Speaker 1: What happens when an interstellar visitor, I mean, an object
that started its life around a completely different star is
about to get blasted by a massive, high energy eruption
from our Sun.
Speaker 2: It sounds like something out of science fiction, doesn't it
an impossible cosmic alignment, But that is the precise high
stake scenario unfolding in real time right now with interstellar
Object three I.
Speaker 1: At least absolutely, and that's exactly why we're here. Welcome
to the deep dive today. We are undertaking well a
really critical analysis of the latest data surrounding three I outlaws.
This is a celestial tourist that it just continues to
redefine our understanding of commentary and interstellar physics.
Speaker 2: And we have two huge immediate updates that just demand
our attention. First, NASA is finally breaking its silence with
some definitive critical imagery, and at.
Speaker 1: The same time, a new powerful coronal mass ejection a
CME is already hurtling straight toward the object.
Speaker 2: Our mission today is surgical. We need to unpack the
complex science behind this object really mysterious and very active behavior.
Speaker 1: Right We're going to delve deep into the baffling controversy
over its true size, which is an uncertainty that throws
off nearly every calculation we try to make.
Speaker 2: And most importantly, we're going to explain why you absolutely
have to understand some cutting edge plasma physics to make
any sense of this visitor from outside our Solar system.
Speaker 1: This object is forcing us to rewrite the rules. I mean,
it's exhibiting features, a clear tail, distinct stable jets, a
massive diffuse coma, all things you'd expect from a regular
Solar system commet.
Speaker 2: But it's not. It remains an interstellar anomaly. It could
be an icy planetesimal, or maybe even a fragment that
was ripped from an exoplanet.
Speaker 1: So we're cutting through all the speculation and noise right
now to bring you the essential thrilling details you need
to be well informed and frankly ready for the incoming
data tsunami.
Speaker 2: Let's start with the release that the astronomical community has
just been waiting for because the lack of certainty up
to this point has created a real data vacuum.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. This is monumental news. For weeks,
observation details on three iet lists were just incredibly sparse.
It was hampered by its position relative to the Sun.
Speaker 2: Right, it was in a really tough spot to observe
from Earth.
Speaker 1: But now NASA has officially broken its silence. So what's
the definitive date and time for this critical data reveal.
Speaker 2: The official release is scheduled via a livestream. It's set
for Wednesday, November nineteenth at twelve pm Pacific time. And
the expectation is, well, it's high. It's really high, because
this isn't just a general image release. It's specifically targeted
data that we've all been hoping for.
Speaker 1: And the payload itself, the data, is the most crucial
part of this announcement. The release promises to include high
resolution imagery. Specifically, they're calling it high rise imagery. Why
is that specific designation so vital to solving the mysteries
of three iet lists?
Speaker 2: Well, high rise is short for high resolution imaging science experiment.
Like this is not your stand space camera. So the
highest resolution camera ever sent to orbit another.
Speaker 1: Planet, another planet, So it wasn't even designed for this.
Speaker 2: No, not at all. It's on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter
or MRO. The MRO is this phenomenal, incredibly stable platform
and high rise imagery has a very specific function. It
can resolve details down to about twenty five centimeters per
pixel on the Martian's surface.
Speaker 1: Wow, twenty five centimeters from Orgon exactly.
Speaker 2: Now, obviously three at lace is much much farther away,
but the quality of the optics means that if any
instrument we have out there could resolve the tiny, obscured
nucleus of this thing, it's mro's high rise camera.
Speaker 1: So we're talking about an instrument designed to capture incredibly
fine detail, even though, like you said, it wasn't originally
intended for fast moving interstellar.
Speaker 2: Objects precisely, and the timing of when they got this
data is also key. It was captured on October third,
during what astronomers were calling a period of reduced visibility
or you know, an observation.
Speaker 1: Shutdown, right, That's when we couldn't see it from Earth
at all.
Speaker 2: We couldn't. It was near what's called superior conjunction, meaning
it was almost directly behind the Sun from our perspective.
Terrestrial observation was just impossible because of the solar glare
and all the background noise.
