The closest planet to our Sun, check this image composite taken by the Messenger Spacecraft.
(check the original, larger size image)

NASA’s Messenger spacecraft has given scientists their best view ever of Mercury, the nearest planet to the Sun.

This picture is a global mosaic of images taken by Messenger from orbit around the tiny planet.

The colours are real, but have been enhanced to allow the human eye to discern distinct chemical, mineralogical, and physical regions across the planet’s cratered surface.

The huge circular, tan coloured feature in the upper right of the image is the Caloris basin which was created by a giant impacting comet or asteroid early in the planet’s history.

This ancient basin was subsequently flooded with lava from volcanic activity, in the same way as magma from impacts on the Moon formed the dark plains of the lunar maria.

The light blue and white streaks are lines or ‘rays’ caused by material blasted out of younger craters from more recent impacts.

The darker blue regions are low reflectance terrains which are an active field of investigation for scientists.

Messenger became the first spacecraft to enter orbit around Mercury on March 18, 2011.

As well as providing the first complete map of the planet’s surface, Messenger is also answering key questions about Mercury’s geologic history and composition, its magnetic field, whether it has ices at its poles, and where its tenuous atmosphere comes from.

Mercury

jawdropping

Pretty picture, that’s for sure.

Thanks for posting.

:)

If I was going to core sample any planet it would be mercury. Must be some interesting crystallization where it’s mantle pressures build.

According to Wiki…
Mercury’s mean surface temperature at the equator is 340 K (66.8° C)

Mean surface temperature at her N pole is 200 K (-73° C)

That seems quite extreme

Aquila said:

According to Wiki…
Mercury’s mean surface temperature at the equator is 340 K (66.8° C)

Mean surface temperature at her N pole is 200 K (-73° C)

That seems quite extreme

Yeah I’d pack a parasol.

Postpocelipse said:

Aquila said:

According to Wiki…
Mercury’s mean surface temperature at the equator is 340 K (66.8° C)

Mean surface temperature at her N pole is 200 K (-73° C)

That seems quite extreme

Yeah I’d pack a parasol.

LOLs (an umbrella?)

I was wondering if that temperature extreme would have some dramatic effect on the planets crust, over geographical time frames.

Aquila said:

Postpocelipse said:

Aquila said:

According to Wiki…
Mercury’s mean surface temperature at the equator is 340 K (66.8° C)

Mean surface temperature at her N pole is 200 K (-73° C)

That seems quite extreme

Yeah I’d pack a parasol.

LOLs (an umbrella?)

I was wondering if that temperature extreme would have some dramatic effect on the planets crust, over geographical time frames.

Pressure is pressure when it comes to crystallization of minerals. The interesting bit to be looking at is what is produced when the planets mass is that much denser. With less silicates what stabilises?

Aquila said:

The colours are real, but have been enhanced

Other solar system objects with enhanced colour.

The Moon

Vesta

Phobos

Titan

etc.

Are there predictions for compounds to be found on Mercury Moll?

mollwollfumble said:

Aquila said:

The colours are real, but have been enhanced

Other solar system objects with enhanced colour.

The Moon

Wow…those colours are gorgeous….. :D

Aquila said:

According to Wiki…
Mercury’s mean surface temperature at the equator is 340 K (66.8° C)

Mean surface temperature at her N pole is 200 K (-73° C)

That seems quite extreme

Not extreme.

The solar system object (other than the Sun) with the highest surface temperature is Saturn, because you have to get really far down through the atmosphere to reach the surface. The only other part of the solar system with temperatures approaching that are the volcanos on Io. The volcanos of Earth and the surfaces of Mercury and Venus are very cool by comparison.

But perhaps you mean that the temperature difference between the equator and poles (140° C) is extreme. Let me check the Moon. The temperature on the Moon varies by 247° C, so Mercury isn’t all that extreme there either.

Postpocelipse said:

Are there predictions for compounds to be found on Mercury Moll?

