/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9285916]

Pictures taken of Jupiter with NASA's $1 billion dollar probe

Absolutely stunning!

[Anonymous No.9285954]

Hey, it has an atmosphere. I wonder what it's made of?

[Anonymous No.9285960]

I agree

/thread

[Anonymous No.9285962]

>>9285916
is is true that the storm thingy is getting smaller ?
and if so why ?

[Anonymous No.9285981]

Nice and thick. Perfect for aerocapture meant to save fuel for Callisto landing.

[Anonymous No.9285982]

>>9285954
salty milk and coins

[Anonymous No.9286030]

imagine falling in

[Anonymous No.9286066]

>>9285916
It's a shame the image was photoshopped to make jupiter look like a round planet even though it should be flat. The picture isn't even that high quality so it's no surprise this (((picture))) is probably a big FAKE

[Anonymous No.9286094]

looks like a painting. how much editing do they do on these?

[Anonymous No.9286101]

>>9286066
u dumb

[Anonymous No.9286106]

>>9285916
Nice *cough*PAINTING*cough* picture, bro.

[Anonymous No.9286156]

>>9286106
?????

[Anonymous No.9286201]

What's that old saying, one picture is worth a billion dollars.

[Anonymous No.9286255]

>>9285962
It waxes and wanes over time. It may eventually collapse, but the fluid dynamics of the system indicate that, if it does, another sill form.

[Anonymous No.9286259]

>>9286094
Very little. But the scale is so far off of anything you're used to looking at, it throws you perceptions.

[Anonymous No.9286306]

>>9285916
What makes these things so expensive?

[Anonymous No.9286397]

>>9286030
Just be glad you wouldn't fall into Saturn you'd be slowly be torn apart.

[Anonymous No.9286449]

>>9286397
>Passing through ammonia, shards of ice, and sheering winds (in addition to the frigid distance from the sun)
Sounds fun

[Anonymous No.9286456]

>>9286066
If you're gonna troll, at least do it well.

[Anonymous No.9286459]

>>9286449

[Anonymous No.9286488]

why no videos?

[Anonymous No.9286491]

>>9286488
Because (((they))) can't fake the videos

[Anonymous No.9286559]

>>9286488
>>9286491
these missions are for scientific research, not cute, visible light coloured images for retards to briefly glance at and never look at again. Producing something like OP's pic is an after-after thought.

[Anonymous No.9286563]

>>9286559
kek

[Anonymous No.9286566]

>>9286559
Shill

[Anonymous No.9286573]

>>9286559
so you can't get scientific data from video?

[Anonymous No.9286755]

>>9286563
>>9286566
>JunoCam is not one of the probe's core scientific instruments; it was put on board primarily for public science and outreach, to increase public engagement, and all images will be available on NASA's website.

>>9286573
It can be done, but it was not a part of the mission. Other science was of higher priority. This thing runs on a fraction of normal satellite power due to it being the furthest solar powered satellite from the sun, and operates in a complex radiation environment. Many many factors where involved with the design of this mission and returning a couple seconds or minutes of video where literally nothing distinguishable happen in frame is pointless.

If you wanted to see movement you'll need a timelapse, because most of the structures in the pic in OP are comparable in size to continents on earth. That large spot is more than twice the diameter of earth.

[Anonymous No.9286768]

>>9286755
Playing devils advocate here. They put a specialised module in there for capturing images, why will they not record video if it is indeed for public outreach?

[Anonymous No.9286772]

>tfw you will never live in a space habitat orbiting Jupiter

Hold me bros

[Anonymous No.9286779]

>>9285916

I want to stick my penis is that swirling gaseous hole.

[Anonymous No.9286780]

>>9286768
>Many many factors where involved with the design of this mission and returning a couple seconds or minutes of video where literally nothing distinguishable happen in frame is pointless.

[Anonymous No.9286784]

>>9286030

If you were David Bowman, sent as a scout, then you would learn that there were proto-life forms, cloud-beings vaguely sifting among the electricity and noise. But you would be instructed that probalistically, these had no evolutionary future, and so you would be spurred on to the next world—Europa.

[Anonymous No.9286785]

>>9285982
Here, have a (you)

[Anonymous No.9286802]

>>9285916
>Hold me bros
Relax. Singularity incoming.

