January 6th, 2017

Some images are worth having, just because. This is one of them.

Credit Steve Gribben and Alex Parker

One angle of thought can constrict your entire perspective.
i.e.. What came first the chicken or the egg?

An Article at MIT News written by Jennifer Chu
dated November 16, 2016 and titled
"Data from New Horizons mission suggest a water-ice ocean lies beneath Pluto’s heart-shaped basin"

Constriction ----- or whats for lunch, the chicken or the egg?

Quote from Chu article,
The researchers determined that the heart-shaped region, and Sputnik Planitia in particular, is aligned almost exactly opposite from Charon.

“The New Horizons data say it’s not only opposite Charon, but it’s really close to being almost exactly opposite,” Binzel says. “So we asked, what’s the chance of that randomly happening? And it’s less than 5 percent that it would be so perfectly opposite.

And then the question becomes, what was it that caused this alignment?”

A viscous ocean
The massive basin also appears extremely bright relative to the rest of the planet, and the reason, the New Horizons data suggest, is that it is filled with frozen nitrogen ice.
Previously, Binzel and the New Horizons team had found evidence that this liquid nitrogen may be constantly refreshing, or convecting, as a result of a weak spot at the bottom of the basin. This weak spot may let heat rise through Pluto’s interior to continuously convect the ice, bubbling it over “like boiling oatmeal,” Binzel says. 

To the New Horizons team, a weak spot in Sputnik Planitia’s basin suggests that the planet’s crust, particularly in this region, must be quite thin. If a massive impactor indeed created the basin, it may have also triggered any material beneath the surface to push the thin crust outward, causing a “positive gravitational anomaly,” or a thick, heavy mass, that would have helped to align the region relative to Charon.

But what sort of material would create enough of a gravitational weight to reorient the planet relative to its moon? To answer this, the team turned to a geophysical model of Pluto’s interior, working in measurements from the New Horizons spacecraft.  
End Quote

(Animation: James Keane/NASA/JHUAPL/SWRI)

Much of what I read in this article is fascinating and well thought out and well stated.
I am likely splitting hairs here but I think there is a point to be learned in this article.

This article gets it right when it says there is evidence that liquid nitrogen is constantly refreshing from a weak spot in the bottom of the SP basin compared to other scientific conclusions that imply the atmosphere created SP.

A question is presented with an assumption. The premise of the question assumes something significant and that is that SP preexisted the alignment process. In other words, SP was formed first which then created an uneven mass distribution (a gyroscopically induced tilting torque due to uneven mass distribution was a basic theory I wrote about 6 months ago) and as a result Charon's gravitational influence then torqued Pluto around to align SP with Charon.
Simply put., the article is saying
Sputnik Planitia's existence preceded (preexisted) its alignment with Charon's gravitational pull.
This assumption (chicken first then egg scenario) constricts all subsequent thoughts and conclusions around this premise.

While this is a reasonable scenario (assumption) there is another just as reasonable and potentially more accurate scenario which incorporates just as naturally my torque induced tilt theory. 

Pluto and Charon could have naturally aligned such that their internal uneven mass distribution was balanced by a torque induced tilt (Page 41),

Early in their eccentric orbital dance when both were being stretched and pulled and kneaded like dough through tidal stretch they likely found their own state of balance. Then, in time, as their orbits became more circular the constant squeeze of Charon's gravity on Pluto at this tidally locked position called SP caused a section of Pluto to collapse. In other words, the egg came first.

The section that collapsed would be the area exactly opposite Charon's constant gravitational squeeze. That collapsed area then became SP. Both of these scenarios are possibilities but when only one is considered then the potential explanations are restricted or constricted by that assumption.

In other words, SP didn't have to develop first. The planet's could have just as easily found their own natural state of torque induced balance as their uneven mass distributions gyroscopically wobbled into alignment with each other then when their orbits became circular (tidally locked), the constant pull at one spot caused the collapse of the crust to form the basin called SP. Matter fact, I'm going to try to build a case to convince you that SP is the result of their tidally locked alignment not the cause of it.

