Strange lights on dwarf planet Ceres

[MorningFox]

A dwarf planet is shining two bright lights at a NASA spacecraft right now, and our smartest scientists are unsure what they are.

As bizarre as that sentence sounds, that's the situation with Ceres — the largest object in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, officially designated as a dwarf planet (the same category as Pluto).

NASA's Dawn spacecraft is approaching Ceres ahead of a March 6 rendezvous. The picture above was taken February 19, from a distance of just under 29,000 miles, and shows two very shiny areas on the same basin on Ceres' surface.

Source - Mashable (http://mashable.com/2015/02/25/strange-lights-dwarf-planet-ceres/)

http://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDE1LzAyLzI2L2I2L1BJQTE5MTg1X2lwLmE4MjU5LmpwZwpwCXRodW1iCTk1MHg1MzQjCmUJanBn/1d323224/280/PIA19185_ip.jpg

I'm aware that the auto-bot user 'NASA' posted this, but I think users have grown to automatically ignore the posts from that 'user'. The thread had no replies and certainly didn't make it obvious in it's auto-post how interesting this actually was.

[Rollo]

First thing about those lights that came to my mind is that we see light signal. Light signal as something very well known in communication between two ships-spaceships.
In this case, one on the space mission approaching its destination and second traveling trough space as planetary body.

WOt83AouoGU

[panpravda]

It will be interesting indeed to see if the small bright patch shows indications of revolving around the larger, central bright patch; for if it does, then enter stage left, plasma - electric universe theory!

[Atlas]

http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/Ceres_OpNav3_Frameanim_MPS.gif

Source: http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/ceres_science_gallery.asp

[amor]

That is a powerfully generated light glowing from the front and back of something, probably a spacecraft, put there by humans. Other dimmer spots suggest other habitation.

[lucidity]

http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/images/Ceres_OpNav3_Frameanim_MPS.gif

Source: http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/ceres_science_gallery.asp

What do you make of it buares ?
Swamp gas ? Weather balloon ? ;-)

more on this story here:
http://rt.com/usa/235915-ceres-mysterious-bright-spots/

be happy

lucidity :-)

[StandingWave]

What we are seeing on Ceres is crater formation in progress. An arc discharge from a twisted current filament rotating as it 'grounds' while machining away the surface to form the crater. Cool to have such clear and direct evidence of this!

[Flash]

StandingWave, with such a precise description, I will want to know if you are a geologist. You certainly sound like someone who knows about geology.

[MorningFox]

The question is... why have nasa released this and not covered it up? As is evidently their usual modus operandi.

[Atlas]

What do you make of it buares ? Swamp gas ? Weather balloon ? ;-)
As far as I know, there are no swamps on Ceres, no weather stations either so it can't be swamp gas nor a weather balloon. If NASA can't explain it, I don't know who can. But maybe you can ? A crashed UFO perhaps ? or did NASA simply forget to airbrush the pictures ?
---------------------------------------------

NASA's Dawn Spacecraft Spots Two Bright Points on Ceres:

bTm1YSSe_iw

[panpravda]

Flash ... Standingwave is correct, and it doesn't need a geologist to make the observation that he/she has offered. Instead, it needs someone, perhaps just like Standingwave, who appreciates the electric nature of what is going on in our universe, and specifically here with the formation of craters; the description given is one that is common for the production of almost all craters, everywhere. If you want to read up on this at a layperson's level, then I suggest downloading, reading, and thinking about what is described in the free book at http://www.newtoeu.com

Best regards ...

[Flash]

The question is... why have nasa released this and not covered it up? As is evidently their usual modus operandi.

Maybe because it is just a volcanoe as described by Standing Wave, therefore no needs to hide. Or, we are being prepared.

My question at this point is: Can dwarf planet have volcanoes? Is their core hot enough for this (I would have thought they are quite cold, and Ceres is quite far from the sun as well, unless it is heated by the large planets)

-------

Ok Pranpradva, therefore you do not need the formation of volcanoes to have the formation of craters, just electric arcs.

Then, what is provoking the electricity?

[Innocent Warrior]

The asteroid belt could serve as a low gravity base for various craft to launch from.

I'd bet a million bucks the place is a thoroughfare.

[Hervé]

See this thread: The "Impossible" Dunes of Comet 67P (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?80245-The-Impossible-Dunes-of-Comet-67P)

... for some possible "Electric Universe" explanations.

[Buzzie]

I always thought that craters were caused by meteorites or asteroids crashing into the planet or moon. Was I wrong?

[Hervé]

The trouble with "thinking" is that more often than not, the thinking has no connection with "reality." :)

From what I can see on these pictures, there are a lot of impact craters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crater) and no evidence for volcanic craters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crater)...

[Billy]

Do we know what position the sun is in relation to the light? It may be exposed crystal or ice reflecting sunlight. :noidea:

[MorningFox]

Do we know what position the sun is in relation to the light? It may be exposed crystal or ice reflecting sunlight. :noidea:


I guess it's pretty easy to work out, going by what portion of the planet is lit?

[Innocent Warrior]

Do we know what position the sun is in relation to the light? It may be exposed crystal or ice reflecting sunlight. :noidea:

It's suggested as an option in the video in buares' post (#10) but the position of the sun is not mentioned. A clearer image is required to determine that, either way.

[panpravda]

[QUOTE=MorningFox;937498]Ok Pranpradva, therefore you do not need the formation of volcanoes to have the formation of craters, just electric arcs.

Then, what is provoking the electricity?

Okay, Flash ... Electricity exists in space due to the positive and negative charge differentials that are present between physical areas of ionised matter of varying density, otherwise known as plasma. Essentially, and rather roughly, ionised matter (plasma) consists of relatively heavy, positively charged protons and ions (atoms that have one or more electrons missing), and much lighter negatively charged electrons. Solid bodies such as planets, moons, asteroids and comets (they're just the same thing; rocks!), and meteors, all have their own levels of charge, too. Contrary to common belief, plasma itself is not a superconductor, for it has "resistance" (resistivity), hence its ability to retain electrical charge over time, and as such it does not dissipate immediately the charge it takes on. Practically everything in the universe has some level of charge associated with it, where that charge will be at a different level than that possessed by other bodies and regions of plasma in close proximity; hence the entire universe consists of 99.99% plasma, and is in fact, electrically alive!

Moving on … where a charge differential exists -- for simplicity sake let's say between a planet and a moon in orbit around it -- then this charge (voltage) differential is the condition that has to exist before an electric current will flow. Electric currents on the scales we are talking about in our universe, galaxies, star and planetary systems, can be of a magnitude that is quite impossible for the human brain to full appreciate; they are called Birkeland currents of which there are now numerous examples, and they come entwined as pairs; see the picture here of the Cygnus Loop Nebula:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/attachment.php?attachmentid=29105&cid=1&stc=1

Think of an everyday electric arc-welding process and multiply that blinding, powerful, metal-melting arc by a few billions or trillions, depending on whether one is considering galaxies, stars, or planets and their moons. This will likely give you at least some idea of what is intended here to be taken as an impression of power and scale.

Of course, where we have electric current flowing, which in this case is through filaments of plasma, we also have similarly powerful magnetic fields surrounding and constricting (pinching) those filaments; those filaments themselves acting like normal wire conductors to carry the current. When these filaments interact with each other over time and their physical, and therefore also their electrical separation becomes less, then gargantuan electric short circuits can occur, and when they do, we get things like stars being formed, novae and supernovae occurring, and craters being scoured out on the surfaces of planets, moons, asteroids and comets. This, my friend, is just a peek at how the force we call electromagnetism, has shaped everything in our universe and now makes everything work.

As for those wondering about the place gravity occupies in all of this; gravity itself is a manifestation of the electromagnetic force, just as the strong and weak nuclear forces are. The real challenge here is for us to understand that fundamental, electrical and magnetic relationship.

[panpravda]

I always thought that craters were caused by meteorites or asteroids crashing into the planet or moon. Was I wrong?

I'm afraid so, Buzzie ... See the latest reply I made to Flash (above).

[lucidity]

What do you make of it buares ? Swamp gas ? Weather balloon ? ;-)
As far as I know, there are no swamps on Ceres, no weather stations either so it can't be swamp gas nor a weather balloon. If NASA can't explain it, I don't know who can. But maybe you can ? A crashed UFO perhaps ? or did NASA simply forget to airbrush the pictures ?


