Ceres is an 'ocean world' with sea water beneath surface, mission finds

a reply to: charlyv

Lots of speculation that each was formed (or deformed, as it were) by the same event that produced most of what is in asteroid belt.

What event is that?

A suspected planetary collision with another planet or asteroid in the same orbit as the asteroid belt. Underline suspected.
a reply to: Phage

a reply to: charlyv

That's a rather dated (and not well regarded) hypothesis. Evidence doesn't really support it.

Quite the contrary actually. It is currently thought, generally, that the "asteroid belt" is a result of accretion. The gravitational influence of Jupiter preventing the formation of larger bodies.

a reply to: MindBodySpiritComplex

Over the years I've read many theories that life started on Mars and due to cataclysms, Martians ended up on earth.

It'd make sense that they colonized Ceres 1st, just as we've been to Luna before heading out to Mars.





en.wikipedia.org...(hypothetical_planet)#Other_hypotheses

Phaeton (alternatively Phaethon or Phaëton) was the hypothetical planet theorized by the Titius–Bode law to have existed between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter,

The formation of the Asteroid belt due to this would have had a huge impact on Martian life sustainability.


Did Life On Earth Actually Originate On Mars
www.forbes.com...

With last week’s news that NASA’s Mars Curiosity rover detected "tough" organic molecules in 3-billion-year-old sedimentary rocks within five centimeters of the surface, at least one prominent planetary scientist thinks that the debate over whether Mars first seeded Earth with life or vice-versa will only intensify.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

It'd make sense that they colonized Ceres 1st, just as we've been to Luna before heading out to Mars.

Why not one of their own moons?
Ceres is pretty far from Mars.

The formation of the Asteroid belt due to this would have had a huge impact on Martian life sustainability.

You stopped reading, didn't you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: charlyv

That's a rather dated (and not well regarded) hypothesis. Evidence doesn't really support it.

Quite the contrary actually. It is currently thought, generally, that the "asteroid belt" is a result of accretion. The gravitational influence of Jupiter preventing the formation of larger bodies.

It is very valid, and has become more valid with technology.
It turns out that most asteroids come for either the crust,mantle or core of another body. If they were just rocks solidified by the original nebulae, then they would not have these differentations.

They are the remnants of bigger things. That is still exciting.....

One particular asteroid... Psyche 16, is a core object that captured Gold, Platinum, Silver, Palladium.... in HUGE concentrations. Like most of the other asteroids, that cannot happen any other way, than to have been part of Two or more objects that had a violent collision...

You speek of Jupiter... it can be a player in the original collision, as well as sucking up a lot of material.

a reply to: charlyv

It turns out that most asteroids come for either the crust,mantle or core of another body.

Citation(s) required. "Most?"

Psyche 16, is a core object that captured Gold, Platinum, Silver, Palladium

There are samples?

Cool Star Wars vibes sending a mission out to the Asteroid Belt to study dwarf planet Ceres! Exciting discovery!

I thought it might be too far from the Sun to have an ocean, but then forgot and realized Europa is much farther away.

What is keeping the water warm enough not to freeze residing in the Asteroid Belt? I didn't catch that in the article.

S&F

a reply to: Phage

advances.sciencemag.org...

Science Advances 17 Apr 2015:

Growth of asteroids, planetary embryos, and Kuiper belt objects by chondrule accretion

phys.org...
SEPTEMBER 14, 2017 REPORT
New theory on origin of the asteroid belt

Am I reading this correctly; the accretion model has been supplanted?

a reply to: Phage

All I can say Phage, is there is wealth of information on these theories and discoveries in scientific sites and journals all over the web. I have been a fan of the theory most of my life, since I took astronomy in college years ago. I am just telling what I have studied and heard. The 'evidence', as it were, is all there.

I did a thread on this subject years ago, If anyone cares I will find it and drag out the link.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Nothing there about a collision being the source of the asteroid belt.

a reply to: Phage

OMG got my names wrong. I always thought of Ceres as 1 of Mars moons. Age and memory......

Duh Phobos and Deimos

Sorry....

a reply to: charlyv

The 'evidence', as it were, is all there.

One should be able to accept that old ideas can be replaced when more information is available. The notion of Phaeton just doesn't cut it. Too many problems. Like the "capture" hypothesis for the Moon. Or Velikovsky's nonsense.

You made a very specific claim about the composition of Psyche 16. From whence did your information come?

a reply to: Phage
It is a theory.

We were not doing a great deal of spectroscopy when science adopted this 'official' stance.

It is going to change.

Most all of the meteorites that fall on Earth originated from the asteroid belt. Some come from planets or moons that have been smacked by other asteroids.

We have the crusts (mostly achondrites), the mantles (Pallasites) and Cores (solid Iron/nickel)

Science has not explained why that should be so, as well. It is a theory, and all that info is in countless documents all over the web.

a reply to: Phage

"is ceres a moon of jupiter"
wiki

Ceres (/ˈsɪəriːz/; minor-planet designation: 1 Ceres) is the largest object in the main asteroid belt that lies between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. With a diameter of 940 km (580 mi), Ceres is both the largest of the asteroids and the only dwarf planet inside Neptune's orbit.

Now I'm totally confused. How can Ceres be in the asteroid belt and also inside Neptunes orbit?


Neptunes orbit is 4.4764 billion kms from the sun

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Try reading what it actually says.

Earth is inside the orbit of Neptune. So is Mercury.

a reply to: Phage

True about the collision model - but the accretion model is superseded?

a reply to: charlyv

Hypothesis. One which has been, for the most, part abandoned.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

True about the collision model - but the accretion model is superseded?

Nope. But it is another model which seems to work.
The collision one doesn't.

a reply to: Phage

Try reading what it actually says.

Ceres

Surface temp. Ceres (/ˈsɪəriːz/; minor-planet designation: 1 Ceres) is the largest object in the main asteroid belt that lies between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. ... It is the 25th-largest body in the Solar System within the orbit of Neptune

Why do they say its inside Neptune's orbit and not Jupiters orbit, I must be thick

Time for a coffee