Speaker 1: So we had to rely on assets in deep space entirely.
Speaker 2: We were relying on things like MRO, which was strategically
positioned relative to Mars to obtain this data when nobody
else could.
Speaker 1: It speaks volumes. Doesn't it that NASA devoted such a
high value asset a Mars orbiter to capturing this image
even when visibility was at its worst from Earth. They
clearly knew this was the only chance to get a
crucial glimpse of the object's core.
Speaker 2: It was a calculated risk, absolutely, but it was a
necessary one. Terrestrial observers were fighting the Sun, which makes
the data just unusable. MRO, being millions of miles away,
offered this unique vantage point away from the immediate glare
and all the atmospheric distortions that played Earth based imaging.
Speaker 1: Now, setting side the science for just a moment, there's
a cultural element to this timing that I find fascinating.
Our source noted that the date November nineteenth, it coincides
with what's called a critical planetary geometry, and while this
doesn't affect the data itself obviously, the source mentioned that
this geometry is sometimes associated with communication breakdowns and paradigm
shattering moments. As it relates to communications, it's.
Speaker 2: An interesting narrative frame, isn't it. I mean, whether or
not one adheres to those kinds of cultural observations, the
fact remains that this piece of data is scientifically poised
to shatter paradigms.
Speaker 1: It really is.
Speaker 2: For years we've struggled with these conflicting measurements about three iyeatlysts.
If this high rise data finally resolves the nuclear size,
it will irrevocably change the scientific conversation around this object.
It is quite literally an information paradigm shift in astronomical communications.
Speaker 1: And speaking of communication, there's a subtle but really important
linguistic shift happening. While the original discoverers and many astronomers
they formally refer to it as interstellar object three I out.
Speaker 2: Lists, which is the correct neutral term.
Speaker 1: Right, but NASA in their press releases about this image,
they're explicitly calling it an interstellar comet.
Speaker 2: And that terminology shift from object to commet is significant.
It's not an accident. It implies that NASA's internal analysis
of the object's behavior, you know, the strength of its outgassing,
the development of its tail and coma, is leaning heavily
toward the conventional cometary classification.
Speaker 1: Even though it's from another star system.
Speaker 2: Even though it has a non Solar system origin, it's
behaving at least outwardly in a very conventional cometary way
in terms of its activity.
Speaker 1: Hold on, if it's acting like a comet, why is
it still fundamentally different from a comet that formed in, say,
the ort cloud of our own solar system. Why does
it retain that special interstellar status.
Speaker 2: The difference really lies in its composition and its trajectory.
Primarily the trajectory we know it came from outside our
system because its hyperbolic orbit confirms it has enough velocity
to escape the Sun's gravitational pull. It's not bound to
our Sun.
Speaker 1: It's just passing through.
Speaker 2: It's just passing through. It didn't originate here. And while
it exhibits activity, the jets the coma that looks very
similar to a solar system commet, its internal composition, its
volatile materials could be fundamentally different. How so well it
may harbor ices, say nitrogen or carbon monoxide, ices that
formed in a much colder or just different stellar environment,
and that dictates how it out gases, when it out gases,
and how it creates that plasma environment we're going to talk.
Speaker 1: About, right and You have to contrast this with the
other interstellar visitors we've had. Umua was rocky, it didn't outgas,
it was shaped like a cigar. It was anything but
a comma, completely different beast and two Iborisov. While it
was clearly a comet, it was exceptionally dark and pristine.
Three Idolys is in this fascinating middle ground. It's highly active,
but it's still alien.
Speaker 2: It is three eyedalysis is forcing us to expand the
very definition of a comet to include these highly active bodies,
regardless of their star of origin. The data they're releasing
should help solidify whether its composition is chemically close to
our comments or if it holds something unique that only
physics from a different star system could produce.
Speaker 1: And just as a final note for listeners who want
to get directly involved, NASA plans to take questions from
the public during the broadcast, So if you're quick, you
can ask your own burning questions using the hashtag hashtag
ask NASA on social media.
