It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A fresh perspective on Ceres, it's a left-over moon

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

You are right, it's absolutely crazy to think it might have been inhabited.



Astrobiologists hope to find life elsewhere in the universe, or possibly even in our own cosmic neighborhood, the solar system. Their efforts are usually concentrated on worlds such as the planet Mars, or icy moons like Europa. However, there are other, less conventional locations in the solar system where scientists think life may be found.

At the International Society for the Study of the Origin of Life conference in Florence, Italy, Joop Houtkooper from the University of Giessen divulged a theory that life could have originated on the asteroid Ceres.

The distant world Ceres, the smallest known dwarf planet in the solar system, lies within the asteroid belt. It was called a planet after its discovery in 1801, then later downgraded to asteroid status. With the latest planet definition from the International Astronomical Union, the round object is now considered a dwarf planet. Is there a chance that this exotic world is home to extraterrestrial organisms?

Space.Com
UniverseToday
Forbes
Astrobiology


Touche




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: LuckyYurg

Sure it's possible. That doesn't mean it's plausible or likely, though.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: LuckyYurg

Sure it's possible. That doesn't mean it's plausible or likely, though.


Very correct, in fact I have no doubt that life didn't start on Ceres. The life cycle of the universe is much older than that!

But at a time, that planet and it's moons played their part.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: LuckyYurg

One possibility is that this Planet M could have been hit by an Antimatter comet or asteroid. It would have to be big, something like 5 to 6 miles big, but it could in theory blow up a planet.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


There is no way of knowing how much rubble would be left after such a destruction. If you are thinking that 100% would be left, it's impossible. Think of when they have a controlled demolition of a building, they expect 12% of the building to remain as rubble, the rest is so small it gets dealt with in different way. Given space is a vacuum, if something were to destroy a planet, I've have to thing very small amount would be left in the vicinity of where that planet was. Most would have to be blown out to travel among the stars for eternity.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: LuckyYurg

One possibility is that this Planet M could have been hit by an Antimatter comet or asteroid. It would have to be big, something like 5 to 6 miles big, but it could in theory blow up a planet.


If it was intelligently destroyed, then there'd be no guess as to what type of "weapon" would be used. But if such a thing were to exist, it sounds like a good idea to me.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: LuckyYurg

One possibility is that this Planet M could have been hit by an Antimatter comet or asteroid. It would have to be big, something like 5 to 6 miles big, but it could in theory blow up a planet.

I've got to give you props for out-of-the box thinking with that one. I wouldn't have ever come up with it. That being said, I would think the odds of such a thing making it to the inner solar system would be virtually nonexistent, given all the other 'regular' matter it would have to dodge on its' way in.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: LuckyYurg

One possibility is that this Planet M could have been hit by an Antimatter comet or asteroid. It would have to be big, something like 5 to 6 miles big, but it could in theory blow up a planet.

I've got to give you props for out-of-the box thinking with that one. I wouldn't have ever come up with it. That being said, I would think the odds of such a thing making it to the inner solar system would be virtually nonexistent, given all the other 'regular' matter it would have to dodge on its' way in.


I agree with you as well, such a thing would have to be under intelligent control. And we think we're so fancy with our Nukes



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


There is no way of knowing how much rubble would be left after such a destruction. If you are thinking that 100% would be left, it's impossible. Think of when they have a controlled demolition of a building, they expect 12% of the building to remain as rubble, the rest is so small it gets dealt with in different way. Given space is a vacuum, if something were to destroy a planet, I've have to thing very small amount would be left in the vicinity of where that planet was. Most would have to be blown out to travel among the stars for eternity.


Don't be ridiculous, we look there today, measure the matter that is there, and come to 100% total infallible conclusion there is not enough material there to make a planet, only 4% the mass of our moon is there. Did space aliens steal it all into magical non existant make believe places?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LuckyYurg

Well, if a planet were suddenly, violently destoryed, you'd think there'd be evidence on a bordering planet. Something like one side would be much more scarred than the side facing away from the violent explosion.

Does Mars show such scarring? Hmm



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


There is no way of knowing how much rubble would be left after such a destruction. If you are thinking that 100% would be left, it's impossible. Think of when they have a controlled demolition of a building, they expect 12% of the building to remain as rubble, the rest is so small it gets dealt with in different way. Given space is a vacuum, if something were to destroy a planet, I've have to thing very small amount would be left in the vicinity of where that planet was. Most would have to be blown out to travel among the stars for eternity.


Don't be ridiculous, we look there today, measure the matter that is there, and come to 100% total infallible conclusion there is not enough material there to make a planet, only 4% the mass of our moon is there. Did space aliens steal it all into magical non existant make believe places?



What I'm saying is that 100% of the matter there, isn't 100% of Planet M. If you blow something up in space, the bits left over are going to go flying everywhere, not just stay right where they are. We're lucky that any of it is left.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Adaven
a reply to: LuckyYurg

Well, if a planet were suddenly, violently destoryed, you'd think there'd be evidence on a bordering planet. Something like one side would be much more scarred than the side facing away from the violent explosion.

