New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

Phobos · 2002-10-02 18:08:44

*Proof of the Big Bang theory - ?
http://www.sciencenews.org/20020928/fob1.asp
--Cindy

I remember reading somewhere that the cosmic background radiation would become visibly blue once you reached a certain percentage of the speed of light. Just thought I'd share that.

Palomar · 2002-10-04 14:54:22

*Yay!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2290005.stm
--Cindy

*About these moons believed to have water: Is it possible the water flows freely under the surface crust of ice? In one of his novels, Sir Arthur C. Clarke imagines that the water within Europa flows freely, thanks to "smokers" in the depths resulting from volcanic activity near the core...or something along those lines. It's been a while since I read that novel. ???

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's not more likely the water found on those moons is frozen solid all the way through. Molten cores wouldn't be enough to keep the water in a nonfrozen state, would it? Our oceans remain unfrozen thanks in some part to our thick atmosphere keeping warmth within its protectiveness...which the moons referred to in the article don't have, obviously. If the water on those moons is frozen solid, there won't be any life there...obviously.

--Cindy

Phobos · 2002-10-04 22:00:07

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's not more likely the water found on those moons is frozen solid all the way through. Molten cores wouldn't be enough to keep the water in a nonfrozen state, would it? Our oceans remain unfrozen thanks in some part to our thick atmosphere keeping warmth within its protectiveness...which the moons referred to in the article don't have, obviously. If the water on those moons is frozen solid, there won't be any life there...obviously.

It's possible that the strong tidal forces caused by Jupiter would generate enough heat to keep the interior of Europa liquid. The way the surface is cracked in some places has led a lot of geologists to think there's liquid water beneath the ice but who knows. I hope there's an ocean under there. It would be an experience seeing the landscape of an alien ocean.

clark · 2002-10-07 11:10:44

Please follow the link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2306945.stm

Looks like Planet X has been officialized.

Only a tenth the size of Earth.

Josh Cryer · 2002-10-07 16:17:14

Pluto is only formally considered a planet, it's not really considered a planet by the scientific community as a whole. It's a nostalgia sort of thing. So this wouldn't qualify as Planet X.

clark · 2002-10-07 16:23:59

Maybe it wouldn't qualify according to the Elitist Planet Natzi's.

And the Appalachains are nuthin but over-sized hills.

Why does it always have to be about size Josh?

Josh Cryer · 2002-10-07 16:30:49

Hey, I didn't say anything about what I thought it should be considered! I actually think Ceres should be upgraded to a planet. And that any relatively large spherical object that doesn't orbit a planet, should be considered a planet.

We'd have 12 offical planets if that were the case, and such criteria was used, though.

clark · 2002-10-07 16:38:08

Okay, now you want MOONS to be considered planets! I wish you would just make up your mind, ugh.

I always wondered about why their was such division in deciding on wether or not a planet should be a planet based on "size"- it's not like the damn things get a tax ride off. I wonder if anyone can shed some light on what appears to me to be solely an academia based debate?

I wonder if this "celestial object" would have any affect on the asteroids around there- it might be a nice piece in a gravitional equation to explain periodic bombardment of the inner system- maybe this small whatever is slinging rocks at us- perhaps it is in fact part of the Axis of evil! Perhaps we should declare a preemptive strike.... wait, sorry, wrong channel.

Adrian · 2002-10-07 16:57:05

I can imagine that one 'advantage' of having an object named as a planet is that it'll receive more research attention. So if some scientist wanted to have a good look at Ceres with some probes, he (or she) might want to kick up a fuss about how it's a planet and deserves planetary-sized attention

Josh Cryer · 2002-10-07 17:49:11

Ceres isn't a moon! Ceres orbits Sol, not any planet in particular. I just think being spherical is a good qualification. If it's spherical and it orbits the sun, it should be considered a planet. Now, I would say 100km across is a good minimum size limit, but since gravity tends to turn large masses into spheres all by itself, such a size limit shouldn't be necessary for this definition, and any unique objects under 100km that are spherical could be included.

I believe academia doesn't even have a solid definition for ?planet.? They just want to preclude Kuiper Belt Objects (KBO) as planets entirely, and it does make some sense to do so. ?Planet? would just be defined by ?Any large spherical objects that orbit a sun on the orbital plane, which were created at the birth of the system.? This would make Ceres a planet (as far as I know), and take away Pluto's status, since Pluto is in the KBO, and isn't on the orbital plane.

Palomar · 2002-10-16 22:53:44

*Black hole confirmed in our Milky Way galaxy:

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl....k_holes

--Cindy

P.S.: Light can't escape from these things...that gives me the willies.

Nida · 2002-10-17 10:47:48

Are they really HOLES though? Do they REALLY lead to somewhere's else? Maybe they are just supersuperdense lumps of matter, you know, like a lump of rock.

mfrieden · 2002-10-17 12:15:14

Nida: That's what a black hole is. A black hole is just a clump of matter so dense that nothing known to man can escape. There's no implication of anything on the other side.

Palomar · 2002-10-20 11:28:21

*I mentioned this guy -- Craig -- in a different thread. He's very well read and informed on many topics. He and his wife know about the Mars Society...I wish they would join! Anyway, here's his comments on the latest solar discovery; this guy is just TOO cool:

"Now, it IS true that there is another "planet" in our solar system,
discovered just last month as a matter of fact, called Quaoar.

http://www.spacetoday.org/SolSys/KuiperBelt/Quaoar.html

It is very small. Smaller than Pluto in fact, and Pluto is so small that
some scientists have expressed scepticism over it being considered a true
"planet" to begin with. But I don't give a damn about those scientists.
I'm pretty hip to this newfound stellar neighbor, because I like the name.
Quaoar. Quayyy-ooaaar.