[Anonymous No.9286868]

>>9286768
Once they have enough pictures, you'll probably get some kind of timelapse video

[Anonymous No.9286874]

>>9286488
Things move slowly in space. Why have a 2 hour long video taking up God knows how much space when you can have a time-lapse of a few dozen pictures showing the exact same thing

[Anonymous No.9286886]

>>9286772
Don't worry anon, you might be one of the last generations that won't get to before death

[Anonymous No.9286917]

>>9285962
Why do storms on Earth get smaller?

It is part of a much larger weather system. Energy is bound to be lost at times, it may be gained at other times.

It would be a greater mystery if it just stayed the same.

[Anonymous No.9286932]

>>9286488
>>9286573
Juno is in a 53 day orbit of Jupiter. I'm not sure how long the trip around the periapsis is but remember, video is just a series of pictures and they would have to take 24 of these pictures, at least, per second for what we class as video which means you would need a lower resolution, it would still take up more space, you won't get a hell of a lot of information from a short video (just look up for a minute and think about what information you gained), storage they have onboard is quite limited and often slow (I don't know if Juno has solid state storage, some of the active probes still use tape storage) and they need to use that storage for scientific measurements as well.

[Anonymous No.9286976]

>>9286932
Not that guy, and not that I don't agree with the rest, but
>if it's not ssd storage it's too slow for a fucking video

[Anonymous No.9287028]

>>9286976
That's not what he said. In fact, he just even went on to point out that some are take deck. I think it's more so, they don't have the room to record all of that video. 2 hours of 720p at 24 fps video is roughly 22gb. What is the point? What could you possibly capture in 2 hours of video that you couldn't in a series of stills?

[Anonymous No.9287039]

>>9286976
Reliable storage is important. I don't think standard hard drives have been used because they're less reliable than tape and SSD. There have been cases of tape getting stuck and they just reprogram it so that it doesn't rewind to the stuck point when clearing data, removing part of the available storage but keeping functionality.
With HDDs far more often a failure takes out the entire drive. You can add backup drives but then that's more weight, etc

SSD is more likely to be the next storage because it is easier to segment out so that you have redundancy without increasing weight much and is very reliable.

[Anonymous No.9287319]

>>9286976
they dont have the power to do it, or the bandwidth to send it home, and orbits are fucking slow that pictures seperated by an hour is good enough for "video"

[Anonymous No.9287450]

>>9285916
I wish they had a "normal" camera to take photos so there isn't this massive amount of post processing needed.

[Anonymous No.9287453]

>>9287450
all of the data required to make a visible light picture is collected, just not in that format to increase scientific data and total data throughput to earth

[Anonymous No.9287457]

>space and NASA shit brings out the loonies.

Every god damn time. Anyone remember when science was science and not just another tool to help rip apart foreign societies via grass roots campaigns and web brigades?

[Anonymous No.9287462]

>>9287453
If you gave it a bit more thought, you would have realized I already know how it is done.

[Anonymous No.9287494]

thanks for the answers about video

[Anonymous No.9287851]

>>9286768
Again, many factors are involved with the missions design, but as a result the craft spins at about 3rpm.

"At three rotations per minute, the instruments' fields of view sweep across Jupiter about 400 times in the two hours it takes to fly from pole to pole." This is so that all the instruments on board can get some personal time with Jupiter. The video would capture 18 second flashes of Jupiter gliding by followed by a couple seconds of darkness for the 2 hours it is on close approach.

The closest you'll get are time lapses.
https://youtu.be/AuOy-shbQuM

People seem to be posting them for every perijove

[Anonymous No.9287856]

>>9286156
This isn't a real, unedited picture of jupiter buddy.

[Anonymous No.9287858]

>>9287856
It is real. It was found on NASA's website

[Anonymous No.9287860]

>>9285916
>$ 1 billion dollar photo
>its shopped

[Anonymous No.9287868]

>>9287858

A government website huh? Oh okay then.

If they can get a close up photo of Jupiter, why the fuck have they never produced a high quality photo of the Apollo landing sites on the moon? Riddle me that.

[Anonymous No.9287872]

>>9287462
if you gave it a bit more thought you would have realized you're an idiot

[Anonymous No.9287900]

>>9285916
pleb needs to see a picture instead of just the math HHAH GAYYYY

[Anonymous No.9288031]

>>9285916
>spend $1 billion on a probe
>don't put even a smartphone tier camera on board

GO TO FUCKING MARS ALREADY (((NASA)))

[Anonymous No.9288034]

>>9287858
>NASA
>in charge of being honest
HAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.9288092]

>>9287457
I have no idea what you're talking about but the whole idea of that stuff is to be pervasive, if the ideas weren't normalized everywhere it wouldn't have an effect

[Anonymous No.9288367]

>>9287868
A close up photo of the Apollo landing sites does not produce any new science, so it is hard to justify spending budget on. If you want a HD photo of the Apollo landers, go send a camera there on your own dime.