Speaker 2: Okay, so now we shift from a data release, which
remember deals with historical observations from back on October third,
to something immediate and frankly spectacular, an imminent, real time
cosmic interaction.
Speaker 1: This is truly breaking news. A powerful new coronal mass ejection,
a huge blast of solar plasma and magnetic energy. It
blasted off today and it came from the very same
active sunspot group that has been causing all the geomagnetic
storming here on Earth. This is a huge wave of
energy moving.
Speaker 2: Across space, and this wave is not missing its target.
That's the key. Stays with models are showing a direct
shot toward three I at lists. The impact is predicted
to occur around November twenty second at twelve Universal time.
Speaker 1: The twenty second I mean, the timing is just astonishing.
It's just three days after NASA's Big Data reveal.
Speaker 2: It's almost too dramatic. It's like we get the scientific
blueprint for the object and then the universe decides to
immediately test it in a cosmic crucible.
Speaker 1: So how certain are we about this trajectory.
Speaker 2: The confirmation is key here and it's pretty solid. We
were able to look at the chronograph imagery. Those are
the instruments that block out the Sun's discs so we
can see the corona, and it showed the ejection launching
off the side of the Sun. It came from a
sunspot group that was just around the limb, so slightly out.
Speaker 1: Of our direct view, and that's how we know it's
not coming for us.
Speaker 2: Critically, Yes, those observations immediately confirmed it was not Earth's
direct so Earth is safe from a major geomagnetic storm
from this particular event.
Speaker 1: But three ia plus is precisely in the.
Speaker 2: Firing line exactly. The confidence level for a direct hit
is high because of the angle of launch. CME observed
launching slightly above the ecliptic plane, which is the plane
the planet's orbit in, and that angle precisely matches the
current inclination and position of three ilis. It's an extremely
well aligned shot.
Speaker 1: This raise is a really fascinating physics question. I mean,
what does a hit like this even mean for an
object that is already outgassing so rapidly and is surrounded
by this vast cloud of plasma. This isn't a physical collision, right,
It's an electromagnetic and energetic shock wave, right.
Speaker 2: And this is where we learn the most. For the
object itself, the solid nucleus, it's actually somewhat protected by
its massive coma, But the coma and the tail, which
are pure highly charged plasma, they will experience a violent interaction.
And to understand the potential magnitude of this, we can
look to the Rosetta precedent.
Speaker 1: Okay, tell us more about that, the Rosetta emissions observations
of Comet sixty seven P.
Speaker 2: The Rosetta spacecraft which tracked Comet sixty seven P was
in the perfect position to observe the effects of a
powerful CME up close. For ordinary Solar system commets, a
strong CME can do a couple of things. It can
break off the plasma tail that's called a tail disconnection event,
or can fundamentally reorganize the magnetic environment around the nucleus.
Speaker 1: And what did Rosetta's instruments actually measure during that CME impact?
What were the numbers?
Speaker 2: The effect was dramatic. The impact caused the surrounding magnetic
field strength is the field that's induced around the comet
by the flowing plasma to surge. It went from a
baseline of about thirty to fifty nanotesla.
Speaker 1: Okay, which is a pretty low magnetic field.
Speaker 2: Pretty low, yes, Yeah, it's surged up to an astounding
three hundred nanotesla.
Speaker 1: Three hundred That is a massive what is that? A
tenfold increase in the local magnetic field strength?
Speaker 2: Almost yeah, a huge jump. A tenfold increase is a
great way to think about it. That tells you immediately
that the environment changes from relatively calm space to a
highly stressed, compressed, and violently charged bubble.
Speaker 1: So what's happening there? Why does the field jump so much?
Speaker 2: It happens because the CME is essentially a supersonic wave
of high density magnetized plasma. When that wave hits the
comets slower moving, denser cloud of ionized gas and dust,
the COMA, it compresses the comet's own magnetic field structure.
It's a boundary we call the comma pause, and that
compression drastically increases its strength and changes the dynamics of
the plasma flow almost instantly.
