Explanation: Last Wednesday the voyaging Lucy spacecraft encountered its first asteroid, 152830 Dinkinesh, and discovered the inner-main belt asteroid has a moon. From a distance of just over 400 kilometers, Lucy's Long-Range Reconnaissance Imager captured this close-up of the binary system during a flyby at 4.5 kilometer per second or around 10,000 miles per hour. A marvelous world, Dinkinesh itself is small, less than 800 meters (about 0.5 miles) across at its widest. Its satellite is seen from the spacecraft's perspective to emerge from behind the primary asteroid. The asteroid moon is estimated to be only about 220 meters wide.
Clearly fragments of an exploded planet. Each has a belt of stronger rock layer across the middle. This can only occur under planetary geological processes.
Roy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 1:14 pm
Clearly fragments of an exploded planet. Each has a belt of stronger rock layer across the middle. This can only occur under planetary geological processes.
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory https://www.cloudbait.com
Roy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 1:14 pm
Clearly fragments of an exploded planet. Each has a belt of stronger rock layer across the middle. This can only occur under planetary geological processes.
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
-- "To B̬̻̋̚o̞̮̚̚l̘̲̀᷾d̫͓᷅ͩḷ̯᷁ͮȳ͙᷊͠ Go......Beyond The F͇̤i̙̖e̤̟l̡͓d͈̹s̙͚ We Know."{ʲₒʰₙNYᵈₑᵉₚ}
The first asteroid to be visited by NASA’s Lucy mission now has a name. The International Astronomical Union has approved the name (152830) Dinkinesh for the tiny main belt asteroid that the Lucy spacecraft will encounter on November 1, 2023. “Dinkinesh”, or ድንቅነሽ in Amharic, is the Ethiopian name for the human-ancestor fossil, also known as Lucy, which was found in that country and currently curated there. Dinkinesh means “you are marvelous” in Amharic.
Hmm, does its little moon have a name yet? Let's see now, what would orbit "Lucy"? How about Linus ( her younger brother!) I thought there was a Peanuts character who had a crush on Lucy, but I can't seem to find that documented anywhere.
-- "To B̬̻̋̚o̞̮̚̚l̘̲̀᷾d̫͓᷅ͩḷ̯᷁ͮȳ͙᷊͠ Go......Beyond The F͇̤i̙̖e̤̟l̡͓d͈̹s̙͚ We Know."{ʲₒʰₙNYᵈₑᵉₚ}
Roy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 1:14 pm
Clearly fragments of an exploded planet. Each has a belt of stronger rock layer across the middle. This can only occur under planetary geological processes.
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory https://www.cloudbait.com
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Cool. Thanks. So the YORP effect caused by incident solar radiation creates the spin over time, and the spin causes material on the asteroid to migrate "down" to the equator, and in some cases to eject such material into forming a satellite. Correct? I guess this also explains why the equatorial region looks to be composed of finer material that the rest of the surface (though maybe that just an optical effect here).
-- "To B̬̻̋̚o̞̮̚̚l̘̲̀᷾d̫͓᷅ͩḷ̯᷁ͮȳ͙᷊͠ Go......Beyond The F͇̤i̙̖e̤̟l̡͓d͈̹s̙͚ We Know."{ʲₒʰₙNYᵈₑᵉₚ}
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Well, I'm not entirely convinced by the simulation, as the belt formation would have to continuously decrease towards the poles. For many moons, however, the belt can be defined as an equatorial bulge untill only a very narrow ridge, with a clear and independent shape, as we can see for example on Saturn's moons Pan or Iapetus. The simulation cannot or only insufficiently explain these phenomena.
"New image of Saturn’s tiny moon Pan, which orbits inside the Encke Gap of Saturn’s rings. A thin “skirt” or ridge of material surrounds the moon’s equator, giving it a "ravioli shaped" appearance. Photo Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute/Ian Regan"
This image of Atlas was taken by Cassini’s narrow-angle camera during a close flyby on April 12, 2017. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute.
Last edited by AVAO on Sat Nov 04, 2023 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Well, I'm not entirely convinced by the simulation, as the belt formation would have to continuously decrease towards the poles. For many moons, however, the belt can be defined as an equatorial bulge untill only a very narrow ridge, with a clear and independent shape, as we can see for example on Saturn's moons Atlas, Pan or Iapetus. The simulation cannot or only insufficiently explain these phenomena.
This image of Atlas was taken by Cassini’s narrow-angle camera during a close flyby on April 12, 2017. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute.
