Rosetta, Philae and Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.

[Shpaget]

Hmm, on my install Rosetta disappears on August 4 2014.

But if I go to 67P it's there.

[Meithan]

Hmm, on my install Rosetta disappears on August 4 2014.

But if I go to 67P it's there.

Yeah, it does the same thing on my computer. Apologies for not mentioning it. I had to focus on 67P instead, and Rosetta is there.

[gogozerg]

Rosetta is there.

But where is Philae?!

[Streetwind]

There was a press conference today. The replay is here: http://www.esa.int/spaceinvideos/Videos/2015/06/Replay_of_Rosetta_conference

Has an in-depth section on the issues with the star tracker and the dust. It's apparently worse than we thought (frequency of errors keeps going up sharply even though they retreated over 200 km by now), but within the parameters simulated before the mission launched.

Still, they are willing to edge closer again in an attempt to improve communications with Philae. A stable, reliable uplink is a primary mission goal right now. It'll take some trial and error though to find the exact spot in the sky where Philae sends to best, and the search will have to be done while Rosetta repeatedly loses track of its orientation. Good luck, mission control!

[Hcube]

I don't understand why it is such a surprise that Rosetta has errors because if star tracking and comet activity/dust. Surely the mission was designed with this in mind, right ? Why is the spacecraft using star tracking orientation instead of another orientation technique then ?

[Streetwind]

That's exactly what they said in the briefing: it's not a surprise, this is happening as expected.

[softweir]

I don't understand why it is such a surprise that Rosetta has errors because if star tracking and comet activity/dust. Surely the mission was designed with this in mind, right ? Why is the spacecraft using star tracking orientation instead of another orientation technique then ?

Star-tracking is the only system that is cheap enough, reliable enough and accurate enough to enable a deep-space probe to aim its dish directly back at Earth and to navigate successfully. Most (if not all) commercial satellites use star-tracking for orientation referencing. All other systems suffer from jitter and drift, especially the return signal which is too weak and too intermittent to be able to use that as an directional reference. (plus, even if they could use the return signal, they still need other reference points!) There are backup systems that enable probes to maintain a reasonably stable orientation in the event the star-tracking system loses sight of too many stars, but they will always depend on regaining starsight before too long or they will lose contact with Mission Control.

I doubt anybody at Rosetta Mission Control is surprised - this is the sort of thing they would expect to happen. True, they couldn't predict exactly when Rosetta would need to retreat, nor do they yet know how far it will have to retreat, but they would have been looking out for this problem and would have programmed the probe in advance to deal with it. They are simply explaining to the public why this long-anticipated event is taking place.

[Meithan]

Thanks a lot for the link to the press conference, Streetwind, I enjoyed it greatly. The opening summary by Mark McCraughean (the first speaker) was inspiring and the rest of the presentations were extremely interesting and enlightening. It also settles most of the questions regarding what kind of orbits Rosetta has been flying since last year.

(On a very innocent sidenote that has no intention to spark debate, it was nice to see two women out of five speaking in that team. The world has to encourage more women to go into STEM, and I think this is a great example to follow.)

[hugix]

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Rosetta_mission_extended

Awesome! Looks like Rosetta will go to sleep next to her buddy!

[Frida Space]

So, just a quick recap: no news from Philae since 17:20 UTC June 24th, when, during a very unstable but also very long 20-minute window, the lander uploaded 80 telemetry packages. Yesterday's efforts to establish a link between Rosetta and Philae through the CONSERT radio experiment (studying the nucleus' interior by radio signals) failed. Next opportunity is Wednesday, July 9th. (source)

[Majorjim!]

So, just a quick recap: no news from Philae since 17:20 UTC June 24th, when, during a very unstable but also very long 20-minute window, the lander uploaded 80 telemetry packages. Yesterday's efforts to establish a link between Rosetta and Philae through the CONSERT radio experiment (studying the nucleus' interior by radio signals) failed. Next opportunity is Wednesday, July 9th. (source)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0BFeqdqhung/VZqXnlTetuI/AAAAAAAAEv8/W6pvtwmEilU/s1600/ESA_Rosetta_Philae_CONSERT.jpg

Anyone else read the possible very exciting news today? Evidence of life inside the comet. Please read!!

[micha]

Anyone else read the possible very exciting news today? Evidence of life inside the comet. Please read!!

There's no evidence; just a crackpot non-mainstream scientists' musings. Which the world's media immediately distorted and whipped into a frenzy, of course.

[Majorjim!]

There's no evidence; just a crackpot non-mainstream scientists' musings. Which the world's media immediately distorted and whipped into a frenzy, of course.

LOL, he worked on the Probe mission. He is just a big advocate of possible alien life. I agree we have to wait and see what becomes of this but blindly sweeping the issue aside does nobody any good. Lets be good scientists and remain open minded.

[peadar1987]

There's no evidence; just a crackpot non-mainstream scientists' musings. Which the world's media immediately distorted and whipped into a frenzy, of course.

You don't need to cross out the "crackpot" part. The only source for this is a guy who thinks everything is evidence of microbial life from space. He is on record as saying he believes SARS came from space as well: http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2015/07/magic-carbon-layer-not-a-sign-of-extraterrestrial-life/

[Majorjim!]

You don't need to cross out the "crackpot" part. The only source for this is a guy who thinks everything is evidence of microbial life from space. He is on record as saying he believes SARS came from space as well: http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2015/07/magic-carbon-layer-not-a-sign-of-extraterrestrial-life/

It is perfectly possible that there is life inside the comet. Sure he has some wacky ideas, but I like that. Circular thinking is a blight on Human science.

[peadar1987]

It is perfectly possible that there is life inside the comet. Sure he has some wacky ideas, but I like that. Circular thinking is a blight on Human science.

It is improbable that there is life inside the comet, given what we know about life. I am not ruling out that there might be some exotic form of life there, but I consider it unlikely.

This guy, on the other hand, has an obsession with Panspermia. Every now and again, he comes up with a crackpot theory that SARS/fungi/Avian Flu/Swine Flu/Spanish Flu is of extraterrestrial origin, and every time, he is shot down by experts in the field. I'm going to stick my neck out and say this is probably going to end in the same way.

[smjjames]

Anyone else read the possible very exciting news today? Evidence of life inside the comet. Please read!!

I saw that one on Sciencedaily. I'm doubtful on that for lots of reasons. Plus, there are plenty of geologic proccesses that can mimic things that life does and it's already well known that comets have organics (well, carbon based molecules) in them.

Basically, we should try to eliminate all possible geological and non-lifebased proccesses first.

[PakledHostage]

Lets be good scientists and remain open minded.

You could make the same argument about the famous assertion that there's a teapot in orbit somewhere between the Earth and Mars. Sure, lets be open minded! But the burden of proof is on the person making the claim and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, there's no such evidence to support the idea of life on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.

[Camacha]

So far, there's no such evidence to support the idea of life on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.

There is a difference between hard evidence and facts that could be explained in different ways. This puts it less in the realm of teapot stories, and more in the realm of highly controversial theories that sometimes turn out to be bupkis, and sometimes are a scientific revolution.

Mind you, I am not saying this guy is right, he seems to have some wild ideas. I am just saying that a lot of scientific principles and discoveries came from people that were ridiculed at the time. The Sun could never be the centre of our solar system, the stars could never be comprised of mainly hydrogen, animals could never naturally evolve, et cetera. They were ridiculed by peers, but turned out to be right. We need scientists that dare to venture out there, even if most will be utterly wrong.

[PakledHostage]

I am not saying this guy is right, he seems to have some wild ideas. I am just saying that a lot of scientific principles and discoveries came from people that were ridiculed at the time. The Sun could never be the centre of our solar system, the stars could never be comprised of mainly hydrogen, animals could never naturally evolve, et cetera. They were ridiculed by peers, but turned out to be right. We need scientists that dare to venture out there, even if most will be utterly wrong.

True enough, but I think it is fair to say that (to my point) those ideas are supported by extraordinary evidence.

But I don't want to derail the thread any further. Hopefully we'll hear from Philae again soon!

[Kilmeister]

I read another article today on this today. I think that this wild speculation at life on this comet may be a tiny bit irresponsible, but I always think investigating these theories are always worth it. I don't know exactly what Philae's ability to actually detect cellular life like this are, but it's if there's any evidence what so ever then it should be pursued. When I read an article on the subject I felt "Yeah, that'd be awsome, but it's almost certainly something else". I'd love to be dissapointed though.

[micha]

I don't know exactly what Philae's ability to actually detect cellular life like this are, but it's if there's any evidence what so ever then it should be pursued.

That's the point. Nobody minds if a credible scientific theory is put forward based on (new) evidence which can then be tested. But none of the instruments on Rosetta or Philae can detect life. So while yes, in general the idea of life on other bodies is a valid theory, specifically stating "there is life on Comet 67P" while having no specific or new evidence for it (we've known for a long time that comets contain organic compounds so that's not new) is a bit crackpot.

This has got nothing to do with ridiculing people with new ideas.

[Camacha]

That's the point. Nobody minds if a credible scientific theory is put forward based on (new) evidence which can then be tested. But none of the instruments on Rosetta or Philae can detect life.

There are no instruments because no one considered it feasible and it cannot be tested because there are not instruments. That is a bit of a catch-22. I very much understand the decision not to send any instruments of this nature along and think it was the most reasonable thing to do, though if we see indeed see hard to explain structures or ones that are ambiguous we might need to send another mission that does have the instruments. I will make it clear that I am in no position to judge whether those structures are present, more knowledgeable men and women will need to look into that.

I honestly doubt whether life could exist in such a place, but then again, I have been amazed by scientific discoveries before. I am hardly an expert

This has got nothing to do with ridiculing people with new ideas.

That is what people always say when they ridicule new ideas

I will repeat that I think this guy's ideas are out there, so I agree with most opinions here. He seems to be a crackpot. My point is, however, that even in science there is a lot of adherence to status quo. People even say that new ideas do not get adopted, but that the people adhering to the old ideas simply die out. This conservatism is sometimes justified, but also tends to slow down developments a bit more than necessary when looking at the evidence and facts. Every great step forward goes accompanied with a huge amount of resistance, skepticism and ridicule before it is accepted as the obvious truth.

As fact finding methods go, science still has some improving to do when it comes to the culture among and between peers.

[softweir]

Something I'd be interested to know is: what instruments could unambiguously detect life on a comet?

[kiwi1960]

You say its implausible for life to exist on a comet?

The world was once thought to be flat. They say the water, and life, came to Earth via the comets.

NOTHING is impossible... just some things may be improbable.

They said there was no water on the Moon, apparently, given the last test, there is.