Is it a moon? Is it a dwarf planet? Well, it's Charon, and it could well be both!

Charon's discovery
The story of Charon's discovery takes us back to 1978 – a time when even astronomers were still thinking that Pluto was a planet. Little was known about Pluto and its system, but all that was about to change in the decades that followed.
On the morning of June 22, American astronomer James Christy already had his head whirling around. If you were under the impression that he was zeroing in on the solution for an astronomical problem, you couldn't be further from the truth. Christy was sharpening his plans to move his house, getting ready for a week's leave from the U.S. Naval Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona – his workplace.
It was under these circumstances that Robert Harrington, his boss, handed him a set of six photographs of Pluto. Christy and Harrington were looking to refine Pluto's orbit around the sun – a journey that takes Pluto 248 Earth years.
Pluto's average distance from the sun is 5.9 billion km. The technology available at that time meant that even the best photographs of it hardly revealed anything. What's more, these six images – acquired in pairs over three nights in the month between April 13 and May 12 – were labelled as 'defective.'
Odd blobs
The reason why these pictures were labelled thus owed to the fact that they revealed Pluto to be oddly elongated. Viewing them under a microscope, Christy noticed that the fuzzy blob that was to be Pluto stretched in a northern direction in two of those pairs, while the final pair showed a southward direction. The defects were attributed either to atmospheric distortion or improper optical alignment in the telescope used for observations.
After ruling out an explosion on Pluto as an unlikely explanation – especially as it lasted a month – Christy searched for other plausible reasons. There was a chance that Pluto itself was irregular in shape. Or could there be an unseen moon, even though one of his former professors, celebrated Dutch-American astronomer Gerard Kuiper, had searched for exactly the same decades earlier without any success?
When Christy went over to the archives to check through older plates from 1965 onwards, there it was... the same elongation. What's more, all these images had also been dismissed as defective on every occasion.
Correct conclusions
Christy and Harrington, however, realised that they were onto something. By reviewing all the images with the elongations, they were able to state that the bulge occurred with a predictable frequency. This frequency of the unseen moon's orbital period – 6.4 Earth days – matched with what astronomers believed to be Pluto's rotational period, suggesting a synchronously locked binary system.
The duo ruled out other possible reasons for the bulge and concluded correctly that Pluto had another companion at a distance of 19,640 km. The discovery of 'S/1978 P1' was announced by them through the International Astronomical Union (IAU) on July 7 and their findings were published in the Astronomical Journal.
What started out as reviewing six defective images, served as the seeds for a whole new discovery. As Christy himself once pointed out, 'Discovery is where the scientist touches nature in its least predictable aspect.'
What's in a name?
As the discoverer, Christy wanted to exercise his rights for naming Pluto's companion. And he had his mind set on naming it after his wife.
The Naval Observatory he worked for had suggested the name Persephone, the wife of Hades. Hades, the god of the underworld in Greek mythology, was the equivalent of the Roman god Pluto after which it is named.
As luck would have it, Christy came across a reference to Charon, a boatman who ferried the dead across a river in the underworld to Hades. Charon's close mythical association with Hades, or Pluto, made it a great option for the newly discovered astronomical object.
It was the perfect option for Christy as his wife's name was Charlene. In addition to sharing the first four letters, 'Char' was the nickname that friends and family used to call his wife. Just like how protons and electrons have the 'on' suffix, Christy saw Charon as 'Char' with the suffix 'on' and submitted his name.
Eclipses and occultations
By the time this name was accepted by IAU in January 1986, Pluto and Charon had a series of mutual eclipses and occultations. Studying them enabled astronomers in general, and Harrington in particular, to confirm the existence of Charon as he observed the eclipses and occultations to occur as predicted.
Observing Pluto and Charon in this manner also enabled astronomers to arrive at Charon's diameter to be about 1,200 km, while also arriving at better estimates of the size and mass of Pluto.
From a small dot in a photograph, Charon had become much much more – almost a world in its own right. It definitely meant the world to Christy in more ways than one, as he was also able to gift his wife the moon! Charlene Christy probably summed it the best when she said 'A lot of husbands promise their wives the moon, but Jim actually delivered.'
Charon fact sheet
Most of what we know about Charon, or even Pluto for that matter, is thanks to NASA's New Horizons mission. Approved in 2001 as the first flyby of Pluto and its largest moon Charon, it was launched in January 2006. This was months before IAU's decision in August the same year to demote Pluto's designation from a planet to a dwarf planet. Despite the fact that Pluto was plutoed, the mission went on, providing us invaluable information.
Before New Horizons' closest approach to Pluto on July 14, 2015, the spacecraft captured plenty of images of Charon. While the images revealed a striking reddish north (top) polar region, Charon's colour palette wasn't as diverse as Pluto's. The origins of this red colouration is a mystery for now and no other icy object in the solar system sports a similar feature.
Charon is 1,214 km across and is at a distance of 19,640 km from Pluto. As Pluto's equatorial diameter is about 2,377 km, Charon is nearly half the size of Pluto. This makes it the largest known satellite relative to its parent body for most astronomers. It is this same size, however, that forces other astronomers to consider Pluto and Charon as a double dwarf planet system.
Charon's orbit takes 6.4 Earth days to go around Pluto. Charon neither rises or sets, however, but instead hovers near the same region on Pluto's surface. The same surfaces of Charon and Pluto always face each other due to a phenomenon called mutual tidal locking.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

