Pluto Has Three Moons
My good friend Dan Durda just sent me a very exciting email: a team has discovered two more moons of Pluto!
According to the press release, these tiny moons were discovered in May 2005 using images from the Hubble Space Telescope. The two as-yet unnamed moons orbit Pluto at distances of about 50,000 and 65,000 kilometers (for comparison, Charon, the previously-known moon of Pluto discovered ion 1978, is about 20,000 km from Pluto). Their sizes are not known, since they are so very far away, but the larger of the two may be 110-160 km in size, and the smaller about 100-140 km (again, for comparison, Charon is about 1170 km in diameter, so these are pretty small moons). They are extremely faint: the brighter of the two is at a magnitude of 23, meaning that the faintest star you can see with your unaided eye is still about 6 million times brighter than this moon. Pluto itself is about 4000 times brighter than these moons, so it’s hard to see them against Pluto’s glare. That’s why they haven’t been firmly detected before.
It’s not possible to get much more info about these two moons from the current data. They are too small to directly resolve, so they appear as point-like objects. That means the sizes can only be estimated using their brightness. Also, the orbits are estimates using the limited data, but it seems clear that they are indeed objects orbiting Pluto, and not chance background stars or some other distant objects orbiting the Sun.
As the team themselves say:
What led us to believe the objects near Pluto in the HST images are satellites of Pluto?
Several factors:
First, both satellites appear to be moving through space with Pluto, and they also appear to be moving around Pluto, as one can see from the images. Since we commanded the Hubble Space Telescope to track Pluto during the imaging, objects not moving with Pluto (like stars and asteroids) appear as streaks in the images, rather than a point-like source moving with Pluto. It is highly improbable that an object would appear to be moving with Pluto unless it was really in orbit around it.
Second, both objects appear to be true point sources in the images, which is evidence that they are real, physical objects in space as opposed to optical glints, stray reflections, or other instrumental signatures in the instrument. HST ACS camera experts like George Hartig who examined our images do not believe that any known instrumental effects could generate signatures that mimic the satellite candidates we had found
Third, the information we have about the orbits of the satellite candidates is consistent with their orbits being in the same plane as Charon’s, and also nearly circular. This is extremely important, because it is very highly unlikely that any image artifact or other astronomical body would mimic such motion while also appearing to travel with Pluto.
Fourth, we determined that the new objects are small enough that they would not have been detectable in previous (less sensitive) Pluto satellite searches quoted in the literature, and that their gravitational effects on Charon’s orbit would not have previously indicated their presence.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Marc Buie and Eliot Young located faint images of both satellites in HST ACS data taken for a Pluto mapping project they spearheaded in 2002.
So for now, consider this discovery tentative but almost certain to be confirmed.
This is very exciting, and I congratulate the team for their hard-won effort!
October 31st, 2005 at 12:13 pm
Cool!
What do you think we should name them?
October 31st, 2005 at 12:25 pm
We’ll name them Chippendales.
October 31st, 2005 at 12:50 pm
I assume they will adopt the designation protocols for all other Kuiper belt objects
October 31st, 2005 at 1:12 pm
I think that astrologers should really sue our solar system for having so many objects they don’t have clue about.
Wonderful discovery.
October 31st, 2005 at 1:15 pm
Congrats to the proud parents on the two new tykes. IMHO proof positive that Pluto is a planet and not just some random KBO.
October 31st, 2005 at 1:52 pm
Wow! That’s breaking news!
Pluto… Charon… mmmh, why not call the moons Styx and Kerberos?
Cheers!
Olivier
October 31st, 2005 at 2:12 pm
I dunno, Styx was a lake and Kerberos was a dog… :/
October 31st, 2005 at 2:14 pm
Well, Charon was the ferryman, so the lake and the dog don’t make any less sense.