All I say off-the-cuff is that Mercury’s atmosphere is extremely interesting. Mercury’s atmosphere (as measured before Messenger arrived) is mostly atomic oxygen, unlike Earth’s which has a much lower concentration of oxygen. It’s atmosphere is 52% oxygen, 39% sodium, 8% helium, 3% hydrogen and 0.04% calcium.

I have some information about Mercury’s geochemistry on my bookshelf. “Mercury’s crust is largely devoid of heavy elements … Mercury lacks basaltic material that is rich in heavy elements like iron and titanium. The mineral ilmenite that makes up most of the opaque material in the Moon’s maria is largely absent on Mercury … Radar echoes indicate the presence of water-ice near the poles”. That was written before the Messenger spacecraft arrived.

The Messenger spacecraft doesn’t seem to have added much to what we already knew of Mercury’s surface chemistry. Water ice and sulphur are confirmed. The lack of minerals with a high iron content, notably ilmenite and pyroxene, is confirmed. “A likely sodium-bearing mineral on Mercury is the plagioclase feldspar albite (NaAlSi3O8), which is commonly found in many igneous rocks. Albite has a melting temperature of about 1100°C and is therefore resistant to melting even on Mercury’s hot surface. We think that the most abundant sulfide minerals on Mercury’s surface are oldhamite (CaS) and niningerite (MgS), but it is possible that others also exist. These might include the very exotic sounding djerfisherite—K6Na(Fe,Cu,Ni)25S26Cl—or sodium sulfide (Na2S).”

Ask me again if you want to know about Mercury’s mantle and core mineralogy.

39% Na sounds odd. What form is it in?

mollwollfumble said:

Postpocelipse said:

Are there predictions for compounds to be found on Mercury Moll?

All I say off-the-cuff is that Mercury’s atmosphere is extremely interesting. Mercury’s atmosphere (as measured before Messenger arrived) is mostly atomic oxygen, unlike Earth’s which has a much lower concentration of oxygen. It’s atmosphere is 52% oxygen, 39% sodium, 8% helium, 3% hydrogen and 0.04% calcium.

I have some information about Mercury’s geochemistry on my bookshelf. “Mercury’s crust is largely devoid of heavy elements … Mercury lacks basaltic material that is rich in heavy elements like iron and titanium. The mineral ilmenite that makes up most of the opaque material in the Moon’s maria is largely absent on Mercury … Radar echoes indicate the presence of water-ice near the poles”. That was written before the Messenger spacecraft arrived.

The Messenger spacecraft doesn’t seem to have added much to what we already knew of Mercury’s surface chemistry. Water ice and sulphur are confirmed. The lack of minerals with a high iron content, notably ilmenite and pyroxene, is confirmed. “A likely sodium-bearing mineral on Mercury is the plagioclase feldspar albite (NaAlSi3O8), which is commonly found in many igneous rocks. Albite has a melting temperature of about 1100°C and is therefore resistant to melting even on Mercury’s hot surface. We think that the most abundant sulfide minerals on Mercury’s surface are oldhamite (CaS) and niningerite (MgS), but it is possible that others also exist. These might include the very exotic sounding djerfisherite—K6Na(Fe,Cu,Ni)25S26Cl—or sodium sulfide (Na2S).”

Ask me again if you want to know about Mercury’s mantle and core mineralogy.

Please please please!!! Holy cow. I want to mine mercury!!!!

Neutral radicals (ie just Na) and ionic (Na+).

Can only exist like this because the atmosphere is so hot and rarified.

dv said:

Neutral radicals (ie just Na) and ionic (Na+).

Can only exist like this because the atmosphere is so hot and rarified.

Like me

dv said:

Neutral radicals (ie just Na) and ionic (Na+).

Can only exist like this because the atmosphere is so hot and rarified.

Thanks.

