7 Hot Facts About Mercury

Mercury, the diminutive planet closest to the Sun, was notoriously mysterious due to its difficulty to explore. That changed on March 18, 2011, when the MESSENGER spacecraft from Johns Hopkins' Applied Physics Laboratory achieved orbit around Mercury. The mission spent the next four years transforming scientists' understanding of how Mercury works and what it is made of. Mental Floss spoke to Sean Solomon, the principal investigator of MESSENGER (MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging), to learn what's most interesting about the first rock from the Sun.

1. MEET MERCURY BY THE NUMBERS.

Mercury is the smallest terrestrial planet of the solar system. Comparatively, Mercury is about midway in size between Earth's moon and the planet Mars. (Mars is a lot smaller than you might think, and our moon a lot larger.) Mercury is 3032 miles in diameter, which is, as the crow flies, just a little less than the distance from Anchorage to Dallas. Its gravity is 38 percent of Earth's, which means if you weigh 150 pounds here, you'd weigh 57 pounds on Mercury (the same as you would on Mars).

One day on Mercury lasts 59 Earth days, and one year lasts 88, which would make figuring out your age a thorny algebra problem. As you might imagine, days on Mercury can get pretty hot—around 800°F. On Earth a brick of coal at that temperature would burst into flames. (This is not a problem on Mercury, as the planet lacks an atmosphere.) Its nights, meanwhile, are a brisk -280°F. This is the widest day-to-night temperature variation of any planet in the solar system, and would make packing for a trip there very difficult indeed.

2. DESPITE BEING CLOSEST TO THE SUN, IT ISN'T THE HOTTEST PLANET.

Logic would suggest that Mercury is the hottest planet, considering its proximity to the giant fusion reactor at the center of our solar system that is 1,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 cubic meters in volume. The hottest planet honor, however, belongs to its neighbor Venus, one planet away, where the average surface temperature is 864°F. On Venus, lead would melt the way an ice cube melts on Earth.

3. MERCURY HAS SURPRISING CHEMISTRY.

Pretty much everything about Mercury should astound the casual observer, but what most surprises the principal investigator of MESSENGER, the first orbiter mission there? "The chemistry—that was the biggest surprise," says Solomon, who is also director of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University. "We still don't have a good physical and chemical model for planet formation, and so the result that Mercury is this iron-rich planet, in which the silicate fraction is not only not depleted in elements easily removed by high temperatures, but is more abundant in some of those elements than Earth." The big takeaway from Mercury's chemical profile, Solomon says, is that "we don't really understand how the planets were assembled."

4. UNDERSTANDING ITS FORMATION WILL HELP US UNDERSTAND THE TERRESTRIAL PLANETS.

"How did we end up with four bodies of rock and metal that are quite different?" asks Solomon. "Venus and Earth are different because of their different atmospheres. The different evolution of the climate, and the feedback between climate and interior, led to very different tectonic evolution."

Mars and Earth are different because Mars is so much smaller than Earth, only 10 percent of Earth's mass, he explains. As for Mars and Venus: "A lot of Mars's atmosphere was stripped away by the solar wind, so it turned into this cold, barren desert world, whereas Venus has this dense CO2 atmosphere. Runaway greenhouse [effect] turned it into a hothouse world." Earth is in between.

Mercury suggests that the process of planet forming depends on more than simply planet size, solar distance, and differences in atmosphere. The original building blocks of planets also varied across the inner solar system in important ways. "The chemistry varied, volatile abundances varied, and some conditions must have helped during planet formation that can't be ascribed to late-stage processes like a collision," Solomon says.

Now that we've performed one comprehensive study of Mercury, scientists can endeavor to explain the diversity of the terrestrial planets. "We now have filled in the last missing piece in describing the four siblings of that process [of planetary formation]. They're all different, and yet the parental processes, if you will, must have been in common, so it's a kind of planetary genome expression," Solomon says. "How the heck can gene expression be so different among these four siblings, given that they all started out at the same time by the same processes, in just slightly different places in the inner solar system?"

5. MERCURY IS SHRINKING.

"There are faults all over the surface, and most of those faults involve horizontal shortening," or shrinking. The idea goes all the way back to Mariner 10, a robotic space probe launched by NASA in 1973, says Solomon. "The faults that accommodate horizontal shortening are seen on top of every kind of terrain, and they have a wide range of orientations. The Mariner 10 proposed—and the MESSENGER team confirmed—that contraction has dominated the history of the planet, and is consistent with the planet shrinking over time as the result of interior cooling and contraction of the interior." This tectonic activity has been active over most of the history of the planet, as the planet continues to cool.

But were you to stand on Mercury's surface, you couldn't expect Seti Alpha VI-like cataclysms as the planet suddenly contracts. "Were we to send a seismic experiment to Mercury, we would probably see mercury-quakes not anywhere near the frequency or size of earthquakes, but something more akin to moonquakes," Solomon says.

