Tuesday, July 14, 2015

The Heart of the Kuiper Belt

Pluto - King of the Kuiper Belt

Probably by now most of you have already seen this image, from the New Horizons probe, showing the remarkable heart-shaped feature on the surface of the King of the Kuiper Belt.

'Remarkable' is fairly weak tea, but my personal stock of superlatives has long since been worn down by the eye candy sent back from our ongoing preliminary reconnaissance of the Solar System. So it will have to do.

And I think we can declare Pluto's pity party to be officially over. Future generations of schoolkids will not remember that the largest member of the Kuiper Belt was once classed as the ninth*  'major' planet - and will be increasingly aware that there are planetary systems out there that would scoff at even mighty Jove.
* For much of my adult life, in fact, Pluto was not the ninth anything, since for a quarter century or so its orbit carried it sunward of Neptune.
If anything, some of those kids might be puzzled by old books, including much rocketpunk-era (and later) SF, that called it simply the ninth planet, back before anyone came up with our current subcategories.

Most of all, we can now officially add the Kuiper Belt to the list of places we've been, albeit so far only vicariously. Going there in person will be a demanding mission, and a ways down the road. Well before that time comes, we will return to our previously scheduled discussion of Earth's orbital space. Previous missions have passed through the Kuiper Belt, but New Horizons went there specifically to take a look-see. And the heart on Pluto is one of the first things we saw.

Discuss:



The image was snagged from Sky & Telescope.

We previously considered Pluto here, while it also came up incidentally in an amusing context. And even the phrase 'heart of the Kuiper Belt' got a previous outing here, albeit in a different sense and context, not specific to Pluto.

24 comments:

Brett said...

Seriously. It does nothing to insult Pluto to call it the King of the Kuiper Belt rather than one of the Major Planets.

That said, if they do find a super-Earth or Neptune-sized planet way out there disturbing Oort Cloud bodies, then Pluto might lose that title as well.

Rick said...

It would still be King of the Kuiper Belt - just not king of the entire far-outer Solar System.

And I shouldn't have been surprised when a quick google showed that a of people have adopted that expression for Pluto.

Eth said...

And that's only because Triton abdicated and Eris was sent in exile (Eris' claim was based on mass while Pluto's one was based on diameter, but in the end Eris ran afoul of some nasty forces - though there are still some that support Eris' claim...)
And there may be dimmer ones at the deep end of their orbits, ready to step in and reclaim their legitimate throne.

It's fascinating how much this photo looks like a science-fiction painting, more than any other body I know of in our system.

Geoffrey S H said...

Ah the Kuiper Belt, where specially modified transhumans scuttle from comet to comet, trading and warring over centuries of slow travel whilst keeping lesser societies under their thumb. Unnoticed and uncared for by the inner and outer solar systems.
Only the space patrol/ national patrols based on Pluto notices them, with the transhumans seeking to evict them from Pluto and make that large body the heart and jewel of their burgeoning empire.

Locki said...

Everytime we go out and take a new close look at something in the Solar System more unanswered questions arise.

Cassini, New Horizons, Curiosity, Galileo et al have provided fascinating information. IMO with the current state of rocket technology the manned part of exploration should be canned and we should be doubling down on the unmanned exploration.

Also its nice to see rocketpunk up and active again Rick. We missed you.

Rick said...

It's fascinating how much this photo looks like a science-fiction painting, more than any other body I know of in our system.

To my eye the heart looks like a desert region of dunes - just an effect of the sandy color, but that is what it looks like. Over the next few days we'll be seeing a lot more close-up details! A cool place, Pluto, and not just on the thermometer. :-)

Ah the Kuiper Belt, where specially modified transhumans scuttle from comet to comet

That (figuratively speaking) is why I declared the Pluto pity party over. When we lost the 20th century's ninth planet we gained an entire vast region of the Solar System, about which we previously had not a clue.

with the current state of rocket technology the manned part of exploration should be canned

Oooo, major heresy in space geekdom! But really the time for human exploration is not yet - it will come when (if???) we hit diminishing returns with the robotic probes, and find questions that only someone with a spade or Petri dish can answer.

IMHO the one good reason for human spaceflight, at this development level, is to test and develop human capabilities in space - which we have already found to be considerable - for when the time is ripe for direct human exploration.

