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.

 

NASA reveals new image of Dwarf Planet 'like nothing that Humanity has ever seen before'

page: 2
47
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2019 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Any idea how long ago it was formed?

This might be a stupid question; I'm no expert, not by any stretch, but judging by the images in this thread it looks to be relatively recent to me.
Wouldn't it be appear more worn, weather beaten and less uniform if it was pretty old?




posted on Jun, 19 2019 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

I think that they think it is an “ice volcano” (and, no, that is a computer generated image from data obtained, not an image of the object itself).

So, it “erupted” and has, off-and-on, over time rebuilding itself. Erosion in the cold, cold vacuum of space takes forever (more eruptions than erosion so it has grown).

Does anybody else think that it looks like the “cat box” photo of The Face on Mars??




posted on Jun, 19 2019 @ 11:00 PM
link   
As TEOTWAWKIAIFF mentioned, it's a simulated image (orbital image stretched over 3D terrain model and looked at in a 3D software). We've seen the actual images of this mountain a while ago.


Still very enigmatic, of course.



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 12:12 AM
link   
all living planets are growing.

Maybe it is a new growth bubbling out the side of the planet. As time goes on more growth will pop up creating a mountainous regular planet as opposed to a dwarf planet.

The new matter is created because trillions of gamma rays and cosmic rays are hitting the center of the planet and have no where to go and end up turning into matter.

Just a theory.

Look up neil adams growing earth, growing mars, growing moon, etc...



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 06:15 AM
link   
My Missus said relating to the crater next to the bulge/ mountain that it could it be an impact took up some space so the other part bulged. Like squeezin a balloon full of water ? If that crater is as deep as the mountain though it would be awesome for Down hill box cars.



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 06:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
Wouldn't it be appear more worn, weather beaten and less uniform if it was pretty old?

Yes, that's why they talk about the lack of craters on the mound, as they usually use the number of craters as a sign of age.

Assuming a random distribution of craters over time, places with more craters should be older than places with less craters.



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
Interesting,

Both summit and surface level are cratered while the slopes are smooth, however, the whole caboodle is said to be frozen??


 



which sets the stage for my theory

the Mountain on Ceres is just a huge snowball/ice body which gently settled down on the surface instead of crashing into the Ceres at meteor or comet speed

the sloped sides are where the snowball lost Its shape from the minor gravity and from other forces over time...

The Result is what we see... a mountain of ice that didn't go Splat !
edit on th30156103360220262019 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
Both summit and surface level are cratered while the slopes are smooth, however, the whole caboodle is said to be frozen??

I don't think the summit is cratered, look at the photo posted by SeaWorthy.



The marks on the summit do not look like craters.



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: SeaWorthy

I've always thought it could be something like that..



posted on Jun, 20 2019 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Seems pretty obvious that the mountain was a slow impact on Ceres, bounced and flipped over with a soft pirouette and landed where it is now. It is practically identical in size and shape to the crater right next to it.



Yep. But answers don’t get grant money.



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 04:56 AM
link   
Looks pretty
a reply to: gortex



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 06:18 AM
link   
"NEW" from 2016 .. Okay



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Drazzl
"NEW" from 2016 .. Okay


The picture was compiled from surface maps taken of Ceres by the Dawn spacecraft in 2016 and released on 16/6/19 so yes it is new.
It's explained in the quoted article , It's not difficult to understand.



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

What the hell is that? It looks like bad CGI.

However it still doesn't beat Olympus Mons, three times the height of Everest and bigger in area than most US states.

Still this "mountain" is bizarre.



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP
The marks on the summit do not look like craters.

No caldera, either, which suggests that this is not a "volcano" at all.



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
What the hell is that? It looks like bad CGI.

It's CGI, the photos were "painted" over a 3D computer generated image, with height increased to 200%, if I'm not mistaken.



posted on Jun, 21 2019 @ 03:57 PM
link   
I cannot imagine the size of the bullymon that made that mon, but bully for it.

would love to see the loot it gives.

Good luck smashing that.



posted on Jun, 22 2019 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Lol someone is watching you
a reply to: ArMaP



posted on Jun, 22 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex

originally posted by: Drazzl
"NEW" from 2016 .. Okay


The picture was compiled from surface maps taken of Ceres by the Dawn spacecraft in 2016 and released on 16/6/19 so yes it is new.
It's explained in the quoted article , It's not difficult to understand.


It is the NASA "Astronomy Picture of the Day" for 16/6/19;
Heres a link to the picture at the missions gallery:

solarsystem.nasa.gov...

"Published: September 1, 2016"

Oh wait, your link also includes this link:
photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

"Image Addition Date: 2016-09-01"

Yeah it is not that difficult to understand :/
edit on 22-6-2019 by Drazzl because: another link



posted on Jun, 22 2019 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Drazzl

I stand corrected and apologise.




top topics



 
47
<< 1   >>

log in

join