Finally, the images taken of Ceres on 12 Feb have just appeared. Have been waiting for these. It looks, well, not as exciting as I’d hoped, small craters are everywhere. The bright spots are still unexplained, but are about the same size as the craters, they closely resemble the white dots seen in a couple of craters on planet Mercury. There’s some natural colour variation due to the colours of the underlying rocks, but not as much as I’d hoped.

For giant images click Here

These two views of Ceres were acquired by NASA’s Dawn spacecraft on Feb. 12, 2015, from a distance of about 52,000 miles (83,000 kilometers) as the dwarf planet rotated. The images, which were taken about 10 hours apart, have been magnified from their original size.

We’re getting close to the closest approach prior to orbit. Dawn swings close to Ceres before moving away again.

Next image ought to be taken on 19 Feb then 25 Feb. But although 25 Feb is closest approach, but that time Ceres is half out of the sunlight. The 19 Feb image ought to be better. Ceres is then in the dark until the image due on 15 April when it will be again in half sunlight.

mollwollfumble said:

Finally, the images taken of Ceres on 12 Feb have just appeared. Have been waiting for these. It looks, well, not as exciting as I’d hoped, small craters are everywhere. The bright spots are still unexplained, but are about the same size as the craters, they closely resemble the white dots seen in a couple of craters on planet Mercury. There’s some natural colour variation due to the colours of the underlying rocks, but not as much as I’d hoped.

For giant images click Here

These two views of Ceres were acquired by NASA’s Dawn spacecraft on Feb. 12, 2015, from a distance of about 52,000 miles (83,000 kilometers) as the dwarf planet rotated. The images, which were taken about 10 hours apart, have been magnified from their original size.

We’re getting close to the closest approach prior to orbit. Dawn swings close to Ceres before moving away again.

Next image ought to be taken on 19 Feb then 25 Feb. But although 25 Feb is closest approach, but that time Ceres is half out of the sunlight. The 19 Feb image ought to be better. Ceres is then in the dark until the image due on 15 April when it will be again in half sunlight.

Had a go a trying to enhance the colour in these images. Turns out I can’t because there isn’t any colour to enhance, the images are strictly monochrome. I take that to mean that the greyness is an artefact of the image processing. If so then Ceres may be much more colourful than this.

The present image is the first one taken with a camera other than that used primarily for spacecraft navigation. The current camera has acronym “RC”. I don’t know what that is, because the main camera on board Dawn is the Framing Camera “FC”. Perhaps “RC” stands for “right camera” because there are two framing cameras on board Dawn.

Aha! The image is monochrome, taken through a wideband filter covering 400 to 1050 nm. Each separate colour requires a different narrowband filter, one of seven, and it makes sense that they haven’t started photographing these colours yet. The only colour information we have so far are the blurred images from the Huibble Space telescope, such as this old one.

• It looks, well, not as exciting as I’d hoped

What exactly were you expecting?

furious said:

• It looks, well, not as exciting as I’d hoped

What exactly were you expecting?

A message in a bottle would be good, and please send back to….

furious said:

• It looks, well, not as exciting as I’d hoped

What exactly were you expecting?

the italian inquisition????

Boris said:

the italian inquisition????

“…they discovered only a small asteroid inhabited by a solitary old man who claimed repeatedly that nothing was true, though he was later discovered to be lying.”

Any forumers near Jervis Bay?

I’ve always known Ceres as an asteroid.
Dwarf planet is a little ambitious.

Ceres mass = 0.0128 Moons

Ceres, is also associated with the mythological goddess of growing plants & harvest.
Ceres also symbolizes physical constitution, vitality & fertility.

)

Ceres is fairly much at hydrostatic equilibrium (ie it’s spheroid) so it’s a reasonable instance of a dwarf planet

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

I don’t really want to get into an argument with you on this but I suggest you look closer to home for “waste of good money”.

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

Stupid troll is stupid

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

I don’t really want to get into an argument with you on this but I suggest you look closer to home for “waste of good money”.

yes, all funding (tax payer) for the abc, & for the labor party.

Dropbear said:

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

Stupid troll is stupid

get fucked cunt

The_observer said:

roughbarked said:

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

I don’t really want to get into an argument with you on this but I suggest you look closer to home for “waste of good money”.

yes, all funding (tax payer) for the abc, & for the labor party.

No point arguing.

The_observer said:

Dropbear said:

The_observer said:

Looks exactly as I would have expected a small ball of rock & ice, in the asteroid belt, to have looked.

What a waste of good money!

Stupid troll is stupid

get fucked cunt

people like the Bush’s, conservatives, get things done. Their always surrounded by smart people advising them.

Liberals are absolutely hopeless.Look at Gillard & Rudd. The two worst PM’s this country gas ever seen by a Antarctic mile.

Hawk was good, but like turnBull, he was in the wrong Party.

Get a Bush in, & that hopeless present President out, & destroy IS, just to start with.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-19/meteor-brighter-than-the-full-moon-spotted-over-usa/6144840

60cm and over 200kg…what’s it made of to be that heavy?

Sorry…

buffy said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-19/meteor-brighter-than-the-full-moon-spotted-over-usa/6144840

60cm and over 200kg…what’s it made of to be that heavy?

metals are all that are left at this stage?

buffy said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-19/meteor-brighter-than-the-full-moon-spotted-over-usa/6144840

60cm and over 200kg…what’s it made of to be that heavy?

Nothing that great. Its volume is approximately 113 liters, so if made of water would be about 113 kg.

At that volume, if it was made from quartz is would weigh about 300 kg.

I was using quartz at 2.65g/cm³

sibeen said:

I was using quartz at 2.65g/cm³

Actually, looking at a table of densities a common housebrick has a density very close to 1.77g/cm³

sibeen said:

sibeen said:

I was using quartz at 2.65g/cm³

Actually, looking at a table of densities a common housebrick has a density very close to 1.77g/cm³

Yeah. I’d hate to be hit by one.

roughbarked said:

sibeen said:

sibeen said:

I was using quartz at 2.65g/cm³

Actually, looking at a table of densities a common housebrick has a density very close to 1.77g/cm³

Yeah. I’d hate to be hit by one.

what is the density of nickel?

buffy said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-19/meteor-brighter-than-the-full-moon-spotted-over-usa/6144840

60cm and over 200kg…what’s it made of to be that heavy?

Reposted from chat:

According to my calculations, that’s about 1.77g/cm³. Meteorites are ordinarily found to be made of iron/silicate or iron/nickel combinations; iron’s density is about 7.5g/cm³ and nickel’s is about 8.9g/cm³, so it’s pretty light for a meteor.

Dropbear said:

roughbarked said:

sibeen said:

Actually, looking at a table of densities a common housebrick has a density very close to 1.77g/cm³

Yeah. I’d hate to be hit by one.

what is the density of nickel?

8.9g/cm³

sibeen said:

Dropbear said:

roughbarked said:

Yeah. I’d hate to be hit by one.

what is the density of nickel?

8.9g/cm³

there you go then.. plenty big enough to be that heavy..

Dropbear said:

roughbarked said:

sibeen said:

Actually, looking at a table of densities a common housebrick has a density very close to 1.77g/cm³

Yeah. I’d hate to be hit by one.

what is the density of nickel?

a quarter.

btm said:

According to my calculations, that’s about 1.77g/cm³. Meteorites are ordinarily found to be made of iron/silicate or iron/nickel combinations; iron’s density is about 7.5g/cm³ and nickel’s is about 8.9g/cm³, so it’s pretty light for a meteor.

Meteorites are not normally iron/silicate or iron/nickel. That’s only about 2.5% of all meteorites. Meteorites are more commonly ordinary chondrites or carbonaceous chondrites. Ordinary chondrites have densities 3.21 to 3.4. Carbonaceous chondrites have densities 2.11 to 3.1. I’ve noticed that bodies in space tend to have a lower density than meteorites, possibly because the lightest weight parts are burnt off in the descent though the atmosphere, or possibly because of many small voids within the body.

mollwollfumble said:

btm said:

According to my calculations, that’s about 1.77g/cm³. Meteorites are ordinarily found to be made of iron/silicate or iron/nickel combinations; iron’s density is about 7.5g/cm³ and nickel’s is about 8.9g/cm³, so it’s pretty light for a meteor.

Meteorites are not normally iron/silicate or iron/nickel. That’s only about 2.5% of all meteorites. Meteorites are more commonly ordinary chondrites or carbonaceous chondrites. Ordinary chondrites have densities 3.21 to 3.4. Carbonaceous chondrites have densities 2.11 to 3.1. I’ve noticed that bodies in space tend to have a lower density than meteorites, possibly because the lightest weight parts are burnt off in the descent though the atmosphere, or possibly because of many small voids within the body.

