Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Mars at Opposition - Earth at Transitition 210

chuckpeters writes "An astronaut friend told us about how the nuts out there seem to think that Mars is going to collide with the earth or the moon, or the gravitational forces are going to rip the earth apart or cause massive earthquakes. While in a co-workers office listening to a co-worker take a call about the possibility of such calamities, our astronaut friend yelled "Quick, duck! It's Mars"! No longer welcome in that office, he's back worshiping launch complex 39A. The true gravity of the situation is much less benign. The fact is I have never seen Mars look so bright or red as the other night, it's definitely time to gaze at the red planet. NASA isn't going to be worrying about Mars colliding with Earth, but they will be keeping a close eye on Mars. During this close approach, NASA will be inviting the public to help decide what areas on the red planet to photograph." More information below about the unique position of the red planet - take advantage of this once-in-a-3x-lifetime event.

On August 27th, Mars will be closer to Earth than in all of recorded history. The event is a rare display of orbital events in the cosmic clockwork of space. It is the chance of a lifetime for everyone to go out and see Mars and never before, and never again in our lifetimes!

The event is much more than just an opposition though because Martian oppositions occur about every 25 months.

What makes this opposition so special? This year, the Mars opposition occurs at the same time that Mars is at perihelion, which means Mars, in its orbit, is closest to the Sun and near when Earth is at aphelion (farthest point from Sun.)

At 5:51 a.m. EDT on the night of August 27, 2003, Mars will be within 34,646,418 miles (55,758,006 km) of Earth. To compare this to an earlier opposition: in 2001 when Mars was last at opposition, the red planet was more than 41 million miles (67 million km) from Earth. The most recent perihelion and opposition took place in September 1988 when Mars passed within 36.5 million miles (58.7 million km) of Earth.

When will Mars be this close to Earth again? The next, closer approach will occur on August 28, 2287 when Mars will be 34.62 million miles (55.69 million km) away. But we won't be around for that one, so you don't want to miss this close approach!

When and Where to see Mars - Best viewing is about midnight in the southern sky. One good way to find more precise viewing of Mars as well as identifying the various features, is using Xephem. We put together some tables which include local sunset times and Mars rising times for August 27th for various locations in the US, Europe, Middle East etc...

Currently Mars is moving the opposite direction from all the other planets. While the other plenets appear to be moving towards the east over time, Mars is displaying retrograde motion and moving westward.

Because Mars is so small it's difficult to see details most of the time or in small telescopes. Since Mars is going to be so much closer than usual, even a 4 inch telescope will show details not normally visible. There are also various filters you can use to enhance observing. Mars through a Telescope: Getting the Most from the Red Planet covers what equipment to use and what specific features to look for on Mars.

Although one night has been advertised as "the night" when Mars will be closest, the red planet will appear large and bright for the next few months. Mars will also be changing seasons and that means you will be able to spot changes in surface features over time. It's summer in the southern hemisphere of Mars and the south polar cap is melting rather quickly. If you observe over a period of days you will be able to see the terrain underneath the ice appear.

Go out and enjoy this cosmic show, but you needn't worry about any unexpected cosmic collisions, Mars Will Not Kill You."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mars at Opposition - Earth at Transitition

Comments Filter:
  • Retrograde motion (Score:5, Informative)

    by Capt'n Hector ( 650760 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @07:43AM (#6782837)
    Just to clear something up in the post, retrograde motion won't affect viewing at all. In fact, the only way someone could detect retrograde motion would be to take very precise measurements over a few days. It's not as if mars or any other planet moves opposite the stars on any given night. But this is slashdot, you all knew that.
  • by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @07:52AM (#6782866)
    Click here [badastronomy.com] to see how much gravitational effect Mars will have. Basically, a neglible amount.


    I bet that won't stop the wackos getting worked up into a lather. After all, astrologers and their ilk have never let facts, figures or even reality get in the way before now, so it's doubtful they'll start any time soon.

  • Close? (Score:5, Informative)

    by LooseChanj ( 17865 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:01AM (#6782894) Homepage
    This approach will be only 12,000 miles closer than one in 1924.

    It's nice to see people taking an interest, but c'mon...Viking [nasa.gov] took better pictures.

  • by hndrcks ( 39873 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:11AM (#6782942) Homepage
    For those of you who viewed the last good opposition a few years back, you may remember the dust storms that kicked up and obscured just about all surface features. The dust storms are all too common this time of 'year' on Mars, but they seem to be holding off. I got a great view of Syrtis Major and the southern polar cap last week.

    Of course, after you drag the scope outside and view Mars, point that thing a little further north and west and catch Uranus and Neptune too! (Ok, hold the jokes about our seventh planet.)

  • sorry (Score:1, Informative)

    by jtroutman ( 121577 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:27AM (#6783032)

    Just to be a pedant:
    The true gravity of the situation is much less benign.
    This means it's worse than it seems, kind of like a double negative. Less benign = more malignant...
    But view of Mars really is cool right now, I've been shooting it with a friends 8" telescope and getting some great photos.

  • by aborchers ( 471342 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:30AM (#6783041) Homepage Journal
    It's a once 4000000000000000000000xlifetimes experiance.


