It will likely be a Greek or Roman name in keeping with tradition. The IAU generally let’s the person/group that discovers have an influence in the decision but they’re the final say on the name.
With two exceptions*, the names are from Roman mythology. So I’d expect the new planet to get a definitive name from the same template. (Please be Janus. It’s the gate of the solar system!)
*Uranus is from Greek mythology, with no good Latin equivalent. Terra is trickier; you could argue that it fits the template for Latin and the Romance languages, but most others simply use local words for soil, without a connection to the goddess. That is also called Tellus to add confusion.
It’s insane what these people do. They’re rewriting code from the 60s to use even less memory, have to test it in production without physical access, and it takes two days to see if anything changes. It’s an insane piece of engineering and it’s incredible that it’s still sending useful data.
I’d love to see what their test environments are like. You can’t test everything, but they can certainly test some things. A raspberry pi has more software capability.
Yeah. I’m half-drunk but the first thing that I thought was, “I could use some gyros. Preferably with a buttload of tzatziki”. (The video is about gyroscopes though. Also cool. But not edible.)
Knowing what I know, I am assuming this image was standardised and then normalised (fancy stats algos to keep things in the same visual range) while stitching it together, and the final product enhanced a lot of colouration (saturation). They’re subtle or undetectable to the naked eye, but they exist. They are reflected in the different minerals present. I’ve done this stuff (raster stitching) with different imagery. Op was active in the comments with info, but I didn’t read up on it.
The colors don’t match what a human eye would see, but without going into a philosophy tangent, color is extremely complex and a huge part of what a human sees is your brain doing representations and mapping that isn’t perfectly represented in the physical object being observed. In this photo the saturation has been increased (versus a human eye) because it helps show the geological differences on the lunar surface. The reddish areas are high in iron and feldspar, and the blue-tinted zones have higher titanium content. Instead of thinking of the color as “real” or “fake” it’s probably better to think of it as a tool, to simulate if you were a super human with the ability to adjust saturation and detect metal composition with your eye. Usually when a photo like this is shared by researchers and scientist all this nuance and exposition is included, but then journalist and social media get a hold of it and people start crying “fake” without an understanding of what the image is trying to accomplish. TL;DR - The image isn’t what a human eye would see but it isn’t just art to look cool, the color and modifications have physical meaning and serve a purpose.
astronomy
Najstarsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.