Thanks for the warm welcome back - it is great to BE back!

fro1797 said...

A desert east of the mountains...that sounds familiar...

Ferrell

Rick said...

Doesn't it, though?!

Geoffrey S H said...

http://xkcd.com/1551/

Rick said...

Shoulda figured that XKCD would be on the case!

Eth said...

As a tangent, I'm not sure what to do with this:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150712-should-we-build-a-village-on-the-moon

It's just a guy talking (no money or formal plan proposal or anything like that), though he's the new ESA top guy. So, political move? Trying to motivate other agencies to do something?
Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge ESA fan. But if you think NASA is cash-strapped, how does he intend to pull that off with ESA's even smaller budget?
That said, my inner hopeless optimistic dreamer makes me want to see a bigger international effort to such grand purpose - even though I'm not sure how the US and Chinese, and hopefully Japanese and Indians, will go along. Or the Iranians. Or the North Koreans. Hey, he did say "every country of the world"!

And even then, I've seen people complaining about giving money for that instead of down-to-earth stuff, with the crisis and all that - as if entirely cutting ESA's budget would feel like anything more than a rounding error for Europe.

Also, I've heard several names for a Moon base, but "village"? That's a new one...

Rick said...

village on the Moon

This is not the first term that would have occurred to me, either. A couple posts back I just had boring old Luna Base, not Luna Village. Certainly the linked writer was not thinking of the traditional sense of the word, but I can think of a couple of others that are maybe more appropriate, such as 'Olympic village' for the athletes' housing. And perhaps even more appropriate a micro-urban sense, such as 'transit villages' within cities, connoting a relatively diverse population and range of activities, different from a base or outpost.

As for 'every country of the world', I'll just put that down as the sort of thing 'political actors' are expected to say, especially when they represent an international agency.

Also, I'm tempted to suggest that you re-post your comment under the new front pager, just put up, Luna Rising.

You know, Luna Village really does sound cool, and fits the scenario I was imagining!

fro1797 said...

Well, a research outpost on Pluto would be like one in Antarctica, but to the extreme. The trip to and from would take some serious time, so crews would spend years there to make it worthwhile. The outpost would see the resupply/crew rotation ship only infrequently, so it would have to have a high degree of self-sufficiency. If something happened, you might be years from outside help, so you better be able to take care of whatever emergency you might face, yourself. Come to think of it, it might be more like a college town under glass then even your typical Antarctic outpost.

Ferrell

Rick said...

This goes to the whole question of human factors in long term habitation. Living in a can for five years will be tough. My gut feeling is that you basically want the Enterprise, more or less, in social space - at least a few hundred people - and physical roominess.

A quick google gives the TOS ship a volume of 211,000 m3. You probably don't need that much, but a lot more than the 'Pullman train' proportions acceptable for a few months. Say 400 people and 40,000 m3, so 100 m3/person. Still only equivalent to a square block or so built to 2nd story level!

fro1797 said...

So, personal/living space, transit space, working space, and support space: each about 100 m2 each per person (about 400 m2 per person) plus the same again for the commons/recreation space, so about 800 m2 per person for long term (a year or more) assignments to off-world outposts. At a minimum and that may not include life support/greenhouse and/or exploration vehicles. Ok, for a crew of 100 (50 maintenance, 20 engineers, 10 medics and 20 scientists) you would need a minimum of 80,000 m2 for your base. I think, Rick, you forgot that people will need someplace to spend their off-time and socialize if they will be living in a high tech cave for a year or more. That, more than anything else will go a long way to ease any psychological distress from living in said high tech cave. again, something to think about.

Ferrell

Rick said...

I didn't forget about it - I just may not have budgeted enough volume for it. Human factors are a lot more complex and uncertain than rocket science. In an old post about large hab structures I also started with 100 m3/person, then backed off (without clearly saying so) to about 300 m3/person. Which at least is in the same ballpark as your 800 m3/person.

