Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Saturn's Moons Built From Ring Material

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the lookit-all-them-moons-up-there dept.

LiquidCoooled writes "Two of Saturn's small moons look eerily like flying saucers, new observations by the Cassini spacecraft reveal. The moons, which lie within the giant planet's rings, may have come by their strange shape by gradually accumulating ring particles in a ridge around their equators."

21 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Actually relevant by explosivejared · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wow, the "that's no moon" comments actually have some relevance now, as one can say "that's not moon... it's aggregated ring material that only looks like a moon!"

    --
    I got a catholic block.
    1. Re:Actually relevant by ByOhTek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The earth isn't a planet, it's aggregated stellar dust that looks like a planet!

      A planet/moon is just aggregated dust from something. Being aggregated ring dust doesn't make it less of a moon.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Actually relevant by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bravo..no really...pounding the anti-Bush rhetoric into a completely unrelated thread is awesome...

      Okay, Folks, I'll hold him down, someone get his medication ready.

    3. Re:Actually relevant by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it came from a chunk of aggregated dust, doesnt that just make it a slightly more modified chunk of aggregated dust?

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  2. Built? by skeftomai · · Score: 2, Insightful

    By god, right? How about a better word, like 'consists?'

    1. Re:Built? by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Built is a perfectly appropriate word. Consists simply tells what something is made of, built tells how. Since it didn't spontaneously pop into existence, built works fine.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  3. Ring Material by CaseyB · · Score: 3, Funny

    Saturn's moons are made of Scrith?

    1. Re:Ring Material by OK+PC · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is Niven the guy who ripped off Halo?

      (I kid, I kid!)

      --
      Did you get that thing I sent ya?
  4. Or Maybe... by nhstar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Saturn's Rings are made of moon material? Is this chick or egg?

    --
    --- no sig to see here... move along.
    1. Re:Or Maybe... by Liquidrage · · Score: 2

      FYI:

      The egg came before the chicken. That's just how evolution works. A non-chicken did not have all its DNA mutate mid-life turning it into a chicken. Instead, the zygote of the first chicken had all it's DNA intact at conception, passed along from two parents that were not quite chickens.

    2. Re:Or Maybe... by Wellspring · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Does the mother create the egg? Or does it self-generate?

      This is actually a semiserious question

  5. Too much to ask? by Kintar1900 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is it too much to ask that New Scientist stop using crappy CGI and start posting some of the actual photographs that the astronomers used to form their theories?

    1. Re:Too much to ask? by JonWan · · Score: 4, Informative

      I thought so too.So I googled and found this. May be redundant now tho.

      http://www.planetary.org/explore/topics/saturn/atlas.html

    2. Re:Too much to ask? by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 3, Informative

      Since the data came from Cassini ISS and since we're the authors on the paper, I feel no qualms about suggesting visiting http://ciclops.org/view_event.php?id=73

    3. Re:Too much to ask? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is it too much to ask that New Scientist stop using crappy CGI and start posting some of the actual photographs that the astronomers used to form their theories?

      Ideally you publish both. The actual photos are a bit hard for a non-expert to interpret. The stark lighting of space makes it difficult to see the full shape.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  6. Sedimentary moons . . . by SpeedyGonz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    . . . now that's a cool concept. Geeky, but cool.

  7. Re:Moon with a wall by Tejin · · Score: 3, Informative
    The moon is Iapetus. It has a walnut shape and a massive equatoral wall. It's a possible explanation, though Iapetus orbits outside the ring system, and off-plane.

    Then again there could be a 'black ring' further out which explains the two-tone colouring of the moon and the equatoral wall. The only problem is that we haven't detected and rings out there.

    --
    The seekers do no need truth, the seekers do find truth and the finding do be painful
  8. Real Images of Pan and Atlas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/image-details.cfm?imageID=2865 //and congratulations to New Scientist for the most annoying holiday ad ever.

  9. Re:News? by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 4, Informative

    Probably. The problem is that the rings can't accrete into moons because of tidal forces. (They do form temporary aggregates, but those tear apart again in roughly one orbital period.) So the presence of moons in this region is a bit of a mystery. One possibility was that they were large shards of whatever body broke up and formed the rings. What we found in our research is that there are indeed seed-cores in the middles of the moons, but that the moons then accreted a lot more material into a mantle, lowering their densities to almost absurdly small values and reshaping them. The moons you have now are a hybrid of progenitor material and ring particles.

  10. In other news.... by paintballer1087 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Astronomers have determined that the shape of the satellite determines whether it is classified as a moon or not. In an astounding landslide at the latest meeting, it was declared that saucer shaped satellites are to be labeled actual moons, while the spherical satellites are now called pseudo-moons. This in a new spree of reclassifications by astronomers has confused many people.

  11. Re:Check out the movie by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because he did the research and, more importantly, put the movie together.

    Honestly, Sebastien's English is so much better than my French, I would never complain.