Clarification... origin of calibration movies

Discuss your experiences with and ideas about Stardust@home here.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Clarification... origin of calibration movies

Post by entropydave »

Sorry if this question has been answered... but are the calibration movies from the actual probe or a simulation from other hi-speed particle tracks (ie aerogel on high altitude balloons &c.)?
I thought I saw somewhere that Van der Graaf accelerators had been used to speed them little buggers up to 20Km/s but I can't find the link
:shock:
Thanks!

mwhiz
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA

Post by mwhiz »

calibration movies are made from simulations.... check out the article on wikipedia about stardust@home
"The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Post by entropydave »

Thanks for that... which means that really and truly none of us have any ideas what a trail would actually look like in this scenario - meaning that a lot of us could be missing a lot of specimens - this could mean that we are all looking for the wrong thing completely - perhaps impacts of the cometary material could be totaly different due to the unfamiliar dynamics of the impact and composition of the particles.
Some particles may be moving in parallel and are resting on the surface, some may just embed slightly below, some may actually create the carrot tracks, I dunno - I am just wondering if any of us are looking for the right thing, that's all.
It might be appropriate for the researchers to seek out a few actual tracks so that perhaps we coud get a better feel for what to look for - we are all groping in the dark here!
I wonder about thet particle size, for example - is it the same sort of size as the dust collected in hi altitude probes? Are they silicates? Sulphides? water ice?
Do we actually have a feel for the impact speed of these particles?

Just a few questions... !

Any ideas?!

entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Post by entropydave »

Interesting to note that this thread has had quite a few views but only one reply - no one any thoughts on this issue? I am mindful that we may all be looking for the wrong sort of tracking in the aerogel!
Could it be that a lot of surface spotting and debris is in fact the very material we are looking for?
I appreciate your thoughts! :D
"I have the most excellent proof that x^3=y^3+z^3, however my signature is too small to contain it..."

Orion_0169
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:17 pm

Post by Orion_0169 »

I should think that trusting the judgement of the people that are running the show is in order. If they think there should only be 1 in 40000 movies with tracks, then you shouldn't be flagging one in five. If they feel the tutorials will at least get us reasonably prepared then so be it. We are waiting on updated feedback.

There is, however, little reason to think that they are completely wrong or haven't thought of the things you have.

As a moderator of a science debate community it's astounding to see how often people think they have completely obvious solutions to scientific problems. It amazes me that these people think that they, with no training or background in teh area, believe they could come up with such a simple idea that had been missed by everyone who knows better.

Could it happen? Sure. Is it likely? Not on your life.

As for us here, what you bring up is possible, but without having a reason to think so, we might as well do what they believe is best (and maybe throw in some helpful little suggestions now and then ;-) )
Je ne peux pas regarder la Mer sans me demander qui vit au-delà de cela.

tshoulihane
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:05 am

Post by tshoulihane »

Actually, people should be flagging 1 in 10, since these will be cal movies with tracks. Provided they are not checking in advance if a move is a cal or not, they ought to be able to tell if they're seeing stuff that's not there.
Based on the events I've clicked, I guess most people are getting about 1 in 10 wrong. This is still fine for detecting 'interesting' things, especially when you consider that the database can also factor in click locations and user accuracy.

Cyphers1011
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:38 pm

Post by Cyphers1011 »

They also may have wanted to limit the number of micro tracks from the bigger ones. Maybe it is easier to get the bigger particles out of the gel? I can make some hypothesis about it. Certainly they would not want to slow down their work. Bigger nice formed tracks are definitely easier to notice and probably verify their validity. Just some thoughts.

Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter »

Here: http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.html you will find the Stardust site at Nasa. It contains at least some off the answers to your questions.

And since this is a first on actual stardust collection: Expect the unexpected ;)
Just dusting... Image

entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Post by entropydave »

For example, I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to whether the particles are/would be much smaller than the Mir samples?
"I have the most excellent proof that x^3=y^3+z^3, however my signature is too small to contain it..."

templar781
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:19 am
Location: St. Petersburg Florida
Contact:

Post by templar781 »

entropydave wrote:For example, I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts as to whether the particles are/would be much smaller than the Mir samples?
All of the 15 suspected particles that I've found have been much smaller than the sample photos provided. Whether they're at the same scale is another question. The cal photos may be magnified somewhat to ensure that nearly everyone could see the particle hits in the tutorials. I have been noticing that the cal movie particles seem to be getting smaller.
Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is. - Vince Lombardi

entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Post by entropydave »

good point - not thought about the scale!
:roll:
"I have the most excellent proof that x^3=y^3+z^3, however my signature is too small to contain it..."

mwhiz
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA

Post by mwhiz »

side comment @entropydave: nice quote. lol!
"The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

Snoopy
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:06 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Snoopy »

hi entropydave, i posted what i think about the particles here http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=542

entropydave
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:28 pm

Post by entropydave »

mwhiz wrote:side comment @entropydave: nice quote. lol!
:D
"I have the most excellent proof that x^3=y^3+z^3, however my signature is too small to contain it..."

Post Reply