Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Solar System Fossils Found By Hubble

Posted by timothy on Mon Sep 08, 2003 05:22 AM
from the just-floating-out-there dept.
segment writes "Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope have discovered three of the faintest and smallest objects ever detected beyond Neptune. Each lump of ice and rock is roughly the size of Philadelphia and orbits just beyond Neptune and Pluto, where they may have rested since the formation of the solar system 4.5 billion years ago. The objects reside in a ring-shaped region called the Kuiper Belt, which houses a swarm of icy rocks that are leftover building blocks, or "planetesimals," from the solar system's creation. The results of the search were announced by a group led by Gary Bernstein of the University of Pennsylvania at a meeting of NASA's Division of Planetary Sciences in Monterey, Calif."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2003, @05:32AM (#6898254)
    Can we invade them for oil? take over their population, oust their government and continue to wage war on their surface for another decade?

    no?

    pfft. what use are they then?
    • I for one welcome our Useless Icy Floating rock overlords.
          • > To stop terrorism, of course, as Saddam Hussein was a major source of it.

            The sad irony is that the only terrorists operating out of Iraq were the Ansar al Islam, which arose in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region under the no-fly zone, and could not have existed without American bombers to hold Saddam in check. (FYI, terrorists hated Saddam almost as bad as they hate us.)

            > Anti-imperialism was also a goal too, given Saddam's track record of attacking neighboring countries with the goal of annexin

                  • > It certainly is. That is why there is no US imperialism since before World War 2.

                    Pfft, don't cloud the argument with facts! Let us continue with our ignorant use of the word "imperialism" without anything to back it up! What's wrong with you, man?
  • by bartyboy (99076) on Monday September 08 2003, @05:35AM (#6898260)
    In case you didn't read it, the article says:

    "The three small objects the astronomers spotted - given the prosaic names 2003 BF91, 2003 BG91 and 2003 BH91 - range in size from 15 to 28 miles

    Hence the size of Philadelphia varies from 15 to 28 miles. Oh, and Philadelphia is a also an irregular sphere.

    • They may be roughly the same size as Philadelphia, but I'm sure they'll win a Stanley Cup before WE do.

      Not that I'm a jaded Philadelphia fan or anything...
    • But how many elephants is that?
    • My first thought was to try it in googles calculator:

      1 cubic Philadelphia in cubic meters


      Didn't work though...

      I love these invented-for-the-moment units.

      The next time I need to order something I'll try make up my own and wait with excitement for what I'll get. Use an area unit for a room mesurement must give bonus points (and vise-versa).

      "Hello, I would like 10 keyboard units of sand, please".
    • It one of the standard canonical Astronomical units:
      • Breadboxes (0.25 m)
      • Elephants (3.0 m)
      • Empire State Buildings (443.2 m)
      • Philadelphia (40 km)
      • Texas (1600 km)
      • Radius of the Earth (6400 km)
      • Light Second (299,792.458 km)
      • Distance from the Earth to the Sun (149,597,870.691 km)
      • Light Year (9.461 e+15 m)
      • Parsec - (3.016 e+16m)
    • But how many volkswagons per library of congress is it travelling at?
    • We need to put this into units people can understand [slashdot.org].

      I was planning on posting an answer myself, but my math skills are a little rusty. Does anyone remember the fomula's for Elephant Packing an Irregular Sphere?
    • Hence the size of Philadelphia varies from 15 to 28 miles.

      Did you notice this fact?

      The results of the search were announced by a group led by Gary Bernstein of the University of Pennsylvania

      I imagine if it had been an MIT group, they would have said the objects were the size of Massachusetts. Thank heavens they weren't from Alaska!
  • by jlemmerer (242376) <xcom123NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday September 08 2003, @05:36AM (#6898261) Homepage
    I would fond it interesting how the scientists can be sure that there objects have originated when our solar system was created. Wouldn't it be also possible that the asteroids traveled vast distances, having originated in stellar events far away, and eventually gor captured by sub's gravity? This would be even more interesting for us, wouldn't it. I just would like to know if it would be feasible to launch a probe to one of those objects, as to look of what materials it is composed. But can you hit an object that small across this distance and, even more land a probe safely there?
    • They are sending one to have a look around in 2006 [jhuapl.edu] but it will take a few years to get there.
      • They are sending one to have a look around in 2006 but it will take a few years to get there.

        This New Horizons mission was hit by a big funding cut early this year, although that decision has now been reversed [space.com]. However it is still not certain that the mission is going to happen, which is a shame because this really is a mission to go where none has gone before...

    • Can't you say something about the origin because of the orbit of the rock and the other rocks around it? Isn't it unlikely that all the rocks in the belt entered the sun's orbit from the same direction with and with the same velocity? If not, they'd be orbiting all over the place, like comets, not organized in a neat belt.
  • by mirko (198274) on Monday September 08 2003, @05:39AM (#6898272) Homepage Journal
    Excuse me, Sir :
    In Armageddon, the meteor was "as big as Texas", now, this one is "roughly the size of Philadelphia".
    Now, for the non-US guys here, could you translate ?
    • That's roughly 6,000 to 11,000 elephants. Or would you prefer it in something more sensible like the "15 to 28 miles" (24 to 45 km) mentioned in the article?
    • What's worse?

      a. Americans who use geo-centric descriptions like "roughly the size of Philadelphia
      -or-
      b. People from the rest of the world who don't bother to read the article and find out the actual size of the objects and instead simply bitch about the geo-centric descriptions?

      Actually, the answer is actually:
      c. People like me who live in the Philadelphia suburbs but have no idea how big the city actually is in terms of miles/km/whatever.

      /me thumps self over head with brick; passes out :P
    • Uh, actually isn't the problem more that we're using geographic references to two-dimensional areas in descriptions of 3-dimensional objects? In other words, even we Americans (and I a Philadelphian, as a matter of fact) have to wonder how deep is Philadelphia??
    • Actually it's not a US centric thing. The machines first awoke at the University of Pennsylvania in the form of Eniac. Ever since they have been conspiring to make Philadelphia the center of the Universe. Just look at the disproportionate number of news stories about Philly on Fark.
      • > Texas : Think 21 Million Fat Americans
        > Philadelphia: Think 6 Million Fat Americans

        So Texas is less than four times the size of Philadelphia? Granted, I've never been to Texas, but that seems a bit off. (I can ruin any joke)
  • Slashdot Effect (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cavalkaf (656724) on Monday September 08 2003, @05:40AM (#6898273) Homepage Journal
    I hope this helps....

    Contact: Steve Bradt bradt@pobox.upenn.edu 215-573-6604 University of Pennsylvania

    Solar system 'fossils' discovered by Hubble Telescope

    PHILADELPHIA -- Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope have discovered three of the faintest and smallest objects ever detected beyond Neptune. Each lump of ice and rock is roughly the size of Philadelphia and orbits just beyond Neptune and Pluto, where they may have rested since the formation of the solar system 4.5 billion years ago. The objects reside in a ring-shaped region called the Kuiper Belt, which houses a swarm of icy rocks that are leftover building blocks, or "planetesimals," from the solar system's creation.

    The results of the search were announced by a group led by Gary Bernstein of the University of Pennsylvania at today's meeting of NASA's Division of Planetary Sciences in Monterey, Calif.

    The study's big surprise is that so few Kuiper Belt members were discovered. With Hubble's exquisite resolution, Bernstein and his co-workers expected to find at least 60 Kuiper Belt members as small as 10 miles in diameter -- but only three were discovered. "Discovering many fewer Kuiper Belt Objects than was predicted makes it difficult to understand how so many comets appear near Earth since many comets were thought to originate in the Kuiper Belt," said Bernstein, associate professor of physics and astronomy at Penn. "This is a sign that perhaps the smaller planetesimals have been shattered into dust by colliding with each other over the past few billion years." Bernstein and his colleagues used Hubble to look for planetesimals that are much smaller and fainter than can be seen from ground-based telescopes. Hubble's Advanced Camera for Surveys was pointed at a region in the constellation Virgo over a 15-day period in January and February. A bank of 10 computers on the ground worked for six months searching for faint moving spots in the Hubble images. The three small objects the astronomers spotted - given the prosaic names 2003 BF91, 2003 BG91 and 2003 BH91 - range in size from 15 to 28 miles and are the smallest objects ever found beyond Neptune. At their current locations, these objects are a billion times fainter than the dimmest objects visible to the naked eye. But an icy body of this size that escapes the Kuiper Belt to wander near the sun can become visible from Earth as a comet as the wandering body starts to evaporate and form a surrounding cloud. Astronomers are probing the Kuiper Belt because the region offers a window on the early history of our solar system. The planets formed more than 4 billion years ago from a cloud of gas and dust that surrounded the infant sun. Microscopic bits of ice and dust stuck together to form lumps that grew from pebbles to boulders to city- or continent-sized planetesimals. The known planets and moons are the result of collisions between planetesimals. In most of the solar system, all of the planetesimals have either been absorbed into planets or ejected into interstellar space, destroying the traces of the early days of the solar system. Around 1950, Gerard Kuiper and Kenneth Edgeworth proposed that in the region beyond Neptune there are no planets capable of ejecting the leftover planetesimals, so there should be a zone, now called the Kuiper Belt, filled with small, icy bodies. Despite many years of searching, the first was not discovered until 1992; nearly 1,000 have since been discovered from telescopes on the ground. Most astronomers now believe that Pluto, discovered in 1930, is in fact a member of the Kuiper Belt. Astronomers now use the Kuiper Belt to learn about the history of the solar system, much as paleontologists use fossils to study early life. Each event that affected the outer solar system -- such as possible gravitational disturbances from passing stars or long-vanished planets -- is frozen into the properties of the Kuiper Belt members that we see today.

    If the Hubble telescope could search the entire sky, it would find perhaps a half-million pla

  • Aha! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Fex303 (557896) on Monday September 08 2003, @05:49AM (#6898296)
    So that's where Darl McBride and the rest of SCO are from!
  • Comets (Score:2, Interesting)

    Comets are as much the remnants of the formation of teh solar system as the belt is. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the belt is in face a string of comets whicha re being held in place by centripetal forces. Asteroid belts and such tend to hang around for that very reason. It's the natural order of things. Everything is in a constant state of transition and by definition, once it reaches a more stable state, it is inclined not to leave that state, but remain in a state of stability. Thus, when t
  • Pluto express.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by adeyadey (678765) on Monday September 08 2003, @05:52AM (#6898307) Journal

    This could be bad news for the New Horizons (Pluto-Kuiper Belt) [nasa.gov] mission, which plans to visit some as-yet undiscovered Kuiper belt objects after swinging by Pluto - but if there are a lot fewer than first thought..

    Discovering many fewer Kuiper Belt Objects than was predicted makes it difficult to understand how so many comets appear near Earth since many comets were thought to originate in the Kuiper Belt,..


    • Or worse, it's a dust cloud resulting from Kupier belt objects that collided with each other over the billions of years. Single objects you could avoid, but how would you like to slam into a sandstorm at 26,000 mph?

      I didn't see it stated, but is this cloud expected to lie in the orbital plane only, or does it envelope the Solar System like a sphere? If the latter, and it is a dust cloud, it could make extra-system exploration very difficult...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 08 2003, @05:52AM (#6898308)
    Each lump of ice and rock is roughly the size of Philadelphia

    Does the Google calculator convert between Philadelphia's and metric units for us non-Americans? :P
  • by Dazhel (171866) on Monday September 08 2003, @06:07AM (#6898339)
    ...Each lump of ice and rock is roughly the size of Philadelphia...

    Yeah but how much would they weigh at sea level in metric elephants?
  • The objects reside in a ring-shaped region called the Kuiper Belt, which houses a swarm of icy rocks that are leftover building blocks...

    In other news, Bob Vila will be demonstrating how to build a solar system from scrap in his series This Old House. Also, a hotel chain in Sweden has threatened to sue God for patent infringement citing illegal use of icy blocks for construction. [head-space.org]
  • by Sr. Zezinho (16813) on Monday September 08 2003, @06:10AM (#6898346) Homepage Journal
    Official Media Size Scale:

    • 1 - VW Beetle
    • 2 - Schoolbus
    • 3 - Football Field
    • 4 - Philadelphia
    • 5 - Texas
    • 6 - ??????
    • 7 - Profit!

  • "Solar System Fossils Found By Hubble"
    When I saw this in my newsfeed I thought they'd found an alien fish or lizard.
  • So how much does that weigh in clouds?
  • by gelfling (6534) on Monday September 08 2003, @07:07AM (#6898565) Homepage Journal
    When I was a kid there were 9 planets, the asteriod belt a few moons and we were happy with it. Now with this new fangled Hubble stuff they're finding new spitwads everyother damn day. This ones' the size of Bangor Maine, that one's the result of two K Mart parking lot sized iceballs crashing into each other. What the f---?
  • I just wondered while reading this article, for no particular reason, what it would take to make Jupiter (or any massive gas giant circling a star) gain enough mass to ignite into a star? The collision of Saturn, Uranus and Neptune with Jupiter? The sum of all the rest mass of all the solar system? I was wondering this as I'm tired as hell and not thinking clearly and came across the thought that that could be how binary and ternary stellar systems are created: With a gas giant gaining enough mass (Jupiter
  • by Gary Bernstein (705249) on Monday September 08 2003, @10:21AM (#6900053)
    Some answers to posted questions from the one who did the research & wrote the press release:

    How do we know these things came from our Solar System and not another one? The response about the directions of orbits is good; all the Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) and all the known planets orbit in the same direction around the Sun. Wouldn't happen if things were falling in randomly, so almost certainly reflects the rotation of the disk of gas & dust from which our solar system formed. Also, why would it be any easier to make a chunk of ice/rock around another star and have it accidentally caught be our star thousands of light years away, then to just make it around our star? There are grains of dust moving through our Solar System that appear to come from interstellar space, but no big chunks.

    Another posts said that comets are the true fossils; in fact short-period comets (including the ones targeted by the spacecraft) are believed to be escapees from the Kuiper Belt. Comets are being evaporated by the Sun (that's why they look so big, they have clouds around them) and so they'll evaporate to nothing but rubble in 10,000 years or so. Not very long by astronomy standards. So there must be unborn comets in "cold storage" somewhere far from the Sun.

    The New Horizons mission to Pluto & Kuiper Belt object(s) is alive & kicking. Our discovery means it will be a little harder to find a Kuiper Belt target for them to hit, but it should still be possible. There probably is a dust cloud associated with the Kuiper Belt (debris from collisions), which is doughnut-shaped, but this cloud is not very dense and won't be a threat to the spacecraft. Space is very empty, even in a "crowded" neighborhood like the inner Solar System.
  • by BryanL (93656) <lowtherb1NO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Monday September 08 2003, @12:03PM (#6901094)
    Oh great another unit of measurement. I already have a hard time converting US Standard to metric, much less elephants, LOCs, and VWs. Now this.
      • by Anonymous Coward
        "I have the same issue with people like you who assume God didn't create everything."

        Or people like the original poster who can twist any subject into a platform to bash people who do not have the same religious views as the poster.
      • > which is inarguably inifinitely more complex, did come into existance that way.

        While I may disagree with your theme, I can't argue much of it, as I don't have "God's viewpoint." One problem, however, arises with this statement you made. Humans are not "inarguably inifinitely more complex." I can argue the point that humans aren't infinitely anything.

        Perhaps you chose the wrong words?

        We believe we know how almost all parts of the human body work, just as we believe we know how a computer works, bu
    • Not remnants of the BigBang, remnants of the first days of our solar system.
      The intresting part of the search was the discovery of lots of big icy rocks there compared to the relatively very low amounts of small ones.
      Its not yet known why there is a lack of the small rocks..
    • Why are the scientists sure that the Kuiper Belt holds reminants of the big bang? Comets are made of ice, but they aren't considered building blocks. This is interesting nonetheless and I hope we can use this to help prove(or disprove) a theory or two.

      First, creation of the solar system happened about 10 billion year later than the big bang. Second, planets do not just magically appear, they slowly form when smaller particles and rocks lump together because of either gravity or impact. Therefore small blo

    • by MickLinux (579158) on Monday September 08 2003, @06:19AM (#6898373) Journal
      The reminants of the big bang (or universal black hole collapse, as I like to think of it... but that's nonstandard) would be the background radiation, nothing more.

      After the big bang, you had the cooling out of our different forces, the formation of subatomic particles, the formation of Hydrogen atoms, and then the formation of giant stars.

      Those stars all exploded long ago, creating the wealth of other elements that we see today. Life may or may not have formed at that time, but if it did, it is my guess that all such lifeforms would have been destroyed in the supernovaes of the first generation of stars. Our solar system formed from the exploded remains of one or more of those.

      All of which makes these fossils impressively old, the moreso because it is not inconcievable to me that bacteria could predate planetary formation. It would indeed be interesting to look at them, and see what we see.

    • Actually, comets are considered building blocks of the solar system. That's why there's a large push from NASA and the ESA to send spacecraft to comets and land on them and/or gather samples from them. Here are a few links:

      Stardust [nasa.gov]

      Contour (failed) [contour2002.org]

      Rosetta (to be launched) [esa.int]
    • A BeetleWulf cluster made out of these!

      Millions of beetle-sized rocks hurtling through space in our direction to the tune of the 'Pods Unite' commercial (Light & Day by the Polyphonic Spree).