Pluto flyover by New Horizons

[Kharakov]

Well there y'go - you obviously believe it all whereas I don't, and only one of us can be right.

Holy shit - you actually weren't kidding?

I wouldn't take her Siriusly when she's been chasing Styx with boos. Although she might forget she's joking on the Styx.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The launch would be easy to fake. Sure, a gazillion people saw the bird fly--but they didn't see inside it's nose. Launch a spy sat and call it "New Horizons".

That's still a real launch, paid for out of the New Horizons budget.

So, black projects being hidden under some other budget item are no surprise.

 

[repoman]

Has New Horizons gotten any higher resolution photos of other Kuiper Belt Objects?

 

[skepticalbip]

Has New Horizons gotten any higher resolution photos of other Kuiper Belt Objects?

It has imaged some of Pluto's moons.

Here's an image of the moon Charon:




If you are interested in the other images from New Horizons, try NASA's New Horizons site:
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/main/index.html

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Has New Horizons gotten any higher resolution photos of other Kuiper Belt Objects?

Have some patience! Kuiper Belt objects are far apart.

 

[Iznomneak]

Pluto has a tail.

Scientists Discover that Something Enormous is Hiding Behind Pluto (Literally)

http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/...ng-enormous-is-hiding-behind-pluto-literally/

 

[Cerberus]

I've been waiting for that. So what do you make of that Telegraph link, dystopian?

We've known about cosmic voids and supervoids for quite a while. Referring to voids as structures is not problematic at all; although it might be more correct to say they are *part* of cosmic structures (galactic filaments); or possibly even the other way around. If you don't understand how a void can be a part of a structure, then consider that the absence of a thing is an integral part of most structures. Consider a doorway as the archetypal example. A doorway is an integral part of any building... yet a doorway is literally *nothing*. It is the absence of a wall. It is a void; yet part of a structure.

Cosmic voids are interesting. They're regions of the universe that are not entirely empty, but have well below average distribution of matter (in the form of galaxies). They're formed as a result of something called baryon acoustic oscillations. The early universe packed all the energy/matter that we have today into a very dense package. The universe essentially consisted of a plasma made out of electrons and baryons. This primordial plasma did not have a uniform density; there were regions that were more dense than others. Gravity will pull even more matter to these dense regions, while at the same time the interaction of photons (light) with the dense matter creates an outward pressure. These two opposing forces create oscillations that ripple through the primordial plasma. There's a bit more to it, but the eventual result is that these dense regions collapse into voids, while the ripples evolve into the galactic filaments we see today.

The fact that this supervoid is larger than expected provides reason to recalculate the specific details, but it does not suggest that something entirely different happened. It's like if you were coming up with an experimental recipe for gunpowder and discover that the explosion created is larger than you thought it would be. This does not suggest that the underlying theory is wrong, just that your calculations need some more work.

Have 'we'? Are you a cosmologist, and in the loop? If not, where do you get all your information?

 

[Cerberus]

How about addressing my questions above with some sort of substance instead of trolling people with one-liners and smiley faces.

Do you think that NASA and the ESA have faked every single space mission that's gone beyond the moon?

All dozen or more successful Mars missions by NASA? The failed ones like Beagle and Mars Climate Observer? Cassini-Huygens at Saturn? Dawn which visited Vesta and is currently orbiting Ceres and making its way into a lower orbit to take higher resolution pictures of the surface? Voyagers I and II, both of which are still active and sending back valuable data to NASA? The various Mariner, Pioneer, etc. probes which have explored various parts of the solar system?

Do you think the contractors that help build and design these missions are in on the hoax or have been successfully fooled by NASA into designing and building equipment which never went to use and which NASA is faking data from? IBM, Lockheed, Boeing, etc. and many many others. What's their role in the cover-up, if they are involved at all?

What about universities like Caltech and Arizona State University which are heavily involved with NASA. ASU is responsible for doing a lot of the legwork of processing and preparing the imagery data from Mars orbiters which is publicly available online on their website and on NASA's website. Literally hundreds of thousands of images. You can view multiple images of the same places on Mars from multiple orbiters (from different space agencies as well, ESA have their own mapping orbiter at Mars) at different times and compare them (I'm the kind of nerd who enjoys that kind of thing.) Are they in on the hoax too or are NASA fooling them into thinking they're actually involved with helping them with their solar system exploration? Are NASA feeding them fake CGI images, thousands upon thousands of them, to make them think they're helping work with the real thing?

How deep do you think the hoax actually goes if you really believe that NASA or anyone else has never actually explored the solar system via probes beyond the moon?

In a couple of years, the James Webb Space Telescope, the successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, will be launched and placed in a Lagrangian orbit, 930,000 miles from earth. When it starts sending back pictures, will you believe them or dismiss them because it's working from beyond the moon, a feat which you apparently think impossible for unspecified reasons?

What India? Have they also gotten into the solar system fakery act by hoaxing their successful probe to Mars?

The bigger the subterfuge, the more there are who will buy into it because nobody would dare challenge the 'received wisdom' (think Emperor's new clothes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes). I'll decline your invitation to engage because all you've done is to provide announcements from a variety of space industry publications or associated (with it) sources. You can believe them if you like - I'm more circumspect and choose not to; I only believe proven and tangible facts, not speculation and fanciful ambitions.