I'm a bit loony

Consider our Moon as an example.
The lunar mare are the large dark blotches of dense iron rich basaltic lava that once flowed on the moon. This created an uneven distribution of mass or imbalance which naturally wobbled to align with the earths gravitational pull. The mare was once believed to be from impacts but now is assumed to have developed from volcanic or natural squeezing processes. This squeezing was induced by earths gravity and pulled the denser iron toward the side of the moon facing the earth (my interpretation). This is the same process we see when an unbalanced ball is rolled around the floor and it wobbles like a drunk duck until it settles with its heavy side facing toward the center of the earth where gravity's pull is strongest.

This would suggest that the same process is taking place between Pluto and Charon the densest part of Pluto is facing Charon and SP is not necessarily a positive gravity area rather the opposite side of Pluto is. This would allow the alignment while the SP basin is a negative gravity area and there would not be a need for a subsurface ocean of dense water under SP. Why would the densest part of Pluto face away from Charon's gravitational pull? It goes counter to what we see elsewhere in the solar system.

The torque induced tilt theory works in either scenario but SP didn't by necessity have to exist first it could be the byproduct of the two planets settling into their natural tilt angle as their uneven masses rotated into a balanced state of equilibrium. As a result of all that twisting, torquing and warming, a subsurface fluid was created as well as a basin. heavier elements shifted toward the Charon side.

While either scenario could have occurred, its interesting to me how we assume one scenario and think this is the only interpretation of what took place then from this one constricted perspective we only build out one optional explanation.

To better appreciate this scenario, it helps to learn a little sumpin sumpin about our Moon? 

Wiki says
Earth's moon as observed in visible light (left), topography (center, where red is high and blue is low), and the GRAIL gravity gradients (right). The Procellarum region is a broad region of low topography covered in dark mare basalt. The gravity gradients reveal a giant rectangular pattern of structures surrounding the region.

Using data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (GRAIL), mission scientists have solved a lunar mystery almost as old as the moon itself.

Early theories suggested the craggy outline of a region of the moon’s surface known as Oceanus Procellarum, or the Ocean of Storms, was caused by an asteroid impact. If this theory had been correct, the basin it formed would be the largest asteroid impact basin on the moon. However, mission scientists studying GRAIL data believe they have found evidence the craggy outline of this rectangular region -- roughly 1,600 miles (2,600 kilometers) across -- is actually the result of the formation of ancient rift valleys.

"The nearside of the moon has been studied for centuries, and yet continues to offer up surprises for scientists with the right tools," said Maria Zuber, principal investigator of NASA's GRAIL mission, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. "We interpret the gravity anomalies discovered by GRAIL as part of the lunar magma plumbing system -- the conduits that fed lava to the surface during ancient volcanic eruptions."

The surface of the moon’s nearside is dominated by a unique area called the Procellarum region, characterized by low elevations, unique composition, and numerous ancient volcanic plains.

Another theory arising from recent data analysis suggests this region formed as a result of churning deep in the interior of the moon that led to a high concentration of heat-producing radioactive elements in the crust and mantle of this region.
End Quote

Moon

Just look at that massive basin on the Moon created by molten iron rich lava that settled on the Moon's side facing the Earth as Earth gravitationally pulled the densest part of the Moon's guts toward Earth. As things cooled, the Moon's surface collapsed toward its center creating an iron heavy basin tidally locked with and facing Earth.

This, likely, is the same thing that happened on Pluto and Charon.
Below left is the hard dense iron side of the moon that always faces us. Right image is far side of Moon. The far side of the moon is not only heavily covered in impact craters but the crust is also four times thicker than the near side. The near side's crust is more dense but much thinner as it was once molten.

Once the moon tidally locked to Earth and stopped spinning, its inner facing surface became more difficult for impacting objects to collide with the near side causing the disproportionate distribution of craters.

Near side of the moon

Far side of the moon

Quote from a paper titled "Ocean worlds in the outer solar system"
By F. Nimmo and R. T. Pappalardo at  AGU Publications.
5.2.1 Applications
Charon probably also had a high initial eccentricity and potentially significant ancient heating [e.g., Rhoden et al., 2015], but its orbit is now circular..

