NASA: Icy object past Pluto looks like reddish snowman

January 2, 2019 by Marcia Dunn
NASA: Icy object past Pluto looks like reddish snowman
This image made available by NASA on Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019 shows images with separate color and detail information, and a composited image of both, showing Ultima Thule, about 1 billion miles beyond Pluto. The New Horizons spacecraft encountered it on Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2019. (NASA via AP)

A NASA spacecraft 4 billion miles from Earth yielded its first close-up pictures Wednesday of the most distant celestial object ever explored, depicting what looks like a reddish snowman.

Ultima Thule, as the small, icy object has been dubbed, was found to consist of two fused-together spheres, one of them three times bigger than the other, extending about 21 miles (33 kilometers) in length.

NASA's New Horizons, the spacecraft that sent back pictures of Pluto 3½ years ago, swept past the ancient, mysterious object early on New Year's Day. It is 1 billion miles (1.6 billion kilometers) beyond Pluto.

On Tuesday, based on early, fuzzy images taken the day before, scientists said Ultima Thule resembled a bowling pin. But when better, closer pictures arrived, a new consensus emerged Wednesday.

"The bowling pin is gone. It's a snowman!" lead scientist Alan Stern informed the world from Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory , home to Mission Control in Laurel. The bowling pin image is "so 2018," joked Stern, who is with the Southwest Research Institute.

The celestial body was nicknamed Ultima Thule—meaning "beyond the known world"—before scientists could say for sure whether it was one object or two. With the arrival of the photos, they are now calling the bigger sphere Ultima and the smaller one Thule.

Thule is estimated to be 9 miles (14 kilometers) across, while Ultima is thought to be 12 miles (19 kilometers).

NASA: Icy object past Pluto looks like reddish snowman
This image made available by NASA on Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019 shows the size and shape of the object Ultima Thule, about 1 billion miles beyond Pluto. The New Horizons spacecraft encountered it on Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2019. (NASA via AP)

Scientist Jeff Moore of NASA's Ames Research Center said the two spheres formed when icy, pebble-size pieces coalesced in space billions of years ago. Then the spheres spiraled closer to each other until they gently touched—as slowly as parking a car here on Earth at just a mile or two per hour—and stuck together.

Despite the slender connection point, the two lobes are "soundly bound" together, according to Moore.

Scientists have ascertained that the object takes about 15 hours to make a full rotation. If it were spinning fast—say, one rotation every three or four hours—the two spheres would rip apart.

Stern noted that the team has received less than 1 percent of all the data stored aboard New Horizons. It will take nearly two years to get it all.

The two-lobed object is what is known as a "contact binary." It is the first contact binary NASA has ever explored. Having formed 4.5 billion years ago, when the solar system taking shape, it is also the most primitive object seen up close like this.

About the size of a city, Ultima Thule has a mottled appearance and is the color of dull brick, probably because of the effects of radiation bombarding the icy surface, with brighter and darker regions.

Both spheres are similar in color, while the barely perceptible neck connecting the two lobes is noticeably less red, probably because of particles falling down the steep slopes into that area.

NASA: Icy object past Pluto looks like reddish snowman
This image from video made available by NASA on Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2019 shows a diagram describing the size and shape of the object Ultima Thule, about 1 billion miles beyond Pluto. The New Horizons spacecraft encountered it on Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2019. (NASA via AP)

So far, no moons or rings have been detected, and there were no obvious impact craters in the latest photos, though there were a few apparent "divots" and suggestions of hills and ridges, scientists said. Better images should yield definitive answers in the days and weeks ahead.

Clues about the surface composition of Ultima Thule should start rolling in by Thursday. Scientists believe the icy exterior is probably a mix of water, methane and nitrogen, among other things.

The snowman picture was taken a half-hour before the spacecraft's closest approach early Tuesday, from a distance of about 18,000 miles (28,000 kilometers).

Scientists consider Ultima Thule an exquisite time machine that should provide clues to the origins of our solar system.

It's neither a comet nor an asteroid, according to Stern, but rather "a primordial planetesimal." Unlike comets and other objects that have been altered by the sun over time, Ultima Thule is in its pure, original state: It's been in the deep-freeze Kuiper Belt on the fringes of our solar system from the beginning.

"This thing was born somewhere between 99 percent and 99.9 percent of the way back to T-zero (liftoff) in our solar system, really amazing," Stern said. He added: "We've never seen anything like this before. It's not fish or fowl. It's something that's completely different."

Still, he said, when all the data comes in, "there are going to be mysteries of Ultima Thule that we can't figure out."

Explore further: Pluto explorer ushering in new year at more distant world

Related Stories

NASA spaceship closes in on distant world

December 28, 2018

NASA's unmanned New Horizons spacecraft is closing in on its historic New Year's flyby target, the most distant world ever studied, a frozen relic of the solar system some four billion miles (6.4 billion kilometers) away.

Recommended for you

Coffee-based colloids for direct solar absorption

March 22, 2019

Solar energy is one of the most promising resources to help reduce fossil fuel consumption and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions to power a sustainable future. Devices presently in use to convert solar energy into thermal ...

