The same applies to Neptune...
Printable View
The same applies to Neptune...
I think all these planets are still mostly unexplored. The scientists have to perfectionate their tools and instruments first. A lot of expertise and money is spent on it.
The more I think of it, the more odd it is that there are no plans that I know of to send probes to these ice giants and their moons. Puzzling...
The last visit was 40 years ago with the two Voyager flybys. They are still in the sun's field of gravity but eventually will pull clear of the sun and continue outward. Voyager 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_1
Voyager 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_2
These both carried messages to any humans who might be out there.
Jupiter’s aurora presents a powerful mystery
"Jupiter has the most powerful aurora in the solar system, so the team was not surprised that electric potentials play a role in their generation. What’s puzzling the researchers, Mauk said, is that despite the magnitudes of these potentials at Jupiter, they are observed only sometimes and are not the source of the most intense auroras, as they are at Earth."
https://astronomynow.com/2017/09/09/...erful-mystery/
Two historical missions. The "Voyagers" employed today are technically improved I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
I wonder when, if ever, we will get any answers from people out there.
No, actually they are the two original voyagers! That is what is so amazing. 40 years later they are still in communication with NASA. Hard to believe, I know...
Jupiter needs another probe to follow up on all the was learned from Cassini.
https://www.universetoday.com/137158...ashing-saturn/
The Huygens Lander was an interesting addition to all the data collected over several years by Cassini.
http://www.astronomy.com/news/2017/0...olliding-moons
Well we learned a bit more about Uranus and its many moons!
My subscription to space.com yields its first very interesting post on Cassini: https://www.space.com/38151-cassini-...to-saturn.html
Jupiter moon(s) follow-ups:
NASA: Europa launch 2020... https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nas...o-design-phase
... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Clipper
ESA: JUICE's launch 2022... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupite...Moons_Explorer
Thanks for those links, tailor, all adding extra useful information.
This post should come after and not before the other one. It seems one has to be careful where one buys eclipse glasses.
Eclipse Aftermath Brings Lawsuit Against Amazon
By: Javier Barbuzano | September 6, 2017
Counterfeit eclipse glasses created great confusion in the days prior to the solar eclipse. Luckily few cases of eye damage have been reported.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astro...awsuit-amazon/
Poor Cassini!But I suppose they donīt have other uses for it. Iīm curious about the images they are going to release.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
See the links in posts 1130 and 1131 :)
Sorry, DW. I mean the very last ones they intend to release tomorrow, 15.09.
Yes, that will be interesting. This, I suppose: https://www.universetoday.com/137158...ashing-saturn/
Yes, thatīs what I mean. Tomorrow or on Saturday they will probably release the last images.
https://www.universetoday.com/137154...-live-forever/
It is clear that a further mission will be sent to examine the two moons, Enceladus and Europa, both of which have seas.
See also this: http://earthsky.org/space/video-cass...tan-atmosphere
Additional link about the end of the Cassini mission:
https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov
I shouldnīt wonder if they make a science fiction movie about the mission.
One thing I am learning from these researches is that the composition and the atmosphere of the planets varies a lot from one to another.
Yes, the variety among "hot jupiters" is staggering. See this post: https://www.universetoday.com/137199...et-eats-light/
https://www.universetoday.com/137205...-solar-system/ presents a much more coherent theory of the way solar systems develop, based on the fact that a "planet 9" or "Planet X" exists. The first designation assumes that is a dwarf planet, an idea that has already been rejected by the new definition which re-classifies Pluto as a planet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_Nine. So "planet X" is probably less controversial.
They are messing around a lot with Pluto these days. I consider him a planet, because in astrology is a very influential one.
Here some more pictures taken by the Cassini expedition:
Farewell, Cassini: Gorgeous Final Photos Are a Fitting Send-Off for Saturn Probe
https://www.space.com/38174-cassini-...ll-photos.html
http://earthsky.org/space/pitch-blac...lanet-wasp-12b This is a similar post to the one above 1142, but more detail.
Amazing image of this dark planet!
Yes, it is so hot that it absorbs the light, rather than reflects it! Not that I understand why this should be...
