New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Jupiter Moon Just a 'Pile of Rubble'

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The Galileo spacecraft, which was launched 13 years ago, is scheduled to crash into Jupiter in September 2003. On its final flyby of the planet last month, the probe came within 160 kilometers of Amalthea, one of Jupiter's many moons. Findings from that encounter, reported this week at the fall meeting of the American Geophysical Union, indicate that the strangely-shaped inner moon is full of empty space. "The density is unexpectedly low," notes John D. Anderson of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). "Amalthea is apparently a loosely packed pile of rubble."

Previous Galileo images of Amalthea allowed researchers to determine the volume of the 270-kilometer-wide moon. With the new data, the NASA team calculated its density and determined that overall, the moon is about as dense as ice. But the conditions surrounding Jupiter do not suggest an icy composition. Instead, the scientists posit that the Jovian moon consists of a large collection of solid chunks with empty gaps between them. "It's probably boulder-size or larger pieces just touching each other, not pressing hard together," Anderson says. The results indicate that Jupiter's inner moons survived some tumultuous times. According to Torrence Johnson of JPL, "Amalthea may have formed originally as one piece, but then was busted to bits by collisions."

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe