Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Pluto's 'Heart' Hints at Underground Ocean


Claire.

Recommended Posts

Pluto's 'Heart' Hints at Deep, Underground Ocean

A new simulation of how Pluto got its "heart" suggests that the dwarf planet most likely has a deep ocean beneath its surface.

Scientists have long suspected that Pluto has liquid water hidden underground. When NASA's New Horizons mission first set sail to the outskirts of the solar system, scientists were already planning to investigate whether the dwarf planet harbors water.

When New Horizons flew past Pluto in July 2015 and beamed its observations back to Earth, scientists found evidence suggesting that Pluto had water at some point. However, they weren't sure whether Pluto's had an existing ocean, or if it had frozen solid over time.

In a new study, scientists have determined that Pluto's subsurface ocean probably does exist, and that liquid water beneath the dwarf planet's icy shell is at least 60 miles (100 kilometers) deep and about as salty as the Dead Sea on Earth. For perspective, the deepest part of Earth's ocean is about 7 miles (11 km) deep, and Earth is about 150 times the size of Pluto.

However, many details about this possible ocean remain elusive.

Read more: Space.com

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ah, the joy of drinking Plutonic Waters.....errrr.

Still it is always great to read about water on other worlds, which always begs the possibility of more life out in all that cold and dark of space.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am particularly amazed at the images we see of Pluto when it is realized that the light level is about 1,500 times lower than it is on Earth. That is like being in a room and replacing a 100 watt light bulb with a bulb with an output of less than one-tenth of a watt. I know the eye can adjust over a remarkable range of brightness, but it is still pretty dark out there!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

I am particularly amazed at the images we see of Pluto when it is realized that the light level is about 1,500 times lower than it is on Earth. That is like being in a room and replacing a 100 watt light bulb with a bulb with an output of less than one-tenth of a watt. I know the eye can adjust over a remarkable range of brightness, but it is still pretty dark out there!

That figure of 1500 times dimmer than Earth gives the impression that the surface of Pluto must be extremely dark, but it needs to be put into context. The full moon is around 400,000 times dimmer than the sun fro the surface of the Earth. That means, at local noon, the sun on Pluto is more than 260 times brighter than the full moon on Earth, easily bright enough to read a book by.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

That figure of 1500 times dimmer than Earth gives the impression that the surface of Pluto must be extremely dark, but it needs to be put into context. The full moon is around 400,000 times dimmer than the sun fro the surface of the Earth. That means, at local noon, the sun on Pluto is more than 260 times brighter than the full moon on Earth, easily bright enough to read a book by.

My statement isn't misleading at all: it is factual. The sunlight reaching Pluto is 1500 times less than the sunlight reaching Earth. We can see in the moonlight because the iris of our eyes widens to take in more light, as I pointed out. Like I said, the light level is the same as replacing a 100 watt bulb with a bulb of less than 0.1 watt. Of course people will be able to see if they were ever to go to Pluto, but compared to Earth it is pretty dark out there.

Edit: I should also point out that I said it would be "pretty dark" at Pluto and not "extremely dark", which is what you imply I said.

Edited by Derek Willis
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Derek Willis said:

My statement isn't misleading at all: it is factual.

I didn't say it was misleading, I said it needed to be put into context. 

1 hour ago, Derek Willis said:

Like I said, the light level is the same as replacing a 100 watt bulb with a bulb of less than 0.1 watt.

Having pointed out that I didn't say your post was misleading I am forced to ask how is this NOT misleading since we are comparing levels of sunlight.

Once again we need context and genuine figures. The Earth receives about 1380 watts per m2 at the surface from the sun.

1m2 is half the size of the average broom cupboard.

In the UK the average sized living room is 4.8m2 x 4.8m2 which is 23.04m2. 1.38 watts per m2 equates to using a bulb of just over 31 watts. Dim maybe, but 300 times brighter than your "non-misleading, factual," post would have us believe.

 

1 hour ago, Derek Willis said:

Of course people will be able to see if they were ever to go to Pluto, but compared to Earth it is pretty dark out there.

This isn't misleading, it's just plain wrong.

The light levels on Pluto are comparable to dawn or dusk on Earth, or a very heavily overcast day on Earth. Darker than under a clear blue sky admittedly but no where near as dark as you are hinting. 