[Anonymous No.9288391]

>>9288367

>If you want a HD photo of the Apollo landers, go send a camera there on your own dime.

Who funds NASA again?

[Anonymous No.9288404]

>>9288391
Not you.

[Anonymous No.9288407]

>>9288404
As a taxpayer, I believe I do.

[Anonymous No.9288503]

>>9287868
That isn't a close up photo of Jupiter though.

Think for a second, the entire Moon would fit into that storm about seven times. This photo is a long, long way away.

The LRO has done photography of the landing sites. You can see in the photos tracks from the buggies and tracks left by the astronauts.

Face it, they could land a high definition Internet controlled camera at one of the landing sites so that you could view from it and move it around to see the whole area and you would still say that you could computer render it and splash in some photoshop.

China sent a probe to the surface and found it to be like what the Apollo missions said it was. It's time for you to stop making yourself doubt.

[Anonymous No.9288526]

>>9288503

>The LRO has done photography of the landing sites.

The LRO must have cost about $30 because the camera is a piece of shit.

>Face it, they could land a high definition Internet controlled camera at one of the landing sites so that you could view from it and move it around to see the whole area and you would still say that you could computer render it and splash in some photoshop.

Scientists should always be sceptical of broadcasted video. Hardly empirical.

>China sent a probe to the surface and found it to be like what the Apollo missions said it was. It's time for you to stop making yourself doubt.

I'm afraid I require a thing called evidence. Photos and video are not scientific evidence.

[Anonymous No.9288551]

>>9288526
Exactly. You're not going to be satisfied.

[Anonymous No.9288566]

>>9288551
Yeah this guy could see it in person and still deny it.

[Anonymous No.9288577]

Why does space always look fake as fuck? Soft, blurred edges and complete black backdrops.

[Anonymous No.9288579]

>>9288551
>>9288566

And you are satisfied with pictures? Doesn't take much does it?

[Anonymous No.9288629]

>>9288579
I'm satisfied with the pictures, because you have to be a skeptic in the first place to be asking for more evidence.

>>9288577
>Soft, blurred edges
Atmosphuckingere.

>complete black backdrops
Because you're exposing for the planet/body, not for the stars which are much dimmer.

It only looks fake to people who don't know shit about photography.

[Anonymous No.9288644]

You'll cowards don't even question the integrity of NASA :p

[Anonymous No.9288648]

>>9288407
Thank you for your contribution to science and progress, whether you had a choice or not.

[Anonymous No.9289028]

>>9286030
It would be so massive you probably wouldn't even experience it as falling into anything.

[Anonymous No.9289035]

>>9285954
Coffee

[Anonymous No.9289048]

>>9287858

Typically, they're enhanced or false color, so not strictly true.

And as if the conspiracy-tards need more ammunition, the appearance of Jupiter in 1968's 2001 is actually a more realistic depiction of how it would look to the naked eye...a yellowish, low-detail sphere.

[Anonymous No.9289386]

>>9288031

It wasn't even supposed to have a camera. They glued one to it at the end after some guys told them it would be a waste not to make some pictures for fags on the internet.

[Anonymous No.9289396]

>>9287868
>why the fuck have they never produced a high quality photo of the Apollo landing sites on the moon?

Why the fuck would they do that? So few retards nobody takes seriously anyways could call it a scam again? What are you going to say once chinks or Space-X puts man on the moon?

[Anonymous No.9289871]

>>9286066
Kek

[Anonymous No.9289888]

>>9286488
bandwidth, power limits, and physical memory on the probe.

[Anonymous No.9289909]

>>9285916
Taking pictures is not part of Juno's main mission. The camera is there for outreach purposes, that is keeping brainlets like you happy with pretty pictures. The real purpose of Juno is looking underneath the clouds of Jupiter to figure out what the fuck is going on there.

The camera's operation cannot be guaranteed past eight orbits due to the intense radiation.

[Anonymous No.9289930]

>>9285981
>>he wants to aerobrake around jupiter
absolute madman. Aerobraking around jupiter isn't practical, you need too much mass for a heatshield.

