It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
All Seeing Eye
Actually, I'm not. The "Scientists" already said there is no dust cloud around it, which means, there has been no impact.
All Seeing Eye
If I'm not mistaken, the Sun is behind this thing, so it would be interesting how it could light up the side we are seeing, or at least one side of it. I need clarification on that.
All Seeing Eye
The nature of these "Beams" is rather odd, thin at the source, and wider further away. Though you would expect this pattern from a pressurized venting, but from 6 separate sources?
All Seeing Eye
Another oddity is that these beams are rotating along with the object. You would think they would spiral away as the object turns, if they were dust /gas combination. Beams of light on the other hand, would rotate from the emitting source and keep there relative positions.
We are given two possible explanations for the failure to find any rotation-caused brightness variations in P/2013 P5.
1.) The object's axis of rotation was pointed directly at us on Sept. 10th and 23rd, the dates of the Hubble images. We saw the same face of the object at all times, hence no variances in brightness.
2. The object takes substantially longer than 40 minutes to rotate, limiting the amount of brightness variation seen by the Hubble in its longest possible observing sessions, of this same length of time.
A rather rare object in itself, an active asteroid/main belt comet, is also supposed to be doing something never observed before in any space object, spinning itself to pieces. In addition, it is proposed that it either just happens to align its spin axis with Earth, or it exists in a small window of rotation rates that is too slow to be readily detected, yet is fast enough to begin to disrupt its surface by centrifugal force. We seem to be piling improbability on top of improbability.
edit on 13-11-2013 by Ross 54 because: added explanatory phrase
Please join us as we discuss this discovery with Dr. David Jewitt from UCLA, the team lead of the researchers who made the #Hubble observations, along with +Max Mutchler +Tony Darnell +Alberto Conti +Ian O'Neill and +Scott Lewis
In addition to your questions and comments, we'll discuss topics like:
* How and when was this asteroid first discovered?
* Does it pose a thread to Earth?
* What are these tails made of?
* How common are these jets in asteroids?
* How large is this asteroid?
* How does it compare to a comet in composition and density?
And anything else we can think of! Please RSVP to let us know you're attending and we'll look forward to seeing you there!
My question is this: Why did the object wait 199 million years, and only then begin to spin up in response to the Sun's influence? Or put another way: Why hadn't this object spun itself up to the point of centrifugal disruption, 199 million years ago, and long, long ago destroyed itself?
There seems to be a change between April and July, with subsequent tails being released much more frequently.
Checking with the Space Telescope Science Institute, I was able to confirm that the Hubble Telescope made observations of the mysterious six-tailed asteroid on October 18th, November 13th, December 8th, and December 31st.
I could not find any information to confirm that the object's rotation rate was high enough to justify the hypothesis that the tails were formed by the centrifugal disruption of material on its surface.
(Submitted on 28 Mar 2011)
The development of civilisations like ours into spacefaring, multi-planet entities requires significant raw materials to construct vehicles and habitats. Interplanetary debris, including asteroids and comets, may provide such a source of raw materials. In this article we present the hypothesis that extraterrestrial intelligences (ETIs) engaged in asteroid mining may be detectable from Earth.
Considering the detected disc of debris around Vega as a template, we explore the observational signatures of targeted asteroid mining (TAM), such as unexplained deficits in chemical species, changes in the size distribution of debris and other thermal signatures which may be detectable in the spectral energy distribution (SED) of a debris disc.
We find that individual observational signatures of asteroid mining can be explained by natural phenomena, and as such they cannot provide conclusive detections of ETIs.
But, it may be the case that several signatures appearing in the same system will prove harder to model without extraterrestrial involvement. Therefore signatures of TAM are not detections of ETI in their own right, but as part of "piggy-back" studies carried out in tandem with conventional debris disc research, they could provide a means of identifying unusual candidate systems for further study using other SETI techniques.