Phys.org has just published a story, Pluto extreme close-up best yet:
These images, which were taken while the New Horizon's probe was still 15,850 km (9,850 mi) away from Pluto (just 23 minutes before it made its closest approach), extend across the hemisphere that the probe was facing as it flew past. It shows features ranging from the cratered northern uplands and the mountainous regions in Voyager Terra before slicing through the flatlands of "Pluto's Heart" – aka. Tombaugh Regio – and ending up in another stretch of rugged highlands.
The width of the strip varies as the images pass from north to south, from more than 90 km (55 mi) across at the northern end to about 75 km (45 mi) at its southern point. The perspective also changes, with the view appearing virtually horizontal at the northern end and then shifting to an almost top-down view onto the surface by the end.
The crystal clear photographs that make up the mosaic – which have a resolution of about 80 meters (260 feet) per pixel – offer the most detailed view of Pluto's surface ever. With this kind of clarity, NASA scientists are able to discern features that were never before visible, and learn things about the kinds of geological processes which formed them.
This includes the chaotic nature of the mountains in the northern hemisphere, and the varied nature of the icy nitrogen plains across Tombaugh Regio – which go from being cellular, to non-cellular, to a cross-bedding pattern. These features are a further indication that Pluto's surface is the product of a combination of geological forces, such as cryovolcanism, sublimation, geological activity, convection between water and nitrogen ice, and interaction between the surface and atmosphere.
[...] The most distant flyby in the history of space exploration, and yet we've obtained more from this one mission than multiple flybys were able to provide from one of Earth's closest neighbors. Fascinating! And what's more, new information is expected to be coming from the New Horizons probe until this coming October. To top it off, our scientists are still not finished analyzing all the information the mission collected during its flyby.
(Alan Stern, the principal investigator of the New Horizons mission and the Associate Vice President of Research and Development at the Southwest Research Institute)
On July 14, 2015, at 11:49 UTC, the New Horizons space craft made its closest approach of 12,500 km (7,800 mi) above the surface of Pluto with a relative velocity of 13.78 km/s (49,600 km/h; 30,800 mph). This transpired at a distance of 4.5 light-hours from Earth, i.e. approximately 4.8×1012km away.
Direct link to the eye candy image and a silent, but annotated, video of the fly by identifying characteristics of each region.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jdavidb on Tuesday May 31 2016, @07:25PM
I see we are getting in full swing to get some beautiful images out and get New Horizons back on everyone's mind just ahead of its new activity this year. Bravo, Nasa, well played. :)
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:41PM
New activity? Is this humor that flew over my head?
The next direct object in the probe's itinerary, a smallish asteroid-like thingy, is about 3 years away.
Due to the sheer distance, it takes a long time to send all the Pluto images. That's why we get them now instead of shortly after the encounter last year.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:52PM
It was planned this way well before January 19, 2006, when the vehicle was launched. Long before current projects were even on the drawing board. It was well planned, but not played. There is not a conspiracy under ever rock.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:29PM
There are enough people at NASA with enough time on their hands to indeed plan this play, years in advance.
Funding is critical to NASA's survival, public opinion is critical to funding, timing of exciting news is critical to public opinion.
Rocket science is relatively easy, political science is more of an art to practice.
Whether or not the PR aspect of the timing altered the planned timing is impossible to determine (unless you are inside the decision makers' head), but the decision makers were not ignorant of the PR aspects of the mission timing when they made their decisions.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:38PM
Too much tinfoil.
The launch timing was dictated by multiple sling-shot jumps. The mission could never be expected to arrive on any future point in time that would coincide with fluid political situations, elections, national events, wars, natural disasters, etc.
Nice Troll. But nobody can predict 10 years in advance precisely when they will need good news.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday June 02 2016, @01:30AM
Not saying they are shifting missions around to "pace" the release of exciting imagery.
Am saying that they are aware of when the exciting imagery is coming out long before a launch date is approved, and they are also aware of how this stacks up with all their other missions.
Does this ever influence go/nogo decisions on schedules? I would _hope_ not, in any significant way. Having experienced "political leadership" firsthand, it probably has had more influence than any science minded people would ever want to know about. Kind of like the Nazi infantry really didn't want to know that their deployment and engagement was influenced by an astrologer. Controlled? not really, but significantly influenced.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:57PM
So with the salt flats being too wet of late we should speed-test our motorcycles on Hayabusa Terra. Combustion engines will need to carry O2, but cooling should be improved.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Wednesday June 01 2016, @04:05AM
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday June 01 2016, @11:08AM
Hm, ... I am waiting for the image to display for some minutes now. Online connection?
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Wednesday June 01 2016, @01:52PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Tuesday May 31 2016, @08:16PM
So, which is it? The best from up close or from far away? Pluto isn't nearby! I blame the editors for my ignorant confusion, since I believe I know the answer but an too obstinate to let the opportunity to comment pass by.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:50PM
The spacecraft was close to Pluto (in relative terms) when the pictures were taken. It is no longer close, but the narrow band radios take a long time to send back this data.