EPA adviser is promoting harmful ideas, scientists say

March 22, 2019

The Trump administration's reliance on industry-funded environmental specialists is again coming under fire, this time by researchers who say that Louis Anthony "Tony" Cox Jr., who leads a key Environmental Protection Agency ...

78 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

cantdrive85
2 / 5 (26) Jan 02, 2019
Another "mysterious" bilobate object. Their explanation that they gently crashed into each other is the typical magical pie in the sky claptrap the plasma ignoramuses must resort to while applying their gravity only nonsense to actual data. Pathetic!
wduckss
3.9 / 5 (14) Jan 02, 2019
"The team says that the two spheres likely joined as early as 99 percent of the way back to the formation of the solar system, colliding no faster than two cars in a fender-bender." http://pluto.jhua...20190102

One should make a distinction between collisions, in which the orbits of objects or systems are different, and fusions, in which objects share the same orbit and gravity causes a soft fusion of objects (for example, 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko). American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics.
http://www.scienc...80603.13
or my site https://www.svemi...rti.com/
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (7) Jan 02, 2019
pathetic
So youre saying its like when you rub a balloon on your pants and then stick it on the wall.

I dont see a wall.

Hey Im just fucking with ya sparky.
SkyLight
3.9 / 5 (19) Jan 02, 2019
@cd - You talk about pie? - Well you guys are the world experts in the subject, since you get so much of the stuff flung at your imbecile faces for continually spouting unscientific woo-shite.
granville583762
3.1 / 5 (12) Jan 02, 2019
Ultima Thule two icy planetesimal's as old as the sun

Approximately 12 and 8miles in diameter
these two planetesimal's grew from grains in collisions
they are not exactly as old as the sun
as they could have just recently joined
the neck on these two planetesimal's is compressed
these two icy planets are harder than iron
however they joined a great deal of force was required to crush this hard as nail material into one another
it is not gravity holding this material together it frozen Cometary material that is holding these planetesimal's together
MrBojangles
3.4 / 5 (22) Jan 02, 2019
Another "mysterious" bilobate object. Their explanation that they gently crashed into each other is the typical magical pie in the sky claptrap the plasma ignoramuses must resort to while applying their gravity only nonsense to actual data. Pathetic!


OK, please show us, using actual data, how these two objects came to be one. Provide a model and explain the equations used to generate it. How did plasma and electricity cause this?

We both know that will never happen. Pathetic.
wduckss
3.7 / 5 (7) Jan 02, 2019
@granville583762
Matter attracts matter. Matter is not running away from the matter.
These two bodies they shared it's the orbit. Difference for bonding gives gravity or attractive force.
rrwillsj
3 / 5 (5) Jan 02, 2019
oh cant, if you are going to go all stupid on us? Here's a treat for you. A frozen treat!

This is Frosty, The Snowman. Seeking a refuge from the Earth warming up.
An anthropophotogenic poster boy for the Anthropocene Era.

That silly name chosen for an object not even out of the Kruiper Belt? Ultima Thule?
Let's just make this easy.

The thousands (minimal) of "Ultima Thules" yet to be discovered? Let's just number them. Simplify the process for the popular sport of coming up with stupid-sounding clickbait headlines.
JRi
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 02, 2019
So Yuri Gagarin was not the first man in space after all.
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (18) Jan 02, 2019
So youre saying its like when you rub a balloon on your pants and then stick it on the wall

No, however spheroids and bilobate spheroids have been shown to form in plasma discharges.

https://ieeexplor.../4287076

Who'da thunk it, actual science with real experiments and real results ILO pie in the sky speculation.
granville583762
4.3 / 5 (8) Jan 02, 2019
Russian ice breaker captains in the arctic read the ice flows
wduckss> @granville583762
Matter attracts matter. Matter is not running away from the matter.
These two bodies they shared it's the orbit. Difference for bonding gives gravity or attractive force.

Gravity is holding them in orbit, if you blew on them they would float away and if the surface were covered in dust the gravity is so weak the dust would float on the surface
When two comets collide the ice melts then refreezes holding them together every time the ice melts an refreezes with collisions the surface gets harder and harder
Russian ice breaker captains in the arctic read the ice flows as they cannot break ice that has frozen and refrozen
So you can imagine how hard the comets are
MrBojangles
4 / 5 (24) Jan 02, 2019
No, however spheroids and bilobate spheroids have been shown to form in plasma discharges.

https://ieeexplor.../4287076

Who'da thunk it, actual science with real experiments and real results ILO pie in the sky speculation.


I click the link, and under introduction I see "Vemasat research institute..." A Google search of that "research institute" provides nothing but links to C J Ransom, Thunderbolts, and Velikovsky.

I'll take pie in the sky speculation over your "actual science" any day.
What a joke...
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (16) Jan 02, 2019
I'll take pie in the sky speculation over your "actual science" any day.
What a joke...

