Has anyone heard about the possible artificial structures on the asteroid Vesta?

Nasa's Dawn spacecraft has recently approached the second most massive asteroid in the belt and there are pictures which show a decidedly unique crater

http://www.ufodigest.com/article/strange-structures-asteroid-vesta

I can't vouch for this particular website but there's a good image with a close up. Googling 'Vesta asteroid structures' yields other results.

I was just wondering how widely-known this is and if anyone has any thoughts or opinions to share.

cheers

Nobody, huh?

Very hard to see what it is.
Interesting though.
What is the hypothesis?

As I see it the argument is (not saying I believe one way or the other) that the impact crater [crudley] circled in these pics is distinct from all the other 'natural' looking craters. Regardless, it defintely does look different, more artifical than the others.

And yet, dependent upon, like all the
other craters, whatever impacted it.

I've read about artificial structures on other moons and asteroids including the two moons of mars.

The pentagon shape is a shape that is sometimes natural in nature. No telling what caused that one.

The two moons of mars are said to be moons that were captured asteroids. They are not made of material common to mars. One of the moons is being drawn closer to the mars surface and will eventually be destroyed, and the other one is orbiting wider and wider and will eventually escape its orbit.

That is what I saw in the Discovery channel series called "How the universe works."

Yes, all manner of pure geometric shapes are created by simple physical processes.

Plus, the resolution of that photo is too low to say very much. The round shapes look like the kind of roundness one gets when something small is out of focus.

I haven't seen the pics (I'm more into political conspiracy theories when I want my fill of scare). But one thing is for sure: If it is irregular as a crater, then it's not an impact crater.

Impact craters are all circular and regularly shaped.

Try throwing a rock or anything into water, at any angle to the water surface. The reimpact will always go UP, away from the centre of gravity of the planet, and the crater (water rings around the stone you throw in) are always circular. If you want to do this into mud, loose mud, you will see the same, always, no matter what shape the thrown in object is, no matter how its relative density relates to the mud, no matter at what speed and in what direction it is thrown in.

The absolute invariance of circularity in a viscous material around an impact sight is very hard to prove with mathematical methods, but no discrepancy has been found so far in the history of human observance of impact craters and stones or other objects hitting water. So the math research to prove this has been tardy in the making. It's still not here.

So irregularly schaped craters are not impact creaters. Could be volcanic, or simply that the heavenly body forgot to wipe after going to the washroom.

This gave Einstein one food for thought when he created the specific relativity model. He saw that when fishing-bird wings tips touched the water surface of a calm lake, the water waves sped out of the impact point at the same speed, no matter how fast the bird was flying, or in what direction.

This gave the first idea to young Albrecht that light may be somewhat disengaged in its speed and direction from the body's speed and direction from which the light emanates. Later he asserted that the disengagement is absolute, not varying. And this further created the idea of an "absolute reference" for speed and direction in the universe. You see, Newton stated that all speed and direction are independent form a central reference point, and they are only meaningful when a speed is measured between two objects. One object alone in the universe, according to Newton, has an undecidable speed, or maybe none, or zero. (Careful: zero speed is not the same as 'no speed'. zero speed can be between two objects, or for an object whose reference point is itself. 'No speed' can't possibly exist between two bodies. If there are two bodies, speed (even if zero) must exist. If you take a single body in the universe, it has zero speed as referenced to itself, or no speed, coz there is nothing else to reference it to.)

The relativity theory done away with the relative speed, and declared an absolute speed, that of light, to which all other movement can be related to. It also created an absolute reference, to which all bodies's movements can be referred to. This reference is not a point, but a sort of immovable space, which is full of grid patterns, which curve when something of mass is in it, and curve differently when something of mass moves in it.

That's the basic bread and butter in A.E.'s theory of Relativity. It all started with observing that waves move at an equal speed in a given liquid medium, no matter what impacts it at what speed and from what direction.

I finally looked at the picture.

It's the other half of the hat of Mickey Mouse. This proves, at least to me, that the movies of Walt Disney contain as much cosmic truth and wisdom as his movies do.

that's nothin'

I'm not sure if you are joking or not. They don't actually do that.



gives the celerity of a wave from a force such as wind where

c = phase speed;
λ = wavelength;
d = water depth;
g = acceleration due to gravity at the Earth's surface.

Impact waves are different and are governed initially by F=MA.

A large impact can create wave celerity of hundreds of miles per hour. The waves would be of various wavelengths and frenquencies with corresponding different celerity.

It is my belief and understanding that AE understood wave theory pretty well.

What I don't understand is why everyone who sees an image of a man with a beard or a woman with a blanket on her head they think they are seeing Jesus or Mary.




It could just be George Harrison.

One hopes we get to the point of putting artificial cities in the craters of Vesta...

Gotta put about 4 billion people somewhere.

time for the human race to expand.

Vesta would be a good place to start.

The geology of Vespa may only be partially disassociated with inclusions of other chunks of asteroids. An impact crater which would normally be roundish and smooth may look like a chocolate chip cookie if it had large chunks of iron imbedded at shallow depths.

Vespa appears to be large enough for the core to melt from radiation like the Earth and form layers of crust, core, etc., but maybe not quite. The crater may look unusual because it occurs at a mix of unusual materials such as a combination of silica rocks and iron.

HOLY CHEESES!

^this

But i seen better, still....

I do not see any reason to believe it is artificial.