The tradeoff challenge will be cost. The ISS has a mass of about half a ton per cubic meter of pressurized volume. Even if you assume a lighter structure, say 0.25 ton/m3, just the hab structure - including support equipment, not just the pressure vessel(s) - for a crew of 100 weighs in at 7500-20,000 tons. Add the drive bus and other facilities, and total 'dry' mass will be somewhere in the range of 10,000-50,000 tons ... quite a big spacecraft! And a big price tag, too, $10-50 billion by my standard rule of thumb.

The designers are going to look at how much they can sweat the thing down. But as you say there are limits when multiyear habitation is the goal.

For a reference point, middle class urbanites in a place like San Francisco live in apartments that run, say, 300-500 sq ft per person, or about 75-125 m3/person, but that is just for immediate living space. You can probably squeeze down transit space and some working spaces. On the other hand, you almost certainly want (need!) some public spaces that are, well, spacious; at least that feel spacious.

Another subject I should mentally flag for a future blog post!

fro1797 said...


Having 300 m3 per person on a ship is different than 800 m3 for a planetary base:half or more of the ship is propulsion, but you generally don't have motorized bases. (I know, there are exceptions...)Besides, most people expect restricted space when traveling from point A to point B, but not so much when they reach their destination. Most people don't consider a ship to be home, but a base (even for a year or three) would. Your example of an apartment in SF doesn't take into account that those people have an entire city to wander around in...If I'm on Mars or Titan or Pluto for a couple of years, I'd at least like to have a big picture window to look out and a flower garden to wander through and a game room, gym, library, maybe even a corner bar...whatever, spaces to socialize and others get away from everything, even your own room...maybe living with my daughter, son-in-law, and baby granddaughter for the last couple of months has somewhat skewed my perspective on the subject...:) I would love to see the post on off-world bases!

Ferrell

Rick said...

300 m3 per person on a ship is different than 800 m3 for a planetary base: half or more of the ship is propulsion

In this case by 'ship' I mean a 'mobile base station' or whatever you want to call it, intended for multi-year habitation. And the 300 m3/person is for the hab structure, not counting propellant tanks or the rest of the drive bus, etc.

And yeah, my apartment figure doesn't count the rest of the city! My gut feeling is that for most getting-out purposes, variety is more important than sheer extent: winding walkways and small shops rather than a big-box store. But I also suspect that some physically big spaces are important, without being able to quantify 'physically big'.

I also talked some about this here: A Place to Call Home

fro1797 said...

Yeah, I do feel that most estimates of 'people spaces' in spacecraft are probably too low or too high. Estimates for planetary bases are also most likely wrong. I guess that until we actually build some, we'll just have to use our imaginations and best guesses. Always a pleasure chatting with you, it always stimulates the imagination.

Ferrell

Rick said...

until we actually build some, we'll just have to use our imaginations and best guesses

Yes, there's really nothing else to go by. And thanks for the kind words! I always appreciate your comments, and you must be the longest-time regular commenter!

Michael said...

Wow! RM is back! Like Rick, I check blogs manually for some reason. All of a sudden, this page had half a dozen new entries. Living space might be a really compelling reason for a moon base over an orbital base. You just have so much more useful stuff. If you want more room for the base, you dig it out. This means that much more HVAC and plumbing, but you're lifting a lot fewer girders and radiation shields. This all supposes that we can make something industrially useful out of moonstuff, but it's not the largest stretch.

Rick said...

Thanks for the welcome back - same back atcha! I also keep track of blogs manually.

Digging out and pressure-sealing lunar material could turn out to be dicey. Construction materials like brick or concrete use large amounts of water - finding enough lunar ice to make propellant from, but having enough for construction would be a lot more demanding.

fro1797 said...

Rick said: "Digging out and pressure-sealing lunar material could turn out to be dicey. Construction materials like brick or concrete use large amounts of water..." Glass bricks. Or sheets... Why use strictly Earthly construction methods on other worlds? Of course use the basic principles, but modify them to fit the environment.

Ferrell

Michael said...

A couple thoughts:

You might be able to reclaim a lot of water with the proper brickmaking equipment.

You might be able to extract aluminum metal from the dust to make beams and stuff, although all I really know about that process is that it requires a lot of electricity.

Moon bedrock might be air-tight already, and if not, it might be structurally strong enough that it let's you use lightweight inflatable habs instead of heavy "hard" habs because it provides radiation protection and structural support.