I know you will, otherwise you wouldn't so ardently defend maths based pseudoscientific claptrap and a religiously based creation story as you do in spite of the fact there is laboratory based experiments that show a real repeatable process to create such things. But this is not surprising as much of the astrophysical community completely shuns "actual science" in favor of hypothetical faerie tales.
Tessellatedtessellations
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 02, 2019
So youre saying its like when you rub a balloon on your pants and then stick it on the wall

No, however spheroids and bilobate spheroids have been shown to form in plasma discharges.

https://ieeexplor.../4287076

Who'da thunk it, actual science with real experiments and real results ILO pie in the sky speculation.


I'm part of the conspiracy that reality is real, so I flushed the evidence that bilobate spheroids have been shown to form in fecal discharges. If they can form in my intestines obviously modern gravitational and plasma physics is completely wrong and must yield to BM theory.
SkyLight
4.5 / 5 (15) Jan 02, 2019
@cd
the fact there is laboratory based experiments that show a real repeatable process to create such things
Yes, there ARE such experiments, and they DO show that spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids can be formed.

However, such spheroids are typically very small: on the order of much less than a millimeter in diameter. Such spheroids can often be seen as occasional sputtered particles when welding metals, for instance.

The part which you guys ALWAYS get wrong is assuming, and then stating as if it were unassailable fact, that such processes can be arbitrarily scaled up in size to match the woolly predictions of your rug-flying lunatic leaders like Thornhill.

No proof is offered to support such conjectures; no means is offered by which anybody outside of your Electric Church can run the experiments for themselves, run the numbers, and check the veracity of your claims. On that basis alone, the empty claims made by the EU do not, and cannot, count as science.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
5 / 5 (7) Jan 02, 2019
What an energetic showman Alan Stern is! The flyby is interesting and they got more data out of it than earlier expected (the late stage accretion dynamics) but as for scope the recent ALMA data is likely more revealing on system formation. (As they captured examples of systems with wide planetary zones and gas giants like ours.)

So more contact binaries and reddish hue reminding of Sagan's radiation induced organic "tholins"!? Also pretty good data on "pristine conditions". (More or less independent constraints of orbit elements from disperse disk, low energy contact binary from disperse disk, unresolved small or no craters from disperse disk, presumably organic tholins from outer disk processes billions of years of undisturbed radiation exposure.) Nice to see the comet data (and old astrobiology) being predictive on the Kuiper Belt Objects! Hopefully the project will get their future 3d pass and make sure/upset the current data.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
5 / 5 (11) Jan 02, 2019
I'll take pie in the sky speculation over your "actual science" any day.
What a joke...

I know you will


ROTFL! And so will everyone else. Especially since you yourself provided the data that you speculate without any data or presumption of science, and based on conspiracy theory to boot. Just give it up, you just made yourself a laughing stock (again).
wduckss
3 / 5 (2) Jan 03, 2019
@granville583762
Gravitation is the only force in the universe that attracts the body. Winds (radiation) with Sun do not lift dust from the moon or sand from the desert on Mars, the dust does not float on the surface. All matter is gathered through the action of gravity.
"One should make a distinction between collisions, in which the orbits of objects or systems are different, and fusions, in which objects share the same orbit and gravity causes a soft fusion of objects." I. The orbit is different, II. The orbit is the same.
V4Vendicar
4.5 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
Can'tDriveTooStupid is right. These contact binaries must have been assembled by space aliens.

Another "mysterious" bilobate object. Their explanation that they gently crashed into each other is the typical magical pie in the sky claptrap the plasma ignoramuses must resort to while applying their gravity only nonsense to actual data. Pathetic!


It's all part of the Global Warming Conspiracy among all of the worlds lying scientists.
V4Vendicar
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019

"No, however spheroids and bilobate spheroids have been shown to form in plasma discharges. "

And from rectal discharges as well. You produce a lot of those Can'tDrive.

V4Vendicar
3.8 / 5 (10) Jan 03, 2019
"But this is not surprising as much of the astrophysical community completely shuns "actual science" in favor of hypothetical faerie tales." - CantDriveTooStupid

Ya, just like those lying Climatologists, Biologists, Volcanologists an the proctologists who are wondering how your entire head was inserted well past your shoulders.
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
We both know that will never happen. Pathetic

How does your fillet of sole taste?
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019
Yes, there ARE such experiments, and they DO show that spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids can be formed.

You only proved even morons can acknowledge the obvious.
that such processes can be arbitrarily scaled up in size to match the woolly predictions of your rug-flying lunatic leaders like Thornhill.

Lab observation has shown plasma processes are scalable over 13 orders of magnitude, well within the scales proposed.
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019
*Lab and in situ observations*....

Left some verbiage out.
SkyLight
4 / 5 (12) Jan 03, 2019
Lab observation has shown plasma processes are scalable over 13 orders of magnitude
And these observations are published where? (Don't even bother to mention the various EU websites, youtube, or the IEEE publications).

