Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Large Kuiper Belt Object 2007 OR10 Finally Given a Name: Gonggong

posted by martyb on Monday February 24 2020, @12:36AM   Printer-friendly

takyon writes:

2007 OR10 is now known as 225088 Gonggong, and its moon has been named Xiangliu:

Not far behind Pluto, the fifth-largest dwarf planet in the solar system hasn't had a name since it was discovered in 2007. It's just been hanging out beyond Neptune under the boring catalog designation 2007 OR10.

Well, that's officially changed as the previously largest unnamed body in the solar system is now officially Gonggong, named for a Chinese water god with the head of a human and the body of a snake.

And as a cool bonus, the tiny moon that orbits Gongong is named Xiangliu, after the minister that attended to the deity in Chinese folklore. The pair make up the first major solar system bodies to have Chinese names, according to astrophysicist Simon Porter.

Minor Planet Center.

See also: Seven Worlds in the Solar System That Could Be Just As Weird As Pluto

Standing on its surface, the icy ground would look dark and red, like Pluto. Indeed, 2007 OR10 is one of the reddest worlds astronomers know of. That reddish hue hints at the presence of complex organic compounds astronomers call tholins.

[...] Research published in 2011 [open, DOI: 10.1088/2041-8205/738/2/L26] [DX] also showed that 2007 OR10 has a fresh surface covered in water ice. Astronomers think it's evidence of cryovolcanoes, where slushy ice erupts from below the surface like lava.

Previously: Large Moon Confirmed Around Slowly Rotating Dwarf Planet 2007 OR10
Public Asked to Vote on a Name for Dwarf Planet 2007 OR10

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Large Kuiper Belt Object 2007 OR10 Finally Given a Name: Gonggong | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 14 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Grishnakh on Monday February 24 2020, @02:14AM (1 child)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday February 24 2020, @02:14AM (#961666)

    I seriously doubt that. As much as I dislike Trump, I can already see the DNC working to get rid of Sanders so one of their billionaire-friendly candidates can take over. I foresee a repeat of 2016: the Dems shoot themselves in the foot *yet again* and then the other side wins the general election.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Offtopic=1, Touché=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Offtopic' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Grishnakh on Monday February 24 2020, @02:21AM

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday February 24 2020, @02:21AM (#961670)

    Just to expand on this, I'm reading articles now saying how we "need" Michael Bloomberg to "save" us from Sanders. Allegedly, according to these people, Sanders isn't "electable" and would surely lose in the general election. That's what they said about him last time, and it's the exact same thing these morons said about Trump back in 2016. "Trump isn't electable!" "There's no possible way Trump could win the general election!" So now they want me to believe their assertions about Sanders' electability? Why do these buffoons still have their media jobs anyway?