New Horizons takes our first ever half-decent image of Pluto, prepares for flyby - Polidicks

Fucks sake it's baffling we can still get these images from a device that is lightyears away.

[QUOTE=Ithon;48157626]looks like the meat planet.[/QUOTE] we've finally discovered where meatwad is from [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=redBadger;48160456]Fucks sake it's baffling we can still get these images from a device that is lightyears away.[/QUOTE] i think you're vastly overestimating the distances involved here

[QUOTE=redBadger;48160456]Fucks sake it's baffling we can still get these images from a device that is lightyears away.[/QUOTE] It's 0.0006 lightyears away

[QUOTE=redBadger;48160456]Fucks sake it's baffling we can still get these images from a device that is lightyears away.[/QUOTE] New Horizons is about 32AUs away. A lightyear is 63293AUs.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;48160442]They might have to do a full revision and start classifying them in "classes" like we do to stellar bodies.[/QUOTE] I like it. And they can give Pluto a slap on the back and call it an Honorary Planet to shut people up

[QUOTE=smurfy;48160488]It's 0.0006 lightyears away[/QUOTE] Decimal amounts are still an acceptable use of the plural form of the word. He gets by on a technicality!

[QUOTE=Pelf;48159150]It's going too fast. At closest approach it's velocity will be 30,800 mph (49,600 kph) relative to Pluto. Gonna pass by at 7,800 miles (12,500 km) and get some amazing images. This is what you can expect the images it'll return, and when it'll return them. [t]http://planetary.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/images/9-small-bodies/2015/20150623_voyager_simulations_nep_data_ver2.jpg[/t] More info on that here: [URL]http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2015/06240556-what-to-expect-new-horizons-pluto.html[/URL] edit: fun fact: New Horizons is the first spacecraft to launch directly into a solar escape trajectory and the fastest to leave earth. It passed the orbit of the moon in only 9 hours.[/QUOTE] my brain can't compute mph when talking about orbital velocities [quote] At closest approach it's velocity will be [B]13,769 m/s [/B](49,600 kph) relative to Pluto. Gonna pass by at 7,800 miles (12,500 km) and get some amazing images.[/quote] (for the ksp people)

[QUOTE=redBadger;48160456]Fucks sake it's baffling we can still get these images from a device that is lightyears away.[/QUOTE] Its around 5.5 light hours away

[QUOTE=Bradyns;48160242] [IMG]http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/thumbnails/image/nh-pluto_charon_color_final.png?itok=7KZrg7mw[/IMG] This is the same image of Pluto and Charon from July 8, 2015; color information obtained earlier in the mission from the Ralph instrument has been added. Credits: NASA-JHUAPL-SWRI [/QUOTE] m8, that's dune as fuck m8. [editline]9th July 2015[/editline] Step it up Mars.

[QUOTE=Trekintosh;48159911]Pluto is and always will be a planet.[/QUOTE] Pluto is smaller than our moon - It's hardly worth calling a planet. It's also not the largest dwarf planet in our system.

Pluto looks fucking cool.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;48160242] [IMG]http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/thumbnails/image/nh-pluto_charon_150709.png?itok=m41FicQY[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/thumbnails/image/nh-pluto_charon_color_final.png?itok=7KZrg7mw[/IMG] [/QUOTE] jesus christ, the pitch black emptiness of space looks so fucking terrifying

This is amazing, I remember seeing an image of Pluto when it was blurry as hell. Man, the amount of technology we have advanced in the last couple of decades. Also, off-topic, is Pluto a Planet? I remember seeing a facepunch thread in SH about it being a Planet again.

[QUOTE=goldenbuttocks;48162892]jesus christ, the pitch black emptiness of space looks so fucking terrifying[/QUOTE] I [I]think[/I] it doesn't actually look like that, you would actually see all the distant stars and shit in the background but that never shows up in photos of space because you would need a really long exposure to capture them, and if you did that then the foreground would be blown out and bright as fuck. It's the same reason a lot of people were like 'omg no stars in the background of the Apollo photos? Conspiracy confirmed'.

[QUOTE=Xonax;48162915]This is amazing, I remember seeing an image of Pluto when it was blurry as hell. Man, the amount of technology we have advanced in the last couple of decades. Also, off-topic, is Pluto a Planet? I remember seeing a facepunch thread in SH about it being a Planet again.[/QUOTE] Pluto is not classified as a planet. Pluto is a dwarf planet. Some people think that it should be a planet, some think that it may perhaps be reclassified after this flyby. I believe the article was of a group of Harvard students having a debate, which if you didn't read the whole article could be interpreted as "Pluto is a planet again guys" since that was the conclusion of their debate.

