Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Strange Asteroids Baffle Scientists

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the science-rocks dept.

Raver32 writes to mention that two nearby asteroids may be evidence of a new class of asteroid or long eroded mini-world. Mineral evidence gathered using photometric data shows these asteroids to contain basalt not normally found in asteroid belt objects. "The lack of basalt and another mineral, olivine, in asteroid belt objects has long puzzled scientists. These two minerals would have formed the crust and mantle, respectively, of belt objects the size of Vesta or larger; theory predicts that more than half of all asteroids should be composed of one or the other of these substances"

12 of 125 comments (clear)

  1. Hint to the Scientists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the facts don't fit the theory, maybe it's time to re-evaluate the theory.

    1. Re:Hint to the Scientists... by Lane.exe · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Or you do more data gathering to see if those facts are anomalous.

      /Undetermination for the win!

      --
      IAALS.
    2. Re:Hint to the Scientists... by wilder_card · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> When the facts don't fit the theory of evolution, maybe it's time to look for new "facts." Well here we go again. Actually facts against the theory of evolution would be really interesting to most biologists. They would mean we don't know something. However, just because a piece of information is posted on a creationist web site doesn't make it a "fact". It's actually the creationists who are looking for new facts; they just haven't found them. Consider this: it's actually much easier to disprove a theory than to prove one. If creationism were true, it would be glaringly obvious. Historically, scientists were dragged kicking and screaming to the theory of evolution, because nothing else fit the facts.

  2. Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I just wish people in other fields, politics, religion, law, philosophy, etc would admit when they are baffled as readily as the scientists do. For all the amount of explanations they offer and advance understanding of nature, these scientists seem to delight on admitting they are baffled at the drop of a hat.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by pete-classic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the thing about Science. Figuring out that you don't understand something is considered an important part of progress. In those other disciplines it's the ultimate failure.

      -Peter

    2. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by dbolger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Would you vote for a politican who admitted that he was delightfully baffled by questions of how to fix the economy? Would you hire a manager who eagerly told people that he had no idea how to rally sales or improve worker morale?

      I can imagine sitting in court as the RIAA shows a jury undeniable evidence that I have downloaded and shared the newly released Bratz movie. I know I didn't do it, but turning to my lawyer to see his reaction, I am faced with his goofy grin and shrugging shoulders. Uh-oh.

      Science is the only field (that I can think of) where being stumped could be considered anything other than a bad outcome. That's what sets it apart from other fields.

    3. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by cathector · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it's not *being* stumped that's so great,
      what the parent is lauding is *admitting* when you're stumped.

    4. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by rthille · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd seen the quote before, but I'm reading "The Atheist's Bible" right now (gift from my wife), and it has the quote:

      Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.

      Voltaire

      Absurd is certainly a good description for my feelings about religion...

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    5. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it was Steven J Gould who said that science is never right, but it is always our closest approach to right, based on our understanding at the time. That's why science is remarkable: it relies on people arguing, being not right, and figuring out what's more right based on the previous mistakes. People who have trouble admitting that something they previously supported is, in fact, wrong, are going to have a tough time in science. The problem with that is that most people don't work that way, and this aspect of science makes them deeply suspicious of it. We constantly hear people complaining about how every ten years all the facts about medicine/health/nutrition/what-have-you change, and they don't know what to believe. That's the *strength* of science, that it learns and accommodates -- dare I say evolves -- but it's perceived as a weakness by people who want to learn something once and never have to relearn it.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    6. Re:Wish more people would fess up their bafflement by GreatDrok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I just wish people in other fields, politics, religion, law, philosophy, etc would admit when they are baffled as readily as the scientists do. For all the amount of explanations they offer and advance understanding of nature, these scientists seem to delight on admitting they are baffled at the drop of a hat."

      OK, I'll admt it, I'm a scientist (hangs head.)

      Anyway, yes, you're right. One of the things that scientists have to learn as part of the scientific method is to admit when they don't know something, or were wrong about it and need to revise their ideas. But this isn't something scientists should be ashamed of, it is something we enjoy because it is all part of the discovery process. Non-scientists seem to have so much trouble understanding the ease with which a scientist will happily admit to being wrong or being surprised or baffled or just plain shocked and stunned. To a scientist, these are all opportunities to do more research and learn more. I love it. There is nothing better than realising that you have discovered something that no-one else in the world has ever seen. I've done it a couple of times and it is a fantastic thrill.

      --
      "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
  3. Re:Applying for grants... by haystor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll raise your cynical view of the world: Funding is easier to secure if the research is assured to support specific answers.

    --
    t
  4. Science as religion by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > Non-scientists seem to have so much trouble understanding the ease with which a scientist
    > will happily admit to being wrong or being surprised or baffled or just plain shocked and
    > stunned.

    Many non-scientist just view science as a new religion, one that just happens to be much better at delivering miracles that the older religions. So they expect scientists to act like priests, and utter absolute truths.

    When discussing science versus religion, it is not the religious nuts I find most annoying, but those laypeople who believe in science as if it was a religion.

    If you crave the Truth, go to a priest. Any of them will do, they all have an absolute truth to offer. But truth is no matter for science. What we can offer is predictions with a better track record than anyone else.