
NASA’s New Horizons Discovers Frozen Plains in the Heart of Pluto’s ‘Heart’ - Thorondor
http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-new-horizons-discovers-frozen-plains-in-the-heart-of-pluto-s-heart
======
leemac
Seems like this entire Pluto mission has opened up quite a few questions for
Geologists. For such a small world so far from the sun, it sure has some very
interesting features and characteristics. The recent mountain range photo/3D
map was incredible.

We live in some exciting times. Every few months we have a new probe somewhere
teaching us so much about our tiny corner of the universe.

~~~
melling
Exciting times is a bit of a stretch. I was cutting black and white pictures
from newspapers of Viking on Mars when I was a kid. 40 years later we're
finally checking out Pluto.

Things will get exciting when the cost drops 100x and we're beaming back hi-
def video and images 24x7 from all the planets and moons in our solar system.

Let's dream a little bigger and set the goal much higher.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Folks, I appreciate that you don't like melling's opinion here, I have
problems with it too. But can we not create an echo chamber by downvoting it
into oblivion? That's not what voting is for. Let him have his say, if you
disagree, then post a response. The way to win an argument is not to bludgeon
the opponent into silence.

~~~
NhanH
On HN, it's completely appropriate to use downvote for disagreement (this has
came up over and over again, but I doubt it's gonna change). Generally, I
tried not to downvote for _just_ disagreement, but melling's comment is pretty
much the text book sample of the middlebrow dismissal, or gratuitously
negative that we try to avoid.

~~~
ars
> On HN, it's completely appropriate to use downvote for disagreement

No. It is not appropriate at all! You reply for disagreement. You do not
downvote.

Downvotes are for useless messages, flamebait, off topic, things like that.

Downvote for disagreement leads to reddit and no one wants that.

~~~
wglb
Check out what PG says about this:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171)

~~~
jschwartzi
I don't agree with him there, because unpopular opinions should still be
expressible. The downvote allows you to suppress opinions that you don't agree
with which I don't think fits with the spirit of discourse that a good
community should have. If someone says something inflammatory, suppress it. If
someone says something you don't agree with, disagree with it.

~~~
pests
I agree.

Is it time we move on and form our own opinion about the use of the downvote
as a community instead of always deferring by quoting pg, whilst whose values
and contributions are obvious, has only posted 1 comment[1] (and no
submissions[2]) since his last active day 475 days ago?[3]

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=pg](https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=pg)

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=pg](https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=pg)

[2] I do not know however if he reads or still votes on HN.

------
aklein
The numerical accuracy and calculations needed for getting the spacecraft so
close to Pluto must be pretty awesome. Does anyone know what the precision is
on calculations like these?

Also, anyone know why the spacecraft has to do a flyby, as opposed to, say,
going into orbit around Pluto? Is it because the fuel involved in slowing down
the spacecraft would be forbiddingly heavy?

~~~
Thorondor
Yes, basically slowing down enough to orbit Pluto would have required too much
extra launch weight, although the difference isn't enormous. The best
candidate, a nuclear-electric propulsion system, would have approximately
doubled the spacecraft's mass. This Stack Exchange question has more
information:
[http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9851/requirements-t...](http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9851/requirements-
to-orbit-pluto)

~~~
jkachmar
Additionally, from the linked paper [1], it would have required a 15 year
transfer phase and a more capable launcher than the Atlas V.

The report proposed using a then-unavailable Ariane 5 variant, which would
have delayed the launch to 2016 (to line up the gravity assist with Jupiter)
and put the final encounter with Pluto at June 2033.

[1] [http://www.esa.int/gsp/ACT/doc/PRO/ACT-RPR-PRO-
ISTS2004-Plut...](http://www.esa.int/gsp/ACT/doc/PRO/ACT-RPR-PRO-
ISTS2004-Pluto.pdf)

~~~
yellowapple
So basically, if we can build a new probe within the next year and a half, and
if this new Arianne variant is now available, we might have a chance of
sending an orbiter to reach Pluto by 2033? That sounds like an opportunity
that's too good to pass up if we can pull it off.

I mean, the flyby's awesome, and it's bound to give us all sorts of new
insights on the formation of the Solar System, but having a permanent orbiter
there would let us continually study Pluto (and its moons), giving us that
degree of information on a continuous basis.

~~~
smeyer
>if we can build a new probe within the next year and a half

The amount of cost and level of precision and robustness required tends to
mean that these probes take years to plan, design, build, and test. It's also
far from clear that the value of the science of sending an orbiter to Pluto
would outweigh other potential missions (that also wouldn't have the same
timing constraints.)

~~~
yellowapple
Sure, though it sounds like the ESA's been planning such a probe for quite
some time already. The linked report even has specifics on instrumentation
payload and the mass thereof, and includes a rendering and parts list for the
proposed "POP" probe. We'd just need to do the "build" and "test" parts, and
while that likely would normally take a couple years, I reckon we could cram
that into a year and a half with enough effort.

------
BurningFrog
Stunning.

I expected just another dusty cratered rock.

