Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Turbulence in Saturn's Atmosphere 23

Posted by michael from the nice-whorls dept.
neutron_p writes "Today an image of turbulence in the atmosphere of Saturn has been unveiled. This image was taken with the NASA/ESA/ASI Cassini-Huygens spacecraft camera. This pattern is an example of a 'Kelvin-Helmholtz instability', which occurs when two fluids of different density flow past each other at different speeds. This phenomenon should be common on the gas-giant planets."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Turbulence in Saturn's Atmosphere More

Turbulence in Saturn's Atmosphere

Comments Filter:
  • This is a cool picture - but how exactly is this news, and why should we be excited?

    • Ummm .... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @12:54PM (#10589825) Homepage
      This is a cool picture - but how exactly is this news, and why should we be excited?


      Because it's posted in the science section of Slashdot and a tremendous amount of us geeks keep an eye on all things space and science related?

      The fact that we're in the middle of learning/confirming/discovering stuff about our own solar system is both News For Nerds and Stuff That Matters.

      What do you expect, baseball highlights?

      • Re:Ummm .... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by dtolman ( 688781 )
        What do you expect, baseball highlights?

        Well... some context would be nice. Is this a first? Does this confirm some long unfulfilled prediction? They post new pictures from the Cassini probe all the time - why is this one chosen for a slashdot story out of all the newly posted pictures from the past week, many of which were also discoveries?

        • Well... some context would be nice. Is this a first? Does this confirm some long unfulfilled prediction? They post new pictures from the Cassini probe all the time - why is this one chosen for a slashdot story out of all the newly posted pictures from the past week, many of which were also discoveries?

          Maybe one of the editors panicked and decided to try and post a non-dupe? :-P

          Truthfully, it seems to be expected results that confirm a well-known phenomenon. So I guess the sheer fact that it was a cassin

    • Re:Can someone explain why we should care? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Hockney Twang ( 769594 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @12:57PM (#10589867)
      I'm not sure how it's news, as it should generally be anticipated to occur naturally in gas giants, as mentioned in the article. There is a scant possibility that the phenomenon has not been observed before, or perhaps only observed in a very specific subset of conditions, which would lead to questions as to whether our understanding of the nature of gas giants is really valid.
      The whole thing should really only be of interest to academics interested in this specific detail of thermodynamics. I don't see any practical reason why a lay person should care. Anyway, for a little more info on this, you can read http://www-sccm.stanford.edu/Students/witting/kh.h tml [stanford.edu] and if you find anything new and exciting, there's a very small wikipedia stub [wikipedia.org] that could use expanding.
    • For some reason your use of 'we' and us being 'excited' is not too comforting.

      What kind of person posts a comment, slating a news story for not being exciting?

      You website even has lots of astronomical looking bits in it - chill out.
      • What kind of person posts a comment, slating a news story for not being exciting?

        The kind of person who wants to be excited.

        Like I said in another other post - this story was posted with barely any context - not that Slashdot or the editor is at fault - just seems to be a trend in all news media lately...

        • in some ways I prefer that! Content is really just another word for spin.

          This way I get the information...new pictures from Saturn showing a principle still holds true on gas giant scales...I do not need people to tell me how this will change my life...for better or for worse depending on the analyst.

          If I really want to know the larger effects I will look them up myself.

          I think it is a refreshing change for news to be exactly that...NEWS and not some flunkies opinion on what the news means.

          but that is
    • Because Cassini cost $4 billion.. :-)

      Good question - in fact there are only 6 replys so far, so I guess people here arent that excited. Also I do sometimes wonder about these big projects - wouldnt we get better performance long-term from a larger number of smaller probes? these can be turned around in a shorter space of time, and hence would have more up-to-date sensors. For example, the CCD on the Cassini camera is only 1 megapixel! (See below)

      I have heard it suggested that most of the useful function o

      • Whoa there tanto (Score:4, Informative)

        by mdp1173 ( 815076 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @02:01PM (#10590721)
        Before you start jumping up and down here, think about a few of the facts first.

        wouldnt we get better performance long-term from a larger number of smaller probes?

        Most of the cost goes into getting to these very far away places and holding enough propellent that you can slow down enough to be captured into orbit after you've been going very fast for a few years. It's not feasible to launch probes to outer planets all the time because you lose the ability to "sling shot" past other planets as a cheap way to pick up a lot of speed. These gravity assist (or more accuratley, angular momentum assist) moves make a little ship go whole heck of a lot faster which means you don't need as much propellent to get you somewhere. You have to go really fast to someplace that several billion miles away in a few years.

        and hence would have more up-to-date sensors. For example, the CCD on the Cassini camera is only 1 megapixel!

        The way to get better quality pics is NOT to have more pixels but to have better optics. The cameras in the "eyes" of the Mars Exploration Rovers (the pancam) are only about 1 megapixel and they have returned VERY high resolution pics that look great if you have to blow them up 10 times their size. That's because NASA spends a lot of money to use phenomonally good optics. In addition, more megapixels means larger files which requires higher data transfer rates which requires more power to your antenna which means less electricity to do other stuff. (whew)

        I have heard it suggested that most of the useful function of the JIMO $10 billion orbiter could be done with a simpler $1 billion direct-to-europa mission.. And look at New Horizons, with a mission cost less $1 billion, or SMART-1 less than $100 million..

        Dude, compare apples to apples here. SMART-1 is a test of new technology (ion drive) that is meant to see how well it works and if it useable in other missions. It was meant to be a cheap way to get to the moon. You don't need a whole lot of force to get the moon and orbit it if you're willing to wait a few years...like SMART is. To get to Jupiter and then ORBIT it, you have to go very fast to get there, then be strong enough to slow down to be captured into orbit. Then maybe you'd want a few kilos of propellent left to actually move around near Jupiter for a few year. That is a completely different scope than crusing along to the moon for several years or flying by Pluto-Charon before the atmosphere freezes out.

        • You also forgot to mention the problems inherent in launching the latest nifty electronics and image sensors into a radiation environment.
          • Not just radiation, but also testing costs. New gizmos, even changes that may appear to be trivial, may have a profound negative effect if not seriously regression tested. As I understand it, there are three rules to sending probes out: Reliability, reliability, reliability. It's pointing out the obvious, but it doesn't do anyone any good to send out the latest tech and have it puke on arrival.
        • Before you start jumping up and down here,

          Seems to me you are the one doing the jumping.. :-)

          (Wouldnt we get better performance long-term from a larger number of smaller probes?)

          Most of the cost goes into getting to these very far away places and holding enough propellent that you can slow down enough to be captured into orbit after you've been going very fast for a few years. It's not feasible to launch probes to outer planets all the time because you lose the ability to "sling shot" past other plan

  • Yum! (Score:4, Funny)

    by CodeWanker ( 534624 ) on Thursday October 21, 2004 @02:21PM (#10590937) Journal
    The turbulence tastes fractally!
  • Saturn: "I can do what Jupiter does also, neener neener!"
  • 1.Gas planets are huge wave machines
    2.???
    3.Profit!

  • animation of similar jupiter turbulance (Score:3, Informative)

    by Danny Rathjens ( 8471 ) <slashdot2@rath j e n s . org> on Thursday October 21, 2004 @05:10PM (#10592895)
    http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA02863 [nasa.gov]

    Quite an impressive animation. I want one on a a globe. :)

  • Higher res pics can be found here [nasa.gov]

Slashdot Top Deals

The 11 is for people with the pride of a 10 and the pocketbook of an 8. -- R.B. Greenberg [referring to PDPs?]

Close