The better to determine our ideas relating to this subject, which has not hitherto been sufficiently considered, let us, for a moment, conceive what change would take place in the various substances which compose our earth, if its temperature were suddenly altered. If, for instance, we were suddenly transported into the region of the planet Mercury, where probably the common temperature is much superior to that of boiling water, the water of the earth, and all the other fluids which are susceptible of the gasseous state, at a temperature near to that of boiling water, even quicksilver itself, would become rarified; and all these substances would be changed into permanent aëriform fluids or gasses, which would become part of the new atmosphere. These new species of airs or gasses would mix with those already existing, and certain reciprocal decompositions and new combinations would take place, until such time as all the elective attractions or affinities subsisting amongst all these new and old gasseous substances had operated fully; after which, the elementary principles composing these gasses, being saturated, would remain at rest. We must attend to this, however, that, even in the above hypothetical situation, certain bounds would occur to the evaporation of these substances, produced by that very evaporation itself; for as, in proportion to the increase of elastic fluids, the pressure of the atmosphere would be augmented, as every degree of pressure tends, in some measure, to prevent evaporation, and as even the most evaporable fluids can resist the operation of a very high temperature without evaporating, if prevented by a proportionally stronger compression, water and all other liquids being able to sustain a red heat in Papin’s digester; we must admit, that the new atmosphere would at last arrive at such a degree of weight, that the water which had not hitherto evaporated would cease to boil, and, of consequence, would remain liquid; so that, even upon this supposition, as in all others of the same nature, the increasing gravity of the atmosphere would find certain limits which it could not exceed. We might even extend these reflections greatly farther, and examine what change might be produced in such situations upon stones, salts, and the greater part of the fusible substances which compose the mass of our earth. These would be softened, fused, and changed into fluids, &c.: But these speculations carry me from my object, to which I hasten to return.

dv said:

The better to determine our ideas relating to this subject, which has not hitherto been sufficiently considered, let us, for a moment, conceive what change would take place in the various substances which compose our earth, if its temperature were suddenly altered. If, for instance, we were suddenly transported into the region of the planet Mercury, where probably the common temperature is much superior to that of boiling water, the water of the earth, and all the other fluids which are susceptible of the gasseous state, at a temperature near to that of boiling water, even quicksilver itself, would become rarified; and all these substances would be changed into permanent aëriform fluids or gasses, which would become part of the new atmosphere. These new species of airs or gasses would mix with those already existing, and certain reciprocal decompositions and new combinations would take place, until such time as all the elective attractions or affinities subsisting amongst all these new and old gasseous substances had operated fully; after which, the elementary principles composing these gasses, being saturated, would remain at rest. We must attend to this, however, that, even in the above hypothetical situation, certain bounds would occur to the evaporation of these substances, produced by that very evaporation itself; for as, in proportion to the increase of elastic fluids, the pressure of the atmosphere would be augmented, as every degree of pressure tends, in some measure, to prevent evaporation, and as even the most evaporable fluids can resist the operation of a very high temperature without evaporating, if prevented by a proportionally stronger compression, water and all other liquids being able to sustain a red heat in Papin’s digester; we must admit, that the new atmosphere would at last arrive at such a degree of weight, that the water which had not hitherto evaporated would cease to boil, and, of consequence, would remain liquid; so that, even upon this supposition, as in all others of the same nature, the increasing gravity of the atmosphere would find certain limits which it could not exceed. We might even extend these reflections greatly farther, and examine what change might be produced in such situations upon stones, salts, and the greater part of the fusible substances which compose the mass of our earth. These would be softened, fused, and changed into fluids, &c.: But these speculations carry me from my object, to which I hasten to return.

—-

Wow, what a rap about Mercury, all we need now is a good beat and it is a song.:)

Dropbear said:

dv said:

Neutral radicals (ie just Na) and ionic (Na+).

Can only exist like this because the atmosphere is so hot and rarified.

Like me

claps and whistles for tonights fly-in from Vegas,,,, the wonderful,,,, Drop. It. Baaare

From:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/mercuryfact.html

I see that Mercury’s atmosphere is essentially a vacuum, with a total mass of <~ one tonne!