Very cool name. It has a certain '30s pulp Sci-Fi sound to it. INVADERS
FROM THE PLANET QUAOAR! Yeah! Break out the 40 watt-range plasma-rifles,
and strap me into my neutronium-plated Rocket Sled! You know, the big red
sleek one with the huge tailfins!

Quaoar. Much better than that embarrassing "Uranus", I'll tell you!

Craig"

Phobos · 2002-10-20 13:51:50

Quaoar. Much better than that embarrassing "Uranus", I'll tell you!

Did the word "anus" exist back in William Herschel's time or is that a more recent term? I sometimes wonder because I just can't see someone naming, or shall I say, abusing their new discovery with such a label unless they have a twisted and dirty sense of humor (hey Mozard did so who knows .) Anyways, I wonder how many other big planetoids are floating around out there in the Kuiper belt. Some astronomers think there could be dozens of Pluto sized objects out there awaiting discovery.

Palomar · 2002-10-20 17:55:17

Quaoar. Much better than that embarrassing "Uranus", I'll tell you!
Did the word "anus" exist back in William Herschel's time or is that a more recent term? I sometimes wonder because I just can't see someone naming, or shall I say, abusing their new discovery with such a label unless they have a twisted and dirty sense of humor (hey Mozard did so who knows .) Anyways, I wonder how many other big planetoids are floating around out there in the Kuiper belt. Some astronomers think there could be dozens of Pluto sized objects out there awaiting discovery.

*From _Dorland's Medical Dictionary_:

Anus: L.; said originally to have been derived from an Anglo-Saxon word meaning "to sit."

I've often wondered why it was named as it was. I don't know of any mythological figure named "Uranus"...unless I'm reeeeeallly rusty on the old mythology stuff I used to read. ???

--Cindy

mfrieden · 2002-10-20 19:30:02

Uranus was the god of the heavens in greek mythology. IIRC, Zeus was his grandson.. but I could be way off. Anyway, it goes along with the naming scheme for the rest of the planets (ignoring the fact that all other planets use Roman names instead).

Palomar · 2002-10-29 09:49:37

*"Middle-weight" black hole [so now they're going to be giving belts to these things?!]

http://www.space.com/science....17.html

---

*Something can go "faster than light" - ?

http://www.space.com/science....17.html

---

*"Missing link" black holes...what will they think of next? These black holes seem to be very diverse creatures!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2268755.stm

---

*Hubble discovers a "new kind of black hole."

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20020 … khole.html

---

*Hubble discovers black holes in unexpected places [perhaps there's a conspiracy amongst black holes to do the rest of the universe in?! <wink>]:

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0209/18blackhole/

--Cindy

Palomar · 2002-11-05 14:27:34

*Now here's a reeeallly interesting story [Apparently it's against Mr. Sibrel's religion to claim that people have actually walked on the moon]:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....moon_dc

turbo · 2002-11-05 15:08:14

Methinks Mr. Sibrel doth wear his anti-NASA mole metal helm with a tautness that doth exceed the allowable compression of yon grey matter.

George H · 2002-11-05 17:30:08

*Now here's a reeeallly interesting story [Apparently it's against Mr. Sibrel's religion to claim that people have actually walked on the moon]:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....moon_dc

Hey Cindy sweetie! LOL!!! Buzz Aldrin gave that dude a sock in the chops.....WELL DONE!! Ya know, any mission to Mars'll make conspiracy theorist's go nuts & make all kinds of denails, like they've been doing with the lunar missions!

AltToWar · 2002-11-05 18:35:31

I don't think the internet exists.

Palomar · 2002-11-06 14:47:28

*Awhile back, Phobos asked what zodiacal light is:

http://www.space.com/spacewatch/zodiaca … 21101.html

Phobos · 2002-11-06 20:04:08

The next time I go camping or visit a very dark site I'm going to make a point to observe the zodiacal light. I kept my eyes peeled for the aurora borealis when it was putting on a good show unusually southward but never saw it even though a lot of Texans apparently got a good view of it.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#101 2002-10-02 18:08:44

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#102 2002-10-04 14:54:22

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#103 2002-10-04 22:00:07

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#104 2002-10-07 11:10:44

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#105 2002-10-07 16:17:14

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#106 2002-10-07 16:23:59

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#107 2002-10-07 16:30:49

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#108 2002-10-07 16:38:08

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#109 2002-10-07 16:57:05

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#110 2002-10-07 17:49:11

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#111 2002-10-16 22:53:44

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#112 2002-10-17 10:47:48

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#113 2002-10-17 12:15:14

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#114 2002-10-20 11:28:21

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#115 2002-10-20 13:51:50

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#116 2002-10-20 17:55:17

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#117 2002-10-20 19:30:02

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#118 2002-10-29 09:49:37

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#119 2002-11-05 14:27:34

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#120 2002-11-05 15:08:14

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#121 2002-11-05 17:30:08

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#122 2002-11-05 18:35:31

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#123 2002-11-06 14:47:28

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

#124 2002-11-06 20:04:08

Re: New Discoveries - Extraplanetary, deep space, etc.

Board footer