October 31st, 2005 at 2:26 pm
I prepose the original naming of
VSMOP 1 and VSMOP 2
Very Small Moon Of Pluto
October 31st, 2005 at 3:04 pm
Wonderful piece. Isn’t science fantastic?
I thought Styx was the river, not a lake. And Cerberus (or Kerberus, depending on your preferred transliteration) was a guardian of the way to the underworld, so each represents an obstacle between the realm of the living and the realm of the dead.
Calling them VSMOP isn’t quite so catchy, but it could work. The only thing is, you’d have to have strict definitions of what constitutes a VSM as opposed to an SM. And maybe another category below VSMOP, such as RRSMOP (Really Really Small Moon Of Pluto), just in case we later discover more, but smaller, satellites of Pluto.
October 31st, 2005 at 3:26 pm
Wow, if this is confirmed it will be very cool. I agree with Cerberus, for one. Styx might be good for the other but I would prefer Persephone (or Proserpina) if the name is not already taken (she was the daughter of Ceres who was kidnapped by Pluto). I think it is better to name astronomical bodies in our solar system after characters and people as opposed to places or geographic features (those would be better reserved for place or geographic features on such bodies).
What are the implications for this regarding Pluto’s planethood? It could be taken either way. You could say that having a significant lunar system makes Pluto more of a planet like the other gas giants. However, it could also be argued it means what we regard as “Pluto” is merely a nearby collection of Kuiper belt objects as opposed to a real planet with moons.
October 31st, 2005 at 3:30 pm
Outstanding news! Can’t wait for more info.
October 31st, 2005 at 3:32 pm
You heard it here first on the Bad Astronomy Web Site!
October 31st, 2005 at 3:34 pm
My recommendation for naming, keeping in line with the theme:
Cerberus (the three headed canine guardian of the gates of Hades)
Minos (mythical king of Crete who was appointed as one of three judges in Hades; the other two were Rhadamanthys and Aeacus)
Although I would not be surprised if other KBOs are discovered to have smaller bodies orbiting them as well… so the “is it a planet” debate will, i suspect, not end here.
October 31st, 2005 at 3:37 pm
Randall Says:
Well, Charon was the ferryman, so the lake and the dog don’t make any less sense.
So long as we don’t *pay* the ferryman.
October 31st, 2005 at 3:38 pm
Persephone may be reserved for a new major planet beyond Pluto, should one be found.
I like Orpheus and Eurydice, but I am a mythological classicist sometimes.
Styx and Cerberus make sense, as would Hades.
October 31st, 2005 at 4:38 pm
Orpheus and Minos has a nice ring to it.
As far as the planet debate goes, *I* learned it was a many ‘moons’ ago, and regardless it is a planet to me.
My jury is still out on Xena…..
October 31st, 2005 at 5:03 pm
The number of moons doesn’t change the status of Pluto as a planet/Kuiper belt object: lots of asteroids (and, presumably, Kuiper belt objects) have moons. I’m still not convinced.
What is exciting about this is that it’s another addition to our knowledge and understanding of the solar system. And there are plenty more names to be bestowed before the annals of Greek and Roman mythology are exhausted, not to mention all the other ancient belief systems of the world. There are already moons of Saturn named after Norse, Inuit and Celtic deities.
When we come to the point where the only mythological name left to be applied is Yahweh, that’s when all the IDers will have to sit up and take notice.
October 31st, 2005 at 5:10 pm
Marlayna: Silly rabbit, Styx was a rock group! What are they teaching you kids these days! Sheesh!
October 31st, 2005 at 6:12 pm
So, are more moons bound to be on the Horizon? Will it have a ring?
Remind us just how much the Hubble has not had time to see.
October 31st, 2005 at 10:02 pm
Wow. WOW! Just… WOW!! (That’s actually what I said out loud when I read the headline.)