Hi buares,

It's nice to see you holding up the establishment end ;-)

How do you know NASA can't explain it ?
Have you ever heard of Maurice Chatelain ? He was one of NASA's insiders.
He's about as 'NASA' as you can get.
He was a high ranking, chief scientist that worked on the Apollo missions during
the 1960s and 70s and he basically blew the whistle on NASA's Lies.
NASA has an extensive history of lying to the public.
Airbrushing satellite photos is a minor example of this.
The fact that NASA are publicly saying they're "puzzled" means nothing.
If they did know, they wouldn't tell you... particularly if it had anything to do with UFOs.

Like you i doubt the usual laughable explanations concerning
swamp gas, lightening, the planet venus, weather balloons and light houses.

Lumps of life-less rock don't tend to give off bright balls of light, that extend for something
like 10 miles in diameter for a period of hours.
Humans have been staring at the moon for thousands of years and,
to the best of my knowledge, no one's reported seeing events like that on the moon.

We don't see this kind of thing on Earth either, despite all the geological activity
here and despite all the atmospheric thunderstorms. The nearest we came was
exploding atomic bombs on Japan. The flash from that lasted just a few seconds.

Ceres is supposed to be a life-less rock, no atmosphere,
no thunderstorms, no geological activity and no life.

So what caused such a big and intense light ?

I welcome your thoughts.... but please, don't appeal to what
some one else is saying on facebook ;-)

be happy

lucidity :-)

[Atlas]

Hi there lucidity,


Have you ever heard of Maurice Chatelain ?
I am probably the only one who started a thread about Maurice Chatelain:


> projectavalon.net/Maurice-Chatelain-Our-ancestors-came-from-outer-space (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?67350-Maurice-Chatelain-Our-ancestors-came-from-outer-space)


don't appeal to what some one else is saying on facebook

What someone else is saying on Facebook is probably as valid as what you yourself are saying.


So what caused such a big and intense light ?

It's just a matter of time before the "establishment" gives us an explanation (which you are not forced to believe).

[lucidity]

Hi there lucidity,


Have you ever heard of Maurice Chatelain ?
I am probably the only one who started a thread about Maurice Chatelain:


> projectavalon.net/Maurice-Chatelain-Our-ancestors-came-from-outer-space (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?67350-Maurice-Chatelain-Our-ancestors-came-from-outer-space)


don't appeal to what some one else is saying on facebook

What someone else is saying on Facebook is probably as valid as what you yourself are saying.


So what caused such a big and intense light ?

It's just a matter of time before the "establishment" gives us an explanation (which you are not forced to believe).

Hi buares,

That's a good thread,.. and i hadn't seen the (Spock narrated) video before.
Nice of you to supply the pdf of the book too. :-)

We know that govt agencies are using social media to manipulate
public opinion. Perhaps you hadn't encountered this story ?
http://rt.com/news/snowden-nsa-us-facebook-717/

They are also using the news services to destroy reputations
of individuals, companies and political parties. To compromise
business relationships, to mis-report financial information etc.
See here:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140224/17054826340/new-snowden-doc-reveals-how-gchqnsa-use-internet-to-manipulate-deceive-destroy-reputations.shtml

These stories came out of the snowden revelations.
I know that many people aren't yet aware of their range or gravity.

Given what we now know about govt agencies manipulating social media
and news media to execute their own agenda...
Facebook posts can not be assumed to be honest opinion.
for example.. Facebook posts reporting that there really is _no_ UFO crash
landing in Canada are immediately suspect.
We know that TPTB go to great lengths to hide the truth of these events.
And a local UFO researcher, seemingly within two minutes of the crash,
publicly announces his conclusions (way, way too prematurely) that 'nope,
there really is nothing to this' ... that just smells to high heaven of bullsh*t.

There might well be 'disinformation' agents using accounts on this
very forum buares. Imagine that. What a shoddy little job that is.



It's just a matter of time before the "establishment" gives us an
explanation...


Unfortunately, history doesn't bare out your optimism.
Roswell, for example, was 1947.
The 'establishment' have lied and lied and lied and lied some more.
Even after Richard Dollan spilled the beans working from
_official_documents_, still no acknowledgement, still no explanation.
Even after Greer's disclosure event at the Press Club.
Still no acknowledgement, still no explanation.

