Important response from the stardust team on Inclusion

Archived here are older posts which are no longer relevant or were redundant.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
endust
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:42 am
Location: Kansas City

Important response from the stardust team on Inclusion

Post by endust »

Ive brought this forward for more exposure. Thanks DustBuster for sharing this. It was in reference to whether something was or wasn't a track.


Hopefully this will clear things up a bit.
I exchanged email with Dr. Butterworth on this specific subject, and this was her response:

Quote:
I've reviewed the movies you sent. 41798 does show something below the surface. To me it looks like an inclusion in the aerogel (part of the manufacturing process), not a track. For sub-surface particles, the focus comes to a point and then diffuses out again. Tracks tend not to come to a dark point. Saying this, it is not wrong to click on something curious in a movie. Going through some of the first cut of movie "hits" we have kept several movies we think are probably inclusions, but will need the high resolution checks to verify.


So, bubbles? Maybe. There's no way to tell until a good review can be made- but it has to be clicked for them to even consider looking-

cosmicrocker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:10 am

inclusions

Post by cosmicrocker »

Ahh, it's good to hear something official on those. I didn't realize inclusions could be created in the aerogel manufacturing process, but it makes sense. I've been assuming anything that comes to a focus below the surface plane is something of interest, even if it doesn't look like a track per se. After viewing 440 real movies, the 4 or 5 things I've tagged are probably all inclusions.
...Tom

visit #space on IRC.freenode.net

SeaJewel
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:19 am
Location: Poland

Post by SeaJewel »

Can someone post an example of those inclusions?

cosmicrocker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:10 am

Post by cosmicrocker »

I see 4 or maybe even 5 in the movie (41798) mentioned in endust's initial post.
...Tom

visit #space on IRC.freenode.net

Sebastian
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 9:44 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Post by Sebastian »

I absolutely respect the authority of Dr. Butterworth, but let´s be a bit more daring with our interpretation of these findings. Just for the fun of it :)

Take a look at my favourite http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=41978

It might well be a group of at least three inclusions. However, I would expect inclusions to be distributed more randomly in the gel, not three of them exactly the same depth below the surface.

But how about a group of particles coming from the same distant origin hitting the gel at exactly the same speed? They would all end up pretty much the same depth inside the gel.

Then the most intresting question appears, why dont the particles leave tracks? My theorie is, that other than the particles they have found before, these particles are perfect spheres. And the surface of these particles has some sort of special nano structure that enables them to pass the gel leaving next to no trace.

What do you think?

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Post by DustBuster »

Please note: There is NO verification of any 'inclusions' or tracks. Anna was only giving a possible explanation. More important was the final statement:

"Going through some of the first cut of movie "hits" we have kept several movies we think are probably inclusions, but will need the high resolution checks to verify".

Keep on Dustin'!
No dessert for you- ONE MONTH!

Post Reply