Pluto is alive—but where is the heat coming from?

originally posted by: 38181
Question, how long will a cup of coffee stay hot in absolute space (vacuum), with zero sun?

This explains that questions quite well:

Does water Freeze or Boil in Space?

PS, on Pluto: Most likely Radioactive decay.

originally posted by: 38181
Must remember that in a pure vacuum of space, heat cannot transfer since there is no molecules to transfer heat energy.

In vacuum of space, objects lose heat through radiation. The energy is carried by electromagnetic waves and does not involve the movement or the interaction of matter. www.physicsclassroom.com...

As for how long will a cup of coffee stay hot in absolute space, not for very long. It will lose heat fairly quickly through radiation. A more detailed answer is here: www.reddit.com...

Gravidic Dynamic Tension.
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

2 dormant death stars which still have their heating on but have been iced over on the surface is the most obvious answer.

If every planet is warming one culprit is likely.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff

What could be causing this for over a decade?

Its either Nibiru or aliens.

Interesting stuff S&F

Was going to say this too

originally posted by: wildespace
...
@ElectricUniverse - your presentation of the links is a bit misleading. The "unexpected warm places" discovered for example on Enceladus don't point to any climate change, they are simply places where Enceladus is warmer than anywhere else, due to whatever geological processes going on there.

It would be dishonest to take these isolated phrases out of context and try to make a "Solar System is undergoing a global warming" story out of them.

I am not taking anything out of context... BTW, Earth is also showing increased geological activity, and such activity is melting glaciers in places like Antarctica... But you are going to try to claim I am taking this out of context as well, which i am not.

It seems that the planets in the solar system are reacting to the increased energy the entire solar system is receiving from an unknown source.

Cosmic Rays, especially X-Rays, The Solar System is Receiving Have been Increasing

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
BTW, Earth is also showing increased geological activity, and such activity is melting glaciers in places like Antarctica...

Sources supporting both of those statements, please.

It seems that the planets in the solar system are reacting to the increased energy the entire solar system is receiving from an unknown source.

Cosmic Rays, especially X-Rays, The Solar System is Receiving Have been Increasing

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: wildespace
Sources supporting both of those statements, please.

Already posted in another thread.

The 2010–2014.3 global earthquake rate increase
Tom Parsons 1 and Eric L. Geist 1

1 U. S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California, USA
...
1. Introduction

Obvious increases in the global rate of large (M ≥ 7.0) earthquakes happened after 1992, 2010, and especially during the first quarter of 2014 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Given these high rates, along with suggestions that damaging earthquakes may be causatively linked at global distance [e.g., Gomberg and Bodin, 1994; Pollitz et al., 1998; Tzanis and Makropoulos, 2002; Bufe and Perkins, 2005; Gonzalez-Huizar et al., 2012; Pollitz et al., 2012, 2014], we investigate whether there is a significant departure from a random process underlying these rate changes. Recent studies have demonstrated that M ≥ 7.0 earthquakes (and also tsunamis) that occurred since 1900 follow a Poisson process [e.g., Michael, 2011; Geist and Parsons, 2011; Daub et al., 2012; Shearer and Stark, 2012; Parsons and Geist, 2012; Ben-Naim et al., 2013]. Here we focus on the period since 2010, which has M ≥ 7.0 rates increased by 65% and M ≥ 5.0 rates up 32% compared with the 1979 – present average. The first quarter of 2014 experienced more than double the average M ≥ 7.0 rate, enough to intrigue the news media [e.g., www.nbcnews.com...]. We extend our analysis to M ≥ 5.0 levels, as many of these lower magnitude events convey significant hazard, and global catalogs have not generally been tested down to these thresholds.

2. Methods and Data

We work with the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) catalog of M≥ 5.0 global earthquakes for the period between 1979 and 2014.3 with a primary focus on the recent interval between 2010 and 2014.3 that shows the highest earthquake rates (Table 1 and Figure 1). A variety of tests suggest that the catalog is complete down to magnitudes between M=4.6 and M=5.2, depending on the method used to assess it (see supporting information). We examine a range of lower magnitude thresholds above M =5.0 to account for this uncertainty.
...

profile.usgs.gov...

