Small Comets, Dr Louis Frank, & Water in Space

[John L]

Lately, I have become quite interested in how the astronomy field has begun to determine that water can be found almost anywhere. And since it is the second most common molecule in the galaxy, at least here, I became intrigued with how it gets around so easily.

 

This brings me to Dr Louis Frank, from the University of Iowa. Since the late 80s, he and some others have stated that they believe the presence of small comets are continually entering the earth's high atmosphere and seeding our planet with enough water to raise the level of water one inch every 20,000 years.

 

There is quite a bit of information on the internet about this, but strangely, around 2000, the information comes to a halt. Not only that, but is seems that it is not entirely an accepted theory among the science community.

 

This speech by Dr Frank, in 1999, seems to suggest that the debate is closed, yet I simply cannot find anything else since 2000.

 

Does anyone have any more links, or information on this intriguing concept. I am inclined to agree with this theory, but I am a bit skeptical in concurring with the total number of small comets hitting the earth's atmosphere on a daily basis, as Dr Frank believes.

 

The reason why this is important is that should there be so many small comets whirling around the solar system, traveling from one point to another, it could be quite dangerous. The odds of hitting one of these would be high. However, with that much water floating around, we would have no trouble finding enough to sustain us.

 

Anyone know about this?

[aguy2]

Lately' date=' I have become quite interested in how the astronomy field has begun to determine that water can be found almost anywhere. And since it is the second most common molecule in the galaxy... we would have no trouble finding enough to sustain us.

 

Anyone know about this?[/quote']

 

If memory serves me correctly, he was postulating something more akin to snowballs than comets. Snowballs newly created by the sun and coming to us via the cosmic wind. I don't know what became of his theory either.

 

Nonetheless your post shows you may have hit on something of real potential.

At the very least,'our' cometary bodies stretch 1/4 way to the second nearest stellar body and there is reason to think that 'theirs' stretch a quarter way to us.

 

These bodies are much more than 100 mile dia. ice bergs. They are more like 'near black body', volitale liquid producing, "gas stations". We may not worry ourselves about light speeds and simply emigrate our way to our destiny in the stars.

 

aguy2

[John L]

If you get a chance, please read the link that I provided. It is very interesting. I just wish I could find some more up to date information, as this is of significance if true. Let's say that the number of small comets are anywhere in the numbers Dr Frank postulates, the there is so many of these very small snowballs moving around the solar system, that they could also prove to be a potential threat to craft moving throughout space.

 

Since it is now recognized that the water molecule is second only to the hydrogen molecule, this is interesting, and we would be able to live almost anywhere.

[Airmid]

Yes, I read it, and found it very interesting too. The story left me in suspense though, since Dr. Frank doesn't mention whether the theory was generally accepted or rejected. My interpretation would be that the earth is indeed hit by "stuff" all the time, but that the stuff proved to be very small particles. The UV-visible trails would then be caused by the passage of the stuff through the upper layers of the atmosphere, which were shown to contain water vapour. But that's only my interpretation, I'd love to hear too if there are any new publications on this subject.

 

Since it is now recognized that the water molecule is second only to the hydrogen molecule, this is interesting, and we would be able to live almost anywhere.

 

If only it would be as easy as that! There's loads of water in our solar system. Almost all planetary bodies from Jupiter on contain huge amounts of water, comets are made mostly of water, etc. Our main problems out there are radiation, cold, lack of oxygen, lack of pressure, lack of food.

Besides, humans use up surprisingly little water, when all waste moisture is being recycled. This is a nice bit of information: Water on the Space Station.

 

Airmid.

[aguy2]

Yes, I read it, and found it very interesting too. The story left me in suspense though, since Dr. Frank doesn't mention whether the theory was generally accepted or rejected.

 

I have been running into the same blank wall as you and John L. As far as I can tell Dr. Frank is still a major player in imaging tech, but I can't find any resolution to the flap.

 

aguy2

[John L]

What is so frustrating is that the subject has very important implicatations for the future. And Dr Frank, et all, are concentrating on their theory concerning earth, which is natural. Their professional name is on the line here.

 

However, with the passage of time, and the disclosure of huge amounts of water on the moon, and high resolution pictures showing water on the rims of mar's major craters, along with newly discovered runoff erosion, there is no question that water is practically everywhere.

 

Now, this is great news for us when it is time to explore space. We will have a natural sourse of oxygen for breathing, and water for "you know what" all water can do for us. And it is also a perfect fuel sourse. Since it appears to be practically everywhere, we are really in luck.

 

However, I keep coming back to the question of just how much is actually floating around the solar system. Also, I would imagine that in molecular form, it too would be diluted, but still plentiful in space.

 

Consequently, a ship traveling from earth to , let's say mars, could set up a huge scoop in front of the craft, and scoop up loose molecules of water, hydrogen, and others as well. This could keep the craft in good supply.

 

However, I worry about what would happen should the craft come into contact with one of these small comets, even if it is no bigger than a VW. This could not only destroy the scoop, but also the space craft.

 

Should there be anything close to the what Dr Frank is referring to, we could be in for serious trouble, as the danger could be very great.

 

Does anyone else agree?

[aguy2]

Does anyone else agree?

 

As far as being a high priority risk to spacecraft, this site from Franks university discounts it. http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/www/faq.htmlx

 

This site again has that 1999 cutoff. I have a hunch Franks and the people he was scrabbling with needed to start working as a team again, and put the 'snowball' thing on back burner. They are making news as a team again with imaging of IO, I think.

 

Personally, I find the prospects of almost 'made to order' interstellar food/fuel cometary bodies, to be of more interest.

 

aguy2

[Airmid]

I did a little search on the web, and came up with a few sites that might be interesting to you:

Daily news about space (and life):

Astrobiology Magazine

Space.com

Loads of links to loads of subjects:

HobbySpace.com

Other sites:

Near Earth Object fuels (1992)

Mining on the Moon

The Meteorotocal Society (Loads of Meeting abstracts there if you take some time to search.)

 

Airmid.

[John L]

Thanks guys! This is truely a fascinating subject! Perhaps in the near future we can accumulate more data and work concerning this development.

 

If you come up on any more information, please feel free to add it to the thread. The more we add to it, the more it stays at the top of the Section, and the more people become aware of just how rich the solar system Really is, and how much potential awaits us out there.

 

Again, thanks!

 

John