October 31st, 2005 at 10:20 pm
>What is exciting about this is that it’s another addition to our knowledge and >understanding of the solar system.
agree like totally… can you emagine the tides here on earth after these two new moons have been discovered. Also, my fait is changing every minute I read this blog. I lost 10 bucks today, but my horoscope was predicting that I would get rich… those darn two moons…
October 31st, 2005 at 10:58 pm
Assuming it becomes solid fact that Pluto has three moons, I think that should fuel the pro-planet people’s fire. On the other hand, we may discover in the next few years that there are in fact other Pluto-sized Kuiper objects which have multiple moons, which will really throw the whole thing on its ear.
November 1st, 2005 at 12:59 am
Wow, I guess now it will be a planet!
November 1st, 2005 at 1:25 am
The designations Pluto II and Pluto III truly would be sufficient enough, but unfortunately with 1 km rocks orbiting Jupiter receiving names, so must these…
Problem is, underworld names by “the plan” are assigned to Plutinos, and with so many of those, “burning” off the best names for Pluto’s new additions might be unwise. In that regard, the rivers might be best… Styx and Acheron.
November 1st, 2005 at 1:43 am
Well, we should have seen it coming, shouldn’t we? I mean, any **decent** astrologer could look at a horoscope and deduce the presence of missing influences which did not correspond to any known objects. Comparing the astrological predictions with experiment and adjusting for the discrepancies would have indicated the locations and orbits of new satellites. Right? Right?
As to names:
This reminds me of when the satellites of Uranus were being discovered. Herschel, who discovered the planet, spotted the first two and named them Titania and Oberon. (As a naturalized Englishman, he might’ve felt super-English, and so to be patriotic, he chose Shakespeare’s **The Tempest** as his source, instead of Greek mythology.) In 1851, William Lassel discovered Ariel and Umbriel, naming them after Alexander Pope’s **The Rape of the Lock**, to keep up the English-lit tradition.
However, the name “Ariel” also occurs in **The Tempest**, so when Kuiper discovered the fifth satellite of Uranus, he picked another **Tempest** name and called it Miranda.
If this sort of back-and-forth free association is legitimate, then I’d say we should name one of the new moons Styx, for its mythological meaning, and then name the other moon Duran Duran. Craters on these moons could be named, oh I dunno, “Roboto” and “Notorious”.
Of course, **Futurama** tells us that in a couple centuries, astronomers will rename Uranus itself, to get rid of “that stupid joke” forever. The new name? “Urectum”.
November 1st, 2005 at 2:27 am
Duran Duran sounds great! But a more appropriate name for a moon would be The Rolling Stones
@Nigel: Nope, Styx is a lake alright.
November 1st, 2005 at 6:09 am
How about ‘By-tor’ and ‘The Snow Dog’?
CJSF
November 1st, 2005 at 7:52 am
Since Charon was the ferryman of Hades (aka Pluto) and Pluto’s two-headed pet dog was Cerberus. And as a matter of fact, Cerberus had a brother, Orthrus, another two-headed dog.
Cerberus and Orthrus most certainly would be fitting names.
November 1st, 2005 at 7:56 am
Oops, Cerberus of course had three heads, not two.
November 1st, 2005 at 9:50 am
Of course I remember Patrick Moore refering to the sattelites of the Uranus system with distain as it was in defiance of convention that names MUST come from Greek Mythology.
PS Pluto is not a planet
November 1st, 2005 at 10:02 am
My initial thought was Cerberus and Proserpine. Those names ARE already taken by asteroids, but… who cares about asteroids?
I also considered Orpheus and Eurydice, but I like throwing Cerberus in better. Cerberus and Eurydice, perhaps? (Does Cerberus have a different name in Latin? You should use the Roman name if possible.)
Orthrus would be okay, but he didn’t have anything to do with the underworld. He was owned by the giant Geryon, who lived on the island Erythea.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:08 am
Hmm.. I wonder what we should save the names Sylph, Gnome, Salamander, and Undine for?
