Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
NASA Space

James Webb Telescope Captures Surreal Images of Jupiter's Auroras (engadget.com) 31

The James Webb Space Telescope has snapped a pair of near-infrared photos showing Jupiter's polar auroras. "You can also see the planet's extremely faint rings and two of its smaller moons, Amalthea (the bright spot to the far left) and Adrastea (the dot at the left edge of the central ring)," notes Engadget. From the report: The pictures were taken using NIRCam's widefield view on July 27th. As for the trippy visuals? Astronomers created composites using several images produced with filters mapped to multiple colors (particularly visible in the image below). The Great Red Spot and other cloud formations are white as they reflect large amounts of sunlight. The observations should provide more insights into Jupiter's "inner life," according to the European Space Agency. That, in turn, could help scientists understand the behavior of gas giants beyond the Solar System.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

James Webb Telescope Captures Surreal Images of Jupiter's Auroras

Comments Filter:
  • How else would you motivate politicians to write another billion check for an oversized camera which can only take pictures of a long forgotten past and some barren planets?

  • by poptopdrop ( 6713596 ) on Tuesday August 23, 2022 @04:24AM (#62813737)

    Webb can do one thing that would change humanity's entire view of our place in the universe.

    So you'll forgive me for not getting too excited about them spending viewing time getting better pictures of Jupiter.

    • by nagora ( 177841 )

      Webb can do one thing that would change humanity's entire view of our place in the universe.

      So you'll forgive me for not getting too excited about them spending viewing time getting better pictures of Jupiter.

      It is interesting that they can see the rings so clearly when it's really not that long since they were discovered by Voyager flying past at very close range.

    • by k6mfw ( 1182893 )
      I think it's great is they scheduled scope time to look at inner solar system objects instead of limiting to just interstellar and galactic objects.
    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      It's a way to get reference info to compare to distant planets. And calibrate; it's still new.

  • by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Tuesday August 23, 2022 @08:26AM (#62813977) Homepage
    While searching for JWST information on YouTube I was astounded by the number of YouTube channels publishing blatantly false claims. The two recent topics that seem to be trending: "JWST Detects Artificial Light from Proxima B", and "JWST Proves the Big Bang didn't Happen." The former claim is absolutely bunk, and the latter misrepresents [cnet.com] statements made by a couple researchers looking at the number of disk-shaped galaxies and looking at spectral lines from the first JWST images. But these channels (one of them even named "NASA Space News") have huge numbers of views, and look legit. It's shameful.
    • by nagora ( 177841 )

      While searching for JWST information on YouTube I was astounded by the number of YouTube channels publishing blatantly false claims.

      Oh? Have you not used YouTube before, then?

      • by RobinH ( 124750 )
        The difference here is that the speaker isn't railing against "the man" like a typical conspiracy theorist, claiming NASA's hiding stuff from you. They're passing themselves off as a regular old space news YouTuber just reporting on news from NASA but reporting absolute B.S.
    • You'll never get rid of it. I mean, imagine if you did. You wouldn't BELIEVE what would happen next! It would rock your fundamental understanding of the world, and destroy all you pre-existing knowledge. You would be baffled!

    • That is not surprising considering the number of other conspiracy theories that have huge followings on YouTube: flat Earth, chem trails, the Olsen twins are not actually one person moving really fast. The establishment got to YouTube on that last one because you can no longer find videos on it.:)
    • Your correction itself does not seem very scientific, and seems to be doing a lot of gaslighting.

      It focuses on the emotional quotes from the original article, but pretty much ignores the real story was that nine out of ten predicted results were quite wrong!

      It ignores for example that while it's looking at galaxies that are just a 4-5 hundred million years after the "Big Bang", the galaxies appear to be over a billion years old... that is, they have existed since before the "Big Bang".

      It ignores that galaxy

      • by RobinH ( 124750 )
        I'm quite happy to see new evidence point the way to a new better theory, or to disprove existing theories. There's clearly a problem with existing theories, which is why we have stopgap ideas like dark matter and dark energy. But these YouTube channels aren't peddling honest science. In the few that I watched, they misrepresent or just make up new "facts" and then say "see, there's no Big Bang, so it was God all along!"
        • At this point there is enough counter-evidence to say the Big Bang probably did not happen, it doesn't have to be God but Big Bang as a viable theory looks pretty dead to me based on hard evidence. Even though it's been somewhat shaky for ears, this image was the turning point, just way too many predictions failed.

          And like I said, there are just a lot of scientists unwilling to let go and accept what teh results are saying.

          • by RobinH ( 124750 )
            Yeah, I don't buy it. Here's someone a lot more reputable discussing the issue [youtube.com]. I'm open to new theories, but they need to explain the CMB, the redshift, and the smaller & less complex galaxies further away, at a minimum.
    • While searching for JWST information on YouTube I was astounded by the number of YouTube channels publishing blatantly false claims.

      You have discovered what Youtube is all about. Most of it's content is the GenZ (or whatever) version of "fake news" on lame-stream media.

      • by RobinH ( 124750 )
        If you look at a specific news organization, like any national newspaper, or ABC, MSNBC, CNN, or Fox, each one has a fairly static editorial slant so it's possible to watch them with that slant in mind and by watching multiple different sources, some from other countries, you can piece together a pretty holistic picture of some topic. The problem with YouTube is that it's not a monolithic entity with a single slant. Each channel has some unknown slant and unknown credibility, but is presented as an equal
  • If I could bring anyone back from the past at this point it would be Galileo.
    • That would be great because now we have proof that Galeo was wrong ( he put the sun fixed at the center of the universe).

      But the difference is, Galileo would understand and say " so that's how it works, thank you"

      • And the problem is, the followers of the Cult of Galileo would stone you to death for questioning the doctrine of a heliocentric universe, you infidel pig.

        Just as the followers of the cult of woke, or the followers of the cult of Trump will stone you for questioning their beliefs.

        • by clovis ( 4684 )

          Those effing Copernicans, my keyboard is ready for them!!!
          Stand Back and Stand By, fellow Big Bang Cosmologist believers!

      • I guess you could conclude that Galileo was wrong... but I hope to be that wrong at some point in my lifetime. Considering the limitations of knowledge at the time, his conclusions were pretty great. He yanked away the earth's special place at the centre, and moved it to an observationally supportable body. It's like saying Newton was "wrong". He was pretty spectacularly spot on for being wrong.

        Not objecting to the characterization, mind you. I just like giving appropriate credit when I can.

    • I believe his first words would be: "Get me out of this box!" Thanks and tip your wait staff.

To thine own self be true. (If not that, at least make some money.)

Working...