[QUOTE=Xonax;48162915]This is amazing, I remember seeing an image of Pluto when it was blurry as hell. Man, the amount of technology we have advanced in the last couple of decades. Also, off-topic, is Pluto a Planet? I remember seeing a facepunch thread in SH about it being a Planet again.[/QUOTE] It's not a planet [editline]10th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=LagMonster!!!!;48162937]Pluto is not classified as a planet. Pluto is a dwarf planet. Some people think that it should be a planet, some think that it may perhaps be reclassified after this flyby. I believe the article was of a group of Harvard students having a debate, which if you didn't read the whole article could be interpreted as "Pluto is a planet again guys" since that was the conclusion of their debate.[/QUOTE] You're not a planet

[QUOTE=smurfy;48162938]It's not a planet [editline]10th July 2015[/editline] You're not a planet[/QUOTE] Woah now, lets not throw personal blows. I'm still working at it. And I'm sure if Pluto keeps at it, it will be classified as one again some day.

[QUOTE=smurfy;48162938]It's not a planet [editline]10th July 2015[/editline] [B]You're not a planet[/B][/QUOTE] Shhh, I hear he has issues about his mass.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;48162953]Shhh, I hear he has issues about his mass.[/QUOTE] I'm a wee 62kg. When I eat enough to be roughly round I'm going to go into my own orbit. one that is far away from debris. That way I can be designated as a planet.

[QUOTE=LagMonster!!!!;48162984]I'm a wee 62kg. When I eat enough to be roughly round I'm going to go into my own orbit. one that is far away from debris. That way I can be designated as a planet.[/QUOTE] I guess we can assume you are a sphere for practical purposes.

[QUOTE=paul simon;48162224]Pluto is smaller than our moon - It's hardly worth calling a planet. It's also not the largest dwarf planet in our system.[/QUOTE] Pluto's not even the size of the Continental United States. [t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/United_States_with_Pluto_%26_Charon_(white_background)_with_loseless_image.png[/t] Left is Pluto, right is its moon, Charon.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;48163041]I guess we can assume you are a sphere for practical purposes.[/QUOTE] Silly examples aside, you actually can't, according to the IAU's planet definition. [QUOTE=IAU](1) A "planet" [1] is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. (2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape [2], (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite. (3) All other objects [3], except satellites, orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar-System Bodies".[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Pilotguy97;48163054]Pluto's not even the size of the Continental United States. [t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/United_States_with_Pluto_%26_Charon_(white_background)_with_loseless_image.png[/t] Left is Pluto, right is its moon, Charon.[/QUOTE] that's cool as fuck

[QUOTE=LagMonster!!!!;48160380]But there is so much shit out there that I would assume that even a large body wouldn't really be able to clear its orbit. [/QUOTE] Nah, gravity actually makes it pretty easy, just look at the Jupiter system. If you get one object of sufficient mass in an orbit, other objects with similar orbital energy will naturally attract and coalesce to it. Pluto really doesn't meet the qualifications to be considered a planet, it just happened to be discovered at a time when we didn't realize how many sub-planet masses are out past 25 AU.

I didn't realize that Pluto was only discovered in 1930.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;48160176]No it isn't.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=paul simon;48162224]Pluto is smaller than our moon - It's hardly worth calling a planet. It's also not the largest dwarf planet in our system.[/QUOTE] Morty I-I-I just don't think you've seen the show Morty you gotta, you gotta watch it.

Why are images so shit? I mean what's the problem with taking HD photo? Is it technology that was limited in 2006? Is it the electricity charge on NH not enough to send large data to earth? Is it taking took long to send large images to earth?

[QUOTE=arleitiss;48164692]Why are images so shit? I mean what's the problem with taking HD photo? Is it technology that was limited in 2006? Is it the electricity charge on NH not enough to send large data to earth? Is it taking took long to send large images to earth?[/QUOTE] It's because they're still really far away. Don't worry you'll get very nice pictures in a few weeks.

[QUOTE=arleitiss;48164692]Why are images so shit? I mean what's the problem with taking HD photo? Is it technology that was limited in 2006? Is it the electricity charge on NH not enough to send large data to earth? Is it taking took long to send large images to earth?[/QUOTE] The imaging devices they're using aren't just straight-up digital cameras, they're also measuring things like the reflectivity of the surface, colour & temperature data and other things. They're getting a lot more data than just the image, the images we're getting are just that data in a form that's easy to visualise; that is, a photograph. And yes, it's also still extremely far away. It's still about 4.5 million km off (nearly 12 times as far as the Moon is from Earth).

[QUOTE=arleitiss;48164692]Why are images so shit? I mean what's the problem with taking HD photo? Is it technology that was limited in 2006? Is it the electricity charge on NH not enough to send large data to earth? Is it taking took long to send large images to earth?[/QUOTE] Because we haven't quite invented infinite zoom lenses yet, so we need to get a bit closer to capture most of the quality.