Speaker 1: So if three to eight less experiences a similar compression,
what are astronomers going to be watching for? What's the
visual evidence that this event occurred and gave us new data?
Speaker 2: The primary observation, the thing everyone will be looking for
is that tail disconnection.
Speaker 1: Event, the tail literally breaking off visually.
Speaker 2: Yes, if the magnetic pressure from the CME is strong enough,
it can literally sever the magnetic field lines that connect
the ion tail to the head of the coma, And
when you look at it, the tail appears to just
float away and a new and immediately begins to form
in its place.
Speaker 1: That would be a breath taking visual confirmation. But what
does that tell us scientifically? What's the takeaway?
Speaker 2: It gives us real time evidence of two things. First,
the density and speed of the CME, which we can track.
But second, and much more importantly, it tells us about
the resilience and structure of three I at leas's own
plasma environment. How so, well, if it's tail snaps off easily,
it tells us something about the magnetization of the material
it's shedding. If it resists the pressure, or if the
magnetic field surge is even greater than three hunderd nanotesla,
it would suggest the material that's shedding is more conductive
or maybe denser than a typical solar system.
Speaker 1: Comments Ah, so it could hint at unique compositional differences
that are rooted in its interstellar origin.
Speaker 2: Exactly. So, the CME hit isn't just a spectacle. It's
a controlled cosmic stress test happening right before our eyes,
and it's allowing us to compare this interstellar object to
our familiar Solar System commets like sixty seven p Okay.
Speaker 1: So while we wait for that CME impact, we need
to talk about the current state of three Aatles because
after moving past perihelion, its closest approach to the Sun,
and as its viewing position improves, the object is concerned
to be, as our source put it, very much awake
and alive.
Speaker 2: It's putting on quite a show.
Speaker 1: It really is one of the key features a strong
are observing.
Speaker 2: Right now. We see a very clear discernible tail. We
see distinct, highly focused jets of material, and of course
that vast diffuse coma enveloping the nucleus. This activity confirms
that even weeks past its peak solar heating, the object
is still shedding volatile materials at a very high rate.
Speaker 1: Let's just emphasize the scale here, because this is where
three ilis just transcends what you think of as a
regular commet. We have a nucleus that is likely tiny,
yet it produces this absurdly large cloud.
Speaker 2: Of material that is the crucial point of disproportion. We
have estimates that at one point the comma the enveloping
cloud of gas, dust and plasma was about seven hundred
thousand kilometers across.
Speaker 1: Seven hundred thousand kilometers. Let's just put that in perspective
for everyone listening. The diameter of the Sun is about
one point four million kilometers. So this interstellar traveler, whose
core is probably only a few kilometers wide, is generating
an atmospheric bubble that is roughly half the diameter of
the Sun itself.
Speaker 2: It's immense, it is a vast region of influence, and
its size just demonstrates the high rate of outgassing and
the low density of the material being ejected. The coma
typically grows as the object nears the Sun, and while
it may have shrunk a little since its closest approach,
it remains gargantuan relative to its tiny core.
Speaker 1: And we also have some data on its rotation, which
seems to complicate the picture even further.
Speaker 2: Indeed, the rotation period has been calculated at approximately sixteen
point sixteen hours with very minimal variants. This suggests a
relatively slow, maybe slightly irregular tumbling motion.
Speaker 1: Okay, so here's where the physics puzzle deepens and it
really sets up the need for the plasma solution. We'll
discuss next. How does that slow sixteen hour rotation square
with the highly stable jets we are persistently observing.
Speaker 2: This is the central anomaly, This is the big mystery.
We observe specific persistent channels of material flow, including a
sunward facing jet sometimes called an anti tail, and several
other lateral jets that remain highly focused. They're like laser beams.
Speaker 1: But if the nucleus is re rotating, right.
Speaker 2: If the nucleus is rotating every sixteen hours and the
only force governing the material is thermal outgassing and simple inertia,
those jets should not hold their shape. They should smear out.
Speaker 1: Why not? I mean, if I spray a can of
paint from a rotating object, the spray spreads out, but
the material is still leaving the object in a directed path.
Speaker 2: Isn't it in a vacuum? Yes, But in the case
of a comet, you have volatile ices turning directly into gas,
and that gas immediately carries dust particles with it. As
the nucleus rotates, that source point on the surface moves
over sixteen hours, the rotation should smear the jet material
across the entire spherical coma, it should turn those specific
channels into a generalized homogeneous cloud a fog.
Speaker 1: So the fact that astronomers can identify stable, persistent jets
is essentially proof that a simple mechanical model based on
rotation and inertia is failing. It's not enough, it.
Speaker 2: Is definitive evidence. It proves that something external to the
nucleus's rotation, something much larger and more influential, is organizing
and channeling the flow of the ejected material after it
leaves the surface. And that something else cannot be gravity
or simple thermal pressure. It has to be the electromagnetic environment.
Speaker 1: Which is just a huge clue. But the anomaly of
these stable jets is compounded by what is frankly the
fundamental embarrassing truth of this entire observation. We still do
not know the definitive size of three EE out losses nucleus. No,
we don't, and this colossal uncertainty is why that NASA
High rise data is so eagerly awaited.
Speaker 2: This lack of certainty is the most critical scientific kurdle
we face. Without an accurate size and mass estimate, all
the subsequent calculations about its behavior are based on massive
assumptions as the source material. Dryly noted, scientists are simply
fiddling around with some of the values to make the
numbers work.
Speaker 1: Why does the size matter so fundamentally to everything else.
Speaker 2: Because size, combined with density, determines mass. If we don't
know the mass, we can't calculate the most important factor.
It's mass loss.
Speaker 1: Rate, how quickly it's dissolving exactly.
Speaker 2: How quickly it's falling apart. Furthermore, we need the size
to accurately measure its non gravitational acceleration.
Speaker 1: Okay, explain non gravitational acceleration.
Speaker 2: For us, that's the slight deviation in its orbit that's
caused by the momentum carried by the material in the jets.
When gas and dust blast off the nucleus, it provides
a tiny, continuous thrust, like a very very low power
rocket engine, a little push. If the nucleus is large
and massive, that thrust is negligible. But if the nucleus
is tiny, that thrust can significantly alter its path, which
is critical for predicting its future trajectory and understanding its past.
Speaker 1: But the calculation of size requires another crucial, often overlooked variable, albedo.
We need to be clear about what that term means.
Speaker 2: Albedo is simply the measure of how reflective a surface is.
It's a percentage. Think of wearing a black shirt versus
a white shirt on a sunny day. A high albedo
means the object is more reflective, it's whiter like fresh snow,
and it absorbs less heat. A low albedo means it's dark,
like soot or charcoal, and it absorbs a lot of heat.
Speaker 1: And why is this so central to the size controversy.
Speaker 2: Because when we observe a tiny faint dot surrounded by
this massive bright coma, astronomers have to estimate the nucleus
size by measuring how much light is reflecting off of it. Okay,
so if we assume the nucleus is highly reflective a
high albedo, we only need a small nucleus to account
for the observed light. But if we assume the nucleus
is incredibly dark a low albedo, we would need a
much much larger nucleus to reflect that same amount of light. Ah.
Speaker 1: So the uncertainty in albedo leads directly to this massive
conflict in the size estimates. You're just guessing at how
bright the surface.
Speaker 2: Is precisely, and the conflicting measurements are drastically different, which
really demonstrates the scale of this albedo uncertainty. The initial
Hubble estimate from back in July suggested the nucleus was
up to maybe two point eight kilometers in diameter. That
estimate likely assumed a relative high albedo.
Speaker 1: But what about the other end of the scale, The
really big estimates well.
Speaker 2: Other measurements that have been floating around have suggested a
diameter of up to fifty kilometers fifty five zero. To
get that large a diameter from the amount of light
we see, the object would have to be incredibly dark,
a very low albedo like the darkest comets we've ever
seen in our own solar system.