In the past, Pluto and Charon danced energetically around each other softening the interior of both via tidal flexing. As they settled toward being tidally locked, gravity focused its pull on the denser inner materials. This cracked Charon open, collapsed its crust inward 2-4 miles in turn spilling its soft guts all over the surface which then cooled and hardened into a smooth southern hemisphere. The same process has taken place on Pluto but with its greater mass, it has not finished cooling. The densest part of Pluto is being sucked to the side facing or closest to Charon while SP on the opposite side is collapsing and squirting out its softened innards in response. SP is not a positive gravity anomaly instead it is a negative gravity anomaly while the opposite side of Pluto contains the positive gravity. Again I ask, why would the densest part of Pluto face away from Charon's gravitational pull?

Back to the Article

Articles like this are very informative and well thought out and I don't mean to sound critical, I just want to point out the natural nature of the mind to construct and constrict it's own preconceived notion of what is or is not.

I recommend you read the entire article its good info.
I learned some pretty cool stuff from it,
Like this quote 

 An icy heart
In addition to being aligned with Charon, Pluto’s heart lies almost exactly at the equator — a location which Binzel’s graduate student and co-author Alissa Earle has found may have helped the region keep its alignment with Charon locked firmly in place.
In a separate paper that was published online in September in the journal Icarus, Earle modeled Pluto’s surface temperatures over millions of years and found that while the poles experience wild swings in temperature, with long frigid winters and equally long, hot summers, the equator has more moderate temperatures. That’s because it cycles through daytime and nighttime fairly regularly, every three days.

Earle found that if bright ice builds up at the poles, it simply melts away when summer returns. But if that same ice forms near the equator, it never gets warm enough to melt away.
“What makes the equator unique is, if you put a bright spot there, because it never gets too hot or cold, then the bright spot will always stay cold,” Earle says. “If ice accumulates at the equator, it can hang onto it.”

Earle modeled the region’s temperatures over millions of years, looking at the tilt of Pluto’s axis, its orientation to the sun, and its daily rotation. From all this, she found that Sputnik Planitia’s ice sheet likely has persisted for millions of years. The long-lived deposit of ice on Pluto’s “heart” may have also played a role in orienting the planet toward its moon. 

“This basin probably has been there a long time and had this bright ice spot for a very long time,” Earl says. “And that may have helped to get it rotated to where it is today.”
This research was funded, in part, by NASA.
End Quote

The poles temperature swing wildly and get really hot and cold relatively speaking creating snow which then evaporates completely away while the equator stays relatively consistently warm/cool. retaining it's layer of snow.
Didn't know that.
Sprinkle white methane snow at the equator and it sticks but not on the poles.
Makes me wonder why Cthulu Regio is then tholin covered and red with methane snow only on higher elevations while SP and east is snow covered in white and muddy gray material at lower elevations?
Why is the south pole gray fluid covered while the north is white with light orange tholin developing at higher altitudes?
Here I go again, I can't just read something and enjoy it, I have to analyze it and tear it apart.
Bahhhhh, Humbug.

Quote from a paper published at Nature.com by Tanguy Bertrand and Francois Forget titled
Observed glacier and volatile distribution on Pluto from atmosphere–topography processes
Quote:
"The characteristics of Sputnik Planum are thus explained by its latitude and depth rather than by a connection with putative (supposed) N2 reservoirs in the deep interior."

Here we report numerical simulations of the evolution of N2, methane and carbon monoxide on Pluto over thousands of years.

Atmospheric fog shadows

The model predicts N2 ice accumulation in the deepest low-latitude basin and the threefold increase in atmospheric pressure that has been observed to occur since 1988. This points to atmospheric–topographic processes as the origin of Sputnik Planitia’s N2 glacier.  
End Quote

Atmospheric haze layers

So the theory is that ices built up in the basin of SP because it is low (a basin) and at the equator where it doesn't experience extreme transitions from relative hot to cold and these ices are atmospherically deposited over thousands if not millions of years.

Yet SP was supposed to have formed by an impact 60 degrees upward in the northern hemisphere where extreme temperature causes the methane ices to sublimate completely away during the north pole summer.

If this were the case then the ices would not have accumulated into the basin of SP as the north pole summer would have sublimated the ices away never allowing enough build up of ices to rotate the planet to its current position.