November 1st, 2005 at 10:24 am
THIS IS ALL NICE AND “INFORMATIVE” ABOUT MORE ROCKS ORBITING MORE ROCKS, BUT WHY HASN’T PHIL DEVOTED A BLOG TO THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT MARS WAS HABITABLE IN THE PAST?
That’s a much bigger announcement, Phil.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:39 am
Hey, if we’re considering Cerberus, a three-headed dog, why not name the other “Fluffy”? Harry Potter’s perfectly good mythology, no?
Hari, I don’t recall there being an announcement that Mars was habitable once upon a time, just that there’s evidence for liquid water in the past. Is there a link to something I’ve missed?
November 1st, 2005 at 12:19 pm
“Duran Duran”? But we don’t have a “Barbarella” yet….
How about “Mickey” and “Donald”?
November 1st, 2005 at 12:41 pm
Persephone and Proserpina were used to name asteroids well over 100 years ago, so they are unavailable.
Got this info from what I assume to be a highly credible source here, the site of the discoverer of the as yet unnamed 10th planet.
November 1st, 2005 at 1:05 pm
Awesome news! I have seen that news on NASA yesterday!
That’s a great discovery
November 1st, 2005 at 1:28 pm
As I said before I think Chip ‘n’ Dale would be cool.
November 1st, 2005 at 2:14 pm
You know, those two moons were not there until a few years ago when the FSM put them there! That is why no one saw them before…..
November 1st, 2005 at 2:21 pm
Also, Pluto, the dog, has a son named “Pluto Junior”. It would be nice to honor one of the greatest animals in history by naming one of the moons after his son. In all the articles about Pluto Junior, he is always refered to as a “chip off the old rock!”.
November 1st, 2005 at 2:36 pm
Of course, we could call them Mickey and Donald…but we’d have to rename Charon Goofy…
Hey, there’s an idea! Disney pays the space program to rename the moons of Pluto! Disney gets some serious advertising and NASA gets funding! Waddya say?
November 1st, 2005 at 2:52 pm
Forgot about FSM and the touch of his allmighty noodley appendage, I’M NOT WORTHY, I’M NOT WORTHY, I’M N….. eh what I meant to say is the two moons should be named Pesto & Bolognese.
November 1st, 2005 at 3:06 pm
Ever since Pluto’s first moon was named Charon I’ve been a little disappointed that they didn’t continue the tradition of embedding the original investigators initials in the name. Perceval Lowell = (PL)uto. Yes I know Clyde Tombaugh was the person who actually discovered Pluto.
Granted, comet discoverers get their names attached to their discoveries. And asteroids are often named after people, though most of those asteroids are so faint few people will ever see them. I just think it would be kind of cool to have one object where the scientist/investigators and team members could claim a small bit of immortality for themselves.
The only bad thing is that I’m not aware of any names that start out PP, unless Phil has a middle name that starts with a vowel.
November 1st, 2005 at 9:55 pm
Mantus and Mania would be the most applicable names in this instance. Mantus considered a coruler of the underworld, along with Mania, his wife/consort. Their origins are Etruscan, but they were known and worshipped in Roman times as well.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:36 am
In case they’re considering it, I’ve got two suggested names for the recently discovered moons of Pluto:
Orpheus, who played the harp instead of paying with coins, and thus charmed Charon to give him a ride into Pluto’s Underworld, and Cerberus, who had to ride back in Charon’s boat out of the Underworld thanks to some intimidation from Hercules.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:10 am
[quote]…as would Hades.[/quote]
Wouldn’t that be more than slightly redundant, since Hades (Greek) and Pluto (Roman) are the same god?
November 2nd, 2005 at 8:26 am
I love discoveries like this!! First, an object bigger than Pluto, and now two more moons. What else could you want? Even better is that we will not have to wait very long (relatively speaking) to view them up close. New Horizons gets there in only 10 years. As far as names, if there are obscure asteroids with appropriate names, why couldn’t the IAU simply rename them and release the names for use as Pluto’s moons?