None of this is news.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:58PM
Well, these images were taken before the probe hit its closest point of encounter with the (dwarf cough) planet. Being they estimated it would take "about a year" to download everything (from on-board storage), perhaps we have YET to see the closest taken. The probe had a lot to do during the encounter, including imaging the moons, imaging in different spectra, and running non-camera sensors, such that there may not be that many nearest-encounter close-ups.
Unlike Voyager, most of the instruments are in a fixed position relative to the probe such that the probe has to rotate each instrument into position, which limits the number of instruments active at a time (although some scan the same general area at the same time). This was to cut probe and mission costs. Keep in mind the more data you gather, the more time Earth antennas will be need to be pointed at the probe to download data, which arrives really slowly from that distance. Close-ups of the entire (visible) surface would perhaps overwhelm Earth antennas. Thus, I believe only select spots or "strips" were imaged with the high-res camera.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 01 2016, @06:36AM
Haha, funny guy! *nod wink wink*
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @08:56PM
Pluto is a logical place for aliens to install surveillance equipment to gather close-up images of our solar system. Pluto is small, is distant from the sun, and orbits outside the ecliptic. Natives would be unlikely to look there.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:06PM
Of course the aliens had to assume that one day a space probe might pass by and take pictures. Therefore they took pictures before building their base, and when they saw New Horizon was sent to Pluto (long before it arrived), they studied it, and when it arrived at Pluto, they deactivated its transmission to earth and replaced it by their own transmission, which contains the old pictures. Of course there's no way those earth people will ever notice, and it's even real Pluto images they get, just not the newest ones. After the images are sent, the probe's own transmission will be reactivated.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by deadstick on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:13PM
and orbits outside the ecliptic
So does every planet but Earth (because its orbit defines the ecliptic). Pluto just has the largest inclination. How would that be a criterion in searching for aliens?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:41PM
The large inclination of its orbit makes Pluto a better vantage point to spy on the planets from above and below the plane of the ecliptic.
(Score: 2) by bryan on Tuesday May 31 2016, @10:13PM
The 40 AU average distance from Earth and 248 year orbital period, however, make it rather less than ideal.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday June 01 2016, @12:04AM
Less than Ideal for what?
How closely do you have to watch a civilization that just two seconds ago (in relative terms) learned to land on nearby planets?
Perfect place. Comes close once in a while, stays comfortably out of reach most of the time.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by liquibyte on Wednesday June 01 2016, @04:52AM
Have space suit will travel.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 01 2016, @07:23AM
Hiding in the clouds of a gas giant via blimp-like ships is also something to consider. It would take a lot of direct probing inside the atmosphere to run into such. Or perhaps radar, but radar is not considered effective for studying gas giants I believe. Probes go there to study air, not hidden blimps.
(Score: 1) by Ken on Wednesday June 01 2016, @05:48PM
I thought all the alien's had bases on Neptune.
:-D
(Score: 2) by bitstream on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:00PM
New Horizons' Best View of Pluto's Craters, Mountains and Icy Plains [youtube.com]
Pluto the "Dwarf Planet" HD [youtube.com]
Latest Pluto Flyby Photos 2015-07-17 NASA New Horizons News Conference / Mission Update [youtube.com]
Seems there's not many good videos on Pluto?
(Score: 2) by mendax on Tuesday May 31 2016, @10:01PM
The US Postal Service released today [nytimes.com] "forever" postage stamps that commemorate the New Horizon's encounter with Pluto. (The links in the article to buy them are bad; go here [usps.com] if you want to buy some.)
For those non-Americans here, a "Forever" stamp is a postage stamp good for mailing an ounce (28.35 grams) anywhere in the United States and anywhere else the USPS delivers mail (e.g., Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Marshall Islands, and a few other places). You know what "mail" is. It what you use to send messages if you don't want them to be read by the NSA.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday June 01 2016, @12:00AM
and a few other places
Like everywhere on planet earth with a functional postal system.
Forever stamps are not just a US and US territory thing any more, and haven't been for about 10 years. Originally there was a problem in that foreign postal systems were taught to look for a currency amount on the stamp, and reject it if none was found.
Worldwide Postal Treaties had to be rewritten to accommodate the Word "Forever" and a Flag. They were ancient and out of date.
Not just a US thing. A few other countries also have stamps that bear no currency symbols, and used colors or symbols or Flags to denominate value.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Wednesday June 01 2016, @12:18AM
Uh, I really don't want to split hairs, but I will because it's fun sometimes.
While other countries have the concept of a "forever" stamp, I suspect most don't call them that.
Second of all, I believe that most countries have their own postal services, and because of that international rates apply to most of them. The exceptions for things mailed from the US are Canada and Mexico, as the US maintains separate postal treaties with them, and a few island nations in the Pacific. The USPS operates there and for that reason domestic postal rates apply. The "Forever" stamps I was referring to is good for an ounce of domestic mail, including any place where the USPS operates. While you can use domestic "forever" stamps for international postage, the postage is considerably higher. Compare $0.47 to $1.15.
And, yes, I do know about the "international forever stamp".
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday June 01 2016, @01:48AM
The "Forever" stamps I was referring to is good for an ounce of domestic mail, including any place where the USPS operates. While you can use domestic "forever" stamps for international postage, the postage is considerably higher.