Speaker 1: Fifty kilometers versus less than three kilometers, that is an
enormous factor of uncertainty. It's not even in the same
ballpark dot at all. It means that three E and
oz is either a very small, highly efficient engine of activity,
or it's a colossal dark body that frankly should be
much brighter than it is.
Speaker 2: The discrepancy just underscores the difficulty of observing the object
during the period when the high rise data was captured.
When the nucleus is obscured by a coma half the
size of the Sun and the albedo is a complete unknown,
any estimate is highly speculative. We are literally struggling to
find the tiny dark needle within a massive bright haystack.
Speaker 1: So all our hope is resting on the November nineteenth
NASA release. Astronomers need the high rise imagery from MRO
captured on October third to provide the necessary spatial resolution
to constrain the size, and maybe it just maybe offer
new photometric data that limits the range of possible albedos.
Speaker 2: If high rise can resolve the core, or at least
provide an unprecedented upper limit on the size that forces
those fifty kilometer estimates out of the picture, it would
fundamentally refine all subsequent calculations of mass density and crucially,
its mass loss efficiency. Until then, the scientific community is
just held hostage by this massive discrepancy.
Speaker 1: This brings us right back to the central scientific puzzle
that can't be solved by gravity or size alone. How
does a tiny rotating core, whether it's three kilometers or
fifty kilometers maintain those incredibly focused and stable jets within
a half a million mile wide coma.
Speaker 2: And the answer, as we hinted, lies in this specialized
and often overlooked domain of dusty plasma physics.
Speaker 1: This is truly the AHA moment for understanding three iOS,
isn't it?
Speaker 2: It is need to discard the idea of space as
simply a vacuum where objects are governed only by Newtonian physics.
The crucial principle here is that the moment gas and
dusts are rejected, they are subjected to intense solar radiation
and the solar wind, and this causes rapid ionization.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's clearly define ionization for everyone.
Speaker 2: Ionization is what happens when a gas molecule loses or
gains an electron that gives it an electrical charge. And
once it's charged, it is no longer an inert physical
particle just floating around. It becomes highly susceptible to electric
and magnetic fields.
Speaker 1: And this happens through a few different ways.
Speaker 2: Yes, there are several mechanisms at play. You have photoonization
from the Sun's powerful UV light. You have charge transfer
interactions with the particles in the solar wind, and you
have electron impact, ionization. All of these things are working
to strip electrons off the gas molecules.
Speaker 1: So the poma isn't a passive physical cloud of neutral
gas and inert dust. It's an immense turbulent, electrically charged
bubble of plasma exactly.
Speaker 2: And because it's charged, it becomes electrically conductive. It interacts
dynamically with the Sun's magnetic field lines, which are carried
outward by the solar wind. This whole interaction leads to
the formation of distinct, structured magnetic regions around the comet.
It's almost like a tiny planet with its own atmosphere
and magnetosphere.
Speaker 1: And we mentioned three distinct regions earlier, the bowshock, the ionopause,
and the comma pause. Can we differentiate those for the listeners?
Speaker 2: Certainly? So. Imagine the comet is traveling through the solar wind,
which is moving supersonically, that is faster than the speed
of sound in that medium, like.
Speaker 1: A supersonic jet flying through the air. You get a.
Speaker 2: Shock wave perfect analogy. First, you hit the bowshock region.
This is a standing shock wave where the supersonic solar
wind abruptly slows down and becomes turbulent as it piles
up against the dense, heavy material being ejected by the comet.
It's the initial barrier.
Speaker 1: Okay, So the solar wind hits that wall and slows down.
Speaker 2: Then what the now slower but still charged particles can
continue inward and they encounter the cometary material more directly.
This leads to the commopause. Now, this is the key
magnetic boundary. It's the region where the cometary magnetic magnetic field,
the field that's induced by the comet's own plasma, is
balanced against the magnetic field being carried by the solar wind.
It acts like a massive, invisible, protective magnetic bubble around
the entire coma.
Speaker 1: And finally, the ionopause. What's that.
Speaker 2: The ionopause is the innermost boundary, sitting closest to the nucleus.