Astronomers couldn't care less how important astronomical objects are to astrologists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danik 2016
So *within astronomy*, is Pluto still considered a planet? A quick Google search seems to indicate there are still two camps. In 2006, when it was demoted by some astronomers, the main argument was that a larger Kuiper belt object (Eris) existed. But they weren't *certain* it was larger! Now it appears that Pluto is actually larger, and is the largest object in the Kuiper belt. Another determining factor for a planet, according to some, was that it should have cleared its orbit of other objects. As there were all these Kuiper objects, Pluto hadn't done this, ergo it wasn't a planet. But, someone pointed out, with all these asteroids & comets coming near the Earth, obviously the Earth hadn't cleared its orbit, so it wasn't a planet! To me, it would seem reasonable to keep Pluto as a planet, and then define a planet as anything at least as large as Pluto. (They still reckon Eris is more massive, so *size* should be the determining factor :). But the whole problem here seems to be in finding a set of really good reasons for calling something a planet or not...)
I am not at all sure what the new definition of a planet is. What has been decided exactly?
There is clearly a lot more water in the solar system that was previously thought. I thought this piece on Mars is just another example, at least of how Mars used to be in the distant past: http://earthsky.org/space/more-evide...-water-on-mars
I agree with you. I found a link to the NASA definition of planet(below).
In Astrology Pluto, the regent of Scorpio, is a planet that relates to the great changes (in people, places or situations) that irrupt from the interior. For example he is related to the earthquakes,
These seems to be be the current situation:
"The International Astronomical Union (IAU), a worldwide organization of astronomers, took on the challenge of classifying the newly found KBO (later named Eris). In 2006, the IAU passed a resolution that defined planet and established a new category, dwarf planet. Eris, Ceres, Pluto, and two more recently discovered KBOs named Haumea and Makemake, are the dwarf planets recognized by the IAU (as of July 2013). Pluto, Eris, Haumea, and Makemake are also classified as KBOs, and Ceres retains its asteroid label. There may be another 100 dwarf planets in the solar system and hundreds more in and just outside the Kuiper Belt.
Astronomers and planetary scientists did not unanimously agree with these definitions. To some it appeared that the classification scheme was designed to limit the number of planets; to others it was incomplete and the terms unclear. Some astronomers argued that location (context) is important, especially in understanding the formation and evolution of the solar system."
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/whatisaplanet
I thought the IAU had changed its definition of dwarf planet by dropping the criterion of having "cleared their orbit (?)" (whatever that may mean), but it seems they have not, just widened the definition to include more "dwarf planets". Your last paragraph (above) accurately reflects the confusion around this whole question.
The subject is still unresolved.
See the long discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAU_definition_of_planet.
And the discussion around "clearing the neighbourhood": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleari..._neighbourhood.
For me this is the key issue. Has Earth "cleared its neighbourhood"? Not according to some, and I have to say I tend to agree.
Good links, DW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
Thatīs whatīs makes current Astronomy so fascinating to me. A lot of set concepts have to be revised to explain the new discoveries.
This discussion probably will go on for a good time. I think the reason for it is that they have much more refined ways to observe the planets. The clutter in the neighborhood wasnīt taken into account before, because it hadnīt be observed.
But one mustnīt worry. If they decide sometime in the future that the earth isnīt a planet, they will find another definition for it, I think. Even basic concepts change. See the discoveries of Galileo.
Good point, Danik.
This is a quite different post, abut using nanosatellites to investigate the many smaller object (asteroids) in the asteroid belt.
See this link:https://www.universetoday.com/137253...anosatellites/
This website post looks at how it is planned to avoid collision with an asteroid, that is inevitable sooner or later:
https://www.universetoday.com/137266...eroid-mission/
Oh, and regarding Earth having "cleared its neighbourhood" (se the previous posts on this), NASA doesn't agree.
Just read this post. Absolutely amazing. I think one can sum up several of all these discoveries in two or three important ones:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
1- The space between planets and stars is filled with smaller celestial objects or fragments, some of which might be put to scientific use.
2-Celestial bodies present very different compositions and atmospheres.