Does Mars show such scarring? Hmm


Or how it would cover the planet next to it with a thin coat of red dust? Mars sure isn't red once you scratch the surface.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


There is no way of knowing how much rubble would be left after such a destruction. If you are thinking that 100% would be left, it's impossible. Think of when they have a controlled demolition of a building, they expect 12% of the building to remain as rubble, the rest is so small it gets dealt with in different way. Given space is a vacuum, if something were to destroy a planet, I've have to thing very small amount would be left in the vicinity of where that planet was. Most would have to be blown out to travel among the stars for eternity.


Don't be ridiculous, we look there today, measure the matter that is there, and come to 100% total infallible conclusion there is not enough material there to make a planet, only 4% the mass of our moon is there. Did space aliens steal it all into magical non existant make believe places?



What I'm saying is that 100% of the matter there, isn't 100% of Planet M. If you blow something up in space, the bits left over are going to go flying everywhere, not just stay right where they are. We're lucky that any of it is left.


No, all the debris would still orbit the sun. If you think more mass existed there then the onus is on you to show where it is. Until you can, the theory is bunk because the evidence in the real amount of observable mass there says it is bunk.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: LuckyYurg

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


There is no way of knowing how much rubble would be left after such a destruction. If you are thinking that 100% would be left, it's impossible. Think of when they have a controlled demolition of a building, they expect 12% of the building to remain as rubble, the rest is so small it gets dealt with in different way. Given space is a vacuum, if something were to destroy a planet, I've have to thing very small amount would be left in the vicinity of where that planet was. Most would have to be blown out to travel among the stars for eternity.


Don't be ridiculous, we look there today, measure the matter that is there, and come to 100% total infallible conclusion there is not enough material there to make a planet, only 4% the mass of our moon is there. Did space aliens steal it all into magical non existant make believe places?



What I'm saying is that 100% of the matter there, isn't 100% of Planet M. If you blow something up in space, the bits left over are going to go flying everywhere, not just stay right where they are. We're lucky that any of it is left.


No, all the debris would still orbit the sun. If you think more mass existed there then the onus is on you to show where it is. Until you can, the theory is bunk because the evidence in the real amount of observable mass there says it is bunk.


I'm not here trying to convince you of anything, just sharing thoughts and ideas.

So what if most of Planet M was broken up into such small pieces they eventually got pulled into the Sun? And just the largest chucks remained.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: cmdrkeenkid
Hmm...


The total mass of the Asteroid belt is estimated to be 3.0 to 3.6×1021 kilograms, which is 4 percent of the Earth's Moon.

Source

That's hardly enough to be a major planet. Plus, about half the mass of the main belt is in the four or five largest of the asteroids.


The theory was that Jupiter and/or Saturn exerted such a gravitational perturbation on that area of space, that no proto-planet ever formed. As soon as any two chunks of asteroid collided to form a super-asteroid, the combined mass would lead to the object being sent out on an outward or inward trajectory.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: Thorneblood
a reply to: LuckyYurg

One possibility is that this Planet M could have been hit by an Antimatter comet or asteroid. It would have to be big, something like 5 to 6 miles big, but it could in theory blow up a planet.

I've got to give you props for out-of-the box thinking with that one. I wouldn't have ever come up with it. That being said, I would think the odds of such a thing making it to the inner solar system would be virtually nonexistent, given all the other 'regular' matter it would have to dodge on its' way in.


There are some theories that there was a Mars sized planet that collided with the early Earth to form the Earth-Moon system.

There is also the Sumerian creation myth relating to the "Tablets of Destinies" (Orbital data), Tiamat, etc.. :

zechariasitchinstudies.weebly.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

If Sitchin said it, it's almost certainly not true.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: smurfy
But it has been hypothesized already, that of planet Phaeton. Phaeton was destroyed and became much of the asteroid belt.

en.wikipedia.org...


Not enough material is in the asteroid belt to even make a planet so how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?


Not my prob, I gave the link to what what was a given hypothetical at the time, so they did what was the thing to do, give it a name after a Greek god, similar to 'the jerk' firemen calling his dog #head.

Of course if you don't know already, STEREO is looking at this moment for evidence of Theia, (also named after a Greek entity) the hypothetically, Mars sized planet that is...hypothetically, a planet that collided with Earth in a big bonk and was responsible for the creation of the Moon. But, anyway at the time the big planet Phaeton hypothesis had some standing, with others saying more remnants would be found, and they were.
Anyway my point was only to describe to the OP the planet Phaeton hypothesis being so similar as he/she's own, including the the orbital path being the same..which Theia's is not.

At the end of the day, to answer your question, "how does an impossible planet that never did exist get a name?" in it's entirety, I suggest reading the fecking link I gave.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
most of the ancient theories were that the planet was smashed to pieces on purpose by tptb and unwelcome intruders lots of alien high tech stuff involved, neighboring planets still not happy about what happened



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join