Starship Asterisk*

Hyperion has a low density, honeycombed structure; it appears the container cavities are empty.

To the geologists:
It is my view that Pumice rocks have generally porus structures and that the holes do not follow any given pattern. The same thing goes for all tectites that I have seen. Those craters of Hyperion, that are not visibly impact craters, appear to radiate out from a central location. They do follow a distinct pattern.

Time to land there............at the end of the mission, just like at EROS

From all of the previous prognostications, I will try my hand at an explanation. Please note that I am just an astronomy enthusiast, I don't even own a telescope, but I love to investigate astro-imagery and research pubications.

This was definitely a comet, and it appears to still retain some of the original layer of surface ice which seems to have been impacted in the past, as indicated by the large void in the centre of mass. Maybe the impactor was not all that large just entering at a very direct angle of incidence (the outer layer of mostly ices was possibly thin. That could have been an event that happened prior to the comet's last excursion round the sun when it possibly it came very close to the sun and the freshly excavated crater (with shattered ices etc.) was partially melted away and the 'sublimation?' radiated outward outward from its centre as that was the hemisphere facing the sun. A dark inner core possibly of rocky/carbonaceous materials seems to have been exposed by the melting away of methane? ice (and possibbly not of water ice? forming the stange looking cones/craters). The badly wounded and then cauterized comet began a new life as a moon adopted by Saturn, the parent that caught it after it's near fatal fall from it's millenial orbit.

A stero pair of the moon would be a great help to interpreting more of this enigmatic body. A beer would taste good right now ...

aviolette wrote:A beer would taste good right now ...

I had a beer, and now I have a version on this subject, too. This moon looks so much like sponge because it's populated with space bugs which dig it here and there, so it looks pitted now...

makc - I can't believe that a moderator would make such a reply...

Quite frankly I have had a couple whiskey's while contemplating this remarkable object in our solar system.

I await more photos as time permits. Saturn's rings and moon system are well worth the time spent in contemplative study of them. There have been some great comments in this thread about Hyperion. Some have noticed much of what I have. What will we learn next I wonder? Our solar system is not the tidy little bundle of planets and moons as one may think. The theories abound about how all this came to be. In time we will know.

Till then I sit at my computer as an armchair astronomer, watching, waiting for the next photo to arouse my interest.

My sincere thanks to those that have made this possible.

aviolette wrote:makc - I can't believe that a moderator would make such a reply...

why? I am moderator, not a robot

One thing to keep in mind when viewing a lot of these images from the robotic imaging satellites is the image sanitation.

A NASA contact has informed that all off world images go thru the editing and retouch studio as a result all images are edited so any conclusions drawn from those images would be invalid and suspect.

FieryIce wrote:A NASA contact has informed that all off world images go thru the editing and retouch studio as a result all images are edited so any conclusions drawn from those images would be invalid and suspect.

Um... so what's the point then?

I expect you're talking about the 'pretty' pictures released to the public newspapers and such - they usually have little scientific merit, but their constituate parts do.

Remember that most pictures from space are not 'visual' images, but the amount of radiation received at particular wavelengths. The Hyperion picture is one taken using visual wavelengths, but with the red toned down and the green and blue toned up to show surface differences.

WOW! YOU GO CASSINI! What an awesome image... fractal looking indeed! Looks 'kind of like' an electron microscope image of a dust mote? What I'm wondering is: the large crater, was if formed by an impact? or by collapse thru out-gassing? or both? Can't wait to hear what its made of... spectroscopy anybody?

All,
This object's appearance most reminded me of a barnacle covered rock, from which part of the colony has been ripped. Please note, I am NOT suggesting that Hyperion is animate, just suggesting an anologue.

In good conditions, and over a long (biological!) period of time, colonies of barnacles will crowd together and grow much longer tubes than usual. The impetus is pressure to reach food, just like tall thin saplings in a forest. The only internet pic that I can find does not show very long barnacle tubes, but I hope shows what I mean:
http://photos.astarwithin.com/archives/ ... nacles.php

The analogue lies in comparing how the Hyperion and barnacle tubes grow. The barnacle deposits limestone, extracted from seawater, on the lip of its tube. The tube grows in length as the barnacle competes with its neighbours to reach into clear water to feed.
If water vapour were being generated within Hyperion, and vented slowly through holes in a crust, then ice would be deposited on the lip of the vent as it hit the cold of space. The lip would grow while vapour continued to flow. Moreover, crowding of vents would lead to them growing with a hexagonal or polygonal section, just like barnacles or the tubes observed on Hyperion.

This begs the question on how vapour is generated within the object. The tubes themselves, their vapour content and the convection through them would insulate the core from an external source. Chemical reaction heat seems unlikely. Nuclear heat seems even more unlikely in such a small object, but what about fission rather than fusion heat? A situation similar to the Oklo natural reactor on Earth, accumulations of Uranium, moderated by normal water? See: http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0010.shtml

John

Hyperion appears too small to have an active interior. The beast is deader than a fossil. Pass more beer, please

ta152h0 wrote:Hyperion appears too small to have an active interior. The beast is deader than a fossil. Pass more beer, please

With a diameter of 286 km (410 x 260 x 220) Hyperion would be too small to be a moon, isn't the smallest diameter for a moon to be shaped, or formed 1448 km or 900 miles?

I don't think there is a limit to the size for a moon. The moons of Mars are both under 25 km.
Orin

Had to find this post and bring it back from the "other" discussion. @ makc.
Some more information about Hyperion
http://nineplanets.org/hyperion.html

FieryIce wrote:With a diameter of 286 km (410 x 260 x 220) Hyperion would be too small to be a moon, isn't the smallest diameter for a moon to be shaped, or formed 1448 km or 900 miles?

There's no size limit on a moon - there is a limit where they have enough gravity to become spherical - that's what you're describing above.

Then that makes me wonder just how many round "moons" there are in our solar system that are much smaller than 900 miles in diameter? How would that be possible?

Some are smaller than 300 miles, and are very round.

Norval

I don't actually know the limit where bodies become spherical - I'll look it up later. I suppose it would depend a lot on density as well - if something was originally liquid, and cooled very quickly, that would probably be round??

Yes, hot lead was dropped from towers to allow the lead to form into a ball before cooling and hitting the soft ground. That was how they made cannon shot for a time.

I would agree if a mass that size, like Hyperion, were liquid that it could form into a ball shape in space. But that has to ask how it became liquid? Not in it's current orbit I would doubt. A chunk of rocky ice doing a close pass to the sun then getting slingshot into this orbit around saturn? And it looks like it went through the asteroid belt, against the flow.

Norval