(ORDO NEWS) — There are “unusual” comets, the properties of which do not fit into the “reasonable”, from the point of view of modern science, framework.
Comet Donati, discovered in the evening sky in August 1858, was observed with the naked eye from August to the end of November. Perihelion took place on 30 September. From early August to the first week of October, it was located north of the Sun. And if so, then it could be seen, both in the evening and in the morning sky. In early September, she is a 3 magnitude object with a short tail. In the middle of the month, 2 magnitudes with a 4 degree tail. By the end of the month, the brightness reaches a value of 0. The comet quickly moved to the southeast and moved to the southern hemisphere and was visible there with the naked eye until the end of November. Comet Donati suddenly began to “blink” strangely, changing its brightness at intervals of 4.6 hours.
Comet Tuttle-Giacobini-Cressac (1973), after passing perihelion, for unknown reasons, increased its brightness by 10,000 times (!), And then within two weeks decreased its brightness to its previous value. Comet Pons – Brooks, in 1884, was distinguished by a similar fireworks display. She increased her gloss 1000 times every 3 hours. The same inexplicable flares were demonstrated in 1927 by the Schwassmann-Wachmann comet – it changed its brightness 600 times for no apparent reason.
In 1972 researcher L.M. Schulman suggested that some complex molecules may be present in cometary nuclei, which, decomposing under the action of solar protons and corpuscles, can form explosive compounds. The assumption seemed both logical and intriguing. Moreover, astronomers have repeatedly observed that with a sharp increase in brightness in the head of the comet, a powerful ejection of a spherical shell took place. Some astrophysicists have tried to simulate similar processes in laboratories. An attempt was made to explain all these effects by the influence of sunlight and heat on the comet’s nucleus. But how legitimate are these models? If only these factors acted, then the discharge of matter would take place only from the side facing the Sun. In practice, several times the discharge of the entire spherical shell was observed simultaneously. This indicated that a single detonation mechanism was activated in the interior of the comet. But this assumption is only a hypothesis. How fully it explains the explosive features of comets will only be shown by further observations and studies.
Many surprises were presented to scientists by the famous Halley’s comet in its last approach to Earth. The fact is that French researchers found a sharp change in its brightness with a frequency of every 24-28 hours. An attempt was made to explain these “blinking” by the comet’s own rotation, but it was strange that in the observations of previous years, periodic changes in the brightness of Halley’s comet were not observed. Then a new assumption arose that the change in brightness is associated with damage to the surface layer of dust on the comet’s head. But such damage could have occurred only as a result of a strong collision of a comet with another large cosmic body, otherwise the scale of destruction would not have caused such powerful fluctuations in brightness. However, in this case, a strong collision should have sharply changed the trajectory of the comet itself, the period of its revolution, and, consequently, the time of arrival – this did not happen, the comet was not late for the meeting with the terrestrial devices that first came out to “intercept”. According to the third hypothesis, the change in the brightness of Halley’s comet could be caused by local eruptions of gases from the comet’s head. Nobody argues: such a phenomenon could really take place. But … how then to explain the strict periodicity of these emissions? It’s not clear yet…
Some comets have been found to have features in motion that cannot be explained only by the attraction of bodies in the solar system. In a number of cases, the nature of the comet’s motion could be perceived as systemic, that is, obeying not so much Kepler’s laws as the dictates of someone’s mind. One can try to consider these features of motion from this point of view: what would an intelligence officer of other worlds do if he got into the planetary system of an unknown star? Most likely, he would begin a systematic and consistent study of planets with an atmosphere, as the most favorable for the existence and development of life. At the same time, he tried, without extreme need, not to approach the star itself. This is exactly how Comet Bennett, discovered in 1969, behaved. This comet was clearly “not indifferent” to the terrestrial planets: it came quite close to the Earth, Mars, went to the orbit of Venus, and then Jupiter. One got the impression that the comet did not particularly bind itself to strict observance of the gravitational laws of motion, but only used them in accordance with its own “plans.”
