Saturn: the "Ringed Beauty" and His Moons

Inizio

Registrati

Elenco album

Ultimi arrivi

Ultimi commenti

Più viste

Più votate

Preferiti

Cerca

Inizio > SOLAR SYSTEM > Saturn: the "Ringed Beauty" and His Moons

Ultimi commenti - Saturn: the "Ringed Beauty" and His Moons

Enceladus-N00145377-N00145387.gifFountains of Light and possible UFO (GIF-Movie; credits: Dr G. Barca)102 visiteQuesto splendido (e, per l'ennesima volta, assai intrigante) GIF-Movie realizzato dal nostro Dr Barca è stato ottenuto dal montaggio di 11 frames.
Qui di seguito, troverete le captions NASA originali relative a questi 11 quadri ed una nostra (assolutamente approssimativa, ce ne rendiamo conto) interpretazione del fenomeno.

Le captions in questione (inclusive dell'indirizzo http) sono le seguenti:

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205400

N00145377.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 200,423 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205401

N00145378.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 200,130 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the BL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205402

N00145379.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 199,946 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the RED and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205403

N00145380.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 199,688 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and IR1 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205404

N00145381.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 199,385 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and IR3 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205405

N00145382.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 198,621 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205406

N00145383.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 198,431 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the BL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205407

N00145384.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 198,090 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the RED and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 201

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205408

N00145385.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 197,950 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and IR1 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205409

N00145386.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 197,494 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and IR3 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/rawimagedetails/index.cfm?imageID=205410

N00145387.jpg was taken on November 01, 2009 and received on Earth November 03, 2009. The camera was pointing toward ENCELADUS at approximately 197,115 kilometers away, and the image was taken using the CL1 and CL2 filters. This image has not been validated or calibrated. A validated/calibrated image will be archived with the NASA Planetary Data System in 2010.

CONSIDERAZIONI

Come potete verificare Voi stessi, tra il primo frame (ottenuto quando CASSINI si trovava a 200.423 Km da Encelado) e l'ultimo (che vedeva CASSINI a 197.115 Km dalla "Luna di Neve") esiste uno scarto di 3.308 Km i quali, supponendo (la nostra è una valutazione arbitraria, lo sappiamo, ma è comunque una valutazione razionale) che la Sonda viaggiasse assecondando una traiettoria (sostanzialmente) lineare muovendosi nello Spazio ad una velocità media di circa 6 Km/sec., dovrebbero essere stati percorsi in circa 551”.

Se quanto sopra è vero (anche solo approssimativamnte), ne consegue che l'intera sequenza dovrebbe coprire un intervallo di tempo pari a poco più di 9 minuti.

L'oggetto scintillante (il Light Streak) appare in 6 frames (da 00145382 a 00145387), ergo da quando CASSINI era a 198.621 Km di distanza da Encelado e sino a quando la Sonda si è trovata a 197.115 Km dalla Luna Saturniana.
Lo spazio percorso da CASSINI durante l'ottenimento di questi frames è dunque fatto pari a (circa) 1506 Km, il che significa - in termini di tempo - che i frames rappresentativi del Light Streak sono stati ottenuti in un arco di tempo pari a (circa) 4 minuti.

Domanda: date queste premesse, è ammissibile che il Light Streak costituisca l'espressione visibile del transito - nello spazio visuale di CASSINI - di un'altra Luna Saturniana?

Ebbene la risposta è: NO.

Non è possibile poichè, qualora si fosse trattato - ragionando per assurdo - di un'altra Luna Saturniana (il che non è, dato che conosciamo la geometria esistente fra CASSINI ed il Sistema di Saturno durante la ripresa), allora aremmo dovuto supporre una sua Velocità Orbitale semplicemente impossibile (troppo elevata, alle soglie della "Fuga").

Questa riflessione si basa sulla circostanza per cui l'eventuale Luna Saturniana "responsabile" del Light Streak andrebbe collocata, visto il diametro angolare apparente dell'oggetto, ad una distanza pari o superiore ai 3/3,5 milioni di Km da CASSINI.
E, come Vi apparirà ovvio, osservando l'oggetto sconosciuto da una distanza simile, l'effetto "Light Streak", considerati i 4 minuti di intervallo di tempo tra l'inizio e la fine del transito, è un effetto impossibile - laddove riferito al (teorico) movimento di un Corpo Celeste appartenente al Sistema di Saturno (in altre parole: da oltre 3 miloni di Km di distanza, il transito completo di una Luna Saturniana QUALSIASI nello spazio visivo della Sonda CASSINI NON PUO' AVVENIRE in un intervallo di tempo di soli 4 minuti e, per giunta, producendo un fenomeno di aberrazione dell'immagine quale è il Light-Streak).

L'effetto Light Streak, inoltre, non è neppure imputabile ad un movimento brusco della Sonda CASSINI la quale, come il filmato mostra benissimo, procede in modalità steady, senza evidenziare oscillazioni o repentini mutamenti di velocità e/o di rotta.

Un'ultima considerazione (ma certo non la meno importante): se ingrandite il Light Streak, vedrete che esso è formato da un oggetto luminoso in movimento e da un artefatto da sovrasaturazione cagionato dall'oggetto stesso (il quale, ovviamente, è luminosissimo).
Ora, dato e premesso che l'oggetto più luminoso del Sistema Saturniano è proprio Encelado ed Encelado - che, durante questa ripresa, era (relativamente, come ovvio, ma) sicuramente più VICINO a CASSINI di quanto non lo fosse nè lo potesse essere un'altra ed ipotetica Luna Saturniana esistente sullo sfondo ed in transito nel campo visivo dell'Orbiter - NON PRESENTA l'esistenza di artifact da sovrasaturazione (sovraesposizione) su di sè, COME SARA' MAI POSSIBILE GIUSTIFICARE (logicamente e fisicamente, ergo "otticamente") l'esistenza di questi artifacts in un ALTRO OGGETTO CELESTE, DIVERSO DA ENCELADO - ma comunque roccioso -, MOLTO PIU' LONTANO E DI ALBEDO PER FORZA INFERIORE?

Risposta: NON E' POSSIBILE.

Conclusioni: il Light Streak è l'evidenza del transito, nel campo visivo della Sonda CASSINI (ed a distanza indeterminata dalla medesima), di un Oggetto Sconosciuto (OVNI o UFO, come volete) avente una luminosità elevatissima ed una traiettoria, come si può vedere esaminando il GIF ed i singoli frames che lo formano, NON lineare (non regolare).24 commentiMareKromium04/26/12 at 13:08walthari: http://www.nationalgeographic.it/ scienza/ spazio/...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/26/12 at 05:15paolocf1963: Gasp! Grazie Eli! La mia autostima ? aumentata sen...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/26/12 at 04:112di7: Bhe Doc... che direi.... bravissimo!!! Effettivame...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/25/12 at 20:39MareKromium: Beh, io mi sbilancio (tanto, nella peggiore delle ...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/25/12 at 18:142di7: Esatto, la pi? grande ? Rhea! ...manca la pi? picc...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 19:45paolocf1963: Ok, ci st? e mi butto: io, la pi? grande, direi ch...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 19:282di7: io le so con certezza perch? avevo controllato al ...

Saturn_and_Friends-EB-MF-LXTT.jpgSaturn and some "Friends" (Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)164 visitenessun commento9 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 15:44paolocf1963: Sapreste indovinare le due lune visibili? Non ? fa...

Janus-MF-EB-LXTT.jpgJanus (RAW Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)150 visiteJanus - apparently, and according to our Readers, one of the most interesting Celestial Bodies that we have shown and talked about on our APOD in the past - is one of the so-called "Inner Natural Satellites" of the Giant Gas-Planet Saturn; it is also called and known, sometimes, as Saturn X, and it occupies (better yet: shares) the same orbit as the Saturnian Inner Minor moon Epimetheus. This (now we know NOT infrequent) circumstance, however caused, in the past, some confusion to many astronomers which, at the time of Janus' discovery - and according to their different observations - assumed that there should have been only one Celestial Body in the orbit where Janus was spotted.
For a long time, in fact, the Astronomical Community struggled to figure out what was going on, until they realized that what they were trying to solve, was (let us use this expression) an "impossible equation": in other words, they were trying to reconcile (so-called "reductio ad unum") different observations of different and distinct Objects, on the wrong assumption that what they all were looking at, was just a single Celestial Body.
The discovery of Janus is attributed to its first observer, such as the French Astronomer Audouin Dollfus, who spotted Janus on December 15, 1966. The newly discovered Object was given the temporary designation of "S/1966 S 2". Previously, though, another Astronomer (Jean Texereau) had also photographed the very same Celestial Body (to be exact, on October 29, 1966), but without realizing the discovery! On December 18 of the same year, then, Richard Walker made a similar observation which is now credited as the discovery of Epimetheus.

Twelve years later, in October 1978, Stephen M. Larson and John W. Fountain finally realized that the 1966 observations would have been better explained by assuming that they were relative NOT to one, BUT to two distinct Objects (as we said, Janus and Epimetheus), sharing very similar (or perhaps the same, as we know now) orbits. Finally, in the AD 1980, the NASA - Voyager 1 Spacecraft confirmed that this "controversial moon" was, in fact, a couple of co-orbital Celestial Bodies.
Afterwards, Janus was observed on other occasions and given different provisional designations. It was observed, for instance, by the NASA - Pioneer 11 Probe when it passed near Saturn on September 1st, 1979. Janus was also observed by Dan Pascu on February 19, 1980 (and then provisionally designed as "S/1980 S 1") and then by John W. Fountain (once again), Stephen M. Larson (again), Harold J. Reitsema and Bradford A. Smith on the 23rd (and, this time, the observed object was, always provisionally, recorded as "S/1980 S 2").
All these Scientists, in a way and in the end, should therefore share, to various degrees, the title of Discoverer of Janus, but this "fair dispute", so far (and as far as we know), has not been solved.

As far as the physical characteristics of Janus are concerned, we can say that this relatively small moon (whose dimensions are approx. 203 × 185 × 153 Km) is extensively cratered, and a few of these craters are more than 30 Km across. The Janian Surface, as we already wrote in the past, appears to be older than Prometheus' one, but younger than Pandora's. Furthermore, if you consideri its oval (or, if you prefer, its "non-spherical") shape, its (very) low Density and relatively high Albedo, it seems logic to conclude, for the time being, that Janus should just be a porous and icy "rubble pile" (such as the final result of a cloud of Cosmic Debris that have coalesced under the influence of gravity).

The so-called Rubble Piles-type Celestial Bodies have a low density because there are, we believe, large cavities between the various "chunks" - such as fragments - of rocky material that made them up; Rubble Piles may also form when an Asteroid or a moon (which may originally be monolithic - such as "one single piece of rock") is smashed by an impact, and the shattered pieces left over by the impact, in time, fall back together, primarily due to self-gravitation (---> mutual attraction). In other words: a Celestial Body like Janus is formed, in our opinion, by a mass of different materials that cohered over time (we repeat: something like a "cloud" of Cosmic Debris - rocks, boulders, dust etc. - which, in time, due to a mutual gravitational attraction, got together until they became one - yet extremely fragile - Celestial Body).
In the light of the above considerations and assumptions, we, as IPF, believe that Janus can reasonably be assimilated, for instance (and among others), to Asteroid 25143 Itokawa or 433 Eros.6 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 12:00paolocf1963: Ahahahahahahahahah!!! MITICO BIG "G"!!!!...