First Post

an hour ago

• First Post

Will humans go extinct if people stopped having babies?

In many countries, women are having fewer babies than their previous generations. As birth rates fall, how long will it take for humans to vanish if people do not reproduce anymore? read more Very few people live beyond a century. So, if no one had babies anymore, there would probably be no humans left on Earth within 100 years. But first, the population would shrink as older folks died and no one was being born. Even if all births were to suddenly cease, this decline would start slowly. Eventually there would not be enough young people coming of age to do essential work, causing societies throughout the world to quickly fall apart. Some of these breakdowns would be in humanity's ability to produce food, provide health care and do everything else we all rely on. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Food would become scarce even though there would be fewer people to feed. As an anthropology professor who has spent his career studying human behaviour, biology and cultures, I readily admit that this would not be a pretty picture. Eventually, civilisation would crumble. It's likely that there would not be many people left within 70 or 80 years, rather than 100, due to shortages of food, clean water, prescription drugs and everything else that you can easily buy today and need to survive. A catastrophe in the making To be sure, an abrupt halt in births is highly unlikely unless there's a global catastrophe. Here's one potential scenario, which writer Kurt Vonnegut explored in his novel 'Galapagos': A highly contagious disease could render all people of reproductive age infertile – meaning that no one would be capable of having babies anymore. Another possibility might be a nuclear war that no one survives – a topic that's been explored in many scary movies and books. A lot of these works are science fiction involving a lot of space travel. Others seek to predict a less fanciful Earth-bound future where people can no longer reproduce easily, causing collective despair and the loss of personal freedom for those who are capable of having babies. Two of my favourite books along these lines are ' The Handmaid's Tale,' by Canadian writer Margaret Atwood, and ' The Children of Men,' by British writer PD James. They are dystopian stories, meaning that they take place in an unpleasant future with a great deal of human suffering and disorder. And both have become the basis of television series and movies. In the 1960s and 1970s, many people also worried that there would be too many people on Earth, which would cause different kinds of catastrophes. Those scenarios also became the focus of dystopian books and movies. Population to touch 10 billion To be sure, the number of people in the world is still growing, even though the pace of that growth has slowed down. Experts who study population changes predict that the total will peak at 10 billion in the 2080s, up from 8 billion today and 4 billion in 1974. The US population currently stands at 342 million. That's about 200 million more people than were here when I was born in the 1930s. This is a lot of people, but both worldwide and in the US these numbers could gradually fall if more people die than are born. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD About 3.6 million babies were born in the US in 2024, down from 4.1 million in 2004. Meanwhile, about 3.3 million people died in 2022, up from 2.4 million 20 years earlier. The population will peak at 10 billion in the 2080s. Pixabay/Representational Image One thing that will be important as these patterns change is whether there's a manageable balance between young people and older people. That's because the young often are the engine of society. They tend to be the ones to implement new ideas and produce everything we use. Also, many older people need help from younger people with basic activities, like cooking and getting dressed. And a wide range of jobs are more appropriate for people under 65 rather than those who have reached the typical age for retirement. Falling fertility rates In many countries, women are having fewer children throughout their reproductive lives than used to be the case. That reduction is the most stark in several countries, including India and South Korea. The declines in birth rates occurring today are largely caused by people choosing not to have any children or as many as their parents did. That kind of population decline can be kept manageable through immigration from other countries, but cultural and political concerns often stop that from happening. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD At the same time, many men are becoming less able to father children due to fertility problems. If that situation gets much worse, it could contribute to a steep decline in population. Will humans go extinct? Our species, Homo sapiens, has been around for at least 200,000 years. That's a long time, but like all animals on Earth we are at risk of becoming extinct. Consider what happened to the Neanderthals, a close relative of Homo sapiens. They first appeared at least 400,000 years ago. Our modern human ancestors overlapped for a while with the Neanderthals, who gradually declined to become extinct about 40,000 years ago. Some scientists have found evidence that modern humans were more successful at reproducing our numbers than the Neanderthal people. This occurred when Homo sapiens became more successful at providing food for their families and also having more babies than the Neanderthals. If humans were to go extinct, it could open up opportunities for other animals to flourish on Earth. On the other hand, it would be sad for humans to go away because we would lose all of the great achievements people have made, including in the arts and science. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In my view, we need to take certain steps to ensure that we have a long future on our own planet. These include controlling climate change and avoiding wars. Also, we need to appreciate the fact that having a wide array of animals and plants makes the planet healthy for all creatures, including our own species. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

