7 ms·

2I/Borisov, the First Interstellar Comet to Have Visited Our Solar System

82 points by wglb 6y ago

lippel82 6y ago
The headline seems to be plainly wrong. It's an interstellar comet that supposedly has not had a close encounter with another star. But it certainly is not the "first interstellar comet to have visited our solar system", or did I miss something?
- UnlockedSecrets 6y ago
  It is the first confirmed interstellar comet and so is the first under the interstellar comet classification, Unfortunate that the headline does not contain that detail however.
- davidcuddeback 6y ago
  It's somewhat debatable. 1I/Omuamua was reclassified as an asteroid because it didn't exhibit a coma. But it's possible that it's a remnant of a comet.
  - firebaze 6y ago
    Despite reading quite a lot about astronomy, comets and asteroids and the history of all of the three, I didn't get the distinction between asteroids and comets yet. I understand the composition makes the difference, but I didn't get why we expect exactly two (!) distinct categories of intersolar/interstellar objects, and giving them exactly two distinct names. Why not more, or less (i.e. no distinction at all, just a summary of the probable composition)? Why is this so? Is there a fundamental reason to make this special distinction, or is it just "tradition"?
    - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
      Asteroids mostly have circular orbits. Comets (at least the ones we see) tend to have very highly eliptical orbits. That I think is the origin of the distinction. But asteroids also tend to be at lower distances from the sun than comets. That in turn leads to them tending to be composed more of rocky material, whereas comets have more ice. I am not an astronomer, so any and all details may be in error. Corrections are welcome.
    - garmaine 6y ago
      Mostly tradition. Asteroids have had their volatiles baked off their surface, or never had them due to forming inside the frost line. But it’s not a very intrinsically meaningful distinction—it’s more about what they look like from the vantage point of Earth as they come by on close approach.
- elihu 6y ago
  That was my reaction; I'm not sure whether they meant to say the "21/Borisov, the interstellar comet for whom our system is the first solar system it has visited", or (as other comments suggest) "the first confirmed interstellar comment to visit our system". Obviously if something is only now noticed with modern technology, it's unlikely that interstellar comets haven't swung by our solar system many times before. We just don't have a record of it.
sam-2727 6y ago
I think the article title is not representing the actual finding well. Stated better in this article: https://earthsky.org/space/2i-borisov-pristine-comet-interstellar-visitor https://earthsky.org/space/2i-borisov-pristine-comet-interst..., "2I/Borisov could represent the first truly pristine comet ever observed," meaning it hasn't interacted with a star before.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
dongobongo 6y ago
A company I work with recently started design and development for space craft to catch Borisov or Omouamoua, the other extra solar object that recently passed by, using a nuclear decay heat source and Hall effect thrusters. It's pretty realistic and doable - no bleeding edge technologies. Very high power density, very high isp, very fast space craft. Apparently, they can achieve 100km/s + velocity delta for a very small payload: https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2021_Phase_I/Extrasolar_Object_Interceptor_and_Sample_Return/ https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2021_Phase_... The same system could do a Mars visit and return to Earth for small payloads in 50 days. This stuff needs to get funded! They are funded for initial studies and design with NASA, but I know they are looking for extra funding to pull off the mission faster without being tied to NASA's timelines and mercurial objectives.
- lrem 6y ago
  Why? I appreciate the coolness factor. But, unless the payload can be enough to pull off a 1998 Bruce Willis, what's the immediate benefit? Or, would this be fundamental to some research?
  - mynegation 6y ago
    That is how progress works. Lots of things were researched or invented before progress in other areas (materials, economics, society, other scientific finds...) made these findings useful or even feasible. You never know when and why you will need this, the only thing you know - it will be used eventually. Maybe this will give some important clues into the future interstellar travel, maybe the tricks and technologies invented for this mission will be used elsewhere, maybe sample will give important clues into the origins and probability of life.
  - dongobongo 6y ago
    Regarding Omouamoua, we just observed for the first time in human history, a cylinder or plate shaped object from another star flying through our solar system with questionable orbital velocities (we are not quite sure how to explain a small acceleration it had). A cylinder/plate is not a low energy geometry (things like to turn into spherical type objects over time), it's from another solar system, we don't know very much about it. How could you not want to visit it? It's an opportunity to pull off a speed and distance record, visit something from another solar system, resolve big research questions about its shape, composition, origin and rule out any theories of its possible intelligent origin. They are also pursuing it to showcase the benefits of nuclear heat for space.
hsnewman 6y ago
The title is incorrect (most likely). It is the "First Known Intersteller Commet to have visited our solar system"!
- URfejk 6y ago
  Indeed.
Klwohu 6y ago
It irritates me to read claims like this. Our solar system is billions of years old. How could we possibly know if 2I/Borisov is the very, very absolute first interstellar comet to have visited our solar system? Lazy stupid science press.
- macintux 6y ago
  A title missing one word, "known"; the body of the news item doesn't seem controversial. Doesn't seem worthy of such contempt.
e40 6y ago
Anton Petrov has a few videos on this https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCciQ8wFcVoIIMi-lfu8-cjQ/search?query=borisov https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCciQ8wFcVoIIMi-lfu8-cjQ/sea... He is one of my favorite youtubers.
denton-scratch 6y ago
Isn't it rather odd that this object is said to (a) be from outside the solar system; and (b) be made from the orginal material the solar system formed from? I presume the object is thought to be from the Oort Cloud, much of which is arguably "interstellar space"; but comets cannot form in interstallar space; there's nothing there to form from. Comets form from the protoplanetary disk, making them part of the stellar system that disk turns into. It's possible, I guess, for a comet to hurled out of one star system, and become adopted by another; but the article doesn't claim that's what happened here. This is just a comet that doesn't seem to have visited close to the Sun before. Most Oort Cloud objects have never been near the Sun.

82 points by wglb 6y ago

The headline seems to be plainly wrong. It's an interstellar comet that supposedly has not had a close encounter with another star. But it certainly is not the "first interstellar comet to have visited our solar system", or did I miss something?

UnlockedSecrets 6y ago
It is the first confirmed interstellar comet and so is the first under the interstellar comet classification, Unfortunate that the headline does not contain that detail however.
davidcuddeback 6y ago
It's somewhat debatable. 1I/Omuamua was reclassified as an asteroid because it didn't exhibit a coma. But it's possible that it's a remnant of a comet.
- firebaze 6y ago
  Despite reading quite a lot about astronomy, comets and asteroids and the history of all of the three, I didn't get the distinction between asteroids and comets yet. I understand the composition makes the difference, but I didn't get why we expect exactly two (!) distinct categories of intersolar/interstellar objects, and giving them exactly two distinct names. Why not more, or less (i.e. no distinction at all, just a summary of the probable composition)? Why is this so? Is there a fundamental reason to make this special distinction, or is it just "tradition"?
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    Asteroids mostly have circular orbits. Comets (at least the ones we see) tend to have very highly eliptical orbits. That I think is the origin of the distinction. But asteroids also tend to be at lower distances from the sun than comets. That in turn leads to them tending to be composed more of rocky material, whereas comets have more ice. I am not an astronomer, so any and all details may be in error. Corrections are welcome.
  - garmaine 6y ago
    Mostly tradition. Asteroids have had their volatiles baked off their surface, or never had them due to forming inside the frost line. But it’s not a very intrinsically meaningful distinction—it’s more about what they look like from the vantage point of Earth as they come by on close approach.
elihu 6y ago
That was my reaction; I'm not sure whether they meant to say the "21/Borisov, the interstellar comet for whom our system is the first solar system it has visited", or (as other comments suggest) "the first confirmed interstellar comment to visit our system". Obviously if something is only now noticed with modern technology, it's unlikely that interstellar comets haven't swung by our solar system many times before. We just don't have a record of it.

sam-2727 6y ago

I think the article title is not representing the actual finding well. Stated better in this article: https://earthsky.org/space/2i-borisov-pristine-comet-interstellar-visitor https://earthsky.org/space/2i-borisov-pristine-comet-interst..., "2I/Borisov could represent the first truly pristine comet ever observed," meaning it hasn't interacted with a star before.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

dongobongo 6y ago

A company I work with recently started design and development for space craft to catch Borisov or Omouamoua, the other extra solar object that recently passed by, using a nuclear decay heat source and Hall effect thrusters. It's pretty realistic and doable - no bleeding edge technologies. Very high power density, very high isp, very fast space craft. Apparently, they can achieve 100km/s + velocity delta for a very small payload: https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2021_Phase_I/Extrasolar_Object_Interceptor_and_Sample_Return/ https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/niac/2021_Phase_... The same system could do a Mars visit and return to Earth for small payloads in 50 days. This stuff needs to get funded! They are funded for initial studies and design with NASA, but I know they are looking for extra funding to pull off the mission faster without being tied to NASA's timelines and mercurial objectives.

lrem 6y ago
Why? I appreciate the coolness factor. But, unless the payload can be enough to pull off a 1998 Bruce Willis, what's the immediate benefit? Or, would this be fundamental to some research?
- mynegation 6y ago
  That is how progress works. Lots of things were researched or invented before progress in other areas (materials, economics, society, other scientific finds...) made these findings useful or even feasible. You never know when and why you will need this, the only thing you know - it will be used eventually. Maybe this will give some important clues into the future interstellar travel, maybe the tricks and technologies invented for this mission will be used elsewhere, maybe sample will give important clues into the origins and probability of life.
- dongobongo 6y ago
  Regarding Omouamoua, we just observed for the first time in human history, a cylinder or plate shaped object from another star flying through our solar system with questionable orbital velocities (we are not quite sure how to explain a small acceleration it had). A cylinder/plate is not a low energy geometry (things like to turn into spherical type objects over time), it's from another solar system, we don't know very much about it. How could you not want to visit it? It's an opportunity to pull off a speed and distance record, visit something from another solar system, resolve big research questions about its shape, composition, origin and rule out any theories of its possible intelligent origin. They are also pursuing it to showcase the benefits of nuclear heat for space.

hsnewman 6y ago

The title is incorrect (most likely). It is the "First Known Intersteller Commet to have visited our solar system"!

URfejk 6y ago
Indeed.

Klwohu 6y ago

It irritates me to read claims like this. Our solar system is billions of years old. How could we possibly know if 2I/Borisov is the very, very absolute first interstellar comet to have visited our solar system? Lazy stupid science press.

macintux 6y ago
A title missing one word, "known"; the body of the news item doesn't seem controversial. Doesn't seem worthy of such contempt.

e40 6y ago

Anton Petrov has a few videos on this https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCciQ8wFcVoIIMi-lfu8-cjQ/search?query=borisov https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCciQ8wFcVoIIMi-lfu8-cjQ/sea... He is one of my favorite youtubers.

denton-scratch 6y ago

Isn't it rather odd that this object is said to (a) be from outside the solar system; and (b) be made from the orginal material the solar system formed from? I presume the object is thought to be from the Oort Cloud, much of which is arguably "interstellar space"; but comets cannot form in interstallar space; there's nothing there to form from. Comets form from the protoplanetary disk, making them part of the stellar system that disk turns into. It's possible, I guess, for a comet to hurled out of one star system, and become adopted by another; but the article doesn't claim that's what happened here. This is just a comet that doesn't seem to have visited close to the Sun before. Most Oort Cloud objects have never been near the Sun.