Something Has Exploded In a Spectacular Fashion On Uranus

Originally posted by abecedarian
The only problem with a comet or asteroid is that Uranus axis is tilted and whatever caused it seems to have done so in a way corresponding with the planet's spin: near vertical in the photos, not horizontal as one would expect someting in the planetary plane would do.

You completely lost me with that comment.

If a shoemaker-Levy-9 type impact event occurred on Uranus, the same way it did on Jupiter, that's how we would expect it to look. It was basically a string of fragments that impacted as the planet rotated, so of course they will appear in sequence as the planet rotates in a line normal to the axis of rotation. So it's consistent with the tilt. That doesn't prove it was an impact (or series of impacts), but I agree with other posters who say that looks like a strong possibility.

And lets stop the jokes, the mods closed the last thread on this topic for too many jokes, so let's see if we can keep this one open, OK?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


judging by the size of those white spots, they ( together ) would by long than Earth. So what would that do to earth, or would it just rip it apart ?

As far as I remember Uranus is 14 times larger than the Earth, so that means that these are freakin' huge explosions. Interesting that they seem to follow the axis of rotation of the planet (98 degrees).

I am wondering if the streaking tails of the impacts on the atmosphere are a result of the rotation of the planet (long exposure and fading of intensity) or the angle of the strike. ie from the photograph is the planet rotation toward our viewpoint or away, are we seeing the vapourising objects or are we seeing the damage to the planet itself?

IF that explosion was due to a comet then you would think NASA knew about it. It's amazing to me that some back yard astronomer can find a small one like Elenin but, can't find one as big as it would take to cause that explosion.

Something that size would annihilate this planet and it be a miracle if roaches survived. I'm going to say it was something besides a comet.

Originally posted by chrismicha77
IF that explosion was due to a comet then you would think NASA knew about it. It's amazing to me that some back yard astronomer can find a small one like Elenin but, can't find one the as big as it would take to cause that explosion.

Something that size would annihate this planet and it be a miracle if roaches survived. I'm going to say it was something besides a comet.

edit on 30-10-2011 by chrismicha77 because: (no reason given)

Not so fast there, our instruments are not as advanced as you assume in my opinion.

We are still discovering moons around these large Jovian planets, and there are newly discovered segments of rings etc.

It would be fairly reasonable to assume that Earth astronomers could have missed this until after the fact.

Originally posted by chrismicha77

Something that size would annihilate this planet and it be a miracle if roaches survived. I'm going to say it was something besides a comet.

List every possible alternative that you can think of.

We can go through the list and either find reasons to support the possibility, or reasons to reject the possibility.

That would be a fun mental exercise in my opinion.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Thanks for the link. Often times "scientific pictures" are colorized make things look more beautiful/interesting, but the "true color" image shows that the planet has an eerie beauty on its own.

The asteroid/comet speculation makes me wonder what sort of interesting chemistry may have occurred on entry considering the presence of ammonia and methane.

With the speculation that life arrived on earth by way of asteroid, it's fun to consider that Uranus was seeded with the right "stuff" to allow a new, unexpected "life" to develop.

Edit: a bit off topic, but I love this site because it makes me curious. I've done more research on and learned more about Uranus in the past 10 min than I have in any classroom.

Originally posted by HumansEh
As far as I remember Uranus is 14 times larger than the Earth,

You confused size with mass.

The diameter of Uranus is 51,118 km across. For comparison, this is about 4 times bigger than Earth.

4x size.

Now, let’s look at volume. The total volume of Uranus is 6.833×1013 km3. Again, for comparison, you could fit 63 Earths inside Uranus, and still have room to spare.

Next, mass. The mass of Uranus is 8.68×1025 kg. This is about 14.5 times more massive than Earth.

It's 4x larger than Earth but 14.5x more massive.
Source

reply to post by Highlander64


Thank you for the interesting link to the history of the naming of the planet now known as Uranus.

I was not aware of all of those names, nor did I know it used to be called Neptune.

Very interesting, thank you very much.

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

judging by the size of those white spots, they ( together ) would by long than Earth. So what would that do to earth, or would it just rip it apart ?

I don't have the expertise on the subject to really say, but observing the sizes and what the size of the new dots would translate to on Earth, it sure looks to my amateur eyes like the last global extinction/asteroid event on Earth would be the least we could expect.

On the bright side, these things do happen from time to time, as we saw with Jupiter not that long ago and someone else mentioned. I'm shocked by how little we know about a planet right there though...especially when they do seem to suggest in the data that this has a solid core, still many times the size of Earth. I.E....it has a surface beneath that atmosphere. I'll just bet NASA could find public support for a mission to land something on THAT surface as we are on Mars, even if time to get there is many times longer. We'll still be here, just as curious...at least I hope so.

I'll start worrying if we see more impacts like this in the next 7-10 days though...which is the time frame I'm most immediately concerned about. After that..Well, December of NEXT year sure looks like one to be equally perked up and alert for the same kind of activity....if it gets higher than normal.