6. IT HAS WATER ICE.

The orientation of craters found on the poles of Mercury allows for permanently shadowed regions—that is, areas that never receive sunlight, no matter the planet's rotational position or place in its revolution. The conditions in those craters are amenable to stable water ice, on or mere centimeters below the planet's surface. MESSENGER's nuclear spectrometer yielded measurements consistent with water ice on the north pole, and its camera later captured optical-light images of that ice.

7. IT'S HARD TO GET NEAR—BUT WE'RE GOING BACK.

Only two missions have thus far explored Mercury: the Mariner 10 space probe in 1974, and the MESSENGER orbiter in 2011. This is in part because of the tremendous challenges associated with visiting the planet. "Mercury is in a challenging environment," says Solomon. "The Sun is 11 times brighter than it is at Earth. The surface temperature of the day-side is very hot. The night-side temperature, however, is quite cold, so the swings in temperature are large. The radiation environment that close to the Sun is challenging, as we anticipated going into the mission. We were hit directly by streams of energized particles from the Sun."

Mariner 10 performed three fast flybys of Mercury, and scientists spent the next three decades working largely from the close-up science it performed. Mariner's findings and the questions they raised would further contribute to the scientific rationale of an orbiter—what would be the eventual MESSENGER spacecraft.

A Mercury orbiter, of course, is no small order, and placing a spacecraft in orbit around that planet is one of the great achievements of the American space program. You can't just fly to Mercury and enter orbit. A spacecraft would be moving at a velocity far too great for that, as Mercury lacks the atmosphere to allow aerobreaking. Instead, a trajectory had to be calculated in which MESSENGER bounced around the solar system, from Earth, around the Sun and back to Earth; around the Sun and to Venus; around the Sun and back to Venus; and around the Sun four more times, flying closer and closer to Mercury each time, until at last it could enter Mercury's orbit. In essence, MESSENGER borrowed the gravity of other planets to compensate for what Mercury could not provide on a direct flight.

Due to this circuitous route, MESSENGER had to travel 5 billion miles over six-and-a-half years to reach a planet 100 million miles away. Once there, the challenge continued. The spacecraft had to maintain an orientation that kept between its scientific payload and the Sun a giant sunshade, lest the Sun fry the instruments. But extreme heat wasn't the only problem. So was extreme cold. When the spacecraft crossed into Mercury's shadow, an onboard heater had to warm the spacecraft lest the instruments freeze.

Despite the challenges, we're going back. The next mission bound for Mercury will launch in 2018. BepiColombo, a joint mission between the European and Japanese Space Agencies, will place two satellites in orbit around Mercury, where they will study its composition, tenuous atmosphere, and magnetosphere. Like MESSENGER, the spacecraft will require a complex trajectory—and a very long time to reach its target. It will achieve orbit around Mercury in December 2025.

The Geminid Meteor Shower Peaks This Week: Here's When and Where to See It

iStock.com/sripfoto
iStock.com/sripfoto

Star-gazers are in for a treat this week with the Geminid meteor shower set to light up skies across the globe. According to Space.com, the shower produces consistently stunning light shows this time each year, with meteors that are fast, frequent, and bright depending on where they're viewed. Whether you catch the spectacle every December or you'll be watching it for the first time, there's some important information to know before the 2018 event.

While most meteor showers are the product of our planet passing through the tail of a comet, the Geminid meteors come from something different: A small, rocky asteroid called 3200 Phaethon that leaves a wake of fiery debris like a comet. Its orbit brings it very close to the Sun, and when this happens, bits of rock break off in the heat and trail the object through space. (Some astronomers refer to 3200 Phaethon as a "rock comet.")

When the Earth passes through the tail, the debris burns up in the atmosphere, producing a bright show that's visible from the ground. And because the matter that trails 3200 Phaethon is denser than what you'd find behind a comet, it takes longer to burn up, creating a brighter spark and sometimes breaking up into multiple meteorites. This year viewers can expect to see more than one meteor a minute with up to 100 meteors per hour at the shower's peak.

The shower peaks the night of Thursday, December 13 and early Friday morning on December 14. The best time to watch is when the skies are darkest, usually around 2 a.m. local time. Unlike two years ago, when the Geminids coincided with a supermoon, the Moon will set around midnight on Thursday so viewing conditions will be ideal.

The Geminid meteor shower is visible around the world, though it's most prominent in the northern hemisphere. As is the case with all celestial events, people who live as far away from cities as possible will get the best view, but even people watching from the suburbs could catch as many as 30 meteors an hour.

[h/t Space.com]

Did NASA Ever Consider Women for the Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo Programs?