1947 was 70 years. Very, very few of the people that remember that
event are still alive. The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of
those people are the current generation.

All the explanations we've been given so far have been palpable bullsh*t.
And given what we've learned from Maurice Chatelain, if they did give
us an explanation, would you take it at face value ? Probably not.

So.. in my view, it's a mistake to wait to be told.
That's giving away your autonomy.
And we're supposed to be intelligent adults, right ?

be happy

lucidity :-)

[Atlas]

Thanks lucidity, I mainly agree with your post.


Ceres is supposed to be a life-less rock, no atmosphere, no thunderstorms, no geological activity and no life.
It seems like there is water on Ceres:




Water Detection on Ceres

This graph shows variability in the intensity of the water absorption signal detected at Ceres by the Herschel space observatory on March 6, 2013. he most intense readings correspond to two dark regions on the surface known as Piazzi and Region A, identified in the ground-based image of Ceres by the W.M. Keck Observatory on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. The two data points at 110 degrees longitude were taken in a time interval of about 9 hours -- equal to the Ceres rotation period -- showing that variability in the water vapor production is possible even over short periods.

Herschel is a European Space Agency mission, with science instruments provided by consortia of European institutes and with important participation by NASA. While the observatory stopped making science observations in April 2013, after running out of liquid coolant, as expected, scientists continue to analyze its data. NASA's Herschel Project Office is based at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. JPL contributed mission-enabling technology for two of Herschel's three science instruments. The NASA Herschel Science Center, part of the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, supports the United States astronomical community. Caltech manages JPL for NASA.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/images/largesize/PIA17831_hires.jpg

Dawn's mission to Vesta and Ceres is managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. Dawn is a project of the directorate's Discovery Program, managed by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. UCLA is responsible for overall Dawn mission science. Orbital ATK, Inc., of Dulles, Virginia, designed and built the spacecraft. JPL is managed for NASA by the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. The framing cameras were provided by the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, Göttingen, Germany, with significant contributions by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) Institute of Planetary Research, Berlin, and in coordination with the Institute of Computer and Communication Network Engineering, Braunschweig. The visible and infrared mapping spectrometer was provided by the Italian Space Agency and the Italian National Institute for Astrophysics, built by Selex ES, and is managed and operated by the Italian Institute for Space Astrophysics and Planetology, Rome. The gamma ray and neutron detector was built by Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, and is operated by the Planetary Science Institute, Tucson, Arizona.

The Dawn spacecraft is due to arrive at Ceres on March 6, 2015.
Source: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA17831

Wikipedia also acknowledge the fact that the nature of Ceres' surface features are "currently unknown":


Ceres appears to be differentiated into a rocky core and icy mantle, and may harbor an internal ocean of liquid water under its surface. The surface is probably a mixture of water ice and various hydrated minerals such as carbonates and clay. In January 2014, emissions of water vapor were detected from several regions of Ceres. This was somewhat unexpected, because large bodies in the asteroid belt do not typically emit vapor, a hallmark of comets.

[...] near-infrared images with a higher resolution taken over a whole rotation with the Keck telescope using adaptive optics showed several bright and dark features moving with Ceres's rotation. Two dark features had circular shapes and are presumably craters; one of them was observed to have a bright central region, whereas another was identified as the "Piazzi" feature. More recent visible-light Hubble Space Telescope images of a full rotation taken in 2003 and 2004 showed 11 recognizable surface features, the natures of which are currently unknown.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_%28dwarf_planet%29

[panpravda]

It seems like there is water on Ceres:

Baures: What is being talked about here is the result from spectrographic analysis that is mistakenly being (and always has been) interpreted as the detection of water. It is, in fact, something quite different … enter stage left the Hydroxyl Radical OH (as opposed to water which is H2O)

Here is an almost inadequate summary, from me, which I hope will at least make the point …

Through EDM - Electrical Discharge Machining (plasma scouring) action on the surface, usually of comets, but Ceres in this instance, due to that body being just another big rock that is electrically charged, Oxygen atoms are separated from minerals and expelled from the surface into space. These go on to combine with "solar wind" protons (Hydrogen nuclei) to produce OH. This is what is known as a Hydroxyl Radical. It has one atom of Oxygen and one atom of Hydrogen. This is what has been at the root of the confusion, because OH has the same spectrographic signature as does H2O (water). And, since it is water that is "expected" by astro-scientists to be found, then it is water that they judge they really have found! I am sure you will appreciate that electrical processes are used in chemistry and they these processes are well understood. This is one that is very well understood, so go figure why they still think it's water they're finding!

