Tag: multitude (page 1 of 3)

32517 Kaleidoscopic Humanoids

View Article Here   Read More

Lord Michael – Waters of Cosmologies – Magnetic Fields – March-22-2017

View Article Here   Read More

60 Kaleidoscopic Humanoids Pics

View Article Here   Read More

Sheldan Nidle January 04 2016 Galactic Federation Of Light

View Article Here   Read More

The Guardians SEPTEMBER 30, 2016 by Sister Pam

View Article Here   Read More

Ascended Twin Flame André for Archangel Michael – November-10-2016

View Article Here   Read More

REVALUATION CLOSE TO COMPLETION RV/GCR MIKE QUINSEY HIGHER SELF 8-26-16 GALACTIC FEDERATION OF LIGHT

View Article Here   Read More

Shivrael Luminance River ~ Embracing Pure Potency of September 25 August 2015

View Article Here   Read More

Think the Anti-GMO Movement is Unscientific? Think Again

Sayer Ji, Green Med Info“Anyone that says, ‘Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,’ I say is either unbelievably stupid, or deliberately lying. The reality is, we don’t know. The experiments simply haven’t been done, and now we have become the guinea pigs.”  ~ David Suzuki, geneticistNow that the mainstream media is catching on to the public sentiment against GMO food, or at least against unlabeled GMO food, to the tune o [...]

View Article Here   Read More

Spring Cleaning Tips for Body, Mind and Spirit

Excerpt from huffingtonpost.comAn extended winter throughout much of the U.S. and Canada really cut into the enjoyment of the spring season this year for many. One of our coaching students sent me photos of over a foot of snow this past May weekend...

View Article Here   Read More

NASA releases first ever moving images of dark side of the Moon ~ Video





From wiki

The far side of the Moon, or 'dark side of the moon', is the hemisphere of the Moon that always faces away from Earth. The far side's terrain is rugged, with a multitude of impact craters and relatively few flat lunar maria. It has one of the largest craters in the Solar System, the South Pole–Aitken basin.

About 18 percent of the far side is occasionally visible from Earth due to libration. The remaining 82 percent remained unobserved until 1959, when the Soviet Union's Luna 3 space probe photographed it. The Russian Academy of Sciences published the first atlas of the far side in 1960. In 1968, the Apollo 8 mission's astronauts were the first humans to view this region directly when they orbited the Moon. To date, no one has explored the far side of the Moon on the ground.





Click to zoom

View Article Here   Read More

New Geologic Map Shows the Beauty of the Asteroid Vesta


This new map of the asteroid Vesta, which uses a Mollweide projection, reveals the asteroid's geological history.
This new map of Vesta, which uses a Mollweide projection, reveals the asteroid’s geological history. NASA/JPL-Caltech/Arizona State University



Excerpt from 
wired.com


For 15 months between 2011 and 2012, the Dawn spacecraft orbited the asteroid called Vesta, snapping high-resolution pictures of the cratered, potato-shaped rock. Scientists then spent another two and a half years poring over the images and piecing together the geology written on Vesta’s surface. Now, a team led by planetary scientist David Williams of Arizona State University has compiled that information together into this beautiful map, which they’ve published online for the December issue of the journal Icarus.

Vesta was forged within the cloud of dust and debris that formed the solar system about 4.5 billion years ago. During its lifetime, Vesta was pelted with smaller asteroids and rocks, which left a multitude of craters. But according to the researchers, there were three impacts in particular that shaped Vesta’s geological history. The most recent collision happened sometime between 120 million and 390 million years ago, forming the Marcia crater seen near the center of the map.

Two earlier impacts struck Vesta’s south pole more than one billion years ago between 200 million and one billion years apart, making the Veneneia and Rheasilvia craters, which are each about 300 miles in diameter. These collisions were so big that they reshaped the asteroid, leading to its elongated shape today, Williams says. 

View Article Here   Read More

So is Pluto a Planet Again or Not?


Illustrated image of Pluto

theweathernetwork.com
ByScott Sutherland Meteorologist, theweathernetwork.com

Friday, July 18, 2014, 12:24 PM - For over 75 years, tiny Pluto enjoyed its status as the most distant planet in our solar system, but in 2006, it was demoted down to a 'dwarf planet' and its title was passed on to Neptune. Now, though, the editor of Astronomy magazine is sounding the rallying cry to re-open the debate about Pluto's nature, which could potentially redefine what it means to be a planet.