Only a fool would subscribe to such a notion, which completely sidesteps considerations of mass and composition of materials undergoing sputtering. Metals and rocks can be made to sputter particles on the order of millimeters or less - viz. metal welding, glassy droplets forming during volcanic eruptions: processes occurring at well over a thousand Kelvin. But ices and rock at temperatures of a few Kelvin? - ain't going to happen, even IF there were huge electrical discharges out there. Which there aren't.

This is where you guys leave reality behind, throw scientific caution to the wind, and make preposterous claims without any attempt at proof.

Gravity has formed these spheroids from icy rubble, has brought them into contact, and holds them together.

wduckss
1 / 5 (5) Jan 03, 2019
@ SkyLight
"And these observations are published where? (Don't even bother to mention the various EU websites, youtube, or the IEEE publications)."

Classical racism.
Your place is on the extreme right forums. It's not for you science.
Evidence does not know national affiliation.
wailuku1943
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019
@ SkyLight
"And these observations are published where? (Don't even bother to mention the various EU websites, youtube, or the IEEE publications)."

Classical racism.
Your place is on the extreme right forums. It's not for you science.
Evidence does not know national affiliation.

Um, "EU" does not stand for European Union in this context.

It stands for "Electric Universe." The less said about that EU, the better.
theredpill
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019
"I'll take pie in the sky speculation "

True of most of mainstream supporters. The sequence goes like this: Pie in the sky speculation - derive it mathematically - Call it a theory based on evidence ( the mathematical kind, not the physical of course) - get your friends to check the math ("peer" review) - publish the pie - watch a bunch of star trek wannabes defend the pie as though it is a real pie.

Theredpill re-reads the thread after reading about dark matter heating and has his second ROTFLMAO moment courtesy of physorg (and the "educated") in the last ten minutes.

"Gravity has formed these spheroids from icy rubble, has brought them into contact, and holds them together."

You do realize we observe 2 locations where, if the above were true, we would actually watch it right? You do realize we don't and never have right? Oh..yeah...pie in the sky. Perhaps a smidgen of dark matter ice cream to go with your pie today?

SkyLight
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 03, 2019
And I will bet my last penny that redpill has produced nothing, invented nothing, discovered nothing, helped not a single person to improve his or her life, can claim nothing but snide and smug retorts to those going about their scientific endeavours.

He falls into the nowadays lamentably classic error of imagining that - just because the extreme edges of scientific exploration show weaknesses (as any scientist would tell you anyway) - the rest of the math-based scientific methodologies must also be called into question. Which is a pathetically stupid and ill-informed position to take and which, if followed to its' logical conclusion, would have us back in the caves banging rocks together.

I'll put my money on the table to say that he is an ineffectual, know-nothing, achieve-nothing, burger-flipping windbag. Same goes for @cd and his ragged band of flint-knappers and pith-ball enthusiasts.
MrBojangles
3.3 / 5 (7) Jan 03, 2019
You do realize we observe 2 locations where, if the above were true, we would actually watch it right? You do realize we don't and never have right?


Right, show where we've seen plasma fuse together two celestial bodies, or whatever you believe is going on. Direct observation with the math behind it please. I'll venture to guess you cannot produce anything because you've never been able to across countless articles and forum comments. The only thing you're capable of doing is acting counter-culture like some emo kid that wants to challenge everything for the sake of doing so because "F the man." You're so egotistical you've convinced yourself you're smarter than the brightest minds of the world.

Take a shower, wash the Cheetos dust and weeks of grime off yourself, and then throw open your shades. When your eyes have adjusted to daylight, consider going outside for a walk. You don't have to be a cretin. Society will accept you when you start acting like a mature adult.
wailuku1943
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 03, 2019
. . . his ragged band of flint-knappers. . . .


Hey! Flint-knapping is very difficult! You have to be able to visualize the point inside the core, and release it from flinty bondage with deft strikes.

I'm not sure that redpill and CD are capable of that. I figure they're good for Oldowan tools, nothing past that.
Captain Stumpy
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 03, 2019
@Sky
I'm with @wailuku1943 on this one - flint knapping isn't as easy as people think!

.

.

@wailuku1943
I'm not sure that redpill and CD are capable of that. I figure they're good for Oldowan tools, nothing past that.
Hmm... ya might be giving them considerable undeserved credit, IMHO
theredpill
2.6 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
It's OK guys, your limitations are nothing to be ashamed of, not true for the compulsion you all have to repeatedly demonstrate them. Some people only need to be told what the truth is and they will embrace it, decry anyone who doesn't and repeat it as though their lives have some sort of meaning through spreading it....then there are those who think, understand, test and confirm whether something is actually true before taking such bold actions towards others. We love you devout guys...you make us look good in debate ( sadly that means you make yourselves look like...yourselves).

Skylight forgot what saturns rings are made of, and apparently is willing to make blind bets with all of his 4$ about what he thinks he knows. Bojangles...LMAO, the name says it all, the new Hawaiian knows geography, (and apparently that's about it)

And Captainstumpy - - the posterchild for the bold and brainless.

Happy new year chuckleheads!
MrBojangles
3.3 / 5 (7) Jan 03, 2019
then there are those who think


lol
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Jan 03, 2019
The most interesting reason that I would consider for returning to this little snowman?? Would be a probe that could drill & retrieve an icecore for inspection.

