Nysa might be three rocks stuck together

Make a confidence-weighted diagram: a diagram that states its own confidence on its own face. Solid lines and solid fills for what was directly observed. Dashed or ghosted for what is inferred or still argued over. The relationship is written along the line, not parked in a legend. The uncertainty is part of the picture, not a footnote at the bottom. One still image, 4:3 landscape, briefed for a GPT Image 2 class model, whose real ratio list is 1:1, 4:3, 3:4, 16:9, 9:16, 3:2 and 2:3. FACT (locked, build on it, do not re-research): Lowell Observatory announced on 29 July 2026 that asteroid (44) Nysa may be the first known three-lobed world. The study is titled Unmasking (44) Nysa: Evidence for a Trilobate Structure, and the lead author is Kate Minker of Lowell Observatory. Nysa is one of the brightest and largest asteroids in the main belt that have an enstatite-like, E-type surface, and it has been studied for more than a century. Note the scoping: that superlative is about E-type asteroids, and Nysa is nowhere near the largest asteroid overall, so do not print or imply that it is. It is about 75 kilometres across. The team used the SHARK-VIS instrument on the Large Binocular Telescope in Arizona, on 15 February 2026 and 21 March 2026, and the SPHERE ZIMPOL instrument on the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope in Chile. These are the highest resolution images of Nysa ever taken. They show large surface features including two prominent valleys that appear to wrap around the asteroid's circumference, which the team reads as neck-like connections between separate lobes. The same work found a previously unknown moon, temporarily designated S/2026 (44) 1, roughly one kilometre across, orbiting at least 170 kilometres from the primary. The moon was picked out using a high-contrast imaging technique borrowed from exoplanet astronomy, and was identified independently in two separate observing campaigns. Use these figures exactly and leave out any figure we have not locked. WHAT IS NOT SETTLED, and this is the actual content of the piece, so draw it as unsettled. The team's own words are that the most likely explanation is EITHER that Nysa is a contact trinary of three connected components, OR that it is an extremely irregular coherent body unlike anything previously observed. Two formation stories are offered and neither is chosen: the shape may have come from low-velocity reaccumulation of fragments after an ancient collision, possibly before Nysa arrived where it now sits in the belt, or Nysa may be the remnant of a hit-and-run collision with a larger parent body. Future observations of the new moon will give a better mass and density and help decide between them. Do not print either story as settled. Do not print a mass, a density, an orbital period, an age, a rotation rate, a distance from the Sun, or a size for any individual lobe or neck, because none is locked here. The 75 kilometres is the whole body only, so do not divide it into three and label the pieces. The 170 kilometres is a LOWER BOUND: if it appears on the piece it must carry the words at least, and the moon's orbit must not be drawn as a determinate circle. Do not render any institutional crest, logo, seal or wordmark, and do not print any named researcher's name or likeness on the piece. GROUND (decide this, do not let the model default): a matte engineering board in oxidised copper green, with a faint hand-inked grid showing through, the surface of something drawn on a drafting table rather than rendered in a computer. The black starfield with a purple nebula is the default this brief FAILS on, and so are white technical paper, the NASA-blue infographic panel, and any photorealistic space render with lens flare. This is a drawing about what we know, not a picture of space. LIGHT: flat and even, the light of a printed plate, with no dramatic modelling. Any three-dimensional feeling must come from the drawing convention, from hatching and section lines, not from a light source. DISTANCE: the whole object at arm's length, plus at least one inset at a different scale, because the moon at one kilometre against a body at 75 kilometres cannot honestly share a frame at one scale. If you draw them together, say so on the piece. FLOOR (hard, this is the material standard): made with a real frontier image model, GPT Image 2 class or better. Flat vector, hand drawn SVG or HTML, and screenshot collage all FAIL. Stock, archive and library imagery FAILS. Text belongs to the artwork: type shares the piece's light, grain and material and reads as printed with it, never bolted on after. Submit your files individually; zipped or otherwise archived submissions will not be considered. CRAFT STANDARD (read all of it before you start). Composition: one clear focal a stranger finds in under 3 seconds, then a second layer that rewards a longer look. Legibility: this is judged first as a thumbnail on a phone, so the headline must survive at that size, and any label too small to read there should not exist. Palette: pick 2 or 3 inks and hold them. A piece with 8 colours reads as a template. Labelling: every label points at something real in the image, no floating decoration. Finish: real material behaviour carried consistently across the whole frame, including the type. DIRECTION is yours. FOCAL: the difference between seen and suspected. A stranger should be able to point at the part of this picture that was directly seen through a telescope, and the part that is a good argument about what was seen, without reading a key. Note that even the seen part is an adaptive-optics reconstruction rather than a snapshot, so do not signal certainty by rendering one region photographically. Certainty is carried by the drawing convention. YOUR CALL: how you encode confidence. Solid against dashed is the obvious grammar and is allowed. Weight, opacity, a second ink, or drawing the inferred parts as an unfinished pencil under a finished ink are all stronger if you can hold them. Also yours: whether both competing formation stories appear, or only the shape question. SURPRISE ME: the obvious take caps your score, the boldest true take wins. The obvious take is a grey potato-shaped rock floating on black with an arrow pointing at a dot. JUDGED on wow, then subject, surprise, taste, craft, material. A diagram that makes a stranger enjoy not knowing something beats a prettier one that pretends to know. NOT THIS: no spacecraft, no astronauts, no asteroid mining, no impact-on-Earth framing, no glowing sci-fi interface, no radar sweep, no purple space haze, no lens flare, no scale bar as the only reference. Do not draw three neat spheres in a row, because the shape being argued about is exactly what you would be inventing. TEXT BUDGET: one headline that states the takeaway and names the subject, plus up to 5 small labels, only if they stay legible at phone size. NOTHING ABOUT HOW THE PIECE WAS MADE GOES ON THE PIECE: no process notes, no verification lines, no model or tool credit, no house credit, no timing or deadline text. Do not render this brief's section labels (FACT, SCOPE, FLOOR, GROUND, FOCAL, NOT THIS and the rest) or the NOT THIS list as type on the piece. Credit your model in the submission text instead. DELIVER: one finished hero image at 4:3, plus concept-note.md and sources.md. The IMAGE itself must be self contained, with no URLs, QR codes or watermarks rendered on it; put your source links in sources.md. Name your model in the submission text.