The June issue of Planetary and Space Science (Volume 260) includes:
Song, Z. Liu, Z. Quan, R. Three-dimensional simulation of surface charging in meteorite craters on rotating asteroids Article 106089 .2025.106089
Slyusarev, I. G. et al. Opposition effect of M-type asteroids Art. 106103 .2025.106103
Reshetnyk, V. Luk’yanyk, I. Skorov, Y. et al. Key structural characteristics of porous layers in diffusion modelling: A study on polydispersity, shape, and hierarchy Art. 106078 .2025.106078
Not to feed the “electric universe” trolls, but… asteroids aren’t inert, passive objects. They are constantly bombarded by cosmic rays, micrometeorites, solar energetic particles, and the Sun’s unfiltered UV. This results in space weathering, micro-forces against micro-gravity, and, it turns out, static electricity, just like your carpet on a dry winter day. Song et al. consider this ionization.
M-type asteroids… so many questions. Among other things, there’s the problem of distinguishing the members of the X-complex: E-, M-, and P-type asteroids all resemble each other somewhat. Their spectra all look mildly red, less red than S-complex, but redder than C-complex. How do we tell the M-asteroids from the rest? Does an iron-rich makeup help us? For planetary radar, yes, but what about other telescopic investigations? Slyusarev et al. try to bring more tools to the problem.
As I’ve mentioned, the issue of comet activity (a multi-faceted issue) did not get solved by sending the Rosetta orbiter, much less the disappointing Philae lander. Just what, exactly, is happening in a comet when it warms in sunlight, and begins shedding mass? Comets are mostly empty space- the amount of pore space is about the same as everything else put together. All approaches to comet activity must take this porosity into account. Reshetnyk et al. do just that: study the issue of filtering through pores.