November 2nd, 2005 at 8:59 am
[...] This is pretty cool : a team of astronomers have discovered two more moons of pluto. [...]
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:56 am
Interesting, but what counts as a moon? Someone mentioned much smaller objects getting names, so I guess these count, but where does one draw the line? I mean, I imagine there are pairs (etc) of asteroids which orbit about their center of mass, or something.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:25 pm
I hope they get some cool names like 2005PLT1.1 and 2205PLT1.2 or something like that.
Virgo
Since Jupiter and Saturn are in retrograde, you may find yourself reminiscing about some events from your past relationship. Don’t let it get you down though. 2005PLT1.1 and 2005PLT1.2 are simultaneously eclipsing Charon and Pluto, which is a favorable sign that love is in the air!
I’d love to see that in an astrological column.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:05 pm
FYI — Titania and Oberon are from Shakespeare’s **A Midsummer Night’s Dream**, not **The Tempest** as one poster suggested. (Sorry to nitpick, but on an site like this, we wouldn’t want to commit any “Bad Shakespeare,” would we?)
November 3rd, 2005 at 2:49 pm
Orpheus would be a cool name, but the other ought to be his wife, Eurydice, who he braved hell to rescue. It would be kind of poetic to have them reunited at last….
November 3rd, 2005 at 9:42 pm
One-headed Charon for Pluto I, two-headed Orthrus for Pluto II, and three-headed Cerberus for Pluto III — it’s got a nice symmetry to it. I just hope if they actually use these names, they’ll do it in this order so the mnemonic works!
November 4th, 2005 at 1:00 am
I really like the idea of Orpheus and Eurydice, especially since the moons were discovered as a pair, so naming them after a pair seems appropriate. ^_^
For those of you unfamiliar with the myth:
http://www.mythology.com/orpheuseurydice.html
November 4th, 2005 at 7:05 am
Pluto is most certainly a KBO, yet it is also traditionally (by modern time standards) a planet. We can argue defining criteria such as process and location of formation, minimum mass or diameter requirements (imperical or ’smoothness’-wise), and whether or not it belongs to a significant population — yet in the end, the sky belongs to everyone. If the majority of people call Pluto a planet, that is what it’s going to remain, no matter what astronomers use in private. If they accept the new KBO sensation as ‘the tenth planet’, that is also their choice. It’s not necessarily an ignorance issue, so much as a social preference.
Pluto and any similarly-sized KBOs have a lot going for them. They’re distant and mysterious, fairly small (thus far!), and elusive. These properties excite public imagination, so it’s only understandable that they have a special attachment to Pluto. I doubt this very fascinating news will change the ‘debate’ any, and as well it shouldn’t, but at the same time I think there should be an understanding. Use such stories to educate and interest people, don’t scoff out of hand if they prefer to call an object by some subjective label.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:16 pm
[QUOTE]The Bad Astronomer Says:
Persephone may be reserved for a new major planet beyond Pluto, should one be found.
I like Orpheus and Eurydice, but I am a mythological classicist sometimes. Styx and Cerberus make sense, as would Hades.[/QUOTE]
Orpheus and Eurydice would be good names since Orpheus went to Hades (Pluto) to fetch Eurydice and by charming the rulers of the shades was permitted to bring her back to the upperworld on condition he wouldn’t look at her until they got there. But he looked before they reached the upperworld and she descended back to the shades. Thus, the farthest moon could be Orpheus “looking back” on Eurydice who would then be taken by Charon across the River Styx (the river that circles Hades seven times) back to Pluto aka Hades.
Anyway, it’s all very interesting.
November 5th, 2005 at 9:50 pm
Just shows that there’s tons more to learn about the universe! But It’s a very good question: What should their names be? It’s really interesting to think: There has been life on this planet for so long and yet we are always learning about the universe! I wonder how much we would know about it if no one started the Enlightment. I agree with several of the other writers like Wolverine, that I can’t wait for more information, with Black Cat, we should sue the solar system for all the things we don’t know, and with metamorhism we should name things in the solar system after characters and people rather than geographical features.