Hair splitting. All Forever stamps are the same value: 47 Cents (check your watch).
There are lots of them to choose from. [usps.com]
The price of a first class letter to Italy has always been higher even when using denominational stamps. The price does not vary based on the stamps you use, only by the weight and destination. The Forever stamp is a 47 cent stamp. Period.
Mailing to somewhere that needs more postage, either put on a couple more, or reach for your cache of denominational stamps.
There was a time when you couldn't use a Forever stamp for non-domestic mail, but that time is long past.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Wednesday June 01 2016, @03:12AM
I think that is what I said.
Of course. I have been getting the catalogs in the mail for years and I just ordered some more stamps today, including the Pluto stamps. I regularly write letters to prisoners as well as ordinary correspondents who know the joy of receiving an honest-to-goodness letter in the mail and enjoy the wide variety of stamps available. My current favorite is the Elvis forever stamp.
Strictly speaking, a forever stamp is worth whatever the first ounce of first class mail costs at the time it's used. Right now it's 47 cents. Before April 10th it was 49 cents (it actually went down, something that hasn't happened since World War One). Who knows what it will be next year.
I think we've hashed this subject out enough now.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday June 01 2016, @12:11AM
From the article: "... Pluto is actually more planet-like than previously thought."
I keep thinking the IAU should have waited for New Horizons data before making a final decision. Why did they rush to demote Pluto? They knew New Horizons was en route when they decided on demotion. What was the hurry? Really dumb to make a decision without facts, particularly when so many new facts of far higher quality were coming soon. And also it would have been simply courteous to delay the decision until the first probe sent there, and quite possibly the only one for the next 50 years, had given us a good look. Was this a slap in the face to America, Pluto being the one planet discovered by an American, and the IAU in an especially anti-American mood at the time? Or, was it a diabolically clever publicity stunt to stir up interest in Pluto by being mean about it, sort of like Coke stirring up more interest in the old drink when they introduced New Coke?
I think the clearest, simplest criteria for a planet is that it should be round, not irregular. Its mass should be enough for it to deform into a round shape, but not so great that it can support nuclear fusion, as that would make it a star. This would bring Ceres back into the fold. Orbiting a star is a more dubious requirement, as there can be "rogue" planets that do not orbit any star, instead orbiting about the center of mass of the galaxy. Such being the case, the requirement that a body clear its orbit to be a planet would be ridiculous for one with a circa 250 million year long orbit about a galaxy. Pluto points up another problem with the orbital clearing requirement, that being that they have to make an exception to that rule for a double planet. Heck, if the Moon was just a little bigger, Earth and the Moon would be a double planet.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday June 01 2016, @04:41AM
My guess is that some astronomer bet some other astronomer they could destroy the Earth [qntm.org]
If you check on the International Earth-Destruction Advisory Board [qntm.org] page, you find:
Strangely, that does not correspond to the year the definition of planet changed [iau.org] (2006), so I could be wrong.
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Wednesday June 01 2016, @12:33PM
Why did they rush to demote Pluto?
Seems to be a clash between two equally irrational arguments - "Waah! but Pluto has always been a planet!" vs. "Nooo... we don't want Ceres, Eros and who knows how many other lumps of rock to be counted as planets!" - in which both sides seem to be inventing arbitrary rules specifically to include/exclude their favourite celestial bodies. Frankly, its starting to border on astrology - or, at least, pre-Darwinian zoology...
The boring, rational attitude is to realise that as long as "planet" still covers everything from Mercury to newly discovered super-Jovian exoplanets, it is never going to be a particularly useful system of classification and you're going to need to invent some notation like "a type X-CZ/31b/RC92 body" if you want to concisely convey useful information about composition and orbit. "Planet" can be handed over to the safe keeping of colloquial English and used for anything planety-looking.
When you've gone from "appears to move against the background of fixed stars" to "has cleared its orbit" its probably time to reboot your classification system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 01 2016, @04:03PM
It wasn't a clash of arguments, like most things, it was a clash of egos. And some of the "winners" have been promoting themselves (such as Brown or Tyson) these last 10 years as scientific rebels, proudly proclaiming they "killed Pluto". If Pluto stayed a planet, they wouldn't be known as cool upstarts, just regular astronomers or astrophysicists.
The whole process involved in the IAU decision was a farce [space.com], and the method it occurred was disappointing [bbc.co.uk]:
You are correct that this was rushed through. Only those physically present at the meeting were allowed to vote, so this much ballyhooed "The IAU has decided" really meant that about 200 out of 10,000 IAU members had decided.
The irony is that if this new mysterious planet is discovered (the one where Brown is out there championing himself as the savior of the 9-planet system!), this being the hypothesized Earth-sized one in an elliptical orbit, well this one can't be a planet after all because one of the criteria Brown and others pushed forward to rule out Pluto is that it has a "near-circular" orbit, which this hypothesized new body doesn't. I wonder what we'll do with that one? (I'm sure some will want to just gerrymander the definition to make "near-circular" to be "no more elliptic than this one").