The same “wayward” space traveler was observed in 1881 by the astronomer from Bristol Dennig. The behavior of this comet was in many ways unusual. She did not come close to the Sun, practically did not emit a tail. In its journey through the solar system, it very close (on a cosmic scale) approached the Earth (by 6 million km, as well as Halley’s comet in 837), then approached Mars by 9 million km and passed 3 million km from Venus. Such an exact trajectory could hardly have developed by accident. But it turns out that the comet of 1881 was not the most “curious” in relation to our planet. In May 1983, comet IRAS-Araki-Olkloka passed from Earth at a distance of 5 million kilometers; comet Tempel-Tatla in 1966 – at a distance of 3.5 million km, and comet Lexel in 1770, breaking all records of interplanetary encounters, passed literally “very close” from the Earth – at a distance of 2.26 million km. Considering that the proper dimensions of comets (taking into account the length of their tails) are measured in millions of kilometers, one can imagine how the above-listed travelers “risked”. Interesting was the behavior of comet Brooks-2 in 1886, which in its orbital motion first caught up with Jupiter, having passed, risking a collision only 100 thousand km from its surface, then crossed the orbit of this giant planet in front of it and, using its powerful attraction, was thrown back. This gravitational maneuver was performed so masterly that the numerous “moons” of Jupiter did not even react to the comet’s passage! then one can imagine how the above-mentioned travelers “risked”. Interesting was the behavior of comet Brooks-2 in 1886, which in its orbital motion first caught up with Jupiter, having passed, risking a collision only 100 thousand km from its surface, then crossed the orbit of this giant planet in front of it and, using its powerful attraction, was thrown back. This gravitational maneuver was performed so masterly that the numerous “moons” of Jupiter did not even react to the comet’s passage! then one can imagine how the above-mentioned travelers “risked”. Interesting was the behavior of comet Brooks-2 in 1886, which in its orbital motion first caught up with Jupiter, having passed, risking a collision only 100 thousand km from its surface, then crossed the orbit of this giant planet in front of it and, using its powerful attraction, was thrown back. This gravitational maneuver was performed so masterly that the numerous “moons” of Jupiter did not even react to the comet’s passage!
However, not all comets behave this way. If comet West in February 1976 circled the Sun at a distance of 150 million km, without even releasing the tail necessary in this case, then Comet Pereira in 1963 passed only 60 thousand km from the Sun, and the Great Southern Comet in 1887 swept through the inner corona of the Sun heated to many millions of degrees. Such thermal stability of comets does not fit in any way with the “ice” concept of their structure, which was once proposed by the American researcher Whipple. After all, the ice should have instantly evaporated, but for some reason this did not happen … Maybe these comets were not made of ice at all?
An interesting version was expressed in 1979 by twice Hero of the Soviet Union, pilot-cosmonaut A. Leonov. The fact is that each time, being near the Sun, comets spend a significant part of their mass on the formation of a tail. Knowing the mass of the tail, the mass of the comet, the intensity of gas release, it is possible to calculate the time it takes for the comet to exhaust itself. But some comets, violating all forecasts, ignoring the law of conservation of matter, appear again and again in the sky after 100, 200, 300 years! Not only do comets do not cease to exist, their number is increasing every year. According to some estimates, the total number of comets can reach 105! Over the entire history of its existence, mankind has observed, judging by the archival and archaeological finds, about 2000 comets. It turns out that comets are “created” somewhere in unknown heavenly workshops … As you know, in 1956-1957. the International Geophysical Year was held on our planet, the worthy conclusion of which was the launch of the first artificial earth satellites. Against the backdrop of one of the greatest scientific events of the century and outstanding technical triumphs, one strange coincidence went unnoticed …
Comet Arenda Roland was discovered in 1956. The tail of this comet appeared on April 22, 1957, and at the very beginning of May it suddenly disappeared. And even before such tails were not observed in comets at all. Together with the usual tail, as expected, directed away from the Sun, the comet had a very narrow, spear-shaped tail, which was directed towards the Sun, which generally violated all ideas about the gas dynamics of comets. As it approached the Earth, the comet began to turn, and the spear-shaped tail turned into a well-defined expanding beam. The spectrum of this anomalous tail was also unusual. If comets with an ordinary dust tail have a continuous spectrum, then Arenda Roland’s spectrum was discrete, that is, discontinuous. It was also unusual that the anomalous tail appeared and disappeared suddenly, as if it had been “turned on” and “turned off”.