Janus-MF-EB-LXTT.jpgJanus (RAW Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)150 visiteJanus - apparently, and according to our Readers, one of the most interesting Celestial Bodies that we have shown and talked about on our APOD in the past - is one of the so-called "Inner Natural Satellites" of the Giant Gas-Planet Saturn; it is also called and known, sometimes, as Saturn X, and it occupies (better yet: shares) the same orbit as the Saturnian Inner Minor moon Epimetheus. This (now we know NOT infrequent) circumstance, however caused, in the past, some confusion to many astronomers which, at the time of Janus' discovery - and according to their different observations - assumed that there should have been only one Celestial Body in the orbit where Janus was spotted.
For a long time, in fact, the Astronomical Community struggled to figure out what was going on, until they realized that what they were trying to solve, was (let us use this expression) an "impossible equation": in other words, they were trying to reconcile (so-called "reductio ad unum") different observations of different and distinct Objects, on the wrong assumption that what they all were looking at, was just a single Celestial Body.
The discovery of Janus is attributed to its first observer, such as the French Astronomer Audouin Dollfus, who spotted Janus on December 15, 1966. The newly discovered Object was given the temporary designation of "S/1966 S 2". Previously, though, another Astronomer (Jean Texereau) had also photographed the very same Celestial Body (to be exact, on October 29, 1966), but without realizing the discovery! On December 18 of the same year, then, Richard Walker made a similar observation which is now credited as the discovery of Epimetheus.

Twelve years later, in October 1978, Stephen M. Larson and John W. Fountain finally realized that the 1966 observations would have been better explained by assuming that they were relative NOT to one, BUT to two distinct Objects (as we said, Janus and Epimetheus), sharing very similar (or perhaps the same, as we know now) orbits. Finally, in the AD 1980, the NASA - Voyager 1 Spacecraft confirmed that this "controversial moon" was, in fact, a couple of co-orbital Celestial Bodies.
Afterwards, Janus was observed on other occasions and given different provisional designations. It was observed, for instance, by the NASA - Pioneer 11 Probe when it passed near Saturn on September 1st, 1979. Janus was also observed by Dan Pascu on February 19, 1980 (and then provisionally designed as "S/1980 S 1") and then by John W. Fountain (once again), Stephen M. Larson (again), Harold J. Reitsema and Bradford A. Smith on the 23rd (and, this time, the observed object was, always provisionally, recorded as "S/1980 S 2").
All these Scientists, in a way and in the end, should therefore share, to various degrees, the title of Discoverer of Janus, but this "fair dispute", so far (and as far as we know), has not been solved.

As far as the physical characteristics of Janus are concerned, we can say that this relatively small moon (whose dimensions are approx. 203 × 185 × 153 Km) is extensively cratered, and a few of these craters are more than 30 Km across. The Janian Surface, as we already wrote in the past, appears to be older than Prometheus' one, but younger than Pandora's. Furthermore, if you consideri its oval (or, if you prefer, its "non-spherical") shape, its (very) low Density and relatively high Albedo, it seems logic to conclude, for the time being, that Janus should just be a porous and icy "rubble pile" (such as the final result of a cloud of Cosmic Debris that have coalesced under the influence of gravity).

The so-called Rubble Piles-type Celestial Bodies have a low density because there are, we believe, large cavities between the various "chunks" - such as fragments - of rocky material that made them up; Rubble Piles may also form when an Asteroid or a moon (which may originally be monolithic - such as "one single piece of rock") is smashed by an impact, and the shattered pieces left over by the impact, in time, fall back together, primarily due to self-gravitation (---> mutual attraction). In other words: a Celestial Body like Janus is formed, in our opinion, by a mass of different materials that cohered over time (we repeat: something like a "cloud" of Cosmic Debris - rocks, boulders, dust etc. - which, in time, due to a mutual gravitational attraction, got together until they became one - yet extremely fragile - Celestial Body).
In the light of the above considerations and assumptions, we, as IPF, believe that Janus can reasonably be assimilated, for instance (and among others), to Asteroid 25143 Itokawa or 433 Eros.6 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 11:27Gianluigi: Tutto sto sbattimento per il platino, rispetto ad ...