I sometimes wonder if we might be wrong with regards to the composition of these gas giants' interiors... ie: could they have small solid cores of some kind ? And is it possible that those small solid cores are similar to the beginnings of a planet in terms of instability/volatility and extreme temperature variations ?

With that thought, if this was not an asteroid or comet strike, then maybe a volcanic explosion into an ammonia/methane type of atmosphere could cause a mass explosion or multiple explosions in spurts as the planet rotates ending up with the pattern we see ?

I've never been one to be totally convinced that the gas giants are just that, completely 100% gaseous... In my mind, strong gravitational pull has a tendency to draw matter inward toward the center eventually gathering and forming some sort of solid mass.


... just thinking outside the box...

I was going to post this earlier because the thread title is the most hilarious one of all time.

Originally posted by CranialSponge
I sometimes wonder if we might be wrong with regards to the composition of these gas giants' interiors... ie: could they have small solid cores of some kind ?

I've never been one to be totally convinced that the gas giants are just that, completely 100% gaseous... In my mind, strong gravitational pull has a tendency to draw matter inward toward the center eventually gathering and forming some sort of solid mass.


... just thinking outside the box...

It sounds like you're not thinking outside the box, you're making stuff up and/or living in a delusional world.

Who told you that Uranus is 100% gaseous? What's the source?

Wikipedia says it has a rocky core, is it too hard to look that up before posting how wrong we are about it not having a rocky core?

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


This whole thread is a hilarious, I'm sorry %100 gaseous, a rocky core. You guys crack(hurr) me up sometimes.

That said, I have been keeping my out on a couple of forums I frequent and there hasn't been a decent enough image of Uranus posted to get an idea of any impact.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by CranialSponge
I sometimes wonder if we might be wrong with regards to the composition of these gas giants' interiors... ie: could they have small solid cores of some kind ?

I've never been one to be totally convinced that the gas giants are just that, completely 100% gaseous... In my mind, strong gravitational pull has a tendency to draw matter inward toward the center eventually gathering and forming some sort of solid mass.


... just thinking outside the box...

It sounds like you're not thinking outside the box, you're making stuff up and/or living in a delusional world.

Who told you that Uranus is 100% gaseous? What's the source?

Wikipedia says it has a rocky core, is it too hard to look that up before posting how wrong we are about it not having a rocky core?

If you want to play the pedantry game, it claims "Uranus' interior is mainly composed of ice and rock". It does not claim a solid rocky core, nor does it go further in depth as to whether or not the ice and rock are tightly compressed to form a solid mass. In fact, science thinks Uranus' core is uniformly distributed ice and rock rather than a solid mass interior.

It's thought that the gas giants are composed of some rock and mostly hydrogen ices, Jupiter and Saturn being the ones with a more solid type of core.

So perhaps you need to bone up on your reading comprehension skills and "googling" abilities before ripping off someone's head.

I always enjoy something new discovered in our solar system, as many have stated, the first thing that popped into my mind was an asteroid event. Astronomers could easily miss it, they miss ones coming by us all the time if they are small. It also could have hit when not viewable, nor do i believe there is a scope on each planet at all times.

Has anyone discovered anything posted from an official space agency on this event? I havent found anything so far... could this be some sort of photoshop gig, so that someone could post a fancy title to get everyone laughing and the story published by every crack pot conspiracy website pout there?

It seems that way, and that is what i'm going to speculate on until someone like NASA, ESO, JPL, etc. produces something official, and authentic.

Edit to add:

Oh, I found this article... could it be what started the hoaxer off on photo shopping Uranus and posting the pun filled article?

Uranus In Aries The Long Slow Explosion

I found another astrology article, which has the image of Uranus showing the explosions posted on it, giving NASA credit for the image...

Uranus - Father Sky

the source shows much of what's copyright dated on the page no newer than 2007...

I'm calling this a hoax....

reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo

Here is what would appear to be the original photos and on the NASA website. At least a part of the NASA network of sites.

Original source of photos?

MSNBC Story on this event

So, it would appear this is more than a hoax. at least in terms of major reputable news organizations taking serious notice of it as a story. The images, unfortunately, seem to be quite dated though if the above is anything to go by. It certainly doesn't look like a photoshop job. Oh well.... The planet itself is good to learn more about either way.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Your link lead to this

Our image here was taken using Gemini by planetary scientisy Larry Sromovsky, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, using Gemini. A line scan through the spot gives the brightness curve below the disk. Superimposed lines of latitude and longitude show how Uranus is tilted right over, believed due to an impact many aeons ago, so that it now rolls around the solar system on its side. Its north pole is at about 4 o’clock in the image.

The bright spot is thought to be some sort of eruption of methane ice high in atmosphere of Uranus. But Dr Sromovsky warned that it is unlikely to be so prominent for amateurs unless they are observing with specialised CCD equipment at longer wavelengths.

more:www.skymania.com...

reply to post by JimOberg


i love your title, it made my night