Furthermore, you need an atmosphere for the methane to exist as a snow. The atmosphere is the result of fluids welling up from below the surface. If the N2 fluid did not rise to the surface through volcanism and become volatile there would be no atmosphere.

In other words, here on Earth we have an ocean that is heated by the Sun which causes moisture to evaporate off the ocean creating clouds which turn to rain which we then call an atmosphere.

The ocean creates the rain, the rain does not create the ocean. On Pluto you need the ocean of nitrogen, methane, carbon monoxide at SP first in order to have an atmosphere of sublimated methane snow.

The atmosphere isn't creating Sputnik Planitia,

Sputnik Planitia is creating the atmosphere.
We're back to the chicken and egg scenario.

Seems to me the main stream scientific explanation struggles because they began with a premise before they arrived at Pluto. Ten years before we arrived, we concluded Pluto and Charon collided and we built models to prove it. From that premise, all these other theories are built. If you are willing to throw out that one assumption, an entirely different and more reasonable scenario can be painted.

Just a billion or so years ago, Pluto and Charon were brought to life as the result of Pluto and Charon being perturbed into near proximity by Neptune. Neptune corals a cluster of objects called Plutino's into a zone where they periodically get near each other. This didn't happen 4.5 billion years ago, Pluto/Charon didn't collide, they, were more recently perturbed into close proximity and they danced in energy producing eccentric orbits and that dance brought them both to life. Allowing yourself to accept this possibility opens the door to many other possibilities.

In any case, if you are being told that 2+2=5, it's your responsibility to reason for yourself that something is amiss.
Here's a summary of the previous and this page.

• Scientists say SP is an impact site, I've shown three reasons why its not.
  • No debris (ejecta)
  • No radial impact evidence (raised rings or circular ridges)
  • Doesn't match any other impacts elsewhere in the solar system including impacts on Pluto near SP
• Scientists say SP originated via an impact 60 degrees upward in the northern hemisphere,
  • I've used their own theory of complete snow sublimation in the northern hemisphere during its summer showing their inconsistency. If SP developed in the northern hemisphere the ices that accumulated there would have seasonally sublimated away. This would not have allowed ice's to accumulate in SP creating a theoretical positive gravity anomaly.
• Scientists say SP was created by the atmosphere,
  • I've shown how an ocean precedes (creates) an atmosphere. Atmosphere's don't create oceans.

• Scientists say Pluto/Charon collided. This conclusion was drawn 10 years prior to our arrival.
  • I don't see any evidence to support this (page 56 shows weakness of this concept). If Pluto and Charon entered a tidal stretching dance that became tidally locked over time then all these geological anomalies can be reasonably explained. No evidence supports the theory Pluto and Charon collided, only (difficult to make) models produce this assumption.
• Scientists say SP existed 60 degrees to the north and preexisted it's alignment with Charon.
  • While this could be the case it is just as reasonable (if not more so) to assume the egg preceded the chicken not the other way around. Pluto and Charon while in eccentric elliptical energetically induced orbits naturally found their own gyroscopically torque induced balance. Then as their orbits locked the steady squeeze collapsed SP into an basin.
• Sputnik Planitia is a negative gravity anomaly with the densest side of Pluto facing Charon just like our moon's densest side faces Earth just like an unevenly balanced ball comes to rest with its densest side facing the center of Earth (strongest gravity).
  

So what did come first the chicken or the egg?



One could argue the dinosaur preceded the chicken from which the chicken developed and dinosaur's were egg layers.

After all, T-rex was a giant chicken without feathers, T-rex did have hairs that eventually became feathers.

Dinosaurs did lay eggs and chickens did come from dinosaurs.

But all life forms develop from a cell with a protective membrane i.e... an egg.

A chicken egg is a type of hybrid of the cell with it's outer protective membrane and internal fluid where digestion and replication take place.

The egg or cell preceded complex life, complex life formed from the cells/eggs replication and digestion process.

That is to say the cell with a protective membrane like the egg came first. 

The cell was then able to divide or replicate into more diverse cells which eventually became the chicken.

Now you know.
The egg/cell came first.

< Page 50 All Aboard

Boo-Boo's Page 52 >