The Parker Solar Probe’s new top speed could get you from NYC to LA in just 20 seconds. It’s not done yet.

  • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just remember not to try and impress a girl back on Ceres by trying to slingshot through the ring.

    RIP

  • LinuxSBC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Breaking news: The thing we put in a highly elliptical orbit around the sun is in a highly elliptical orbit around the sun (and hasn’t yet reached its perihelion).

  • donio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    My butt is orbiting the center of our galaxy at around 500K mph so that thing still has some ways to go.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m so glad somone said this, the title of this article is as if a child wrote it and has no concept of relativity.

  • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s too bad they can’t fling the probe in the opposite direction once it’s done with the sun. I know it’s instruments are probably tuned specifically to take measurements of various solar phenomenon from close-up and probably aren’t sensitive enough to be useful for any deep space science, but it’d be cool to use that speed to launch it on an escape trajectory and see how long it takes to catch up to the Voyager probes.

    • dave@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      PSP is travelling at 394,736mph. Voyager 1 is about 15 billion miles away and travelling at about 35,000mph.

      Time taken to catch up t is roughly 394736t = 15000000000 +35000t or about 4.75 years.

      • fiat_lux@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks for the math! Here’s hoping we can fling the records of our civilisation far enough out for another civilisation to learn about our demise. And not, like, just accidentally flinging it into a burning star or space imperialist Klingons or something. Even though that would be poetically appropriate too.

    • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So, it doesn’t work the way you think.

      It’s only going that fast because it’s near the sun. The same way a satellite close to Earth needs to move faster than one farther away. You can’t really use that velocity to go elsewhere. It had to lose a lot of energy to get as close to the sun as it is. It would need to gain that back to get to earth.

      I’m really blanking on a way to explain this concisely and I can’t explain orbital mechanics in a Lemmy post.

      If you play Kerbal space program, you can definitely use that to get a very intuitive understanding of this concept.

      • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thanks! I didn’t think about the fact that it’d lose velocity to gravity as it gets further away.

        I wonder if you could slingshot a probe by firing it to fly by the sun and then shedding mass at its perihelion. The idea being that the craft would be mostly dead weight, increasing the force exerted on the craft by the sun’s gravitational pull. Once you reach the perihelion, you eject the mass behind the craft so that there’s less force acting on the craft as it moves away from the sun.

        • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          👍. I like science.

          You wouldn’t just drop mass along side you in space. It would just continue to float along beside you.

          You definitely have to throw it behind you, like you said, but that’s what rockets do. They throw mass behind them to make them move forward. That’s a rocket.

          When you throw mass behind you at one point in your orbit, you raise the height of your orbit on the opposite side of the orbited object (this is simplified).

          So you’re basically right, it’s partially about the mass of the object, but it’s mostly the firing of the rocket.

          You’ve got some pretty good intuition though. That’s basic orbital mechanics.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just “shedding mass” won’t do it. Uncouple a payload from the mass of the ship at perihelion, and they will just float along together, side by side in their original orbit.

          But, if that “mass” is “rocket fuel”, and you “shed” it by burning it behind you, you’ve got the right idea. As the other commenter said, the Oberth effect means the closer you are to the sun, the faster you are moving, and the greater the effect that burning will have.

        • LinuxSBC@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, the Oberth effect means that firing a rocket at the periapsis changes your orbit more than at any other point in the orbit.

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well yeah, that’s how orbits work. You accelerate down to your periapse, the closest point to the body you’re orbiting, then slow down on the way up to your apoapse, the furthest point. Thus the probe will keep accelerating until it gets to its closest point to the sun.