The two USGS seismologists who posted their findings are Tom Parsons and Eric L. Geist.

Underwater volcanoes, not climate change, reason behind melting of West Antarctic Ice Sheet

There are an estimated 3 million underwater volcanos, and most of them are bigger than the majority of the land volcanos.

originally posted by: wildespace

It seems that the planets in the solar system are reacting to the increased energy the entire solar system is receiving from an unknown source.

Cosmic Rays, especially X-Rays, The Solar System is Receiving Have been Increasing

www.abovetopsecret.com...

BTW, already responded to the statements from that other member. The skepticalscience blog website is full of made up, false claims made by John Cook which have been refuted long ago.

"Global warming" of the Solar System is a myth. www.skepticalscience.com...

* Mars: the notion that Mars is warming came from an unfortunate conflation of weather and climate. Based on two pictures taken 22 years apart, assumptions were made that have not proved to be reliable. There is currently no evidence to support claims that Mars is warming at all. More on Mars...
* Jupiter: the notion that Jupiter is warming is actually based on predictions, since no warming has actually been observed. Climate models predict temperature increases along the equator and cooling at the poles. It is believed these changes will be catalysed by storms that merge into one super-storm, inhibiting the planet’s ability to mix heat. Sceptical arguments have ignored the fact this is not a phenomenon we have observed, and that the modelled forcing is storm and dust movements, not changes in solar radiation.
* Neptune: observations of changes in luminosity on the surface of both Neptune and its largest moon, Triton, have been taken to indicate warming caused by increased solar activity. In fact, the brightening is due to the planet’s seasons changing, but very slowly. Summer is coming to Neptune’s southern hemisphere, bringing more sunlight, as it does every 164 years.
* Pluto: the warming exhibited by Pluto is not really understood. Pluto’s seasons are the least understood of all: its existence has only been known for a third of its 248 -year orbit, and it has never been visited by a space probe. The ‘evidence’ for climate change consists of just two observations made in 1988 and 2002. That’s equivalent to observing the Earth’s weather for just three weeks out of the year. Various theories suggest its highly elliptical orbit may play a part, as could the large angle of its rotational axis. One recent paper suggests the length of Pluto’s orbit is a key factor, as with Neptune. Sunlight at Pluto is 900 times weaker than it is at the Earth.

(this is from an old article, as Pluto has clearly been visited by New Horizons.)

So all the planets in our system are warming but ours is our fault?

That's some good science.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff

What could be causing this for over a decade?

Its either Nibiru or aliens.

Interesting stuff S&F

I hope you're right, the world has talked about aliens for so long without contact that a Nibiruan Santa flying back in his alien craft would be the Entertainment of the Century!

Wasn't there an article last year about the solar system in general heating up? So is it the Sun or cosmic rays reacting with the planets/moons? Look at Earth's own climate change. Isn't the Antarctic melting from the bottom? So something impacting the core? Same with Pluto.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Wasn't there an article last year about the solar system in general heating up? So is it the Sun or cosmic rays reacting with the planets/moons? Look at Earth's own climate change. Isn't the Antarctic melting from the bottom? So something impacting the core? Same with Pluto.

The movie 2012.

Sorry, on my phone. Cannot do links.

Polar shift was the result. Lol.

The Chinese built the arks and civilization started again in S. Africa.

The end.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

If it happens, it might just be that half of the globe jumping in sync on commanding orders of their Communistic Leaders in order to actually create that scenario. Hey, it could happen.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Wasn't there an article last year about the solar system in general heating up?

Might have been, but there's no solid evidence that the Solar System is heating up. See my previous post.

Perhaps nuclear reactions are taking place below the surface of Pluto?

originally posted by: wildespace
"Global warming" of the Solar System is a myth. www.skepticalscience.com...
...

Skepticalscience is the myth which has been shown to be wrong time, and time again...