To ascertain the age of "Frosty".
If billions of years was confirmed?

Then the important work would be to figure out how-in-the-hell it maintained a stable, circular orbit, over that span of time?

Without any interference from Planet 9 or X? Or, from other stars randomly intersecting the same space/time as the Solar System?
wailuku1943
5 / 5 (3) Jan 03, 2019
r the new Hawaiian knows geography, (and apparently that's about it)


Talk about proving my point. Geography? Right. Try paleoanthropology -- oh no! too many syllables for you.
snoosebaum
5 / 5 (4) Jan 03, 2019
just relax and enjoy the moment , how lucky we are to see such a thing
cantdrive85
2.6 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
The most interesting reason that I would consider for returning to this little snowman?? Would be a probe that could drill & retrieve an icecore for inspection

Just like 67P perhaps? Ya know, the "ice" that was "too hard" for the ice drill. Utter fail of dirty snowball hypothesis yet still closely held as any proper religiousite should do.
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
Yes, there ARE such experiments, and they DO show that spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids can be formed.

At least you acknowledge that simple fact. To most, this would be a hint.
on the order of much less than a millimeter in diameter.

Just five of those observed thirteen orders of magnitude would take you to about 10km, just about right.
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
Don't even bother to mention the various IEEE publications

Right, don't refer to experts in the field of plasma physics. That sounds like a good plan! Besides, if one ignores empirical science and the volumes of literature it is easy to conjure up all sorts of pseudoscientific faerie tales. Just look to astrophysics as proof.
MrBojangles
3 / 5 (8) Jan 03, 2019
Just five of those observed thirteen orders of magnitude would take you to about 10km, just about right.


I'll play the game you guys love playing when it comes to any article regarding black holes or dark matter - where is the direct observational evidence of sputtering on a large scale? Where have we observed this happening? This should be happening all around us all the time, yet we've never seen it. Curious.
Solon
1 / 5 (5) Jan 04, 2019
All objects in space will acquire some degree of surface charge from ionising radiation, so gravity could well bring two objects to within a certain distance of each other, but at some point the charge will equalise and then the repulsive forces come into play, and they are very powerful.

Electric Force Example
http://hyperphysi...for.html

As for the red being due to tholins, that is debated among scientists as the spectral line has 3 possible explanations.
yep
1.7 / 5 (6) Jan 04, 2019
where is the direct observational evidence of sputtering on a large scale? Where have we observed this happening? This should be happening all around us all the time, yet we've never seen it. Curious.

Most of you consensus stooges are way behind the times. Knowing everything makes you incapable of learning new material. Science has shown it is hard to learn new truths as most default to the old belief system regardless the current facts.
Here you go cup cake pay attention.
https://www.resea...trometry
Da Schneib
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 04, 2019
Good deal; they bagged Pluto, this is bonus.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (8) Jan 04, 2019
Meanwhile, looks like two planetesimals that collided and stuck together to me. Nice evidence for current theories of accretion of planets from planetesimals.
MrBojangles
3.2 / 5 (9) Jan 04, 2019
Most of you consensus stooges are way behind the times. Knowing everything makes you incapable of learning new material. Science has shown it is hard to learn new truths as most default to the old belief system regardless the current facts.
Here you go cup cake pay attention.
https://www.resea...trometry


Your reading comprehension skills are on par with your fellows. We were discussing sputtering causing the formation of spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids at a scale of 10km. Did you not read the comments before you blindly link an irrelevant paper? Talk about a stooge.

cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Jan 04, 2019
Your reading comprehension skills are on par with your fellows. We were discussing sputtering causing the formation of spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids at a scale of 10km.

The process would likely involve an arc discharge between two large bodies, consider a capture event as is postulated with the Earth/Moon system. The EM forces involved would likely prevent impact but instead the two charged bodies would experience a charge exchange just as your hand and the doorknob exchange charges.
Also, as mentioned above, numerous other plasma processes have been shown by in situ observations to scale over 13 orders of magnitude. Why would this particular plasma process not scale as other plasma processes do? The burden is on you to explain why this plasma is different from that plasma.
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 04, 2019
The process would likely involve an arc discharge between two large bodies, consider a capture event as is postulated with the Earth/Moon system. The EM forces involved would likely prevent impact but instead the two charged bodies would experience a charge exchange just as your hand and the doorknob exchange charges.
Also, as mentioned above, numerous other plasma processes have been shown by in situ observations to scale over 13 orders of magnitude. Why would this particular plasma process not scale as other plasma processes do? The burden is on you to explain why this plasma is different from that plasma.


No, the burden is on you to show that any such crap is possible. Get it in the scientific literature, and let's all have a laugh! Total shite. Velikovskian garbage. Scientifically illiterate crap. Write it up, woo boy.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Jan 04, 2019
where is the direct observational evidence of sputtering on a large scale? Where have we observed this happening? This should be happening all around us all the time, yet we've never seen it. Curious.