For a much more complete explanation of this, please follow the link below to Wal Thornhill's website and read the article there entitled: "First Evidence of Comet Ice – What Does it Mean?".

http://www.holoscience.com/wp/first-evidence-of-comet-ice-what-does-it-mean/

[Atlas]

Thank you for this explanation panpravda.

-----------------------------------------------

NASA probe begins search for life on Ceres:

lBR0sRqy7wM

[Carmody]

The next domino to fall, is that 'electricity' or electrical charge and electrical differential, is one of the fundamental aspects of mass/time/space.

"Is", here, where the you thinking what that word is and looking around, is not "Is', for other or other places spaces, people and so on.

That "Is" is entirely local and self affected/effectual.

That is the fundamanet we end up at.

That observation becomes integration becomes change, inclusion, exchange, etc.

That the difference in electrical charge... is as fundamental as the difference from one moment/time/location.... in the ideas of time/space/dimensions, and is a descriptor of such.

http://phys.org/news/2015-02-physicists-theory-differences-sun-due.html


In the article below, it is all about the inertial reference frame, or, if you will..'inertial reference frame bubble', and that, due to how the universe expresses itself, is strongly tied to the voltage differential between two spots.


Think of time/space being differently stretched and differently expressed between the galaxies, but our perception package, our reference frame...not understanding it nor having ability to record or measure it.


http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/2015/howcanspacet.jpg

How can space travel faster than the speed of light? (http://phys.org/news/2015-02-space-faster.html)

Cosmologists are intellectual time travelers. Looking back over billions of years, these scientists are able to trace the evolution of our Universe in astonishing detail. 13.8 billion years ago, the Big Bang occurred. Fractions of a second later, the fledgling Universe expanded exponentially during an incredibly brief period of time called inflation. Over the ensuing eons, our cosmos has grown to such an enormous size that we can no longer see the other side of it.

But how can this be? If light's velocity marks a cosmic speed limit, how can there possibly be regions of spacetime whose photons are forever out of our reach? And even if there are, how do we know that they exist at all?

The Expanding Universe

Like everything else in physics, our Universe strives to exist in the lowest possible energy state possible. But around 10-36 seconds after the Big Bang, inflationary cosmologists believe that the cosmos found itself resting instead at a "false vacuum energy" – a low-point that wasn't really a low-point. Seeking the true nadir of vacuum energy, over a minute fraction of a moment, the Universe is thought to have ballooned by a factor of 1050.

Since that time, our Universe has continued to expand, but at a much slower pace. We see evidence of this expansion in the light from distant objects. As photons emitted by a star or galaxy propagate across the Universe, the stretching of space causes them to lose energy. Once the photons reach us, their wavelengths have been redshifted in accordance with the distance they have traveled.

This is why cosmologists speak of redshift as a function of distance in both space and time. The light from these distant objects has been traveling for so long that, when we finally see it, we are seeing the objects as they were billions of years ago.

The Hubble Volume

Redshifted light allows us to see objects like galaxies as they existed in the distant past; but we cannot see all events that occurred in our Universe during its history. Because our cosmos is expanding, the light from some objects is simply too far away for us ever to see.

The physics of that boundary rely, in part, on a chunk of surrounding spacetime called the Hubble volume. Here on Earth, we define the Hubble volume by measuring something called the Hubble parameter (H0), a value that relates the apparent recession speed of distant objects to their redshift. It was first calculated in 1929, when Edwin Hubble discovered that faraway galaxies appeared to be moving away from us at a rate that was proportional to the redshift of their light.

Dividing the speed of light by H0, we get the Hubble volume. This spherical bubble encloses a region where all objects move away from a central observer at speeds less than the speed of light. Correspondingly, all objects outside of the Hubble volume move away from the center faster than the speed of light.

Yes, "faster than the speed of light." How is this possible?