"New image of Saturn’s tiny moon Pan, which orbits inside the Encke Gap of Saturn’s rings. A thin “skirt” or ridge of material surrounds the moon’s equator, giving it a "ravioli shaped" appearance. Photo Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute/Ian Regan"
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Well, I'm not entirely convinced by the simulation, as the belt formation would have to continuously decrease towards the poles. For many moons, however, the belt can be defined as an equatorial bulge untill only a very narrow ridge, with a clear and independent shape, as we can see for example on Saturn's moons Atlas, Pan or Iapetus. The simulation cannot or only insufficiently explain these phenomena.
This image of Atlas was taken by Cassini’s narrow-angle camera during a close flyby on April 12, 2017. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute.
"New image of Saturn’s tiny moon Pan, which orbits inside the Encke Gap of Saturn’s rings. A thin “skirt” or ridge of material surrounds the moon’s equator, giving it a "ravioli shaped" appearance. Photo Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute/Ian Regan"
Lasse H wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 12:32 pm
Certainly a very nice asteroid!
Something struck me about the legend to the photo – it's an unsystematic mixture of metric and Imperial units:
... a distance of just over 400 kilometers
... at 4.5 kilometer per second
or around 10,000 miles per hour
... less than 800 meters
(about 0.5 miles)
... only about 220 meters
What was the distance in miles? What was the speed in km/hour? Or miles per second? How big is the moon in feet (or yards)?
It would be nice if USA, Myanmar, Liberia and Samoa would also adopt metrics - and thus join the other 190 countries in the world.
When NASA Lost a Spacecraft Due to a Metric Math Mistake
In September of 1999, after almost 10 months of travel to Mars, the Mars Climate Orbiter burned and broke into pieces. On a day when NASA engineers were expecting to celebrate, the ground reality turned out to be completely different, all because someone failed to use the right units, i.e., the metric units!
...
A NASA review board found that the problem was in the software controlling the orbiter’s thrusters. The software calculated the force that the thrusters needed to exert in pounds of force. A second piece of code that read this data assumed it was in the metric unit—“newtons per square meter”.
During the design phase, the propulsion engineers at Lockheed Martin in Colorado expressed force in pounds. However, it was standard practice to convert to metric units for space missions. Engineers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab assumed the conversion had been made. This navigation mishap pushed the spacecraft dangerously close to the planet’s atmosphere where it presumably burned and broke into pieces, killing the mission on a day when engineers had expected to celebrate the craft’s entry into Mars’ orbit.
Well, I'm not entirely convinced by the simulation, as the belt formation would have to continuously decrease towards the poles. For many moons, however, the belt can be defined as an equatorial bulge untill only a very narrow ridge, with a clear and independent shape, as we can see for example on Saturn's moons Atlas, Pan or Iapetus. The simulation cannot or only insufficiently explain these phenomena.
This image of Atlas was taken by Cassini’s narrow-angle camera during a close flyby on April 12, 2017. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Space Science Institute.
"New image of Saturn’s tiny moon Pan, which orbits inside the Encke Gap of Saturn’s rings. A thin “skirt” or ridge of material surrounds the moon’s equator, giving it a "ravioli shaped" appearance. Photo Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Space Science Institute/Ian Regan"
There is no evidence of "exploded planets" in the Solar System (and no physics to explain such a thing). Asteroids are remnants of material that failed (probably due to gravitational resonance zones created by the gas giants) to coalesce into planets. The total mass of all the asteroids in the Solar System is about 3% of the mass of the Moon. Nowhere near enough material to point back to any planet.
I won't comment on the "exploded planet" theory (however unlikely it may be), but on the OP's statement about "belts". Each of these asteroids does indeed appear to have an "equatorial" belt or ridge, though the ridge on Dinkinesh itself is much more obvious than the ridge - if it is in fact more than an accidental artifact of perspective - on its moon. A few other moons of planets also exhibit ridges. Is there a good explanation for them?
Because they rotate. That means there are different forces present at the equator than near the poles... and in the common case of these things being "rubble piles" it isn't unexpected for material to accumulate around the equator. The YORP effect can result in asteroids spinning up, creating increased distortion and eventually the ejection of material and possible formation of a binary (as with today's APO). Here's an example of such a system being simulated mathematically:
.
Click to play embedded YouTube video.
Do I get it right?
1) an asteroid in the Asteroid belt would have a satellite because it would be spinned by Sun's heated spots until, after a billion years, it breaks
2) an asteroid with a satellite in the Asteroid belt would be rotating slowly because the satellite would steal the spin to its orbit by tidal forces
3) a satellite would be in a high orbit with high orbital spin after stealing the spin for a billion years. The orbital spin would have the same direction as the asteroid spin and the orbital period would be longer that the period of the asteroid's rotation
Now can you explain why a Koiper's belt asteroid would have a body of a binary coalescence?
Dinkinesh Moonrise
