Thread: Why are Ceres's poles 50 C colder than its equator, when it has no axial tilt?

1. Why are Ceres's poles 50 C colder than its equator, when it has no axial tilt?

I've been looking for an answer, and haven't found one.

2. Isn't it because it has no (that is, a very small) axial tilt?

Grant Hutchison

3. Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Isn't it because it has no (that is, a very small) axial tilt?
That would be my expectation. Always a low angle of sunlight and a good number of crater bottoms in permanent darkness.

Here, one pole is in complete darkness, the other shows a good number of craters with large dark areas:

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resourc...t-ceres-poles/

4. At the equator, a beam of sunlight one square unit in area strikes an equal area of Ceres' surface. With no axial tilt, the sun will rise to a maximum of 45 degrees above the horizon at a point halfway between the equator and either pole. At this latitude, at noon, a square unit of sunlight is spread out over an area ~41% larger, or put another way, a unit of surface there receives just 1/1.414 = ~71% of the light as at the equator. And ever less towards the poles, and more to the equator.

Of course, I've assumed Ceres shape is a sphere. Maybe it's an oblate spheroid.

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•