Ever feel like you're being watched?
On Sept 2nd 2017, I created my Eruptions page.
Last week I came across a paper released by NASA published Nov 7th, 2017.
The paper is called.
A Search for Temporal Changes on Pluto and Charon = Change with time
The timing of this paper is interesting because for nearly two and a half years NASA didn't say a word about or bother looking for potential plumes or streaking effects from plumes on Pluto, Then two months after I post Eruptions Page 77, NASA releases a paper on this very subject (things that make you go hmm).
My basic premise was/is that dark streaks or the lack thereof from eruptions can infer a level of tidal flex energy experienced by the planet. I was not taking the concept to excruciatingly detailed levels, rather I was interpreting how large scale mineral deposits versus how the general lack of large scale mineral deposits correlate to the level of internal tidal flex energy.
Unlike me, however, when NASA releases a paper they scrutinize things down to the tiniest degree (as they should), it would be irresponsible for them to do otherwise and yet this seems to be their Achilles heel.
Here's an example of context or understanding the big picture before dissecting the finer details or the area.
The black line is a rough boundary where more rigid ices exist and are coated with tholin and covered in a thin vinear of methane snow.
The yellow is the zone where tholin runoff has stopped showing signs of coalescing in the polygonal cell troughs. They have dispersed and become more diffuse.
The the troughs turn bright colored rather than darkened by red tholin the troughs now exhibit a lack of tholin. They are now brighter than the polygonal cell center.
This shows how wind has carried a lighter aerosol version of the tholin onto the higher elevated raised hills darkening them.
The wind direction and pattern can be determined by where the aerosol tholin is carried the farthest.
This wind is coming from the north as the aerosols have traveled the furthest from that direction, along the western edge of SP the tholin accumulates close to the shore line.
This whole latitude zone is a hotbed of activity. It appears to be the heart of Pluto's heat.
I had to rotate the below section of the image right 40 degrees to obtain the same degree of orientation as seen in the NASA paper.
I think it would be difficult for anyone to suggest these smears or broad streaks are plumes spewing out sedimentary minerals from below the surface rather than wind swept material coming off these icebergs especially in light of the obvious runoff from these mountainous bergs,
In their description of the panel's, they say the Red arrows in panels A-D indicate a few streaks in Sputnik Planitia that may be smaller examples of the streaks indicated by blue arrows in panel A or that may be the result of previous plumes.
In other words, the obvious broad wide patterned wind swept tholin aerosols coming off the broad base of the mountains are likely the same form of aerosol patterns coming off the smaller icebergs.
But they then suggest, you could also interpret them as ejected material from subsurface plumes, but could you really interpret them that way?
Is that a reasonable interpretation of what we see?
No its not.
The smaller mountains (icebergs) display the same thing as the larger ones, broad based fans of tholin blowing downwind.
Tholin on the mountain surfaces is heated enough to rise into the atmosphere and is then deposited downwind.
Just as, image A does nothing to support this NASA plume concept, neither does image F aka Burney Crater.
This is Burney Crater in its normal N/S orientation.
Below is NASA's version of Burney. They've mirrored the image and rotated it 45 degrees so it appears as though small impact craters don't align. I fixed that.
I had to mirror the real image then spin it left 45 degrees to get it to match NASA's flipped and turned version of Burney crater. This image matches theirs.
Once I got the arrows pointing to the exact locations I then rotated the image back to the right 45 degrees and unmirrored it to come up with the below. This is how Burney looks naturally oriented with NASA's associated arrow placement.
I took the black rectangled area above and stood it on end so I could blow it up further for your viewing pleasure.
I also added some blue arrows to demonstrate where some of the fractures (sorry plumes) are aligned into straight long lines that intersect at right and diagonally intersecting angles.
Quote from NASA images.
Green arrows in panel F indicate a few of the many dark streaks in and near Burney crater.
Unless you're absolutely desperate to find plumes where they don't exist it becomes exceedingly obvious that these lines which run in all sorts of directions are in fact fractures not plumes.
Would airborne plumes travel at right angles?
In panel A, NASA displays wind swept material coming off bergs suggesting it is from subsurface ejected mineral based plumes.
In panel F, NASA has used fractures inside and around Burney crater to suggest there are many plumes in Burney crater.