Russell L. Schweickart, Keystone/Getty Images
Russell L. Schweickart, Keystone/Getty Images

C Stuart Hardwick:

Unambiguously, no.

This was not sexism. NASA decided early on, and quite correctly, that early astronauts must all be experienced high-performance jet test pilots. To anyone who understands what the early space program involved, there can be little question that choosing all men was the right call. That's because there were zero women in the country with high-performance test flight experience—which was due to sexism.

You may have heard of the so-called “Mercury 13” or the Women in Space Program, both of which are misleading monikers invented by the press and/or American aviator Jerrie Cobb.

Here’s what happened:

Randy Lovelace’s laboratory tested astronaut candidates to help NASA select the initial seven Mercury astronauts. He later ran Jerrie Cobb through the same Phase I (biomedical) tests (though not through the other tests, as he didn’t have access to equipment owned by the military). Contrary to some reports, Cobb did not test superior to the men overall, but she did test as well overall. And while that should not have been a surprise to anyone, it was in fact a surprise to many.

Lovelace published a paper on the work in which he suggested that women might actually be preferable candidates for space travel since they weigh less on average and consume less oxygen, water, and other consumables, a fact which I exploited in my book, For All Mankind, and I can tell you that on a long duration mission (of several months) the difference really does add up.

This had no effect on Mercury, Gemini, or Apollo, all of which were short little jaunts in which the mass of the astronauts wasn’t terribly critical, and all of which were always going to be flown by high-performance test pilots anyway.

However, it attracted the attention of famed aviation pioneer Jackie Cochran, who agreed to fund further research on the suitability of women for space.

Pioneer American aviator Jacqueline "Jackie" Cochran in the cockpit of a Curtiss P-40 Warhawk fighter plane
Jackie Cochran in the cockpit of a Curtiss P-40 Warhawk fighter plane
Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons

Cochran and Cobb recruited several more women, mostly from the ranks of the Ninety-Nines, a women aviator’s professional organization founded by Amelia Earhart. These women also went through the initial biomedical testing, and 13 passed at the same standard as met by the Mercury astronauts.

So far so good. Cobb, Rhea Hurrle, and Wally Funk went to Oklahoma City for an isolation tank test and psychological evaluations, and Lovelace secured verbal agreement through his contacts to send another group to the Naval School of Aviation Medicine for advanced aeromedical examinations using military equipment and jet aircraft.

However, no one had authorized the use of the military facilities for this purpose—or the costs that it would entail. Since there was no NASA request behind this effort, once Lovelace tried to move forward, the military refused his access.

Meanwhile, Cobb had been enjoying the attention she was receiving and, according to some, had gotten it into her head that all of this was going to lead to some of the women actually flying in space. In fact, I’ve found no evidence that Lovelace ever implied that. This was a small program of scientific study, nothing more. Nevertheless, Cobb flew to Washington, D.C. along with Jane Hart and was given a meeting with then-vice president Lyndon Johnson.

Johnson was congenial—Cobb has always claimed he pledged his support—but immediately afterward, he sent word to have all support for the experiments withdrawn.

Far be it from me to defend the motives of LBJ, but consider this: The president had publicly committed the nation to returning a crew from the moon by the end of the decade—and this was at right about the same time when enough work had been done for Johnson to have a handle on just how hard that was going to be. He may or may not have supported the idea of women astronauts in general—we have no idea—but Jerrie Cobb standing before the press, pushing for “women in space” was definitely, irrefutably a distraction he didn’t need. And any resources devoted to it were being pulled directly away from the moon shot—which, to Johnson, was the goal.

Jerrie Cobb poses next to a Mercury spaceship capsule
Jerrie Cobb poses next to a Mercury spaceship capsule
NASA, Public Domain, Wikimedia Commons

Cobb has always maintained the women were misled and betrayed. I’ve found no evidence of that. Testimony of many of the other participants suggests that Cobb simply got carried away—not that anyone could blame her. Let’s remember that at that time, she couldn’t have known what was really involved in space flight or what the program would look like over the next decade. No one did.

Of course, American women did start flying in space with the Space Shuttle. Do not for a moment think this means they didn’t face the same prejudices at NASA that they did everywhere else. The first class of women astronauts was, according to my sources, invited to help design an in-flight cosmetics kit—an offer they immediately and forcefully shot down. Thirty years later, women remain a distinct minority in the U.S. astronaut corps ...

The bigger question is not whether Cobb was betrayed, but why, in 1961, not a single U.S. woman had been hired to work in high-performance flight test—considering that so many (like Cobb, for example) had performed test flight and ferry duties during the war.

Why weren’t women welcome in the post-war aerospace economy, and why—even today—are so few women granted degrees in engineering of any sort? I don’t know the answer, though sexism is unquestionably in the mix, but it’s a question we need to address as a nation.

This post originally appeared on Quora. Click here to view.

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER