Astronomers Reveal Best-Ever Images Of The Far Side Of Pluto

Forbes ^ | October 22, 2019 | Jonathan O'Callaghan

[DoodleBob]

A team of astronomers from NASA’s New Horizons mission has unveiled our best look yet at the far side of Pluto, which went unseen to the spacecraft during its historic July 2015 flyby of the dwarf planet.

We have only seen one hemisphere of Pluto in high-resolution because the New Horizons flyby of Pluto lasted just hours, whereas the dwarf planet takes 6.4 Earth days to rotate. Thus as New Horizons flew past, one side of the world was illuminated by the Sun, but the other was shrouded in darkness.

However, using images taken by the spacecraft while it was on approach up to a distance of six million kilometers away, the team was able to use image processing tools to reveal Pluto’s hidden hemisphere. The final resolution is 100 times better than the Earth-orbiting Hubble telescope, which had previously provided our best views of this hemisphere.

[MomwithHope]

I use the library a lot, they have an ebook and regular book. I might check it out just to look at it. I am not much of a knitter but ideas are always worth exploring.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

I crochet, v. knit. You can apply a lot of her ideas to that, and also your quilting, I’d think. ;)

[Empireoftheatom48]

That reminds me I was a Member of the Astronomical Society of Las Cruses, on several occasions I got to sit next to Clyde Tombaugh, speaking with him I noticed his watch. It was a large Disney Pluto watch. Looked pretty cool. He was a nice very warm and happy person.

[lonevoice]

Wow! Thank you!

[MomwithHope]

I have some beautiful batik fabric about 20-25 different pieces, some are fat 8ths. Bought in a quilt shop in Lancaster, PA in 2005!! Waiting for an idea. This next year is for finishing things.

[Paal Gulli]

When Pluto was a planet, this would have been big news. Now it’s just ... ho, hum.

[Forgiven_Sinner]

‘Isn’t in accord with enumerated powers’

One could argue it promotes the general welfare.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks DoodleBob.

· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·

Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·

[Viking2002]

'Balrog Macula'

I'll bet you that within a year, some Swedish death metal band will be using this name. Book it.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

“This next year is for finishing things.”

Or starting new things! :)

[GingisK]

It is called “Promote the general welfare”, which is just what the accumulation of knowledge accomplishes.

[DoodleBob]

...except that the Preamble confers no power to the govt, and the Article 1, Section 8, clause 1 mention of "general Welfare" is not a grant of general legislative power, but a qualification on the taxing power.

And thankfully so...otherwise the statists would have used those openings to grow Leviathan to even more nightmarish proportions than they have with the Commerce Clause.

[GingisK]

Uh huh, except the Congress can legislate whatever they choose, subject only to the Supreme Court.

I am a "Child of Apollo", meaning that I grew up during the Apollo program. Its influence on everything was positive, and fostered explosive growth in the technologies. You wouldn't be packing a cellular phone without that kick start. It is provable that the space program promotes the general welfare.

[DoodleBob]

Believe me, I get that we have lots of awesomeness because of the quest to boldly go where no man has gone before...indeed, I posted the article on New Horizons!

Perhaps I am a purist on these things. I hear the Liberals go on about Roosevelt's "saving" the nation through the expansion of the government, Great Society, the EPA, and Social Security and other clear Article 1, Section 8 violations. Their basic counter argument is that look at all the "good" coming from those things. And sure...maybe there are a few bits that are "good" like elderly people having some small income, or "clean water" and so on.

However, at that point of discussion, we have surrendered principle and are effectively arguing that Constitutional violations are ok if they are a net positive in the cost/benefit calculation.

[GingisK]

OK, prove this is a violation of the Constitution.

[PapaBear3625]

To be a killjoy, Pluto is a tiny ball of ice in perpetual near darkness. It is unlike a planet in every way except being round. No one will ever see it with their own eyes.

Never say never. Someday, perhaps in your lifetime, perhaps in a hundred years, somebody may discover something worth mining there.

[Telepathic Intruder]

Perhaps, but definitely not in our lifetimes. I have nothing against Pluto, I just find it ridiculous that there are thousands of other objects just as notable as Pluto floating around the solar system that don’t have the same celebrity status. Why is that? Because of some irrational human tendency to glorify the already popular. Even if it’s a tiny ball of frozen nitrogen billions of miles away. Is that how science works?

[DoodleBob]

I did, but from the top again:

-There is no Article 1, Section 8 right conferred to the govt to engage in transportation or exploration

-Technically, NASA grew out of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), which was established as an emergency measure during World War I to promote industry, academic, and government coordination on war-related projects. I guess that's Constitutional.

- NASA's remit wasn't tied to military endeavors, thus breaking whatever Constitutional linkage to NACA that NASA may have had. Thanks for listening.

[GingisK]

Yes, but I think you are conferring a meaning from between the lines. The Constitution does encourage funding scientific endeavors and "promoting the general welfare". The space program clearly does both.

I thank God daily that people like you have no traction in our governance.