Pluto May Not Be a Planet, But It Could Be Made Out of Millions of Comets
Pluto may not be categorised as a planet any more, but it still holds plenty of fascination. For instance, how did the dwarf planet form, and why is it so different from the planets? By examining its chemical composition, researchers have come up with a new idea: Pluto is made of comets.
According to the currently accepted model, planets are formed by the gradual accretion of smaller objects - and Pluto, situated right next to the Kuiper Belt asteroid field, has long been thought to have formed the same way. So that part is nothing new.
But there are similarities between Pluto and Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko that scientists from the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) believe may not be coincidental. In particular, the nitrogen-rich ice in Pluto's Sputnik Planitia.
[...] "We found an intriguing consistency between the estimated amount of nitrogen inside the glacier and the amount that would be expected if Pluto was formed by the agglomeration of roughly a billion comets or other Kuiper Belt objects similar in chemical composition to 67P, the comet explored by Rosetta."
Also at SwRI.
Primordial N2 provides a cosmochemical explanation for the existence of Sputnik Planitia, Pluto (DOI unknown, Journal Icarus) (arXiv)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday May 25 2018, @05:55PM (4 children)
1) Hydrostatic equilibrium (mostly round)
2) Orbits star
Yup, maybe thousand of them. Why do we care?
8 are special because of where they are, but calling every single other one "dwarf" is totally arbitrary. Pluto and Eris are half the diameter of Mercury, which is tiny compared to Jupiter.
(Score: 3, Touché) by takyon on Friday May 25 2018, @06:27PM (1 child)
btw #MercuryIsNotAPlanet
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday May 25 2018, @10:01PM
Interesting tweet.......... twitter.com/IdentityHabits/status/848295754225635328 [twitter.com]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday May 25 2018, @06:34PM
I'd even go for: Orbits star mostly in-plane, and mostly circularly, and on a mostly cleared orbit, at least mostly cleared of "things of significant size" - intentionally dinging Ceres with that one.
Is there a dwarf distinction? Yes, because some people who work in the field of celestial body naming made it up. Does it matter? Not nearly as much as it gets talked about.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday May 26 2018, @04:22PM
BTW #NotAllDwarfProstitutesAreFat