory when YT in highschool)

Methane can be produced in many ways.

> Spectro studies above involve observing what is reflected, after
> sunlight (starlight?)

Sunlight, it is still much brighter than starlight
even that far out.

> is shone on them, so I trust that _all_
> frequencies were present before reflection (not to argue that both
> bodies are not similar, but that both data are due to methane only).

Note the legend on the Y scale, "Relative Reflectance".
The plots are not just the raw brightness but the ratio
of reflected to incident light at each frequency.

> Off to find a comparison between Fe at increasing temp, and C (then
> steel, FeC mix)

Good move.

George


.