The Magic of Relativity
How can space travel faster than the speed of light?
Two sources of redshift: Doppler and cosmological expansion; modeled after Koupelis & Kuhn. Bottom: Detectors catch the light that is emitted by a central star. This light is stretched, or redshifted, as space expands in between. Credit: Brews Ohare

The answer has to do with the difference between special relativity and general relativity. Special relativity requires what is called an "inertial reference frame" – more simply, a backdrop. According to this theory, the speed of light is the same when compared in all inertial reference frames. Whether an observer is sitting still on a park bench on planet Earth or zooming past Neptune in a futuristic high-velocity rocketship, the speed of light is always the same. A photon always travels away from the observer at 300,000,000 meters per second, and he or she will never catch up.

General relativity, however, describes the fabric of spacetime itself. In this theory, there is no inertial reference frame. Spacetime is not expanding with respect to anything outside of itself, so the the speed of light as a limit on its velocity doesn't apply. Yes, galaxies outside of our Hubble sphere are receding from us faster than the speed of light. But the galaxies themselves aren't breaking any cosmic speed limits. To an observer within one of those galaxies, nothing violates special relativity at all. It is the space in between us and those galaxies that is rapidly proliferating and stretching exponentially.

The Observable Universe

Now for the next bombshell: The Hubble volume is not the same thing as the observable Universe.

To understand this, consider that as the Universe gets older, distant light has more time to reach our detectors here on Earth. We can see objects that have accelerated beyond our current Hubble volume because the light we see today was emitted when they were within it.

Strictly speaking, our observable Universe coincides with something called the particle horizon. The particle horizon marks the distance to the farthest light that we can possibly see at this moment in time – photons that have had enough time to either remain within, or catch up to, our gently expanding Hubble sphere.

And just what is this distance? A little more than 46 billion light years in every direction – giving our observable Universe a diameter of approximately 93 billion light years, or more than 500 billion trillion miles.

(A quick note: the particle horizon is not the same thing as the cosmological event horizon. The particle horizon encompasses all the events in the past that we can currently see. The cosmological event horizon, on the other hand, defines a distance within which a future observer will be able to see the then-ancient light our little corner of spacetime is emitting today.

In other words, the particle horizon deals with the distance to past objects whose ancient light that we can see today; the cosmological event horizon deals with the distance that our present-day light that will be able to travel as faraway regions of the Universe accelerate away from us.)
How can space travel faster than the speed of light?
Fit of redshift velocities to Hubble’s law. Credit: Brews Ohare

Dark Energy

Thanks to the expansion of the Universe, there are regions of the cosmos that we will never see, even if we could wait an infinite amount of time for their light to reach us. But what about those areas just beyond the reaches of our present-day Hubble volume? If that sphere is also expanding, will we ever be able to see those boundary objects?

This depends on which region is expanding faster – the Hubble volume or the parts of the Universe just outside of it. And the answer to that question depends on two things: 1) whether H0 is increasing or decreasing, and 2) whether the Universe is accelerating or decelerating. These two rates are intimately related, but they are not the same.

In fact, cosmologists believe that we are actually living at a time when H0 is decreasing; but because of dark energy, the velocity of the Universe's expansion is increasing.

That may sound counterintuitive, but as long as H0 decreases at a slower rate than that at which the Universe's expansion velocity is increasing, the overall movement of galaxies away from us still occurs at an accelerated pace. And at this moment in time, cosmologists believe that the Universe's expansion will outpace the more modest growth of the Hubble volume.
How can space travel faster than the speed of light?
The observable universe, more technically known as the particle horizon.

So even though our Hubble volume is expanding, the influence of dark energy appears to provide a hard limit to the ever-increasing observable Universe.

Our Earthly Limitations

Cosmologists seem to have a good handle on deep questions like what our observable Universe will someday look like and how the expansion of the cosmos will change. But ultimately, scientists can only theorize the answers to questions about the future based on their present-day understanding of the Universe. Cosmological timescales are so unimaginably long that it is impossible to say much of anything concrete about how the Universe will behave in the future. Today's models fit the current data remarkably well, but the truth is that none of us will live long enough to see whether the predictions truly match all of the outcomes.