November 7th, 2005 at 5:19 am
“”"
…Pluto’s glare.
“”"
…is that an oxymoron?
November 7th, 2005 at 4:11 pm
Proserpina the Roman version of Persephone the consort/wife of Pluto/Hades
Minos, Aeacus, and Rhadamanthus were the three judges of the dead in Hades I am not sure what the Roman equivalents would be.
Dirae, Eumenides, and Semnae were the attendents to Hades and Persephone again I do not know if there were Roman names for them.
Eurydice and Orpheus are also posibilities. Eurydice was in the Underworld and Orpheus attempted to bring her back, on the condition he would not look back to see her until they were back in the living world. He failed and Eurydice was taken back to the underworld
November 7th, 2005 at 5:06 pm
mickal555 Says:
…Pluto’s glare.
…is that an oxymoron?
Just as long as you don’t pronounce it “oxy-moron”.
November 9th, 2005 at 6:10 am
One of the new moons should really be called “Hades”, which means the other one will have to be called “Hadoze”
November 9th, 2005 at 6:44 pm
GalaxyTrio –
Ah, but to quote Robot Devil, Hades/Hell is “where Styx is a river and not just the band”!
(Futurama reference).
November 14th, 2005 at 3:19 pm
How about Aeacus and Rhadamanthus? They’re the judges of death in the Roman underworld.
I think it’s really unfair that we get only one moon, and teensy weensy Pluto gets three. At least there’s someone to look at them here.
November 14th, 2005 at 6:56 pm
I like the name Cerberus, but would offer Tisiphone, the Avenging Fury, who kept guard in an iron tower about the city of the damned.
November 14th, 2005 at 7:52 pm
Awesome discovery! As for their names, I don’t think you can go wrong with Bill and Ted
November 15th, 2005 at 12:14 am
Pluto has always been my fav. I like the names styx and as black cat suggested Persephone.
Has anyone one or every one heard about new horizons probe that is scheduled to go past Pluto? Launches in January hopefully.With this new discovery of moons I have high hopes of many new surpises withthis fly by!
November 15th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
can you pay money to give your name to one of these moons??
I wont pay anything, but a person i know has so many money(higher than 10k million bucks)…he wants to give his name to the bigger moon discovered “aurous” or “thera” i would name them Marie,l337z0r, or zubieta
November 16th, 2005 at 4:13 pm
I still think Pluto is lucky to be a planet. As for the two new moons (and Charon), they don’t really help make Pluto be more of a planet. What about Ida and Dactyl! They’re just asteriods, but Dactyl still orbits Ida. As for being just discovered, thats amazing! Hooray for the Hubble!:)
December 2nd, 2005 at 11:30 am
If a 100 KM object can be considered a moon for Pluto, then there are many asteroids that qualify to be called planets.
Just because a couple more moons were discovered for Pluto, IMO, does not make Pluto affirm its status as a planet.
December 7th, 2005 at 9:43 am
i am a totally amateur astronomer (like 15 years old – although i have a qualification in Astronomy believe it or not (just believe it)) but Styx is a river in some versions and a lake in others. (i personally call it a river.)
thought it was cool that we are learning more and more every year about Space and all that gubbins….. sometimes i wonder if we are even intelligent….. well as intelligent as we say…
i don’t mind what the moons are called, asd long as i know their names as soon as they are officially given some…..
December 7th, 2005 at 9:58 am
I think we should call them Styx and Erebus. But that’s just me.
December 8th, 2005 at 7:25 pm
rivers (Styx, Acheron) would be nice but there are 3 other rivers. Eurydice and Orpheus is the best. There other judges other than aeacus, rhadamanthus. IAU should have order and sense.