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
formatting and typo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction to the above post:

My figure of 1380 W/m2 is for sunlight at the top of the Earth's atmosphere, not at the surface as I said. Some of this light is absorbed by the atmosphere, so the surface receives about 1000 W/m2. However this does not change the fact that Derek's comparison is out by a factor of 300.

 

Edited to add:

It is also worth pointing out that my corrected figure for illuminating the would be a 23 Watt bulb. A modern, energy saving bulb rated at 23 watts is equivalent to an old, style, incandescent bulb rated at around 92 Watts.

Using real figures often puts things in a different light... in this case literally.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf
added information.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Waspie_Dwarf said:

I didn't say it was misleading, I said it needed to be put into context. 

Having pointed out that I didn't say your post was misleading I am forced to ask how is this NOT misleading since we are comparing levels of sunlight.

Once again we need context and genuine figures. The Earth receives about 1380 watts per m2 at the surface from the sun.

1m2 is half the size of the average broom cupboard.

In the UK the average sized living room is 4.8m2 x 4.8m2 which is 23.04m2. 1.38 watts per m2 equates to using a bulb of just over 31 watts. Dim maybe, but 300 times brighter than your "non-misleading, factual," post would have us believe.

 

This isn't misleading, it's just plain wrong.

The light levels on Pluto are comparable to dawn or dusk on Earth, or a very heavily overcast day on Earth. Darker than under a clear blue sky admittedly but no where near as dark as you are hinting. 

Where did I say you said my statement is misleading? I simply said my statement isn't misleading. You said that the light being 1500 times lower gives the impression that it is "extremely" dark on Pluto. I said it is "pretty" dark on Pluto. I mentioned that the eye can adjust to light levels, and so was using the light levels within a room as an example of relative brightness.

I was not hinting at anything - I was straightforward. People can make up their own minds. Imagine you are in a room with a 100 watt light bulb and your eyes have adjusted to that level of brightness. Now switch off the light and light a candle. The candle is about 100 times dimmer than the light bulb. Now imagine a light 15 times dimmer than the candle. Would you say that is pretty dark compared to when the light bulb was switched on. I would say it is - and that is what I said in my original posting. I did not say it was extremely dark - that is what Waspie implied I was saying.

But in absolute terms the fact remains that the light reaching Pluto is 1500 times less than that reaching Earth. I maintain that is pretty dark, but not extremely dark as Waspie implied I said.

Edit: Perhaps Waspie can explain why, when I said "pretty dark" he implied I meant "extremely dark"?

Edited by Derek Willis
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great find never the less.  The amount of light really doesn't come into play for the photos as IR cameras work in almost no light if any at all.  I'm sure NASA has some technology available that the every day person doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, paperdyer said:

Great find never the less.  The amount of light really doesn't come into play for the photos as IR cameras work in almost no light if any at all.  I'm sure NASA has some technology available that the every day person doesn't.

That was the point I was making. The cameras can operate on low light levels, which gives the impression that it is brighter at Pluto than it would appear to our eyes.

Edited by Derek Willis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 5:25 AM, Derek Willis said:

Where did I say you said my statement is misleading? I simply said my statement isn't misleading. You said that the light being 1500 times lower gives the impression that it is "extremely" dark on Pluto. I said it is "pretty" dark on Pluto. I mentioned that the eye can adjust to light levels, and so was using the light levels within a room as an example of relative brightness.

I was not hinting at anything - I was straightforward. People can make up their own minds. Imagine you are in a room with a 100 watt light bulb and your eyes have adjusted to that level of brightness. Now switch off the light and light a candle. The candle is about 100 times dimmer than the light bulb. Now imagine a light 15 times dimmer than the candle. Would you say that is pretty dark compared to when the light bulb was switched on. I would say it is - and that is what I said in my original posting. I did not say it was extremely dark - that is what Waspie implied I was saying.

But in absolute terms the fact remains that the light reaching Pluto is 1500 times less than that reaching Earth. I maintain that is pretty dark, but not extremely dark as Waspie implied I said.

Edit: Perhaps Waspie can explain why, when I said "pretty dark" he implied I meant "extremely dark"?

Yeah some people are on this site soley to troll. They go around looking to try to make themselves look smarter so as to make themselves feel better about themselves. Sad really...

Edited by FTWind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FTWind said:

Yeah some people are on this site soley to troll. They go around looking to try to make themselves look smarter so as to make themselves feel better about themselves. Sad really...

It is, and then when you ask them a question about why they misrepresented what you said, they go quiet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.