2262: Parker Solar Probe

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 21:33, 31 January 2020 by Punchcard (talk | contribs) (Added sentence and citation from NASA announcement about Jan 29, 2020 distance to sun's surface.)
Jump to: navigation, search
Parker Solar Probe
It will get within 9 or 10 Sun-diameters of the "bottom" (the Sun's surface) which seems pretty far when you put it that way, but from up here on Earth it's practically all the way down.
Title text: It will get within 9 or 10 Sun-diameters of the "bottom" (the Sun's surface) which seems pretty far when you put it that way, but from up here on Earth it's practically all the way down.

Explanation

Ambox notice.png This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: Created by a FRIED ROBOTIC SOLAR PROBE. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.
If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

This is an informative comic meant to represent the relative distances of astronomical objects relative to the Parker Solar Probe. It also shows where the probe will be in 2025 if its mission continues going according to plan.

The Parker Solar Probe is a robotic spacecraft launched by NASA in 2018 with the mission of repeatedly probing and making observations of the outer corona of the Sun. It travels in an elongated orbit that passes close to the Sun and sometimes passes near Venus, arranged such that Venus nudges the orbit slightly in each pass to bring the probe's perihelion (the lower end of its orbit) closer and closer to the Sun. By the end of the probe's planned lifetime in 2025, it will pass within 4.3 million miles (6.9 million km), or about 5 solar diameters, of the Sun's surface, at a speed of 430,000 mph (690,000 km/h). Two days before this comic was published the probe again passed through perihelion, establishing new records for closeness to the Sun and speed.

Helios 2 was a solar probe launched in the 1976 that formerly held the records for closest man-made object to the Sun and fastest man-made object. Both records were surpassed in 2018 by the Parker probe.

Animation of Parker Solar Probe's trajectory from August 7, 2018 to August 29, 2025
Parker Solar ProbeEarthVenusMercurySun

Cueball and Megan are standing on Earth. The way this diagram is drawn, they look like they could fall off Earth toward the Sun -- hence the comment "Careful!" -- though the joke is that in real life they would fall toward the center of the Earth, not toward the Sun.

The title text says the probe will get within 9 or 10 Sun-diameters of the Sun's surface. This is a bit of a mistake: it will actually get within that many Sun-radii -- only 4½ or 5 Sun-diameters. NASA says "he spacecraft traveled 11.6 million miles from the Sun’s surface" on Jan 29, 2020. citation: https://blogs.nasa.gov/parkersolarprobe/2020/01/29/parker-solar-probe-completes-fourth-closest-approach-breaks-new-speed-and-distance-records/

Transcript

Ambox notice.png This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.

[A tall, narrow box with Earth at the top, a slice of the Sun at the bottom, and planets and other spacecraft in between.]

Caption above: Looking down toward the Sun and the Parker Solar Probe (distances are to scale, sizes are not to scale)

Earth, with Cueball and Megan standing "on top" [with their feet lower on the page, toward the Sun]

Cueball: Careful!

Venus

Mercury

Helios 2 (1976)

Parker Solar Probe (today)

Parker Solar Probe (2025)

Sun (not to scale)


comment.png add a comment! ⋅ comment.png add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!

Discussion

I thought "down" meant towards the center of the Earth. Apparently I was wrong. 162.158.214.148 23:17, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Our usual understanding of "down" means "towards the center of the Earth", here Randall is using it as "towards the center of the Sun". If you think about it, down means "towards the pull of gravity", Randall is just changing the gravity source he's referencing. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

I think the reference frame used here is a reference to "the enemy's gate is down" from Ender's Game, which is a book that the comic references often. 172.69.69.238 23:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

No, see my above comment. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Considering Sagittarius A* is not in picture, I think we can't rule out Ender's Game completely. -- Hkmaly (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This is common in space travel. When entering a new system, down is towards the main star.SDSpivey (talk) 04:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

To be fair, Ender's Game only applies in a zero-G environment. signed, Mr. Buzzkill. Cellocgw (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Cueball and Megan standing on Earth remind me of the illustrations from The Little Prince. Barmar (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Whether or not the use is 'official', I can't help feeling that describing it as a "robotic" probe gives a different impression to some other term such as "(semi-?)autonomous". At the moment it makes me think of VINCENT from The Black Hole (*surely it can't be too long before the Disney trend to re-release "Live Action" remakes of its old features starts to include this, The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes, Blackbeard's Ghost and Herbie Goes Bananas - jus' sayin' in passin'...) or Huey/Louie/Dewey from The Valley Forge. But I must check to see how much actuator use it has, other than for once-only 'deployment' like unfolding of solar panels/shielding. 162.158.154.241 16:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

The orbit GIF moves a little too quickly to see clearly (and might not be fully accurate), but there seem to be some close calls between PSP and Venus, and PSP and Mercury. These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For (talk) 00:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

That is correct and intentional. The probe is using Gravity Assists to slow down. As a result, the close flyby with Mercury and Venus are all essential parts of going to the Sun. 172.68.141.148 01:39, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Note the resolution of the picture: what looks as close calls is not THAT close. -- Hkmaly (talk) 23:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Who put an extra explanation? We don't need two of the same thing. Could we get that copy cleared, except for the table chart? That can go with the first one.108.162.241.226 14:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Randall was doubly sloppy on the title text. It should be 9-10 radii form the center, not 9-10 diameters from the surface. Clarified this in both explanations on this page, I agree that someone should delete one of them.108.162.229.98 12:50, 5 February 2020 (UTC)