NDTV

2 hours ago

• NDTV

Mysterious "Dead" Satellite Sends Powerful Signal to Earth After Decades

Scientists received a mysterious radio pulse that came from a satellite that had been dead for decades. The signal was so powerful that for a moment it outshone all other objects in the sky, New Scientist reported. The radio pulse was blasted from a defunct satellite, Relay 2, which was a NASA experimental communications satellite launched in 1964. It was part of the Relay programme, which consisted of two satellites, Relay 1 and Relay 2, designed to test communications in medium Earth orbit. Both satellites were funded by NASA. The US-based space agency stopped using it in 1965, and the technical and electronic devices stopped working altogether by 1967. Last year on June 13, scientists using the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) detected a small but powerful flash that lasted less than 30 nanoseconds. Clancy James at Curtin University in Australia and his colleagues were shocked as the signal came from our galaxy. "If it's nearby, we can study it through optical telescopes really easily, so we got all excited, thinking maybe we'd discovered a new pulsar or some other object," says Clancy as quoted by New Scientist. "This was an incredibly powerful radio pulse that vastly outshone everything else in the sky for a very short amount of time," Clancy added. Scientists studied the source and found that the signal came from within 20,000km of Earth. After comparing it with the locations of known satellites, they found that the pulse came from the Relay 2 satellite. As the satellite has been dead for nearly six decades, scientists believe that the signal must have come from an external factor, such as an electrostatic discharge or a micrometeorite. Either it was a spark-like flash that originated from a build-up of electricity, or it was a plasma discharge following a micrometeoroid impact. "In a world where there is a lot of space debris and there are more small, low-cost satellites with limited protection from electrostatic discharge (ESD), this radio detection may ultimately offer a new technique to evaluate electrostatic discharges in space," Karen Aplin at the University of Bristol, UK, said as quoted. The research, whose preprint is available on arXiv, has been accepted for publication in The Astrophysical Journal.

Indian Express

9 hours ago

• Indian Express

22 chirps = 17°C?: How crickets became nature's living thermometers

Did you know that the cricket chirp is nature's indicator of the weather? According to the official website of Reconnect With Nature, American scientist Amos Dolbear first described this quirk of nature in 1897. In his paper 'The Cricket as a Thermometer,' he observed that the muscles crickets use to chirp move more easily in warmer temperatures than they do in cool weather. This correlation was so reliable that he was able to write a formula that connected ambient temperature to cricket chirp rates — popularly known as the Dolbear's law. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Dolbear's law states that temperature in degrees Fahrenheit is roughly equal to the number of cricket chirps in 15 seconds plus 40. Here's some cricket math: If you count 22 cricket chirps in 15 seconds, it is roughly 62 degree Fahrenheit (or 16.67 degree Celsius), because 22+40=62. If you count 35 chirps, it's about 75 degrees out (or 23.89 degree Celsius), because 35+40=75. Based on these simple equations, you can see that crickets chirp faster in warmer temperatures than they do in lower temperatures. The reason a cricket's chirp rate changes with the temperature is because they are cold-blooded, or ectothermic, meaning their body temperature is the same as that of their external environment. Chirping requires their muscles to contract, and temperature is a factor in how quickly the chemical reaction necessary for muscle contraction can occur. Muscles contract faster in warmer temperatures, allowing them to chirp at a more frequent pace. According to the Reconnect With Nature website, it is believed, however, that Dolbear was listening to a snowy tree cricket, a species that has earned itself the nickname 'thermometer cricket.' While cricket math is a useful indicator of the temperature, keep in mind the crickets generally don't chirp when the temperature is below 55 degrees Fahrenheit or above 100 degrees Fahrenheit, according to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Plus a cricket's chirping rate can be affected by hunger, age, mating success and competition from other male crickets. Although we can derive useful, if not exactly precise, information about the temperature from a cricket's chirps, that's not the point of the racket. The real reason crickets chirp is because the males attract a mate. The process of chirping is called stridulation, and crickets create their signature sound by rubbing their wings together. When they want to chirp, they raise their wings, and a structure called a scraper on one wing moves across a structure called a file on the other wing. The process of rubbing these two structures together is similar to what happens when you run a finger along the teeth of a fine-tooth comb.