Astronomers concluded it is not the same and that Cassini's spot disappeared in 1708.
See full article...
See full article...
Is Jupiter’s iconic Red Spot the same one that Cassini observed in the 1600s?
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Upvote
-6
(2
/
-8)
Astronomers concluded it is not the same spot as the one Cassini previously observed and which disappeared in 1708.
Upvote
-2
(1
/
-3)
Not a likely scenario, but the idea that there is no ground on Jupiter on which to stand, and you would just keep falling until the eventual pressure and heat would kill you, is intensely terrifying.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
What puzzles me is when I DuckDuckWent for snaps just now, the Great Red Spot was positioned on the lower half but in today's Arsticle, it's always on the upper half.
1830s? Anthropogenic jovian warming.Jennifer Ouellette said:
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
To paraphrase the authors: we're not sure how it formed and not sure what sustains it, but we wrote some modeling code that says it went away and came back so we're pretty sure it's not the same spot.
Upvote
13
(15
/
-2)
Under either theory, Jupiter is super different from Earth.
As you say, Earth develops these storms all the time. We have hurricanes and typhoons starting at different places going in different directions. Multiple times a year. Occasionally, we have several happening at the same time.
Jupiter only has one.
Either it was a unicorn event that created one perpetual storm, or these storms happen all the time, but only ever one at a time, and sometimes not at all for a century. Either way, that's super different from Earth.
Upvote
14
(14
/
0)
If this spot fades and another one appears, I'll only be convinced that they're different spots if the next one appears on the opposite hemisphere.
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Albino_Boo
Ars Praefectus
It's not impossible that was no Homer at all and the works as exist today are the products of hundreds years of oral transmission.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Did everybody forget about Oval BA? Surprised it hasn't come up in the article or the comments. We saw three smaller storms coalesce into one larger storm in 2000 and then turn red in 2006. I am not an astronomer but that, to me, suggests that red spots on Jupiter may be a recurring thing and not necessarily something that never goes away. I also read somewhere that there was another even smaller red spot that got torn apart by the GRS (if I'm remembering correctly).
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
How would one distinguish them from drawings done while the spot was out-of-view on the far side of Jupiter?
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
I argue that Heraclitus had some insights on this question:
He viewed the world as constantly in flux, always "becoming" but never "being". He expressed this in sayings like "Everything flows" (Greek: πάντα ρει, panta rhei) and "No man ever steps in the same river twice"
en.wikipedia.org
He viewed the world as constantly in flux, always "becoming" but never "being". He expressed this in sayings like "Everything flows" (Greek: πάντα ρει, panta rhei) and "No man ever steps in the same river twice"
Heraclitus - Wikipedia
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
And deprive you of a perfect opportunity for a rant? Seriously?
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
Omnidirectional antenna on the probe, high sensitivity receiver on the orbiter capturing and relaying the data. If you design the probe for the explicit purpose of the dive, you can do it. The Cassini probe death dive mentioned by another respondent wasn't equipped for omni broadcast.
Omni uses more power versus a directional dish which is why we don't use it commonly for probe communications.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
katie3anderson
Smack-Fu Master, in training
This is the thing you decided was important enough to create an account and say? A complaint about a group of astronomers from Bilbao using a grant from the Basque government to research the dynamics of Jupiter's atmosphere?
(Sorry, I know I shouldn't feed the trolls...)
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
On top of that, the composition of the Spot seems value as well and that surprises me. We xcan look into the far distance realms of space and determined thr atmospheric compsition of a planet, even to the point to answer is there organic life there, but a planet in our own system and we can't stated "The Spot is composed of X, Y, Z atoms/molecules whatever".
I find this:
and this:
and this:
Likey, many possible combinations, not yet established....sigh....So much to explore, tough choices with limited funds. It is like Venus, It is as if humanity is intentionally ignoring a planet next to us in favor of looking at dwarf planet millions if not billions of milers away.
As a tax payer, I would rather my money spent on a scientific mission to Venus (or to the Red Spot) then an xx billion dollar aircraft carrier that these days has a short life span in a shooting war or multi-million dollar aircraft that do next to nothing in an urban war.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
There wouldn't have been much to discuss back then. The nature of Jupiter wasn't yet understood, so regarding the Great Red Spot, all they could do is note when they observed it, and how it looked.
We only found out for sure what the Great Red Spot was when the Voyager probes flew by Jupiter and took pictures from up close. It had already been suspected that the Spot was a cyclone, but those sharp pictures of the Spot and the eddies swirling around it, they proved it beyond any doubt. I was 14 at the time and I remember it being quite exciting!
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Makes you wonder if there is a Core - that has a bump on it, that is causing a whirlpool of sorts as the gas spins around it.
But I know nothing. If I were an AI I'd might be hallucinating. As a human, I might just be wrong :-D
But I know nothing. If I were an AI I'd might be hallucinating. As a human, I might just be wrong :-D
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
There's a perfectly good reason why we can determine atmospheric composition of extrasolar planets from telescope observations but cannot do so for planets in our own solar system: spectroscopy relies on observing the light from the planet's home star as the planet transits in front of it. We're on the wrong side of Jupiter's orbit for that to begin with, and our proximity to our star almost certainly adds a bunch of additional problems. Any reports of organic life based on spectroscopy are speculation or conjecture at best, so I wouldn't take that stuff too seriously.
I agree that it would be nice if, as a species, we diverted more of our resources away from killing one another and toward furthering our understanding of our universal neighborhood, but I've met humans; it ain't gonna happen.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
So if Jupiter is ever as big in our sky as in image “a”, we’re definitely going to die in a couple years, right? I’ve never seen it as being big enough to be confused for the moon before.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
This reminds me of a question I've had bouncing around in the back of my head for ages: are any of those video game skyboxes dominated by a large planet that occupies a quarter of the sky or more physically possible? In any of the flybys of Jovian and Saturnine moons, the gas giants are big but nowhere close to sky-filling. If you're close enough to another planetary body that it can loom enormous, are you too close to maintain a stable orbit?
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
What makes you say that Jupiter only has one storm? The Big Red Spot is certanly the largest but there's at least a dozen more. Three white storms were recorded to have formed in the 1940s and then merged some time in the year 2000 before turning red and becoming known as the Little Red Spot.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
The dissipation of the Great Red Spot is clearly caused by anthropogenic global warming, which is radiating heat out into the entire solar system. The only way to save this natural treasure for future generations is to buy more luxury electric SUVs. And all that third row seating would incidentally solve the housing crisis as well.
Upvote
-7
(0
/
-7)
I presume not all observations of Jupiter would be made at times where the Red Spot would be visible.
With Jupiter's rotation of around 10 hours, there's five hours each night where the Spot wouldn't be visible at all.
With Jupiter's rotation of around 10 hours, there's five hours each night where the Spot wouldn't be visible at all.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
That would make a nice update or expansion to this article. The article has a nice collection of drawings of the spot(s) going back to 1711 (pretty cool in itself) but nothing from the possible in-between period.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
i believe Bolton said this in context of the timeframe that this storm persist and the absence of occurrences of similar phenomena in other parts of Jupiter. it would be interesting if someone tried to find correlation between placement of the spot and Jupiter features that are underneath the easily observable cloud surface. the uniqueness of the spot would require some uniqueness of such features otherwise we would observe similar spots appear in other areas as well.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Refractors used without a star diagonal give an upside down image (and not just of planets, but of everything!). Newtonian reflectors mirror-reverse the image, or rotate the image (depending on the angle at which the focuser is located). Refractors using a 90-degree star diagonal give an image that is right-side up but mirror-reversed. A refractor using a 45-degree correct image diagonal (usually used for birding, not astronomy, because they dim the image too much) give an image that is correctly oriented in all directions (right-side up, left is left, right is right), just like binoculars do.
So where you see the Red Spot (or the major features on the Moon) depends on exactly what telescope setup you are using!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)