Strange "structures" on surface Asteroid 2005 YU55's

Originally posted by Thunda
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Nobody said it meant 'buildings' as you say.......

Well, the OP said this:

Can this prey-tell be what Richard Hoagland was trying to convey in his preamble smatterings about this asteroid being an A.I. space-craft?

and this, in another post:

So if they didn't see it and only detected it why would they use the words 'strange structures'? How do they know it's not part of its natural formation?

and then there was this post in which the OP was disputing the assertion that "structure" does not mean "building":

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by amaster
"Strange Structures" as in odd surface formations, not necessacarily "alien buildings" or intelligently manufactured alien base.

Then why not use those exact words so to not have any further debate about this?
Because as I see it: that's your opinion and your interpretation.

...and reading many more of the OP posts leads me to believe that he thinks the word "structure" means something that is artificially built by intelligent beings.

A new motion study (movie) of YU55 was released a couple of days ago. It is made up of 28 images taken on November 7th. The impression of a flattened rim, surrounding a rounded area is, if anything, more distinct than before. The latter now appears more like a low, broad dome, than a true hemisphere. 'Rim' and 'dome' appear most clearly at about 17 to 19 seconds into the video. In addition, a circular impression is apparently centered on the rounded area. It is marked by a shaded and lighted side, opposite each other. It appears most clearly about 19 seconds into the video. So, we have a bull's eye effect. There appear to be three concentric circular structures. I'm not surprised that the scientists find themselves 'puzzled' by all this. I find that pausing the video frequently helps to make all these features more obvious. Otherwise, the very short video seems to flick by too quickly. link to new video: www.nasa.gov...

As it turns out, roughly spherical asteroids with equatorial ridges are not unheard of. Both features have to do with the centrifugal force caused by their rotation, acting on a loosely held, 'rubble pile' type of asteroid. Given that these features are far from unknown, one wonders, then, what was seen by the astronomers, that caused them to remark about puzzling structures that they could not explain, on the surface of YU55. They are probably waiting for the processing of image data from closer in to the object, before expanding on what these structures look like. Every thing we've seen so far is from 860,000 miles out or farther. Images from the minimum distance of ~ 200,000 miles have yet to be seen. Ross

The Goldstone space radar facility, in the Mojave Desert, California, will be observing YU55 through the 18th. Presumably after that, there will be more time for them to release videos, improved shape models, and other information. Nothing new heard for the past five days; since the updated, 28-image 'movie' of the object was released. Ross

reply to post by Human_Alien


It is odd to me that they would call them structures, but I think they were merely trying to say they do not understand exactly what they are seeing/what is suppose to be on the surface of this object.

Originally posted by Machinery
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

It is odd to me that they would call them structures, but I think they were merely trying to say they do not understand exactly what they are seeing/what is suppose to be on the surface of this object.

The term "Structure" used by scientists (especially geologists) can commonly mean natural formation, and can have nothing to do with being artificial. A volcanic dome would be considered a structure to a geologist, as would certain pats of an impact crater, or even specific geological features on an asteroid.

here is one of the dictionary definitions:

structure (ˈstrʌktʃə)
— n
1. a complex construction or entity ...
...
6. (geology) the way in which a mineral, rock, rock mass or stratum, etc, is made up of its component parts

Does anyone know of any updates or news on yu55 ?? NASA website doesn't seem to have anything ?

Originally posted by rick004
Does anyone know of any updates or news on yu55 ?? NASA website doesn't seem to have anything ?

Below is a like to a Phys.org story regarding some new data. Data from the ESA's Herschel Space Telescope suggest that YU55 is a loose bundle of rocks, and finds that it way be smaller than was originally estimate -- about 340 meters. The original estimation was at least 400 meters.

I suppose the ESA and NASA are still analyzing the data they each collected (which could take weeks or months), so this article seemed to key on the data collection more than actual findings from the data, but there are a few preliminary findings mentioned.

Please note that the image of YU55 captured by Herschel does not show the true shape of YU55. In fact this is not a standard "image" as one would expect. YU55 is too small for the space telescope to actually resolve (it would be just a very dim dot, if it could be resolved at all), so Herschel took 3500 pictures of a point along it's path in space as it flew by. Those 3500 pictures were then stacked on top of one another with the location of the asteroid at the center.