Leaving Pluto as a planet would save time correcting all media issues (think textbooks, magazines, etc). Another oxymoron isnt a big deal. language is ripe with them. Astronomical bodies that borderline cases are going to be plentiful, as astronomy expands and becomes more strange.
December 9th, 2005 at 7:21 pm
I think that these new moons would screw up astrologers (Yes, I think they are bogus too) since their “star charts” will be wrong.
December 12th, 2005 at 9:16 pm
er…..aren’t those new planets such as ‘zena2003′ (found in the Oort Cloud about 10 billion mi. from the Sun) a tad bit more interesting than a couple of frozen turds whirling about Pluto? haha
December 13th, 2005 at 11:09 pm
This isn’t RIGHT .There are probably a lot more than that!!!
December 13th, 2005 at 11:12 pm
I wonder is there anymore moons around the EARTH????
December 13th, 2005 at 11:13 pm
HALF A KM MAYBE^_^
December 19th, 2005 at 11:31 am
I’m for naming the New Moons of Pluto…… Mickey and Minni.
TC
December 20th, 2005 at 2:42 pm
Mickey and Minnie might be a bit redundant. Besides: Pluto’s moons are called Mickey, Minnie and Charon. Odd ring to it, don’t you think? I like Cerberus and Styx, because Pluto was the Roman name for the god of the underworld and that way they’d all relate nicely…plus it’d be sticking with the idea of naming moons after elements of Greek mythology. Jupiter and Saturn’s moons have all sorts of Greek-y names, like Io and Europa.
If the first moon wasn’t named Charon, they could have named them after the three furies, Tisisphone, Alecto and Megaera (I think). Orpheus and Eurydice is kinda funky, but I like Chaos and Oceanus – which were in the beginning, or even Oceanus and Eurynome (who created the universe and would be nicely ironic)…
It shouldn’t really matter all that much.
December 20th, 2005 at 11:22 pm
Feigenbaum’s Number of Chaos Theory (something like 4.689etc) predicts
onset of Chaos in any physical system at about 4.689etc cycles of an
element of measure, like the dia. of a cigarette, wherin after about 4.689
dia’s of length the smoke off the tip of a cigarette should break up in chaos
If one looks at the solar system and counts planets outward from the sun,
we get 1.Mercury 2.Venus 3.Earth 4.Mars and before you reach 5th planet
you get Feigenbaums Number 4.689etc or Chaos that we call Asteroids.
Continue the count and you have 1.Jupiter 2.Saturn 3.Uranus 4.Neptune &
before you reach a 5th planet you get Feigenbaums Number 4.689etc and
a multiplicity of objects not unlike the asteroid belt, much more distant and
spread out, so we still have a lot to discover in the realm of Pluto’s orbit.
Cordially,
Roger Carmichael, Opto-mechanical designer of 1st LandSat
January 11th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
I really love the names everybody has come up with and some have really done their mythology homework! I’d like to see, as a couple of you here put it name the new moons after a devoted couple so here is my two favorite couples ‘ Romeo and Juliet’ the star crossed lovers, or Julius Ceaser and Cleopatra (sp?).
February 8th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
I for one think they (among others) should get their own unique names, rather than being named after something else. That way when we’re talking about Xynoccodus, we all know we’re talking about a moon of Pluto and not some mythological character. And there will be no sifting through google results to find what you’re looking for. Same thing with band names!
February 17th, 2006 at 6:29 pm
It still amazes me that we believe we should name everything. It’s the old adage about name something and you pocess it. But, if we are going to name them something other than a letter and a numeral, why not name them after a gateway or a bellhop? If coming from the cosmos to our stupid little star system, these moons might be the first roadsign heading Sunward. Or is the 3rd rock from our Sun really the center of the universe?
March 9th, 2006 at 2:29 pm
Orpheus and Euridice gets my vote. It’s lovely and in keeping with the tradition of naming celestial bodies after people.