It's the sharp dividing line between the heavily magnetized solar
wind plasma on the outside and the virtually magnetic field
free region immediately surrounding the nucleus on the inside. So,
in short, the bowshock is the slowdown, the chemopause is
the main magnetic boundary, and the ionopause is the core.
Speaker 1: Shield that makes the environment so much clearer. It's a
series of nested magnetic bubbles. Now, how does this massive
structured magnetic field, this comopause bubble, which is hundreds of
thousands of kilometers across, how does that solve the problem
of the tiny rotating core.
Speaker 2: The key is that the nucleus is tiny and it's
rotating slowly every sixteen hours inside this immense highly charged
plasma bubble. The rotational inertia the nucleus is completely utterly
overwhelmed by the organized channeling force of the massive electromagnetic
environment it is created around itself.
Speaker 1: So the magnetic fields are acting like invisible guide rails
for all the material coming off the surface.
Speaker 2: Precisely, the magnetic field lines that are generated or trapped
within the coma can guide the flow of charged particles,
and that even includes the dust grains through a process
called dust charging. So instead of the material diffusing evenly
outward because of the nucleus rotation, the field lines act
as conduits. They're like magnetic hoses. They sort, accelerate and
channel the ionized gas and dust into those specific stable
observed jets.
Speaker 1: That is a phenomenal explanation. So the stability of the
jets isn't a function of some complex nozzle or weird
structure on the nucleus itself. It's a function of the
massive surrounding electromagnetic environment channeling the material along these magnetic
field lines.
Speaker 2: It is the most robust physics based explanation we have.
It suggests that three Ietellis's active behavior is less about
its internal mechanics and much more about its powerful rapid
interaction with the solar environment, which creates this huge, self
organizing plasma structure. This complex dusty plasma physics provides a
compelling evidence, grounded reason for the anomaly, and it takes
the explanation firmly out of the realm of unsupported speculation.
Speaker 1: It fundamentally changes how we view comments. They aren't just
orbiting dirty snowballs anymore. They are highly dynamic, electrically active
generators of magnetospheres, even if they are just passing through.
Speaker 2: Given all the excitement over the NASA data and the
anticipation for the CME impact, a lot of amateur astronomers
and curious observers are trying to spot three iout lists now,
But we need to be realistic about the challenges.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, this is important three I out list is not Jupiter.
It is quite dim even with decent equipment. If you
just look at a single live feed image, you will
likely see only a blurry, pale, little dot, and.
Speaker 2: That leads to tremendous confusion Online. You see people who
watch a live stream and they confidently state the astronomers
are lying. There's no tail, It's just a fuzzy blob.
And this denial is rooted entirely in a misunderstanding of
observational technique.
Speaker 1: Let's clarify the essential technique then stacking images. Why is
stacking mandatory to resolve the faint tail and the jets?
Speaker 2: Okay, so to resolve faint objects like the three ie
at us tail. It's the signal you want. You need
a long exposure to gather enough light. But a single,
very long exposure captures way too much noise.
Speaker 1: And what do you mean by noise? In this context?
Speaker 2: The noise includes the constantly shimmering atmospheric distortions, any tiny
movement in the telescope mount, and the inherent electrical noise
from the camera sensor itself. The longer the exposure, the
more blurred and noisy the image becomes. The signal gets
washed out.
Speaker 1: So the signal is the light from the comet, but
the noise is all the distortion and unwanted back ground data.
Speaker 2: Correct stacking solves this problem. You take dozens, sometimes hundreds,
of shorter, medium length exposures, say thirty to sixty seconds each.
Then sophisticated software digitally aligns all those images perfectly on
the target object.
Speaker 1: So it layers them all on top of each other exactly, and.
Speaker 2: By mathematically averaging all those aligned frames, the consistent signal
the photons that are actually forming the tail and the
jets is reinforced and integrated. It gets stronger. Meanwhile, the
random noise like that atmospheric wobble and random sensor artifacts,
it's effectively canceled out or drastically diminished.
