NASA Probe Reveals More Detail In Pluto's Complex Surface

astroengine writes: As NASA's New Horizons spacecraft careens through the solar system with Pluto in its cross-hairs, new detail in the dwarf planet's surface is popping into view at an ever increasing rate. Any images acquired from here on in are the most detailed images humanity has ever seen of Pluto and, a little over a month from its historic flyby, New Horizons is already giving us tantalizing glimpses of what appears to be a rich and complex little world. Take, for example, this most recent series of observations captured by the mission's Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (LORRI), which were taken from May 29 to June 2. There appears to be large variations in surface albedo (reflectiveness), possibly indicating there are huge regions of varying composition.

Comments

Over the moon?

[Guildor]

As happy as I am to see such amazing photos and time-lapse video, I immediately noticed a crater at the south pole which NASA are going to be surprised about. With a raised centre. Curious, but nothing we haven't seen on other moons and planets on the inner solar system.

What's clear to me, is we've not no idea how planets or moons are formed, and the standard model doesn't really cut the mustard, hence, why we're still exploring, and still surprised at every turn.

If Pluto had been whacked soo many times by asteroids (south pole, 90 degree impact?) wouldn't you expect its rotation to be tumbling all over the 3 axis? The time lapse looks like a regular rotation to me.

Re:Over the moon?

[wonkey_monkey]

I immediately noticed a crater at the south pole which NASA are going to be surprised about.

NASA would be surprised about it already by now, if it was anything to be surprised about. Which it probably isn't. These are heavily processed images, and what you think you're seeing (quite how you've decided you're qualified enough to declare it to be a crater with a raised centre is beyond me) could be anything.

What's clear to me, is I've not no idea how planets or moons are formed,

FTFY.

Re: Over the moon?

[ComputerGeek01]

Did you even read that article you posted? In the third paragraph the author complains that pictures of black holes don't exist. Honestly think about that for a minute. Let's ignore the stupidity of imaging a black object against a black backdrop for a second (although it does remind me of a historic work of art done by one Bullwinkle Moose). You have a phenomenon that is so dense light cannot escape it's gravity well. How in the fuck, pray tell, is light supposed to reflect off of it for a picture? The "unidentified objects" that this quack so readily dismisses are examples of hawking radiation by the way. He then goes on into a rambling tirade about how establishing theory using an ideal model isn't 100% accurate, as if no one in the scientific community is aware of this fact. By the time I get to his division by zero argument, I just want to hit him. I want to find this guy and kick him in the shin. "Duh, you can't divide by zero", yeah and -1 doesn't have a square root either; that doesn't stop the equations from being right.

You post about how a decent physicist and mathematician would understand this stuff better then the guys who devote their lives to studying it and then you post an article by someone who's math ability is somewhere short of pre-algebra. Way to make an argument.

Re:Investment into NASA vs welfare

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's because when the Pluto probe engineer spends her dollar,...

You describe the multiplier effect of money. Research has shown that the largest multiplier effect of different types of government spending comes from: food stamps. That money that gets spent at local stores, and on perishable goods that are harder to import is more likely to get spent on again within the country. Give more well off people money (e.g. through employment or tax breaks), and they are more likely to spend it on things like electronics, and some to most of that money goes overseas, and out of the US economy.