In 2006, when the International Astronomical Union (IAU) set down an official definition for what a 'planet' is, they came up with three rules:
1) The object must be in orbit around the Sun,
2) The object must be massive enough to be a sphere by its own gravitational force. More specifically, its own gravity should pull it into a shape of hydrostatic equilibrium, and
3) It must have cleared the neighborhood around its orbit.

Everything in the solar system technically orbits around the Sun, of course. Something like the Moon doesn't qualify, though, even though it's massive enough to be roughly spherical and its 'neighborhood' is as clear as Earth's is, because it only goes around the Sun as a consequence of being in orbit around Earth. Same goes for the moons of the other planets. Asteroids and comets don't qualify because they're not big enough to become spherical by their own gravity. Even Ceres (which is roughly spherical) doesn't make the cut, because it's in the asteroid belt, thus its 'neighborhood' isn't clear.
Pluto suffers the same problem as Ceres. It's definitely in orbit around the Sun (or at least the common gravitational focus it shares with Charon is in orbit around the Sun). It is massive enough to be a sphere. It just isn't considered to have cleared its neighborhood. So, not a planet, at least by the IAU rules.

However, while the first two rules are pretty clear and easy to determine, third isn't. According to Prof. Abel Méndez, of the University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo, "there is no standard 'cleared' metric." It seems that due to the very existence of the Kuiper Belt, Pluto loses its status. However, exactly how cleared does the neighborhood have to be? There are millions of near-Earth asteroids flying around us, and there are even some asteroids that are locked into the same orbit as Earth ('Earth trojans'). There are even more asteroids near Mars' orbit, due to its proximity to the asteroid belt. Jupiter has an extremely large collection of asteroids in its orbit, both preceding it (the Greeks) and following behind (the Trojans).
Even discounting these cases, as it is, when you go further out into the solar system, it gets harder and harder for an object to clear its neighborhood. This is simply because it makes fewer orbits around the Sun compared to objects closer to the Sun, and thus it encounters the other objects in its orbit far less often. Consider Earth, going around the Sun once every year, with Pluto orbiting every 247 years. So, whereas Earth has made roughly 4.5 billion trips around the Sun since it formed, Pluto has only made 18 million similar trips (if it formed at roughly the same time).
As Astronomy magazine editor David Eicher said: "At the Pluto-like distance of 40 astronomical units — 40 times farther away from the Sun then we are now — Earth would not clear its orbit of asteroids, and so would Earth then not be classified as a planet?"
Also, since recent evidence has pointed to the fact that there may be two super-Earth-sized objects out beyond Pluto, both of them would be considered 'dwarf planets' as well, despite one potentially being 10 times the mass of Earth and the other being up to 100 times the mass of Earth.
So, when it comes to Pluto, what's the case for making it a planet again? Based on the facts above and Eicher's own thoughts:
1) the definition of what 'cleared the neighborhood around its orbit' is, itself, unclear
2) it seems unjustifiable that an object even larger than the Earth would not be considered a planet, simply because it orbits far out in our solar system
3) an object's intrinsic characteristics should dictate what kind of object it is, not its location.

Indeed, if you take the IAU's definition and attempt to apply it to all objects we know about, the multitude of worlds that we've discovered outside our solar system aren't technically planets, despite being large enough and even if they've cleared their orbit, because they don't orbit around the Sun.
So, perhaps it's time to revise the IAU's definition, not only to reconsider Pluto for planetary status, but also to make the definition applicable to a wider range of objects. Even if they changed the first rule to have 'a star' instead of 'the Sun' and changed the emphasis of the third rule to be that the object is large enough compared to the rest of the objects in its orbit to be capable of clearing its neighborhood (given enough time), it might be a much better set of conditions to measure everything against.
As Astronomy's editors offer up their time and efforts to host a renewed debate about Pluto, what do you think about its status? Should it be a planet again, remain as a dwarf planet, or perhaps something else? Leave your ideas in the comments below.

pluto

View Article Here   Read More

Older posts

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
.
unless otherwise marked.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy



Up ↑