And the usual tail also presented scientists with surprises in terms of the unusual spectrum. In order to somehow combine the observational data with the repeatedly tested theory of cometary tails, it was necessary to make the assumption that the initial velocity of the particles emitted by the tail was higher than 3 km / s. But in order to artificially achieve such speeds, equal to the Outflow rates of modern liquid-propellant jet engines (LRE), it is necessary to use special accelerators – expanding nozzles, the profile of which is carefully calculated, is consistent with the chemical composition and temperature of the fuel! Some researchers consider the assumption of the natural formation of such high velocities of the outflow of matter from comets not legitimate.
Another mystery of the comet Arend-Roland was the discovery on March 10, 1957 by American researchers of short-wave radiation at a wavelength of 11 m (27.6 MHz). The intensity of this radiation fluctuated within +/- 30%, and its source was located in the main tail, at a considerable distance from the head. Starting from April 20-21, that is, just before the appearance of the anomalous tail, this source began to move away from the Sun in a radial direction. But on April 9 in Belgium, another source of radio emission from this amazing comet was recorded, working at a wavelength of 0.5 m (600 MHz).
The high stability of this radiation, both in frequency and in amplitude, contradicted the assumption of sporadic radiation in the plasma of cometary tails. Emission at a wavelength of 11 meters was observed for more than a month and reached its maximum in the period from March 16 to April 19, that is, on the eve of the appearance of the anomalous tail. Moreover, the intensity of the signals sent increased daily.
According to the researcher of anomalous phenomena F.Yu. Siegel, the mechanisms of this radio emission cannot be explained by either thermal or any other known natural process. Other amazing comets have also been observed. So, in the spectrum of the comet in 1882, chromium, iron, nickel were found, that is, such elements that are necessarily present in the spectra of jet jets flowing from a liquid propellant engine. These spectral components of the liquid-propellant rocket engine arise due to a slight erosion of jet nozzles containing these metals. Maybe someone has installed such engines in comets? But in this case, the tails-jets of cometary “engines” should not depend on the solar wind. It turns out that there are observations that partially confirm this assumption.
For the comet, which was observed in 1926, astronomers recorded the absence of the influence of the Sun on the position of the tail. This strange tail turned in space quite arbitrarily, and the comet itself did not adhere to the trajectory calculated for it, but deviated significantly (by 4 arc minutes) from the orbit calculated by astronomers. This deviation can be explained only by the presence of a significant thrust developed by the outflow of matter from the comet’s body. In this case, the effect should be observed in the form of phenomena that at least remotely resemble the operation of an LPRE. It turns out that in a relatively small number of comets, these phenomena are found and called rays.
The most famous characteristics of these rays are as follows:
The beam width is about 2 thousand km;
The length of the rays is about 107-108 km;
The beams are located symmetrically about the tail axis and in the direction of the extended radius vector;
The first (short) rays appear at an angle of about 60 degrees to the tail axis and lengthen as they approach this axis;
The beams can be folded like a regular fan or take on a spiral shape. The analysis of these characteristics involuntarily prompts an analogy with some jet engines, and the short beams in this case can work as “rudders”, and the long ones – as “marching” ones.
Sometimes comets emit concentric rings of light, expanding at a speed of 1–2 kilometers per second – galos. What these formations are, and how the comet forms them is not yet clear. Sometimes halos occur when a comet’s brightness changes abruptly. Some researchers suggest that galos are dusty formations with a mass of about a million tons, while having an energy of 1021 erg. It is surprising that the energy expended by a comet to form a halos is comparable to the energy of the propulsion system of the Vostok spacecraft!
Contact us: [email protected]