Halley's Comet Imaged As Transneptunian Object

An anonymous reader writes "The European Space Observatory has imaged Halley's Comet at the farthest point (past Neptune) in which such a 10-kilometer diameter iceball has ever been observed. To image a comet as a raven-black object, without its bright dust tail (coma), is equivalent to seeing a lump of coal at the distance between the Earth's poles and to do so in the evening twilight. The last gasp seen from Halley's Comet was 1991, when a gigantic explosion happened, providing it with an expanding, extensive cloud of dust for several months. It is not known whether this event was caused by a collision with an unknown piece of rock or by internal processes (a last 'sigh' on the way out). Halley has an orbital period just over 76 years and will return in 2062."

Comments

Makes me think of 2061...

[krymsin01]

Reading this made me think of the comet rendevous in 2061. I doubt that I'll live to see something like that actualy accomplished.

What we need is another space race, some incentive to get there. My guess is that the next space race will be for resources, metals, chemicals, etc.

What's the fun...

[supersam]

... in seeing a comet without its dust tail??

Re:What's the fun...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's human curiosity, what allowed us to survive and evolve through ages. Give us some knowledge buried under a giant rock and we'll put huge efforts in removing that rock.
The same applies to the comet's tail: there's a chance to learn something by making observations without the comet tail hiding things.

Re:Question

[Jeremy Erwin]

The spot was discovered by Robert Hooke in 1664. The spot is HUGE (large enough to hold to Earths) and back in the 15'th centurty it was much brighter.

Really? You have some idea of of how the GRS appeared 200 years before Hooke (in the mid seventeenth century) inferred the rotational period of Jupiter? The earliest definitive observations of the GRS, btw, are those of Heinrich Schwabe (1831)

Re:Slightly over-hyped

[EvilTwinSkippy]

Back in the old days science was 95% imagination, 5% data.

Now it's 5% imagination, 5% data, and 90% computation.

It's not like imagine that lump of coal at all

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

I'd put money on it in fact being impossible to view a lump of coal at that distance. In fact, I propose someone do a lump of coal viewing test. These people can get away with all sorts of silly analogies to make themselves seem impressive and nobody calls their bluff.