From the claims of Cook that the sun's activity had lowered in the 1980s, which is false. To the made up BS claim from Cook that 97% of scientists agree with AGW, when he took that number from 36% of scientists he asked.

Popular Technology has shown many of the false arguments made by John Cook.

John Cook has gone "cuckoo" a long time ago...

Google Scholar Illiteracy at Skeptical Science

Cook likes to "cook" data...

The Truth about Skeptical Science

His "cooking" days are numbered...

97% Study Falsely Classifies Scientists' Papers, according to the scientists that published them

You have to be "cuckoo" to believe the BS John Cook cooks...

originally posted by: wildespace

Might have been, but there's no solid evidence that the Solar System is heating up. See my previous post.

No?... Even the sun is reacting strangely...

Declining solar activity linked to recent warming

The Sun may have caused as much warming as carbon dioxide over three years.

Quirin Schiermeier

An analysis of satellite data challenges the intuitive idea that decreasing solar activity cools Earth, and vice versa. In fact, solar forcing of Earth's surface climate seems to work the opposite way around — at least during the current Sun cycle.

Joanna Haigh, an atmospheric physicist at Imperial College London, and her colleagues analysed daily measurements of the spectral composition of sunlight made between 2004 and 2007 by NASA's Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE) satellite. They found that the amount of visible light reaching Earth increased as the Sun's activity declined — warming the Earth's surface. Their unexpected findings are published today in Nature1.

The study period covers the declining phase of the current solar cycle. Solar activity, which in the current cycle peaked around 2001, reached a pronounced minimum in late 2009 during which no sunspots were observed for an unusually long period.

Sunspots, dark areas of reduced surface temperature on the Sun caused by intense magnetic activity, are the best-known visible manifestation of the 11-year solar cycle. They have been regularly observed and recorded since the dawn of modern astronomy in the seventeenth century. But measurements of the wavelengths of solar radiation have until now been scant.
Radiation leak

Haigh's team compared SORCE's solar spectrum data with wavelengths predicted by a standard empirical model based mainly on sunspot numbers and area, and noticed unexpected differences. The amount of ultraviolet radiation in the spectrum was four to six times smaller than that predicted by the empirical model, but an increase in radiation in the visible wavelength, which warms the Earth's surface, compensated for the decrease.

Contrary to expectations, the net amount of solar energy reaching Earth's troposphere — the lowest part of the atmosphere — seems to have been larger in 2007 than in 2004, despite the decline in solar activity over that period.


The spectral changes seem to have altered the distribution of ozone molecules above the troposphere. In a model simulation, ozone abundance declined below an altitude of 45 kilometres altitude in the period 2004–07, and increased further up in the atmosphere.

The modelled changes are consistent with space-based measurements of ozone during the same period.

"We're seeing — albeit limited to a very short period — a very interesting change in solar irradiation with remarkably similar changes in ozone," says Haigh. "It might be a coincidence, and it does require verification, but our findings could be too important to not publish them now."
Sun surprise

The full implications of the discovery are unclear. Haigh says that the current solar cycle could be different from previous cycles, for unknown reasons. But it is also possible that the effects of solar variability on atmospheric temperatures and ozone are substantially different from what has previously been assumed.
...

www.nature.com...

Let's recap the important part again...

...
Contrary to expectations, the net amount of solar energy reaching Earth's troposphere — the lowest part of the atmosphere — seems to have been larger in 2007 than in 2004, despite the decline in solar activity over that period.
...
"We're seeing — albeit limited to a very short period — a very interesting change in solar irradiation with remarkably similar changes in ozone," says Haigh. "It might be a coincidence, and it does require verification, but our findings could be too important to not publish them now."
Sun surprise

The full implications of the discovery are unclear. Haigh says that the current solar cycle could be different from previous cycles, for unknown reasons. But it is also possible that the effects of solar variability on atmospheric temperatures and ozone are substantially different from what has previously been assumed.
...

www.nature.com...

An influence of solar spectral variations on radiative forcing of climate