Fractures can run in all sorts of directions, plumes, however, align with the direction of winds.
NASA's top green arrow is the exact same fracture Keane references in red.
Keane's fractures are NASA's plumes.
There's a horseshoe erosion pattern to the cliff face, there are red tholin fingers (NASA's plumes) and a red/white pinkish smooth ice cream looking material at the base of this fluid flow .
The pink smooth material runs south until it forms into a massive glacier that is sliding into Sputnik Planitia.
If NASA scientists didn't try to over justify their point by presenting obvious fractures and wind blown surface tholin aerosols as plumes it would lend more credibility to the three images (B, C & D) which potentially could be plumes.
The landslide above sorta looks like this mud slide in Alaska on the Yukon river
A 90 second video showing a flow of permafrost in Tibet
I can't find the two potential plumes displayed in NASA's panels labeled B and C but I found the potential plume listed in panel D.
It looks intriguing.
The surrounding area is what makes this one so interesting to me.
This is a prime example of what I mean by context.
There is aggressive sublimation taking place indicating heat.
In most sublimation zones, I refer to the divots as cups i.e. sub cups but here they almost look like waves or ripples suggesting there is a great deal of heat at this location or something else entirely.
The larger the sublimation ripples the more active the evaporation.
While the above panel D image is compelling, we could be looking at the same effect as in panel A (as stated by NASA) wind blown atmospheric aerosols. Material could be dissolving off a very small berg becoming an aerosol carried by winds.
This area is also noticeably warm as the sublimation ripples are very numerous along the troughs within which sits the berg/plume mouth.
While it could be a plume it could also just as easily be a berg.
Since the material emanates from a small object and fans out it certainly gives the appearance of being a plume but could be exactly what we see in panel A.
Panel D is an interesting feature, however, the fact we don't see the same effect on the other two objects at the bottom of the image is a bit perplexing.
I blew this section up 400 percent.
Things are blurry but a distinct shadow circling the object is visible producing the appearance of a raised peak.
This suggests to me that this is clear evidence that this feature is an iceberg from which tholins are evaporated.
Like I said, its an interesting artifact but interpreting what it is, could go either way.
Taken within the context of its surroundings, I have to favor the interpretation that says it is not a plume (but it could be).
Pluto remains a fascinating enigma.
NASA appears to be force fitting their premise in three of the six images.
Panel A is clearly atmospherically driven wind swept aerosol tholin based hydrocarbon material coming off the bergs which Stern also referenced as such back in 2015.
This feature from panel D displays the clear shape of a floating berg. There is a distinct circular ring around the base with an elevated structure toward the center.
Its a very small berg and as such gives the appearance of a streak from a plume, however, I see it as a berg from which tholin has released into the atmosphere like we see elsewhere.
In my opinion, its not a plume.
Channels or troughs on SP are warmer than elsewhere, hence they are smooth as viscous relaxation allows the surface to flatten more quickly.
The only things we see protruding or extending upward within these troughs are water based iceberg mountains. Nitrogen can not support tall angular structures but water based ice does.
This area from which tholin emanates has a clear ringed outline shape and rises upward and out of the soft smooth warmish nitrogen trough.
If this were not an iceberg from which tholin aerosols were released, we wouldn't see an elevated structure in the middle of a smooth channel.
The highest resolution image of Triton that I can find doesn't show as much detail as the above image of panel D's plume but this is a typical example of plumes on Triton.
On Triton the plumes emanate from a small point like a geyser and don't seem to have a mound or mountain from which those plumes originate.
Whereas in the above image, I can make out the faint but clear circular edges of raised land ice rock or a small mountain which was once probably covered in tholin.
I like to finish a page with the basic concept with which I started so here's a shout out to my omniscient Big Brother.
NASA people please read my Nitrogen page as it shows what real and recently active cryovolcanoes look like on Pluto also please ask Alan to stop calling Wright Mons a cryovolcano, the sooner he stops the less embarrassing it will be for him later when the rest of the world finally wakes up.
Also please read my Far From Objective page it will show you how to fix the falsely presented data related to age dating the small satellites via crater counts. It doesn't help your position when data is deliberately falsified i.e.. scaling the data for regolith while claiming to scale it for ice and removing more than 50% of the data that doesn't support your age date preference.
I'm watching you.