[Anonymous No.9289962]

>>9289909
Is it really necessary to insult the guy because he likes the photos taken by the probe? Yeah god forbid somebody take an interest in what NASA is doing as opposed to being another social media zombie. Get a grip, cunt.

[Anonymous No.9289980]

>>9289962
Fuck off retarded moralfag

[Kolmogorov No.9291352]

I also suspect this image if Jupiter (and others published on the NASA) website may be FAKE

Consider. The sun is extremely far away. It would cast negligible light onto Jupiter. The area would be almost pitch black. The prove should not be able to take such a clear and well lit picture!

[Anonymous No.9291457]

>>9286306
gotta write fat checks to a lot of people

[Anonymous No.9291481]

so the crazy sandstorms are due to all of the moons throwing off jupiters gravity right? is there an official theory for the giant red one? like a river of lava that gets sucked in to a tornado or some rad shit like that?

[Anonymous No.9291496]

>>9291352
You can see Jupiter, with the naked eye, from your back yard. It's reflecting more than enough light to take pictures of with nasa's low light lenses, and CCD's.
Though historically these pictures aren't taken in true color, and they touch them up color when they release them to the public.

[Anonymous No.9291511]

>>9286306
Cost of getting mass from here to Jupiter. You've got to really over-engineer these things because they have to survive a transit of years in vacuum, which isn't a great environment for machinery and electronics. You don't want to cheap out on making the thing, and have it fail half way to its objective, then you've literally just flushed that money down the toilet.
Not to mention NASA has a huge bureaucracy.
Honestly though when you look at the fraction of the budget NASA gets compared to other ridiculous examples of government waste, you've got to be a real asshole to get your hackles up over it. At least it provides scientific information, and if I get a few new desktop wallpapers out of it then that's just a cherry on top.

[Anonymous No.9291606]

>>9291511
Those little eddies on the upper left are still larger than any hurricane on earth

[Anonymous No.9291651]

>>9285954
Zeus's cum.

[Anonymous No.9291754]

>>9291606
I think that picture is from the polar storm on Saturn from the Cassini mission.
A little bit jealous that someday this is going to be the view some guy wakes up to and takes for granted.

[Anonymous No.9291808]

>>9287868
oh hi!
>>9288526
>taking pictures from orbit is just so easy you guys!
if you're such a fucking genius, go build a camera

[Anonymous No.9291812]

>>9289048
they're still pictures of jupiter, no matter how much you adjust the levels and hue/saturation

[Anonymous No.9292009]

>>9291812
Sometimes they false color frequencies of light humans can't see, because sometimes infrared or ultraviolet, or other frequencies reveal other structures not visible with the human eye. In these cases, the image it not something we would ever see with human eyes. Not only would the color be off, but it would also have extra detail we wouldn't see.

This bothers some people I guess.

[Anonymous No.9292212]

>>9285954
The souls that didn't praise God.

[Anonymous No.9292669]

>when shit eating retards STILL respond to shitposters and other shit eating retards

just fucking report them you dumbasses, don't give them (You)s

[Anonymous No.9292841]

>tfw we will never get pictures from inside of Jupiters atmosphere

[Anonymous No.9292845]

>>9292841
some day anon, some day. Someday we could put a nuclear powered ramjet in Jupiter's atmosphere
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/library/meetings/annual/jun02/510Maise.pdf

[Anonymous No.9292952]

>>9291754
I stand corrected.

[Anonymous No.9293792]

>>9286917
>>9286255
>not using category theory

[Anonymous No.9294436]

>>9293792
Still not that far off. The eye of that storm is like 20 times the size of the biggest hurricane on earth.

[Anonymous No.9294455]

Is this an actual picture or is this an edit?

i once had a flat earther call pic related (i took it myself) "suspiciously edited". lmao.

[Anonymous No.9294466]

>>9287868

we already have lots of high quality photos. they just so happen to be taken on the moon. ask yourself this: why would anybody bother to do it? it costs money. it takes time and effort and a team of engineers.

[Anonymous No.9295944]

neat

[Anonymous No.9297016]

>>9291754
This one always creeps me out, I can't wait for the Space Mafia to start executing snitches by throwing them towards this thing

[Anonymous No.9297070]

>>9294455
>i took it myself
Nice. I miss being far enough in the country to have a real night sky.

[Anonymous No.9298165]

>>9288031
>the radiation would cook any pleb tier camera

Its not like you can put what ever instrument you want on the poor probe