Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Space

Asteroids Scarred By Solar System's Violent Youth 31

Posted by Soulskill
from the kids-these-days dept.
astroengine writes "Telltale evidence of the solar system's traumatic childhood can be found in the main asteroid belt, which contains a far more integrated assortment of bodies than previously believed, a new study shows. Previous observations of the 2,000 or so biggest asteroids in the belt — those with diameters of roughly 100 kilometers (62 miles) or larger — showed a neat structure, with asteroids closer to the sun having surface temperatures warmer than those located farther away. The observations neatly matches theories about the formation of the solar system, which posits that bodies formed in warm environments would be found closer to the sun and those formed in cold environments are farther away."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Asteroids Scarred By Solar System's Violent Youth

Comments Filter:
  • Wow (Score:4, Funny)

    by rossdee (243626) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @03:55PM (#46103069)

    " with asteroids closer to the sun having surface temperatures warmer than those located farther away."

    Thats amazing, who would have predicted that

    • by Talderas (1212466)

      Even reading the article doesn't make that line make any more sense. They say that evidence showed the asteroids formed all over the solar system and the remnants that failed to become planets ended up in the asteroid belt. I just don't get how surface temperature has anything to do with indicating where the asteroid may have come from.

    • What they obviously mean is: the sunscreen retailers are all orbiting Jupiter.

    • Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)

      by radtea (464814) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @04:13PM (#46103231)

      From context, I believe they mean "asteroids closer to the sun having surface temperatures *at the time of their formation* that are warmer than those located further away."

      The volatile fraction in asteroid surfaces goes down as they get closer to the sun, indicating they out-gassed at the time they were formed. The "early warmth correlates with current orbits" indicates relatively little orbital resorting over time.

      The new data on smaller bodies suggest this is not the case in general, only for the largest bodies. This is quite important to theories of asteroid formation, which in recent decades have been dominated by the assumption that the asteroid formed "in place".

      • by mythosaz (572040)

        From context, I believe they mean "asteroids closer to the sun having surface temperatures *at the time of their formation* that are warmer than those located further away."

        Conceptually?

      • by kfsone (63008)

        That position seems rather like arriving at a pool table and from 10 seconds of observation concluding that the game is to wait for a black ball to drop into a pocket and then collect a series of balls from a slot under the table and place them on top of it.

        Is this some sort of safe/default position in the absence of significant counter evidence or is it just not thought out? If I see water splashed around a sink, I don't assume that the droplets formed in-place although they *could* be condensation.

        It has

        • by Anonymous Coward

          I love how non-scientists here shit on studies by actual scientists, and then give their own bullshit "common sense" analogies to show that the science they don't understand is flawed, by using an nonsensical situation that has nothing to do with the actual conditions being studied.
           
          If you're so smart, read the actual study, then respond using credible objections you produced after learning the relevant cosmology.
           
          You turd burglar.

          • by kfsone (63008)

            I love how some people think discovery.com is a source of actual scientific facts, unlike places like arxiv.org with their "factual peer reviewed" hoity toity pdf publications, by using waffly long winded jibber jabber that has nothing to do with fun information about cats.

            If you're so smart, spot the actual humor, then respond using credible objections you produced after learning the relevant ability to laugh.

            You semi-evolved simian.

    • Re:Wow (Score:4, Funny)

      by slick7 (1703596) on Thursday January 30, 2014 @12:11AM (#46107151)
      It's not the solar system's fault, it came from a broken home. We need to be more sympathetic.
  • Reads like a randomly-generated generated scientific paper - take a sentence from this paper, then a sentence from that one. Some of it reads like it was sent round-trip through Google translate.

    I was unable to glean a single coherent thought from reading this article. Why was this submission even accepted?

  • Confusing but ... (Score:4, Informative)

    by PineHall (206441) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @04:35PM (#46103395)

    It does make sense. The summary confuses things and the article is not much better. But if you start with the very last sentence of the article it starts to make some sense.

    "Asteroids’ compositions tell us about where they formed. Where they are today tells us the whole evolution of where they’ve gone since," DeMeo said.

    The composition of an asteroid tell us where it was formed. The old theory was that asteriods can be found close to where they were formed and there was some evidence of that, however with a larger sample the theory is found lacking and things are more complicated. At least that is how I read it.

  • by harvestsun (2948641) on Wednesday January 29, 2014 @05:14PM (#46103777)
    The summary leaves out the whole point of the article.

    "The observations neatly match theories about the formation of the solar system, which posits that bodies formed in warm environments would be found closer to the sun and those formed in cold environments are farther away... But a new analysis, this time based on 100,000 asteroids of varying sizes, tells a far different story."
  • Cry me a river. Imagine you're a planet, and then all of a sudden some bastard decides you're not. Scarred? More like traumatized.

    If that happened to me I'd lob Charon at you. Rotten bunch of jumped-up monkeys.

    • The other planets let Pluto in their club, even though it was smaller than several of their moons, just to be polite to the outsider. But then they started seeing more and more of Pluto's close relatives all trying to get into the club on the family ticket. Worse, it looked like there was thousands more, perhaps millions. They risked being completely outnumbered by these Trans-Neptunians, outnumbered by orders of magnitude.

      Fuck this, they thought, there goes the neighbourhood. And they re-voted and kicked P

Never make anything simple and efficient when a way can be found to make it complex and wonderful.

Working...