“The densities of Ceres, Pallas, and Vesta are 2.2, 3.4, and 3.3 grams per cubic cm”.

So Ceres DOES have an unusually low density.

It is looking a bit bland at this stage but there are bound to be some surprises as our view becomes more detailed.

Aquila said:

I’ve always known Ceres as an asteroid.
Dwarf planet is a little ambitious.

Ceres mass = 0.0128 Moons

I think that Ceres, together with other dwarf planets, should be planets.

In support of Ceres being a planet I’ve long been a fan of the currently-unpopular Bode’s Law.

The list of “planets” with distances matching the distances given by successive terms in Bode’s law are
Mercury
Venus
Earth
Mars
Ceres – fits Bode’s law almost perfectly – error 1.1%
Jupiter
Saturn – error in fit to Bode’s law – 4.8%
Uranus
Pluto – fits Bode’s law almost perfectly – error 1.6%
Eris

Neptune is the only odd one out – it doesn’t fit Bode’s Law.

mollwollfumble said:

mollwollfumble said:

btm said:

According to my calculations, that’s about 1.77g/cm³. Meteorites are ordinarily found to be made of iron/silicate or iron/nickel combinations; iron’s density is about 7.5g/cm³ and nickel’s is about 8.9g/cm³, so it’s pretty light for a meteor.

Meteorites are not normally iron/silicate or iron/nickel. That’s only about 2.5% of all meteorites. Meteorites are more commonly ordinary chondrites or carbonaceous chondrites. Ordinary chondrites have densities 3.21 to 3.4. Carbonaceous chondrites have densities 2.11 to 3.1. I’ve noticed that bodies in space tend to have a lower density than meteorites, possibly because the lightest weight parts are burnt off in the descent though the atmosphere, or possibly because of many small voids within the body.

“The densities of Ceres, Pallas, and Vesta are 2.2, 3.4, and 3.3 grams per cubic cm”.

So Ceres DOES have an unusually low density.

On the other hand, 2.2 is not that low. Phobos has a density of 1.87 and Diemos a density of 1.46

Thanks for the meteor weight answers. I just thought 60cm, two rulers, not very big. But obviously it’s entirely possible.

This is absolutely the best image we will see of Ceres before mid-April. That’s because Dawn is now heading towards the night side of Ceres and will only be back on the day side after April 14. The white spots are now definitely confirmed as craters. No moons have been found for Ceres so far, and that means that if there are any moons then they will be tiny. Dawn is only imaging in monochrome so far.

For the full story, including the state of Dawn’s ion drive, onboard instrumentation, future picture taking schedule, orbits and links to past pictures see
http://dawnblog.jpl.nasa.gov/

The Dawn spacecraft is performing flawlessly as it conducts the first exploration of the first dwarf planet. Each new picture of Ceres reveals exciting and surprising new details about a fascinating and enigmatic orb that has been glimpsed only as a smudge of light for more than two centuries. And yet as that fuzzy little blob comes into sharper focus, it seems to grow only more perplexing.

Dawn is showing us exotic scenery on a world that dates back to the dawn of the solar system, more than 4.5 billion years ago. Craters large and small remind us that Ceres lives in the rough and tumble environment of the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, and collectively they will help scientists develop a deeper understanding of the history and nature not only of Ceres itself but also of the solar system.

Even as we discover more about Ceres, some mysteries only deepen. It certainly does not require sophisticated scientific insight to be captivated by the bright spots. What are they? At this point, the clearest answer is that the answer is unknown. One of the great rewards of exploring the cosmos is uncovering new questions, and this one captures the imagination of everyone who gazes at the pictures sent back from deep space.
Other intriguing features newly visible on the unfamiliar landscape further assure us that there will be much more to see and to learn — and probably much more to puzzle over — when Dawn flies in closer and acquires new photographs and myriad other measurements. Over the course of this year, as the spacecraft spirals to lower and lower orbits, the view will continue to improve. In the lowest orbit, the pictures will display detail well over one hundred times finer than the RC2 pictures returned a few days ago (and shown below). Right now, however, Dawn is not getting closer to Ceres. On course and on schedule for entering orbit on March 6, Earth’s robotic ambassador is slowly separating from its destination.