Ceres!

[viscount aero]

[

Yeah that is false. That component of the theory is so reaching and overly complicated. Too many far-fetched but highly specific things must take place for that theory to even begin to be believed.

The flattening over time part is not too unreasonable. Find an ice cube in your freezer and position it so it is sitting on top of the metal grating of one of the shelves. Over time it will sink down, and the metal wires will cut into it as it flows around them. It could also be argued that a glacier is like a very slow moving river, but it does indeed flow when looked at over a longer time scale.

But... doesn't provide any explanation of the hexagons, and doesn't provide any explanation of the central peaks.

Man, I'm intrigued. Isn't Dawn arriving into orbit some time today? No doubt the first high-res images will be posted up here as soon as.

Yes I see that. But the overall geometry, floors included, do not lend credence to the "glacial" theory. Impact events are to be moved away from as theories in this case. The hexagonal craters didn't happen that way.

The straight sides did not arise from magically perfect "faulting" or fracturing that occurs randomly over the entire planet as hexagons.

[willendure]

Yes I see that. But the overall geometry, floors included, do not lend credence to the "glacial" theory.

Look at this one on Tethys, its not even flat, its convex. It doesn't seem likely this was ever an impact bowl.

[viscount aero]

Yes I see that. But the overall geometry, floors included, do not lend credence to the "glacial" theory.

Look at this one on Tethys, its not even flat, its convex. It doesn't seem likely this was ever an impact bowl.

Yes and look at the size of the area relative to the planet body. An impact of that size would have destroyed the world.

[ThunderIdeal]

Man, I'm intrigued. Isn't Dawn arriving into orbit some time today? No doubt the first high-res images will be posted up here as soon as.

I read in a recent article that the next photos will be taken in April.

[ThunderIdeal]

photos around april 10, other measurements around april 23.

something to do with dawn being behind ceres.

[willendure]

photos around april 10, other measurements around april 23.

something to do with dawn being behind ceres.

Such a tease, its going to be a long month. Can't they get some shots of that electrical arc lighting up the rear side while dawn is behind, that would really make our day...

[ThunderIdeal]

from stephen smith in today's TPOD https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2015/0 ... will-tell/

There might be an Electric Universe explanation for the spots; something less speculative than “cryo-volcanoes”; perhaps the spots are similar to what was observed on Titan by the Cassini spacecraft. On July 8, 2009, the Cassini-Equinox spacecraft detected a flash of reflected light from Titan. It was speculated that the bright infrared spots were due to reflected light from Titan’s putative methane lakes. However, a past Picture of the Day proposed that the infrared light seen by Cassini was reflected by the hard, glassified crust left by an interplanetary plasma discharge.

Could the bright spots on Ceres be a specular response from glassified, electrically excavated pits? Since they seem to be there at different phases of its rotation, reflection might not be the answer: another phenomenon not yet considered could be causing the spots. Time will tell.

[D_Archer]

another phenomenon not yet considered could be causing the spots.

I think Stephen Smith/EU is/are careful to not jump the gun.

But i have said it already and am not afraid to do so. it is an active discharge, craters like that are produced by rotating Birkeland currents. It is a slow continual discharge. You can also see crater chains on Ceres, topside, probably due to precession*, the discharge jumps to another spot.

It would be cool if the discharge jump while dawn is in orbit, but we probably will not be that lucky.

Regards,
Daniel

*The precession time of the axis of Ceres is very long, about 220,000 years (from NASA)

[Metryq]

But i have said it already and am not afraid to do so. it is an active discharge

Well, the spots are unlikely to be a binary star.

[viscount aero]

Upon looking at the photo of the bright spots on Ceres again, I realized that there are no dropshadows behind them. As comparison, look at the local and surrounding crater rims: You can clearly see there are shadows cast from crater walls sharply rising above the surface of the planet. Crater shadows are also cast near the bright spots. But this isn't seen in the case of the bright spots themselves. This lends me to believe the bright spots are not geological forms.

Were the bright spots physical structures, geological, or even columnar in shape [as in a volcano or geyser], there would be shadows of these things cast across the crater floor. But none are seen.

The light sources could therefore be:

• BELOW the surface, as in holes or giant pits, the light coming out of vents
• luminous bursts or discharges

[Metryq]

Upon looking at the photo of the bright spots on Ceres again, I realized that there are no dropshadows behind them.

Ah, the old "It was Photoshopped; the shadows are all wrong" ploy.

I'm in agreement, of course. A depression would also be less likely to catch sunlight. In a photo a few pages back in this thread the sunlight is coming from far to the left, which doesn't dovetail with the spots being reflections from ice (angle of incidence/reflectance). The persistence of the spots (between probe and Hubble images) also argues against them being sunlight glinting off some smooth surface.

[viscount aero]

Upon looking at the photo of the bright spots on Ceres again, I realized that there are no dropshadows behind them.

Ah, the old "It was Photoshopped; the shadows are all wrong" ploy.

I'm in agreement, of course. A depression would also be less likely to catch sunlight. In a photo a few pages back in this thread the sunlight is coming from far to the left, which doesn't dovetail with the spots being reflections from ice (angle of incidence/reflectance). The persistence of the spots (between probe and Hubble images) also argues against them being sunlight glinting off some smooth surface.

Yes and the "smooth surfaces" would need to be entirely anomalous and extraordinarily different than the entire planet's albedo and surface characteristics were they actually concentrated regions of ices or liquids. If they are volcanic then there is no evidence thus far of plumes or geological mounds or build up. As of now they are blanked out and highly focused areas of brightness that overload and blow out the camera's optics.

If they are merely taller bright structures then, again, they cast no shadows--zero. This is problematic for the white spots being deemed as physically tall structures.

[4realScience]

Why no new images of Ceres? It's a week since they went into orbit. NASA website has no info about this.

Anyone know why the data has stopped?

Remember when the first Rosetta 67P pictures came in ? They also stopped the flow, and still sit on it to this DAY.

[Dotini]

Relax. They overshot the dwarf planet and are currently on the dark side turning around and going into orbit. New pix in a month, they say.

Go to the Welease Wosetta thread. I posted some new pix there that will make your socks roll up and down.

[4realScience]

@Dotini: Ah, thank you. (I was becoming increasingly incensed over this and might have broken up some more furniture. Where can we follow the info you are getting? And be sure to say whether it is NASA data.)

They overshot, that's the report that interests me most, right now. I'm sure exact shooting at Cere's range, asteroid belt, is hard but it would not surprise me to see them indeed acquire orbit. That's because I watched with amazement as the Rosetta pilots glommed down into a close orbit onto that 67P Rock in its crazy rubber duck tumbling.


And while we are waiting on this stream:

At this point, the mainstream astronomers not only have little chance, ...they have no chance of defeating the EU revolt in astronomy because dogma can never defeat data and data is really beginning to flow, from their own mainstreaming, mean machines, even.