Most of you consensus stooges are way behind the times. Knowing everything makes you incapable of learning new material. Science has shown it is hard to learn new truths as most default to the old belief system regardless the current facts.
Here you go cup cake pay attention.
https://www.resea...trometry


Completely irrelevant, you burke. That is heavy ions from the solar wind striking the lunar surface, and liberating various species. Nothing to do with the conversation. Do you know the mass of those ions? Get an education.
yep
1 / 5 (3) Jan 05, 2019
More sputtering you daft pricks.
https://www.aanda...0-15.pdf
SkyLight
4 / 5 (8) Jan 05, 2019
More sputtering you daft pricks
What an utter fool and scientific illiterate you show yourself to be.

If you had actually read the paper you link to - instead of just Googling for anything containing the words "solar wind sputtering" - you would know that the paper does not support in any way a thesis that the component spheres of the bilobate planetesimal Ultima Thule are the result of any kind of sputtering process.

The sputtering referred to in the paper is that of single neutral ATOMS of refractory species (primarily Na, Si with lower counts of K, Ca) being sputtered from the surfaces of dust grains located on the surface of the comet 67P by solar wind ions, at times in its' orbit when the solar wind has the opportunity to impinge directly on the surface, i.e. during periods of low activity before the coma becomes too dense. As stated in the paper, the sputtered signal was "very low": the total amount of refractories sputtered off per orbit being microscopic.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (4) Jan 05, 2019
Yes, there ARE such experiments, and they DO show that spheroids and bilobate accretions of spheroids can be formed.

However, such spheroids are typically very small: on the order of much less than a millimeter in diameter. Such spheroids can often be seen as occasional sputtered particles when welding metals, for instance.
Lab [and in situ] observation has shown plasma processes are scalable over 13 orders of magnitude, well within the scales proposed.
CD85, if your in situ observation lacks the underlying math or equation of state then it's just pareidolia: "The sun is plasma and spherical and so it must therefore be electric."
cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Jan 05, 2019
CD85, if your in situ observation lacks the underlying math or equation of state then it's just pareidolia: "The sun is plasma and spherical and so it must therefore be electric."

You can continue to lie and claim the maths hasn't been worked out, I am sure you feel safe in you little insular gravity box. Willful ignorance must be the word of the day.
Plasma is electric in the lab, it is electric in near Earth space., where exactly does it cease being electric?
cantdrive85
4 / 5 (4) Jan 05, 2019
That is heavy ions from the solar wind striking the lunar surface, and liberating various species

Which is sputtering, also known as an electric discharge. And increase the charge density enough and an arc discharge will occur, simple physics.
SkyLight
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 05, 2019
Which is sputtering, also known as an electric discharge
Completely wrong, bozo.
Physical sputtering is driven by the momentum exchange between the ions and atoms in [...] target materials, due to collisions (https://en.wikipe...ttering)
and
The incident ions set off collision cascades in the target. When such cascades recoil and reach the target surface with an energy greater than the surface binding energy, an atom would be ejected, and this process is known as sputtering.
So, ions in the solar wind travelling at high speed hit materials on a body's surface, and momentum exchange results in sputtering of atoms from that surface. Nothing to do with charge density, or the solar wind being a plasma.

"Electric discharge" my ass! - you might just as well say that the signal coming from a mobile phone is electric discharge since it's powered by a battery.

Epic fail again from a representative of the EU Stoopid Club.
SkyLight
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 05, 2019
Notice how gleefully the EU Loony Toons acolytes have picked up the word "sputtering" (first mentioned here in my second post in this thread) and have run with it, (mis-)using it like they do the words "electric" and "plasma", as if they owned the terms.

And then, in spite of all their boasting about how well they understand the subject, they just keep making such glaringly obvious errors as those outlined above.

But the planet jugglers and woo-merchants Wal Thornhill and Uncle Velikovsky would be proud of 'em, and that's what matters, right?

cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 05, 2019
Completely wrong, bozo.

LOL!
From your own link...

"Sputtering is done either using DC voltage (DC sputtering) or using AC voltage (RF sputtering)."

Foot in mouth disease...
cantdrive85
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 05, 2019
"Electric discharge" my ass!

From wikistupidia;

"An electric discharge is the release and transmission of electricity in an applied electric field through a medium such as a gas."

Please do explain who ties your shoes? Unless of course you rely on Velcro.
SkyLight
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 05, 2019
@cd - you have the attention span of a gnat - your quote comes from the section in the Wikipedia article dealing with artificial sputtering processes in laboratory experiments or in industrial processes such as "thin-film deposition, etching and analytical techniques".

In such cases, it's more than a little difficult to induce the solar wind down into the lab or factory - hence the need in such cases to use DC or AC voltage-driven equipment to accelerate ions to the velocities required.

Within the solar system however, the solar wind prevails, and is responsible for the sputtering of atoms from the surfaces of bodies such as moons, asteroids, comets, etc.

Even here, the amounts of material being released in such sputtering processes is so minuscule as to completely rule them out as source-material in planetesimal-building accretion processes.