Janus-MF-EB-LXTT.jpgJanus (RAW Natural Colors; credits for the additional process. and color.: Elisabetta Bonora and Marco Faccin - Lunexit Team)150 visiteJanus - apparently, and according to our Readers, one of the most interesting Celestial Bodies that we have shown and talked about on our APOD in the past - is one of the so-called "Inner Natural Satellites" of the Giant Gas-Planet Saturn; it is also called and known, sometimes, as Saturn X, and it occupies (better yet: shares) the same orbit as the Saturnian Inner Minor moon Epimetheus. This (now we know NOT infrequent) circumstance, however caused, in the past, some confusion to many astronomers which, at the time of Janus' discovery - and according to their different observations - assumed that there should have been only one Celestial Body in the orbit where Janus was spotted.
For a long time, in fact, the Astronomical Community struggled to figure out what was going on, until they realized that what they were trying to solve, was (let us use this expression) an "impossible equation": in other words, they were trying to reconcile (so-called "reductio ad unum") different observations of different and distinct Objects, on the wrong assumption that what they all were looking at, was just a single Celestial Body.
The discovery of Janus is attributed to its first observer, such as the French Astronomer Audouin Dollfus, who spotted Janus on December 15, 1966. The newly discovered Object was given the temporary designation of "S/1966 S 2". Previously, though, another Astronomer (Jean Texereau) had also photographed the very same Celestial Body (to be exact, on October 29, 1966), but without realizing the discovery! On December 18 of the same year, then, Richard Walker made a similar observation which is now credited as the discovery of Epimetheus.

Twelve years later, in October 1978, Stephen M. Larson and John W. Fountain finally realized that the 1966 observations would have been better explained by assuming that they were relative NOT to one, BUT to two distinct Objects (as we said, Janus and Epimetheus), sharing very similar (or perhaps the same, as we know now) orbits. Finally, in the AD 1980, the NASA - Voyager 1 Spacecraft confirmed that this "controversial moon" was, in fact, a couple of co-orbital Celestial Bodies.
Afterwards, Janus was observed on other occasions and given different provisional designations. It was observed, for instance, by the NASA - Pioneer 11 Probe when it passed near Saturn on September 1st, 1979. Janus was also observed by Dan Pascu on February 19, 1980 (and then provisionally designed as "S/1980 S 1") and then by John W. Fountain (once again), Stephen M. Larson (again), Harold J. Reitsema and Bradford A. Smith on the 23rd (and, this time, the observed object was, always provisionally, recorded as "S/1980 S 2").
All these Scientists, in a way and in the end, should therefore share, to various degrees, the title of Discoverer of Janus, but this "fair dispute", so far (and as far as we know), has not been solved.

As far as the physical characteristics of Janus are concerned, we can say that this relatively small moon (whose dimensions are approx. 203 × 185 × 153 Km) is extensively cratered, and a few of these craters are more than 30 Km across. The Janian Surface, as we already wrote in the past, appears to be older than Prometheus' one, but younger than Pandora's. Furthermore, if you consideri its oval (or, if you prefer, its "non-spherical") shape, its (very) low Density and relatively high Albedo, it seems logic to conclude, for the time being, that Janus should just be a porous and icy "rubble pile" (such as the final result of a cloud of Cosmic Debris that have coalesced under the influence of gravity).

The so-called Rubble Piles-type Celestial Bodies have a low density because there are, we believe, large cavities between the various "chunks" - such as fragments - of rocky material that made them up; Rubble Piles may also form when an Asteroid or a moon (which may originally be monolithic - such as "one single piece of rock") is smashed by an impact, and the shattered pieces left over by the impact, in time, fall back together, primarily due to self-gravitation (---> mutual attraction). In other words: a Celestial Body like Janus is formed, in our opinion, by a mass of different materials that cohered over time (we repeat: something like a "cloud" of Cosmic Debris - rocks, boulders, dust etc. - which, in time, due to a mutual gravitational attraction, got together until they became one - yet extremely fragile - Celestial Body).
In the light of the above considerations and assumptions, we, as IPF, believe that Janus can reasonably be assimilated, for instance (and among others), to Asteroid 25143 Itokawa or 433 Eros.6 commentiMareKromium04/24/12 at 11:27paolocf1963: ...Si, va bene, ho capito. Ne riparliamo - visti i...

920 immagini su 77 pagina(e)