…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Mercury Atmosphere (Exosphere)

Surface pressure: ~10-15 bar (0.001 picobar)
Average temperature: 440 K (167 C) (590-725 K, sunward side)
Total mass of atmosphere: <~1000 kg

Atmospheric composition:
42% Oxygen (O2),
29% Sodium (Na),
22% Hydrogen (H2),
6% Helium (He),
0.5% Potassium (K),
possible trace amounts of:
Argon (Ar),
Carbon Dioxide (CO2),
Water (H2O),
Nitrogen (N2),
Xenon (Xe),
Krypton (Kr),
Neon (Ne),
Calcium (Ca and Ca+), Magnesium (Mg)

(The atmosphere of Mercury is essentially a vacuum. Compositional values are variable and not well constrained, values from “Mercury”, Vilas, Chapman, and Matthews, eds., University of Arizona Press, 1988)

tauto said:

—-

Wow, what a rap about Mercury, all we need now is a good beat and it is a song.:)

Kinda what I thought.

So, the atmospheric composition likely tells us what’s evaporated from the surface of Mercury. Albiet makes sense then, as a significant component of the surface mineralogy.

Albite

Apologies for the typo.

Michael V said:

Albite

Apologies for the typo.

shakes head in disgust

stomps off

sibeen said:

Michael V said:

Albite

Apologies for the typo.

shakes head in disgust

stomps off

Hey, I made an error. I admitted the error. I corrected the error. I apologised for the error. All before anybody noticed.

Yet the engineer (true to his type) throws a tanty.

:-)~P

albeit.

Michael V said:

sibeen said:

Michael V said:

Albite

Apologies for the typo.

shakes head in disgust

stomps off

Hey, I made an error. I admitted the error. I corrected the error. I apologised for the error. All before anybody noticed.

Yet the engineer (true to his type) throws a tanty.

:-)~P

I must admit a failing that I still have from my management years.

There’s some albite on Mercury

dv said:

There’s some albite on Mercury

It’d float.

Wahey

Michael V said:

Atmospheric composition:
42% Oxygen (O2),
29% Sodium (Na),
22% Hydrogen (H2),
6% Helium (He),
0.5% Potassium (K),

Whoa, that’s changed. In the edition of the book “Planetary sciences” that I have it’s only 3% hydrogen. Oh, I wonder if my figures are composition by MASS whereas yours are composition by NUMBER of atoms. 22% hydrogen by number of atoms translates to 1.7% by mass.

mollwollfumble said:

Michael V said:

Atmospheric composition:
42% Oxygen (O2),
29% Sodium (Na),
22% Hydrogen (H2),
6% Helium (He),
0.5% Potassium (K),

Whoa, that’s changed. In the edition of the book “Planetary sciences” that I have it’s only 3% hydrogen. Oh, I wonder if my figures are composition by MASS whereas yours are composition by NUMBER of atoms. 22% hydrogen by number of atoms translates to 1.7% by mass.

Would the He have to be bonded with the K to be retained in mercury’s atmosphere?

As I understand it density defines the boundaries of stability over mass. Mercury should have stable compounds unique to it’s barycenter?

Postpocelipse said:

As I understand it density defines the boundaries of stability over mass. Mercury should have stable compounds unique to it’s barycenter?

Density is the number of things for a given space

Dropbear said:

Postpocelipse said:

As I understand it density defines the boundaries of stability over mass. Mercury should have stable compounds unique to it’s barycenter?

Density is the number of things for a given space

I refer to Mercury having a different barycenter potential to Earth’s. This should provide an alternate balance of stable isotopes While I expect the disparity to be one of minimal displacement, I do expect there to be a degree of elements found to be stable on Mercury that are not on Earth.

Postpocelipse said:

Dropbear said:

Postpocelipse said:

As I understand it density defines the boundaries of stability over mass. Mercury should have stable compounds unique to it’s barycenter?

Density is the number of things for a given space

I refer to Mercury having a different barycenter potential to Earth’s. This should provide an alternate balance of stable isotopes While I expect the disparity to be one of minimal displacement, I do expect there to be a degree of elements found to be stable on Mercury that are not on Earth.

Uh-huh