~~~
gizmo686
So did the scientists. In fact, the lack of craters is really suprising
because it suggests that Pluto is still active, which would require a hot
core. Unlike other bodies it the solar system we have observed, we cannot
attribute this to tidal forces, as none of Pluto's moons are big enough [1],
which means there is a currently unknown mechanism powering Pluto.

[1] And even if the big one, Charon, was, it is tidally locked in Pluto-
stationary orbit.

~~~
kijin
It's probably too early to start guessing, but have scientists come up with
any possible explanation for the "hot core" yet?

Could Pluto have an unusually large amount of radioactive elements in its
core, despite its low density overall?

Could it have recently collided with a large KBO, melting much of the surface
even though the core is long dead?

Could it have been subjected to large tidal forces relatively recently, e.g.
it was much closer to Neptune until a few hundred million years ago?

~~~
BurningFrog
> Could Pluto have an unusually large amount of radioactive elements in its
> core

I heard Real Scientists mention that as a possibility. We didn't expect much
radioactive material out there, but we also have very little real knowledge.

I can't be the only one hoping Pluto is shaped by Plutonium?

> Could it have recently collided with a large KBO

I like that idea. I guess a planet that is mainly ice could absorb that
without showing obvious scars.

> Could it have been subjected to large tidal forces relatively recently

I think it has to have been a moon of Neptune for that to have any major
effect. Don't know if that's at all feasible.

------
yk
If anybody else has the problem that the first and last word of each line is
cropped, just disable the ".after-body, .article-body" css. This brings back
the scroll bars.

------
mkoryak
"Data from New Horizons will continue to fuel discovery for years to come.”

why will it take years?

~~~
aggie
They are gathering a lot of data but their transmission speeds back to Earth
are very slow. They are also including a lot of redundancy in their
transmission from what I understand, since there is a several year window to
transmit so they might as well use it.

~~~
Steuard
Adding to that, it will take time to develop models that can explain these
unexpected features! Even with all the data in hand, it may take a number of
years of intense study and perhaps simulation to make a convincing case for
any single explanation.

------
ashhimself
Serious question; how would they know it's no more than 100million years old.
I consider myself a some what smart guy but this is... beyond me :)

~~~
BurningFrog
Because there are so very few craters. During the 4+ billion years we thing
Pluto has been around, vastly more objects should have crashed into it.

If the surface is 100 million years or less, the number of craters makes
sense.

Or we could have some other basic assumption wrong. Science has only known
about this since this morning...

------
ajays
Where did the water come from on Pluto?

~~~
Splendor
Not all of the ice is water ice. Some is methane ice, carbon monoxide ice,
etc. That being said, I've definitely heard members of the New Horizons team
speculating about water ice being responsible for some of the mountains
they've seen and even the idea of Pluto having an internal ocean at some
point.

~~~
gizmo686
To expand on the internal ocean point:

One of the big problems with Pluto is that we would not expect it to still be
active. One of the hypothesis that has been proposed is that the heat from
Pluto's formation is trapped in an internal ocean and is slowly being released
as the ocean freezes.

Of course, even if this isn't what is powering Pluto, the other mechanism
might still make the core hot enough for liquid water.

------
evantahler
So... can Pluto be a planet again?

------
atorralb
an image search and it comes out alot of old concrete walls... wtf?
[https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&imgil=5aN7IeRgNSROxM%...](https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&imgil=5aN7IeRgNSROxM%253A%253Be0ydH3kgOUanNM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fmxgem.com%25252Fcement-
wall.html&source=iu&pf=m&tbs=simg:CAES0AEazQELEKjU2AQaAggDDAsQsIynCBpfCl0IAxInlQZTxhWWAdQHlAbRB7cB0wfSB-o31ijgIek35SfeKN4p6zfyN9coGjBp3W2RRFi4SPoHYjxHphGVCXR3FnoGj9JgOxICbwxpPTfDNBIumJiPXaigKF4GzMkMCxCOrv4IGgoKCAgBEgQLG_1RpDAsQne3BCRo-
ChEKD2JsYWNrIGFuZCB3aGl0ZQoGCgR3YWxsCgcKBWZsb29yCgoKCG1hdGVyaWFsCgwKCm1vbm9jaHJvbWUM&fir=5aN7IeRgNSROxM%253A%252Ce0ydH3kgOUanNM%252C_&usg=__VO_hG5r7hi__xUqX8sBSClvYXSI%3D#imgrc=UqnRtPx3jyjxQM%3A&usg=__VO_hG5r7hi__xUqX8sBSClvYXSI%3D)

------
ams6110
What an annoying amount of crap on that page for a publicly funded website.
Even the back button is hijacked.