Disappointing? Sure. But totally worth the effort to help our puny brains consider such mind-bloggling science – a reality that, as usual, is just plain stranger than fiction.

[StandingWave]

The question is... why have nasa released this and not covered it up? As is evidently their usual modus operandi.

Maybe because it is just a volcanoe as described by Standing Wave, therefore no needs to hide. Or, we are being prepared.

My question at this point is: Can dwarf planet have volcanoes? Is their core hot enough for this (I would have thought they are quite cold, and Ceres is quite far from the sun as well, unless it is heated by the large planets)

-------

Ok Pranpradva, therefore you do not need the formation of volcanoes to have the formation of craters, just electric arcs.

Then, what is provoking the electricity?

Hi Flash,

I have always had an affinity for geology and if my math had had a better grounding I would probably have studied the subject at university. Unfortunately the school system ensured that my grasp of complex math was severely compromised...

Im impressed! You found the big question so quickly - what is provoking the electricity?

The answer is simple enough: Movement.

It turns out that 99.99% of the matter in the cosmos is in the form of plasma, which is a soup of elemental atoms stripped of their outer electrons to a greater or lesser extent. Yes, the matter we are so familiar with in the form of anything with durable form and structure constitutes only 0.01% of all the matter in the cosmos! That should be a fairly sobering thought! LOL

A plasma implies a population of 'free electrons'.
If these 'free' electrons should move in concert in any particular direction, that movement will constitute a current:
- which in turn generates a magnetic field
- which forms, tightens and speeds the flow of free electrons into braided helical filaments
- which increases the strength of the magnetic field
- which increases the current speed and strength and the complexity of the filamental structure
- which increases the magnetic field strength....

basically a positive feedback loop is generated and huge charge potentials and differentials are created, quickly, quite spontaneously and fairly effortlessly.

When the charge gradient is strong enough the plasma goes through some interesting state changes. At high enough levels of charge seperation the attempt at equalisation of these differentials gives rise to what is known as an arc discharge. We are familiar with arc discharges in the form of the 'spark' in arc welding or arc cutting. This is what we are seeing at Ceres. This discharge type is extrememly physically active and can machine away matter from a surface in prodigious quantities in a very short amount of time, turning that matter into a fine dust and in the process, melting the bedrock, creating complex combinations of elemental matter and releasing atomic gasses in the form of plasma.

As a formative force in Universe, electromagnetic dynamics are far wider reaching, more potent and immediate than the mainstream's ideas that only allow for physical interactions based on gravity and weathering. Things that go 'bump' in the night. :)

Interestingly, lightening discharges (arc discharges) are more often being witnessed in volcanic eruptions. Of course mainstream scientists are convinced the charges are generated by dust particles rubbing against each other... sigh.

Whenever the sun becomes sufficiently active and sends huge gobs of plasma (solar wind) in the direction of earth, increases in teluric or earth currents are measured at the polar latitudes as the current flow is grounded at the foot of the aurora displays.

This magnetic/electric/plasma view of cosmic processes clears up a lot of mysteries currently (pun intended) plagueing mainstream understandings and will be the foundation of future sciences, imho.

[StandingWave]

[QUOTE=MorningFox;937498]Ok Pranpradva, therefore you do not need the formation of volcanoes to have the formation of craters, just electric arcs.

Then, what is provoking the electricity?

Okay, Flash ... Electricity exists in space due to the positive and negative charge differentials that are present between physical areas of ionised matter of varying density, otherwise known as plasma. Essentially, and rather roughly, ionised matter (plasma) consists of relatively heavy, positively charged protons and ions (atoms that have one or more electrons missing), and much lighter negatively charged electrons. Solid bodies such as planets, moons, asteroids and comets (they're just the same thing; rocks!), and meteors, all have their own levels of charge, too. Contrary to common belief, plasma itself is not a superconductor, for it has "resistance" (resistivity), hence its ability to retain electrical charge over time, and as such it does not dissipate immediately the charge it takes on. Practically everything in the universe has some level of charge associated with it, where that charge will be at a different level than that possessed by other bodies and regions of plasma in close proximity; hence the entire universe consists of 99.99% plasma, and is in fact, electrically alive!