You very evidently spend too much time in the company of your fellow EU dullards. Get out and learn some real science.

SkyLight
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 05, 2019
Time and time again, we see these EU dolts misquoting articles and papers, not reading said documents, and certainly not understanding them.

It must be down to the double-layers of heavy cartilage encasing their enfeebled brains and keeping them isolated from the world of reason and enlightenment. Perhaps a good strong course of electroconvulsive therapy would help?
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (4) Jan 05, 2019
You can continue to lie and claim the maths hasn't been worked out,
whoa brofessor, you're the one who just tried to scale up a 1mm ball of sputtered slag by 5 orders of magnitude and got 10km instead of 0.01km, and I know from past experience with you that you reject the math of magnetohydrodynamics and also of general relativity. Why it isn't evident to you that electromagnetism alone is insufficient to account for all that we observe at the smallest scales and also at the largest, is best explained by your next statement where you spoke very well for yourself:
Willful ignorance must be the word of the day.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Jan 05, 2019
Late edit: 0.01 km --> 0.1 km
genoid
3.3 / 5 (4) Jan 05, 2019
Another "mysterious" bilobate object. Their explanation that they gently crashed into each other is the typical magical pie in the sky claptrap the plasma ignoramuses must resort to while applying their gravity only nonsense to actual data. Pathetic!


OK, please show us, using actual data, how these two objects came to be one. Provide a model and explain the equations used to generate it. How did plasma and electricity cause this?

We both know that will never happen. Pathetic.


No need to act like Sheldon. You aren't being threatened lol. Have you ever performed any arc welding in your lifetime? If you had, then you would have noticed in certain conditions, the production of odd-shaped bowling pin shaped double spheroids, similar to what is being described here. It definitely is worth looking at, but I would suspect most of the Sheldons out there doing this sort of research have never welded in their lifetime lol
genoid
2 / 5 (4) Jan 06, 2019
And I will bet my last penny that redpill has produced nothing, invented nothing, discovered nothing, helped not a single person to improve his or her life, can claim nothing but snide and smug retorts to those going about their scientific endeavours.

He falls into the nowadays lamentably classic error of imagining that - just because the extreme edges of scientific exploration show weaknesses (as any scientist would tell you anyway) - the rest of the math-based scientific methodologies must also be called into question. Which is a pathetically stupid and ill-informed position to take and which, if followed to its' logical conclusion, would have us back in the caves banging rocks together.

I'll put my money on the table to say that he is an ineffectual, know-nothing, achieve-nothing, burger-flipping windbag. Same goes for @cd and his ragged band of flint-knappers and pith-ball enthusiasts.

No need to get angry and upset. Our nonsense is no worse than your nonsense
genoid
1 / 5 (4) Jan 06, 2019
Time and time again, we see these EU dolts misquoting articles and papers, not reading said documents, and certainly not understanding them.

It must be down to the double-layers of heavy cartilage encasing their enfeebled brains and keeping them isolated from the world of reason and enlightenment. Perhaps a good strong course of electroconvulsive therapy would help?

Not sure if you were aware or not, but electroconvulsive therapy has been outlawed for years. In other words, your comments are offensive, inappropriate, and bullying in nature. A little suggestion...act like a human being, and also understand that arrogance will get you nowhere. If you have ever wondered why people are suspicious of scientists, just read through these comments. You will find your answer.
yep
1 / 5 (3) Jan 06, 2019
where is the direct observational evidence of sputtering on a large scale? Where have we observed this happening? This should be happening all around us all the time, yet we've never seen it. Curious.

Skytool and bojang I guess the surface of the moon was not large enough. You must have meant sputtering not sputtering...Bright as Jonesy...and Proto still has not conceptualized math is not empirical evidence. You guys have a lot of scaling up to do.
genoid
1 / 5 (3) Jan 06, 2019
"The team says that the two spheres likely joined as early as 99 percent of the way back to the formation of the solar system, colliding no faster than two cars in a fender-bender." http://pluto.jhua...20190102

For two spinning objects to join in that configuration would be highly unlikely I would think. Think about that for a moment.
Spinning objects coming to rest to produce this common shape. Some other mechanism is at play. Whether it is electrical, or whatever, another mechanism needs to be explored.
Da Schneib
3 / 5 (4) Jan 06, 2019
In other words, your comments are offensive, inappropriate, and bullying in nature.
Troll detected.

Some other mechanism is at play. Whether it is electrical, or whatever, another mechanism needs to be explored.
Troll confirmed.

SkyLight
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 06, 2019
@genoid
would be highly unlikely I would think
Nobody is concerned with what you think to be true. You have to be able to SHOW, using standard scientific methodologies, that two spinning objects like the two lobes of Ultima Thule CANNOT join in the observed bilobate configuration. You've not done that and I strongly suspect that you are incapable of doing that.

The science team, on the other hand, HAVE done their homework, they have examined the physics of a plausible formation hypothesis as laid out in e.g. https://en.wikipe...rmation, where the two lobes "formed over time from a rotating cloud of small, icy bodies" and where outlying objects in the cloud have, over time, escaped the group, carrying off momentum with them. This loss of momentum in the cloud inevitably (conservation of momentum) causes objects in the cloud to slow down, and leads eventually to accretion via slow collisions.