    That depends on whether you're looking forward or back to count your lifetimes. It will be closer in 2287 than it is this time.
  • Re:The Face (Score:2, Informative)

    by SEWilco ( 27983 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:35AM (#6783068) Journal
    How many photographs will be enough?
    http://www.msss.com/education/edprog.html [msss.com]
  • Re:Makes me smile. (Score:2, Informative)

    by aborchers ( 471342 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:37AM (#6783074) Homepage Journal
    You paraphrased

    This special event takes place because of the specific positions of Mars and Earth in their orbits.


    as

    Mars will be the closest to Earth it's ever been, because Mars will be the closest to Earth it's ever been.


    Am I missing something? That's not how the sentence reads to me. It says that the distance will be small because of a rare coincidence of the orbital positions of Mars and Earth, specifically Mars at perihelion and opposition simultaneously. In other words, the orbital geometry leads to a relatively small physical separation.

    Of course, I couldn't find this at all in the basic post, so I assume it is in one of the linked items. Perhaps there is some additional context...

  • by planet_hoth ( 3049 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @08:39AM (#6783086)
    If you weren't using a telephoto lens or a telescope or something else to magnify the image, then it probably wasn't the actual disc you were resolving. It was probably just the excess light from Mars "bleeding" onto adjacent detectors on the surface of the camera's CCD. Or maybe the camera had trouble focusing?

    For comparison, I have a 2 megapixel camera with 3x optical zoom, and when I hook it up to my 3.5" newtonian telescope, the disc is still tiny. You really need a telescope or a serious telephoto lens to be able to resolve the disc.
  • by avrincianu ( 605446 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @10:17AM (#6783726)
    Acrux, Alcor, Zeta Ursa Major, Alcyone, Alya (double star), Antares, Izar, Menkent, Polaris, Pollux, Prima and Secunda Giedi, Sadr, Vega. More than 10 :D.

    [shameless plug] If you're curious to see how they look like, go here: Some pictures of deep space objects [avrincianu.as.ro] [/shameless plug]

    But I think you are right. The level of general education decreases over time. People read less (I know people that don't remember when was the last time they opened a non-techhie book). They use odd source of information and believe all the crap that's fed into their brains through the tv sceen or (some) websites (see the hoax: "Conspiracy Theory: Did we actually land on the moon ?" -- I don't remember the address, but a google search wil reveal it).

    And I don't play Quake. I play Orbiter Space Flight Simulator [orbitersim.com]. It's the sort of serious fun that makes you learn some physics and remember some of the math you've forgotten, let alone the joy of flying the Discovery to Jupiter (you know, 2001 - A Space Odyssey) or of a "short" trip to Mars, just to celebrate the occasion (less fuel burn :D).
  • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @10:51AM (#6784034) Homepage
    no you dont need a great telescope but it make a HUGE difference if you have a telescope with decent optics.

    The funny part is that most people spend about $300.00 - $400.00 on a piece of crap department store or camera shop telescope while something that will amaze them but doesn't have useless things like gear drives and other electronics is available for around the same price.

    a Dobsonian telescope with a 6 inch aperature from Orion telescopes is about $350.00

    an 8 inch version will take your breath away, while a 10 inch or larger will blow your mind.

    I have sat next to the guy with the $1400.00 Meade autoguided telescope and had people comment that my el-cheapo fully manual 8 inch dobsonian was tons clearer and brighter than the other guys expensive scope.

    plus I was unpacked and looking 10 minutes after I arrived. it took him 45 minutes to align and setup his scope.

    More $$$ does not equal better in telescopes.

  • by spaceyhackerlady ( 462530 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @12:20PM (#6784751)
    Oh, come on. Mars is in opposition every couple of years. Does anyone think it will look THAT much bigger and brighter subtending 25.1 seconds this year than it did in Jun 2001 subtending 20.5 seconds?

    Something I've pointed out many times is that while Mars is indeed closer than it was for the 2001 opposition, and, yes, marginally closer than it has been in a very long time, the view isn't all that hot for us Northern folks, because it's quite low in the sky, down in Aquarius. The last opposition was worse, even before the dust storms.

    While Mars won't be quite as big at the next (2005) opposition, it will be much higher in the sky (Aries), and the view won't be as badly compromised by the atmosphere. I'll be ready.

    I saw a report on the local news last night that originated with CNN. The illustrations were all Hubble pictures. I wish they would, once in a while, use pictures more representative of what you would actually see looking through a telescope. If I had a penny for every time somebody had looked through my telescope (a 5" Synta refractor), sniffed, and said "Is that it?"...

    ...laura

  • Re:coming or going? (Score:2, Informative)

    by 2short ( 466733 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @03:33PM (#6786622)

    Theoretically, an orbiting body not affected by some mass other than its primary is not going to escape, and it's not going to "spiral in" unless it is under drag. In a sufficiently pure theoretical abstraction, ALL orbits are perfect.

    Non-theoretically, there is drag on the planets, but it is so incredibly miniscule we can safely ignore it. (think about how many inches the moon has to move away from us to make any difference at all). So we're down to being affected by other masses. The planets (particularly the gas giants) mess with each others orbits sufficiently that the existence of the outermost planets was detected by noticing the deviations before they were observed. Add in minor disturbances from smaller masses (comets, etc.) passing through, and it becomes very difficult to exactly calculate where everything will be a very long way in the future. Note I say "exactly". None of these disturbances makes much of a big difference. It's a pretty ridiculously small chance that anything will escape short of the sun going nova (at which point probably everything will escape that doesn't get incinerated). THe chances of a collision (between planets) before the sun goes away look ridiculously small even in comparison to the ridiculously small chances of an escape. Relatively speaking, the planets are small, and the space they're moving in is just insanely vast.

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Working...