Speaker 1: It's the only way to dramatically improve the crucial signal
to noise ratio and to pull out those fine details
that are otherwise completely hidden. So if someone is looking
at an unprocessed live single frame image, they are failing
to perform the necessary due diligence for dim object astronomy.
Speaker 2: Exactly those beautiful images you see online showing the faint,
extensive tail and the distinct sounward face jet. Those are
the result of many hours of acquisition and post processing
work by dedicated AFTRA photographers who understand this technique. They
are not fabricated, They are simply the result of necessary processing.
Speaker 1: The good news, though, is that the viewing conditions are
actually starting to improve dramatically.
Speaker 2: Yes, during the most difficult observation period around that superior conjunction,
if the tail was there, it would have been stretching
effectively directly away from us. It would be pointing right
back along our line of sight, making it very difficult
to distinguish from background glare.
Speaker 1: But as the object moves further along its orbit toward
its closest approach to Earth on December nineteenth, it's viewing
geometry gets better.
Speaker 2: Much better. We're now seeing it at a more oblique
or lateral angle.
Speaker 1: And what does that mean visually?
Speaker 2: That oblique angle means the tail is no longer stretching
directly away from our line of sight, but is presented
more to the sign. It gives us much better contrast
against the background sky. Assuming a course that we employ
the stacking technique, and.
Speaker 1: We have some really clear examples contrasting the effort. If
you try to use a basic smart telescope like a
five hundred dollars c star. You might capture the bright
central coma with a few stacked images, but the.
Speaker 2: Tail will remain invisible. You need the commitment to process.
For instance, you can compare that simple image to the
professional results taken using say six hundred and eighty two exposures.
That is, one hundred and eighty two exposures in six
different filtered bands, resulting in thousands of captured frames that
are then stacked.
Speaker 1: The difference must be staggering.
Speaker 2: It is one shows a fuzzy doc the other shows
a fully formed active inter cellar body with clear jets
and a long, faint tail.
Speaker 1: It is a clear reminder that in deep space observation,
your technique often matters just as much as your equipment. Okay,
let's synthesize the critical elements of this incredible situation. We
have tracked the immediate imminent news NASA's critical high rise
image reveal on November nineteenth, and that holds the key
to solving the object's true size, the most fundamental unknown,
and we.
Speaker 2: Have identified the real time high stakes threat, the CME
strike around November twenty second. This provides an involuntary high
energy physics experiment that's set to test the resilient and
density of the object's plasma environment.
Speaker 1: And crucially, we've learned that making sense of three ilo
less requires moving past simple Newtonian physics and really embracing
dusty plasma dynamics. The stable persistent jets are likely not
features of the tiny nucleus, but rather a function of
the massive electromagnetic fields within its enormous coma channeling the
ionized material along these magnetic conduits.
Speaker 2: This interstellar object is forcing the absolute application of our
most cutting edge physics to a body that originated outside
of our stellar neighborhood, and that brings us to the
final necessary question that's raised by this whole saga.
Speaker 1: What stands out to you is the ultimate takeaway from
this ongoing observation, What should we be thinking about?
Speaker 2: The CME hit on November twenty second is more than
just a passing headline. It represents a unique opportunity to
gain new fundamental knowledge. If we see a dramatic tail
disconnection event, or if instruments confirm a massive surge in
the surrounding magnetic field, say comperal to that tenfold increase
scene during the Rosetta mission at Comet sixty seven P.
What new profound information about the composition, density, and magnetic
interaction capabilities of objects born around other stars will that
force us to integrate?
Speaker 1: It's a measure of how different the environment of another
star system might make these objects.
Speaker 2: Exactly? Will the severity of the plasma interaction tell us
that three Iatlys is shedding denser, more highly volatile material
than we ever expected from a typical comment? What boundaries
of cometary science was interstellar challenger help us shatter? Next?
So think about this. How profoundly does the knowledge of
plasma dynamics, the fact that the space around this object
is an electrically charged active environment, How does that change
how you view space itself? We are observing something born
somewhere else being violently tested by our own son, and
the results coming in the next few days could genuinely
rewrite the rule book on interstellar visitors