 

[skepticalbip]

The bigger the subterfuge, the more there are who will buy into it because nobody would dare challenge the 'received wisdom' (think Emperor's new clothes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes). I'll decline your invitation to engage because all you've done is to provide announcements from a variety of space industry publications or associated (with it) sources. You can believe them if you like - I'm more circumspect and choose not to; I only believe proven and tangible facts, not speculation and fanciful ambitions.

Really? And where do you get these "proven and tangible facts"? Maybe "Infowars"?

 

[barbos]

I presume all these smiling space "scientists" are actually Hollywood actors?
Damn, they are good.

 

[Cerberus]

I presume all these smiling space "scientists" are actually Hollywood actors?
Damn, they are good.

They're smiling because people like you are providing them with a lucrative job for life - who wouldn't smile! Not many people can say that these days; 'jobs for life', especially non-productive ones, are hard to come by.

- - - Updated - - -

The bigger the subterfuge, the more there are who will buy into it because nobody would dare challenge the 'received wisdom' (think Emperor's new clothes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes). I'll decline your invitation to engage because all you've done is to provide announcements from a variety of space industry publications or associated (with it) sources. You can believe them if you like - I'm more circumspect and choose not to; I only believe proven and tangible facts, not speculation and fanciful ambitions.

Really? And where do you get these "proven and tangible facts"? Maybe "Infowars"?

 

[barbos]

They're smiling because people like you are providing them with a lucrative job for life - who wouldn't smile! Not many people can say that these days; 'jobs for life', especially non-productive ones, are hard to come by.

I am actually one of these people with "non-productive" profession, so I can't provide them with anything like you suggested.
I am also an expert on smiles. Their smiles are different from the types you described., so they are must be extremely good actors.

 

[dystopian]

Have 'we'?

Yes we have. The first cosmic voids were discovered in the 1970's.

Are you a cosmologist, and in the loop? If not, where do you get all your information?

I am not a cosmologist. I'm just not an idiot who'se incapable of or refuses to look at and interpret independent research findings.

The bigger the subterfuge, the more there are who will buy into it because nobody would dare challenge the 'received wisdom' (think Emperor's new clothes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Em...7s_New_Clothes). I'll decline your invitation to engage because all you've done is to provide announcements from a variety of space industry publications or associated (with it) sources. You can believe them if you like - I'm more circumspect and choose not to; I only believe proven and tangible facts, not speculation and fanciful ambitions.

These *are* proven and tangible facts. But because they don't fit with your archaic worldview you convince yourself that it's all a lie. You are not the skeptic you imagine yourself to be.

 

[Cerberus]

Yes we have. The first cosmic voids were discovered in the 1970's.

Are you a cosmologist, and in the loop? If not, where do you get all your information?

I am not a cosmologist. I'm just not an idiot who'se incapable of or refuses to look at and interpret independent research findings.

The bigger the subterfuge, the more there are who will buy into it because nobody would dare challenge the 'received wisdom' (think Emperor's new clothes? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Em...7s_New_Clothes). I'll decline your invitation to engage because all you've done is to provide announcements from a variety of space industry publications or associated (with it) sources. You can believe them if you like - I'm more circumspect and choose not to; I only believe proven and tangible facts, not speculation and fanciful ambitions.

These *are* proven and tangible facts. But because they don't fit with your archaic worldview you convince yourself that it's all a lie. You are not the skeptic you imagine yourself to be.

Stop digging, dystopian, you're beginning to come across as clutching at straws.

 

[Cerberus]

They're smiling because people like you are providing them with a lucrative job for life - who wouldn't smile! Not many people can say that these days; 'jobs for life', especially non-productive ones, are hard to come by.

I am actually one of these people with "non-productive" profession, so I can't provide them with anything like you suggested.
I am also an expert on smiles. Their smiles are different from the types you described., so they are must be extremely good actors.

Yes, they must be.

 

[dystopian]

Stop digging, dystopian, you're beginning to come across as clutching at straws.

I don't think you even understand what that phrase means.

 

[bilby]

Stop digging, dystopian, you're beginning to come across as clutching at straws.

I am pretty sure that, while digging, it would be impractical to also clutch at straws; I mean, both activities generally imply the use of both hands. If you think about it.

 

[dystopian]

Stop digging, dystopian, you're beginning to come across as clutching at straws.

I am pretty sure that, while digging, it would be impractical to also clutch at straws; I mean, both activities generally imply the use of both hands. If you think about it.

I don't know, if the straw is frozen solid it could conceivably be used as a crude digging tool. Of course, that would likely mean the ground was frozen too and the frozen straw would not be sufficient enough to dig through that.

Perhaps that is why this hole I'm apparently digging isn't getting any deeper?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, the straws don't need to be used for digging themselves. You could get thirsty while digging and use the straws to drink some water, allowing you to get rehydrated and be able to dig further.

 

[dystopian]

Well, the straws don't need to be used for digging themselves. You could get thirsty while digging and use the straws to drink some water, allowing you to get rehydrated and be able to dig further.

Surely you jest! Straw is for feeding horses, you can't drink with it...

...unless!

Do you mean to say there's more than one kind of straw? This is starting to turn into a more complicated situation than I could ever imagine.