Moving on … where a charge differential exists -- for simplicity sake let's say between a planet and a moon in orbit around it -- then this charge (voltage) differential is the condition that has to exist before an electric current will flow. Electric currents on the scales we are talking about in our universe, galaxies, star and planetary systems, can be of a magnitude that is quite impossible for the human brain to full appreciate; they are called Birkeland currents of which there are now numerous examples, and they come entwined as pairs; see the picture here of the Cygnus Loop Nebula:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/attachment.php?attachmentid=29105&cid=1&stc=1

Think of an everyday electric arc-welding process and multiply that blinding, powerful, metal-melting arc by a few billions or trillions, depending on whether one is considering galaxies, stars, or planets and their moons. This will likely give you at least some idea of what is intended here to be taken as an impression of power and scale.

Of course, where we have electric current flowing, which in this case is through filaments of plasma, we also have similarly powerful magnetic fields surrounding and constricting (pinching) those filaments; those filaments themselves acting like normal wire conductors to carry the current. When these filaments interact with each other over time and their physical, and therefore also their electrical separation becomes less, then gargantuan electric short circuits can occur, and when they do, we get things like stars being formed, novae and supernovae occurring, and craters being scoured out on the surfaces of planets, moons, asteroids and comets. This, my friend, is just a peek at how the force we call electromagnetism, has shaped everything in our universe and now makes everything work.

As for those wondering about the place gravity occupies in all of this; gravity itself is a manifestation of the electromagnetic force, just as the strong and weak nuclear forces are. The real challenge here is for us to understand that fundamental, electrical and magnetic relationship.

This is a brilliant synopsis! Thanks, Panpravda. Apologies for saying it all again in different words - I responded to Flash before reading your response through fully. Nice to include that pic of the braided filament and to see my understanding of this affirmed :)

[Atlas]

size comparison of the MYSTERIOUS BRIGHT SPOTS of Ceres

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-u1Wq3W4AEZbrp.png:large
https://twitter.com/Melih_CALIKOGLU/status/570749179921887234/photo/1

[t2016]

They want to send us message? or .........


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whAjVr-HZ0Q

[lucidity]

Hi t2016,

I've been pondering this for some time now.
What's causing it ?
Since when does an apparently barren, lifeless rock glow bright white
over a distance of something like 10 miles, for a period of hours ?

We don't get these effects on the earth nor on the moon.

Similarly, what's causing the geyers on the south pole of Mars ?
See here:
http://www.space.com/28573-mystery-plumes-on-mars.html
155 miles into the atmosphere !
Scientists believe there is no volcanism on Mars.
So what could propel 'stuff' that high ?

What are your best guesses t2016 ?

be happy

lucidity :-)

[StandingWave]

size comparison of the MYSTERIOUS BRIGHT SPOTS of Ceres

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-u1Wq3W4AEZbrp.png:large
https://twitter.com/Melih_CALIKOGLU/status/570749179921887234/photo/1

Yep, those are pretty big bolts of lightning and they last for quite a while! The creative power of Universe laid bare. Of course you only have to glance at the sky day or night to see the same force in the form of every star, nebulae, comet and galaxy out there! Amazing.

[yelik]

Spot of mining work going on.

[Flash]

There is already a thread on this topic

[Hervé]

They want to send us message? or .........

[...]

Hello t2016,

I merged your thread with this earlier, pre-existing one.

Cheers!

PS: Fresh from the cookie-cutter:

My guess is that, it's time for you to gain some mastery over the "Advanced Search (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77629-Google-site-search-vs-built-in-search)" function one can find at the upper right corner of any Project Avalon page...

[MorningFox]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHYhtffWcAI2mIc.jpg

[Aspen]

Space colonies? Space Mining Company, Deep Space Industries is advertising on youtube MWGdz-YKg3E

They have probably been out there for awhile . . .

Another Pretty glitzy ad Eeyx4sTtsAM

Maybe there is a small city on Ceres? Maybe they don't mine there, but harvest the asteroids nearby and this acts as a base.

[Aspen]

DrbCAoiyUNw Ceres is part of the asteroid belt. It is actually not as hard to navigate the asteroid belt as is depicted in the sci-fi movies. It is not a celestial mine field and this video claims a dozen other space craft have safely navigated through it already. It also claims that Ceres has water in the form of ice on it and a thin atmosphere.