Astronomy on Titan: Looking Upward

Let us now consider what one sees as one looks upward from Titan’s surface.

At first sight, it is very disappointing. All one sees is a reddish-brown haze, though a haze well above the surface. The Sun looks like a bright orange dot, but one only visible at high elevation angles, greater than about 30 – 45 degrees. But it is easily resolved with a small telescope: its angular size is 3 minutes of arc. But even when the Sun is hard to see, it would still light up the haze.

One can watch the Sun move across the sky with a period of about 16 (Earth) days, and move between 27d north and 27d south with a period of about 30 (Earth) years. As one does so, one can show that Titan is approximately spherical in another way: the Sun will be at different directions relative to different locations. One also finds that the Sun’s period is close to the Foucault-measured rotation period. So could the Sun be moving much more slowly than Titan?

There are plenty of other things to see, especially if one can get above the haze.

Continue reading

Astronomy on Titan: Living There

Have you ever wondered what the Universe looks like from elsewhere in it? What the Solar System looks from elsewhere in it? I have considered that for Saturn’s largest moon Titan, and I will describe what I’ve found in my next few posts here.

I will start with what one can learn without looking upward.

Titan’s surface gravity is about 1/7 of the Earth’s, a bit less than the Moon’s at 1/6. So it should be easy to jump upward one’s own height, at least in a shirtsleeves environment. But Titan’s surface temperature is around 95 K (-188 C, -289 F), and its surface atmospheric pressure about 1.5 bar (the Earth’s is 1.013 bar). This implies a column density 11 times the Earth’s. It is almost entirely nitrogen with some methane and some other gases.

So one would need the sort of pressurized and temperature-controlled environment maintained in manned spacecraft and space stations, the sort of environment proposed for colonizing the Moon and Mars.

Continue reading

Exploring the Earth’s Interior

How did we learn about the Earth’s interior? I will channel my inner Isaac Asimov here, and explain how we did it.

One can do so by digging downward, and some mines have been dug to some impressive depths by ordinary standards. The champions are currently the TauTona and Mponeng gold mines near Johannesburg, South Africa, going down some 4 km (2.5 mi). But that’s barely a scratch compared to the Earth’s average radius of about 6371 km (3959 mi).

There are also tunnels excavated by various natural effects — caves — but those don’t extend very far down either. The deepest known cave is the Krubera Cave in the Abkhazia district of Asian Georgia, at about 2.2 km (1.4 mi).

So we have to use more indirect methods: magnetism, earthquake waves, gravity, eruptions and overthrusts, and meteorite composition.

Continue reading

Lightning!

Lightning.

What looks like a stream of light between the ground and the clouds, and sometimes inside of clouds. It is followed by thunder, a loud noise.

Lightning can be very frightening, to the point that psychologists have invented a word for the fear of it: “astraphobia”. Lightning can also be dangerous. Lightning can injure and even kill, it can split trees, it can damage buildings, and it can start fires. It can also damage electrical components, and knock out electricity-distribution systems.

Not surprisingly, many people have considered it a weapon wielded by some deity, and sometimes even a deity itself. Wikipedia has a big list of lightning and thunder gods. The Greek god Zeus is well-known for throwing lightning, and the Germanic god Thor makes lightning with his hammer. We also find in Psalm 18:14 that the God of the Bible also throws lightning. Looking away from western Eurasia, some North American First Nations people considered it the flapping of a supernatural bird, the Thunderbird.

But something changed. What was it?

Continue reading

The Big Five: Alternatives

Here I will discuss various alternatives to the Big Five personality model, and I will show that they all fit into it in some way or other. They are:

Continue reading

The Big Five: Their Biology

There is some evidence of a biological basis for the Big Five personality traits, in the form of evidence of brain-activity variations corresponding to variations in four of the five.

There is also some evidence that Big-Five variations are partially heritable, and there is some evidence of differences between the sexes. However, the variations also have a strong environmental component, something that suggests that we may be able to shape our personalities to some degree.

Many other species also have personality variations, and some of these variations may be very old, dating back to the common ancestors of much of the animal kingdom.

Continue reading

Five Dimensions of Personality

For centuries, and likely for as long as our species has existed, it has been recognized that different people have different personalities. Some people are very outgoing, some people are very reserved, some people are very calm and unflappable, some people are big worrywarts, some people are very diligent, some people are very careless, some people are very interested in new things, some people can’t stand anything new, etc.

But by the late twentieth century, psychologists have settled on the Five Factor Model, a.k.a. the Big Five (The Big Five (Wikipedia)). The model features five major personality traits, Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism, each with several subtraits. These traits are sometimes known by acronyms: OCEAN and CANOE.

It must also be noted that psychology has lacked Grand Unified Theories since the discrediting of Freudianism. So the Big Five model is a step forward in that direction.

Continue reading