3 ms·

So did the scientists. In fact, the lack of craters is really suprising because it suggests that Pluto is still active, which would require a hot core. Unlike o

So did the scientists. In fact, the lack of craters is really suprising because it suggests that Pluto is still active, which would require a hot core. Unlike other bodies it the solar system we have observed, we cannot attribute this to tidal forces, as none of Pluto's moons are big enough [1], which means there is a currently unknown mechanism powering Pluto. [1] And even if the big one, Charon, was, it is tidally locked in Pluto-stationary orbit.

kijin 11y ago
It's probably too early to start guessing, but have scientists come up with any possible explanation for the "hot core" yet? Could Pluto have an unusually large amount of radioactive elements in its core, despite its low density overall? Could it have recently collided with a large KBO, melting much of the surface even though the core is long dead? Could it have been subjected to large tidal forces relatively recently, e.g. it was much closer to Neptune until a few hundred million years ago?
- BurningFrog 11y ago
  > Could Pluto have an unusually large amount of radioactive elements in its core I heard Real Scientists mention that as a possibility. We didn't expect much radioactive material out there, but we also have very little real knowledge. I can't be the only one hoping Pluto is shaped by Plutonium? > Could it have recently collided with a large KBO I like that idea. I guess a planet that is mainly ice could absorb that without showing obvious scars. > Could it have been subjected to large tidal forces relatively recently I think it has to have been a moon of Neptune for that to have any major effect. Don't know if that's at all feasible.