Styx and Duran Duran was a close second, though
March 23rd, 2006 at 12:03 pm
At least some Kuiper belt object should be called:
“Hoostrandoo” (Also spelt “Oshendo”)
These are the stone-headed giants of the Wendats (Hurons).
They were the original Talking Heads – and they are made of stones, as are most planetoids.
Cheers!
April 7th, 2006 at 8:37 am
How come our moon doesn’t have a name?
May 7th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
It does, “The Moon”.
Or just use Luna.
August 25th, 2006 at 5:19 pm
What does the finding of these extra bodies around Pluto mean? The finding of planets or moons in our solar system has always come at some important time in human history. Introducing a new age shift in thinking or living. Since Pluto rules sex, death, taxes, war — I suspect we will have a radical shift and insight on life and death/afterlive. Maybe the answer to the Why and What’s out there? It will drastically affect our religous perceptions and promote a more spirtual connection to us and others who have gone before. The end or start of global WAR? The advent of no Taxes? The advent of Gifting? That we are Not alone? or maybe they really aren’t moons, but orbiting space vehicles waiting for the Others to catch up — you know the many that are behind them. Waiting for us to be ready to say “hello”! Maybe we should name them — ‘insight’ and ‘awareness’.
October 10th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Pluto, not a planet?
I think that any planet that has at least one moon shoul be a planet.
So what is the problem? Well I mean, so what if it intersects with another planets hood? Big Deal. Everyone still considers Pluto a planet anyway.
So it is totally stupid to say it is not. Nobody should say that, because it is all of the science books. Also people were taught that Pluto was a planet. So people even made up sayings: My Very Energetic Mother Just Served Us Nine pizzas.
People are so stupid to go further into space, what do they think they will find, GOD? All they are gonna find is small planets. Then they die.
So please correct people when they say that pluto is not a planet, beacause I beliieve it is. Alyce
October 10th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Dear Everyone,
Hey. Has anyone ever seen the movie contact?
December 23rd, 2006 at 2:14 pm
Hi. You have very nice website! Beautiful design. Great article – exactly the information on exactly the lenses I was wondering about! my namme is 上海租车
February 1st, 2008 at 3:09 am
Feigenbaum’s Number 4.689..etc is a number of Chaos
that can be applied to the solar system. If you count the
planets outward from the sun, before you get to a 5th
planet, Chaos occurs. So Mercury,Venus,Earth,Mars gives
a chaotic Asteroid Belt before we reach any 5th planet.
Also Jupiter,Saturn,Uranus,Neptune gives another chaotic
Kuiper Belt before we would reach another 5th planet.
Feigenbaum’s Number is the reason from the 5th child on,
characteristics are a repeat of the first 4 sequence of children
You can see Feigenbaum’s Number in nature, including the
sun-synchronized human race wherein after the 4th generation
arrives we have a chaotic socio-economic phenomenon.
read
February 1st, 2008 at 3:13 am
Feigenbaum’s Number 4.689..etc is a number of Chaos
that can be applied to the solar system. If you count the
planets outward from the sun, before you get to a 5th
planet, Chaos occurs. So Mercury,Venus,Earth,Mars gives
a chaotic Asteroid Belt before we reach any 5th planet.
Also Jupiter,Saturn,Uranus,Neptune gives another chaotic
Kuiper Belt before we would reach another 5th planet.
Feigenbaum’s Number is the reason from the 5th child on,
characteristics are a repeat of the first 4 sequence of children
You can see Feigenbaum’s Number in nature, including the
sun-synchronized human race wherein after the 4th generation
arrives we have a chaotic socio-economic upheaval as now.
February 15th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
thanks for stealing my name ): alyce brannen.
no it’s not stupid to go farther into space.
imagine alll of the new things that we could discover farther in space, all of the new places we could go.
also, when the earth is done we will need another place to go, farther in space we might find one.