Hypothesis leads to a workable solution = physics.
SkyLight
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 06, 2019
@genoid
For two spinning objects to join in that configuration would be highly unlikely I would think
See above.
Think about that for a moment.
So, we're invited to think about your off-the-cuff speculation which lacks all scientific rigour? Nope, but thanks for the offer.
Spinning objects coming to rest to produce this common shape. Some other mechanism is at play
Yep - and I can tell you what that is. It's woefully inadequate scientific ignorance on your part, coupled with an intransigent and wilful desire to prove the scientific mainstream wrong at any cost.

Fortunately, science will ignore your speculations for what they are: meaningless, unsubstantiated fluff. Good luck with that.
SkyLight
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 06, 2019
Not sure if you were aware or not, but electroconvulsive therapy has been outlawed for years. In other words, your comments are offensive, inappropriate, and bullying in nature
You have nothing substantive to offer to further the discussion regarding the article.
SkyLight
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 06, 2019
@genoid
electroconvulsive therapy has been outlawed for years
I looked it up (which I suspect you did not do, relying instead on your own set of ill-informed precepts) and discovered that, in the US and in the European Union and the UK, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still used in certain circumstances. I understand that ECT is not available in Slovenia and Luxembourg - do you live in one of these countries?

From the Mayo Clinic article on ECT:
[it] is a procedure, done under general anesthesia, in which small electric currents are passed through the brain, intentionally triggering a brief seizure. ECT seems to cause changes in brain chemistry that can quickly reverse symptoms of certain mental health conditions.
and
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) can provide rapid, significant improvements in severe symptoms of several mental health conditions
My suggestion that ECT might help the EU loonies was offered simply to help free them from their delusions.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (5) Jan 06, 2019
..and Proto still has not conceptualized math is not empirical evidence. You guys have a lot of scaling up to do.
No, yep, I'm not the one here with conceptualization difficulties. In fact I took the liberty of scaling up the math that describes an arc welder and it predicts that Ultima Thule should be made of metal, that we should see the larger welded objects that Ultima Thule sputtered off of, that we should see the even larger objects that function as a welding rod, an arc welder (or electrical transformer to step up the voltage high enough to weld), a power supply for the welder, and a continuous electrical circuit for the power. Where anywhere in the solar system do you see any welding going on, yep?
SkyLight
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 06, 2019
@Proto - Ya nailed it!
genoid
1 / 5 (2) Jan 06, 2019
..and Proto still has not conceptualized math is not empirical evidence. You guys have a lot of scaling up to do.
No, yep, I'm not the one here with conceptualization difficulties. In fact I took the liberty of scaling up the math that describes an arc welder and it predicts that Ultima Thule should be made of metal, that we should see the larger welded objects that Ultima Thule sputtered off of, that we should see the even larger objects that function as a welding rod, an arc welder (or electrical transformer to step up the voltage high enough to weld), a power supply for the welder, and a continuous electrical circuit for the power. Where anywhere in the solar system do you see any welding going on, yep?

I think he was offering an alternative explanation to the "contact binary" issue. Comet Borrelly is a similar shape, and how can it be explained if both are spinning, and make contact in that manner? Wouldn't it make sense to at least consider other options?
genoid
1 / 5 (2) Jan 06, 2019
Russian ice breaker captains in the arctic read the ice flows
wduckss> @granville583762
Matter attracts matter. Matter is not running away from the matter.
These two bodies they shared it's the orbit. Difference for bonding gives gravity or attractive force.

Gravity is holding them in orbit, if you blew on them they would float away and if the surface were covered in dust the gravity is so weak the dust would float on the surface
When two comets collide the ice melts then refreezes holding them together every time the ice melts an refreezes with collisions the surface gets harder and harder
Russian ice breaker captains in the arctic read the ice flows as they cannot break ice that has frozen and refrozen
So you can imagine how hard the comets are

Assuming the comet is composed of ice. Doesn't that contradict the actual data, which shows they are composed of rock, with only sparse amounts of water ice here and there?
MrBojangles
2.6 / 5 (5) Jan 07, 2019
No need to act like Sheldon. You aren't being threatened lol. Have you ever performed any arc welding in your lifetime? If you had, then you would have noticed in certain conditions, the production of odd-shaped bowling pin shaped double spheroids, similar to what is being described here.


Uh-oh, did they recruit you from Thunderdolts to help back up their argument? Why didn't you call your friend a Sheldon? My comment was parody of his.

plasma ignoramuses must resort to while applying their gravity only nonsense to actual data. Pathetic!


Also, we're talking about astronomical processes, not arc welding. Unless you can show with observation and models how this process scales up from mm wide particles to km wide celestial bodies. They really are appealing to the lowest common denominator with the EU theories aren't they?

Next.
savvys84
not rated yet Jan 09, 2019
Lol. Looks cute

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.