The shape you see is not the real shape of the asteroid but rather an artifact of this stacking method and the point spread function of the telescope.

2005 YU55 Resembles a Collection of Rocks Hurtling Through Space

Thanks for the info "Soylent green is people " !! IMO NASA and all these astronomers should be studying things a bit closer to home ? They seem to be able to detect a little planet fart a billion miles away but something is on our doorstep and nobody can get a decent look at it ??? Something is definately wrong here !!!

An interesting discrepancy in the size estimates of YU55, from Arecibo and the Herschel Space Observatory. Both are considered to be quite accurate, yet each gives a substantially different figure for the diameter. Before Arecibo gave their results in April, 2010, it was assumed, on weaker evidence, that the true diameter was about 200 meters.&&&&& I wonder if it's possible that the object is an unexpectedly good reflector of radio waves, and this made the Arecibo radar give a erroneously large diameter. Objects with high metal content give more conspicuous radar returns than others. Based on its dark color, they've classed YU55 as a type C asteroid, which means that it is composed of carbon rich minerals, not metal. Perhaps YU55 is atypical; both very dark, and metal-rich.&&&&& The thermal profile from the Herschel satellite suggests an irregular surface with features of a variety of different sizes. It is thought to resemble the surface of a loosely consolidated 'rubble pile' asteroid. This is a good inference, but is far from certain. As far as I'm aware, we do not even have a density figure for YU55 yet. This would provide more direct evidence of the object's internal structure. If the density proves to be low, it would suggest either a 'rubble pile', with substantial hollows inside itself, or another sort of object, also with significant internal voids. If the density is high, a solid object would be indicated. Ross

Originally posted by rick004
Thanks for the info "Soylent green is people " !! IMO NASA and all these astronomers should be studying things a bit closer to home ? They seem to be able to detect a little planet fart a billion miles away but something is on our doorstep and nobody can get a decent look at it ??? Something is definately wrong here !!!

It's very small and 200,000 miles away.

The Moon is a little further than that (238,000 miles), and we can't resolve a crater that small from Earth. We need to have probes in lunar orbit to do so.

Originally posted by Ross 54
An interesting discrepancy in the size estimates of YU55, from Arecibo and the Herschel Space Observatory. Both are considered to be quite accurate, yet each gives a substantially different figure for the diameter. Before Arecibo gave their results in April, 2010, it was assumed, on weaker evidence, that the true diameter was about 200 meters.&&&&& I wonder if it's possible that the object is an unexpectedly good reflector of radio waves, and this made the Arecibo radar give a erroneously large diameter.

I'd be more inclined to think the diameter suggested by Herchel's data may be more accurate than the diameter suggested by the Arecibo data, considering that the Herschel data was gathered when the object was at its closest approach 200,000 miles away, rather than from 1.9 million miles away, which is where it was 18 months ago when Arecibo looked at it.

I don't find it surprising that what astronomers knew about size of the asteroid would be "fine tuned" as they got a better look at it from a much closer distance.

I had to read the story twice as a supposedly enlightened author has to insult Richard Hoagland without any knowledge or information whatsoever. I was under the impression some people here were semi-intelligent, but alas a story which makes claims with no foundation at all. Is this ATS or FOX news. As somebody who has followed RH for YEARS and has met him in person, I can tell you he has been DEAD ON with many of his statements. Please at least back up your insults and falsehoods with FACTS. This used to be a great place to get informed, now just a bunch of uninformed trolls posting whatever they want without an ounce of credibility. You really need to go write for FOX, you'll fit right in, pal.

A new interview of one of the scientists involved in radar imaging of YU55 has several points of interest. &&&&& It is confirmed that an equatorial ridge, such as YU55 appears to have, is unexpected, even unexplainable in an object that rotates as slowly as this, ~20 hours. This ridge is represented by the fine whitish line, not by the grey area above it in the images. That this ridge that shouldn't be there is so thin, well-defined, and regular seems to add to its mystery. &&&&& It is now clear that there is data that can be constructed into further images. Due to a combination of proprietary and technical issues, these may not be released for some time. None of the images seen so far, apparently show the peculiar promontory alluded to in the interview. It seems to be of such a sharp, narrow shape that ready geological explanations simply do not apply to it. I suspect that YU55 has some remarkable surprises in store for us. Ross www.earthfiles.com...