Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Shrinking Giant Red Spot of Jupiter

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the getting-small dept.

Space 160

schwit1 (797399) writes "Jupiter's trademark Great Red Spot — a swirling storm feature larger than Earth — is shrinking. This downsizing, which is changing the shape of the spot from an oval into a circle, has been known about since the 1930s, but now these striking new NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope images capture the spot at a smaller size than ever before."

cancel ×

160 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Global warming (4, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 4 months ago | (#47015857)

Must be global warming...

Re:Global warming (-1, Offtopic)

darkob (634931) | about 4 months ago | (#47015863)

Somebody do something!

Re:Global warming (-1, Flamebait)

scsirob (246572) | about 4 months ago | (#47015901)

I'm sure they'll invent a 'save the red spot, pay up' tax soon.

Re:Global warming (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015981)

I'd rather pay that than the current "save the highly profitable oil companies" subsidy

Re:Global warming (2, Informative)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 4 months ago | (#47016959)

I'd rather pay that than the current "save the highly profitable oil companies" subsidy

The mods on the 2 comments above really demonstrate the hive mind / political / religious attitudes of the typical Slashdot mods.

The saddest part is, even though the /. crowd is generally more intelligent than most other Internet discussion sites, yet even here the lie that "big oil" is getting "subsidies" is not corrected, but repeated (this is how a lie becomes unquestioned by the shitizens).

Basically, Percentage Depletion is the oil and gas industry’s version of a depreciation deduction for its main asset, which is the oil and natural gas in the ground, commonly known as its reserves. Every industry of any kind is allowed a depreciation deduction on its assets under the U.S. Tax Code, but, far from being a “subsidy” for “big oil”, this tax treatment was in fact repealed for all integrated oil companies, i.e., ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, etc., in 1975, and is today available only to independent producers and royalty owners. So repeal of this extremely long-standing, completely common tax treatment would have no effect on “big oil” at all, and would in fact hit small producers and royalty owners harder than anyone else.

Another great example of the specious mischaracterization of these tax treatments is the Manufacturer’s Tax Deduction, more commonly referred to as Section 199. The Section 199 provision was enacted by congress in 2004 as a means of encouraging manufacturers to relocate overseas jobs to the U.S., and is in no way specific to or limited to the oil and gas industry. In fact, the oil & gas industry’s ability to take advantage of this provision has already been singled out for limitation – in 2008, Congress reduced the industry’s deduction under this provision to 2/3rds of what other manufacturing industries are allowed to deduct.

The tax code contains a couple of credits related to the oil and gas industry – the Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Tax Credit, and the Marginal Well Tax Credit. Far from being “subsidies” to “big oil”, these tax credits are used almost exclusively by small to mid-size independent producers who tend to become the operators of marginal oil and gas fields as they age and are divested by the larger companies. The EOR credit was implemented in 1990, and the Marginal Well Credit was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1994.

Finally, let’s talk about Intangible Drilling Costs (IDCs), another feature of the federal tax code that will enjoy its’ 100th birthday in 2013. Basically, IDCs are the costs incurred by the oil and gas industry in the drilling of its wells. Since drilling wells is the only means of finding oil and natural gas, IDCs essentially amount to what any other industry would be able to deduct as a part of its cost of goods sold, a concept of accounting and tax law as old as the tax code itself. Independent producers and royalty owners are allowed an election to either a) expense these costs in the year they are incurred, or b) amortize them over a 5-year period. Again, most media reports commonly characterize this as a “subsidy” for “big oil”, as does the Obama Administration. The truth is that “big oil” – the ExxonMobils, Chevrons, Shells and BPs of the world – benefit much less from this tax treatment, it having been severely limited to them by congress in 1986, and again in 1992. And the truth also is that IDCs are not a “subsidy” to anyone engaged in the oil and gas business.

Bottom line: Despite the Administration’s rhetoric that has been so widely repeated in the press, the tax treatments in question are not “subsidies” that are in any way outside of the mainstream of tax treatments commonly available to all U.S. industries. Rather than being mostly a benefit to “big oil”, the repeal of these and other oil and gas industry-related tax provisions would mainly impact smaller independent producers and royalty owners. Such repeal would serve no legitimate public policy purpose, other than to unfairly discriminate via the tax code against one of the nation’s most productive – albeit easily demonized – manufacturing industries.

Re: Global warming (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017379)

The real hidden subsidy is the global security provided by the US military to security European energy supplies and which hides the true $300/b cost.

Re:Global warming (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017443)

You must understand that if I, as a college educated individual, do not engage in name calling, my social status and opportunities will become imperiled. Therefore, in order to maintain said status, I have no choice but to call you a RANDROID.

What is learned in all post-secondary educational environments, except Hillsdale College and Harding University:

0. Man is a collectivist animal.
1. Money belongs to government.
2. Critical thinking means agreeing with collectivists.

This sums up the Slashdot readership.

Re:Global warming (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015919)

Somebody do something!

Uh, spending quite possibly millions since the 1930's to track and study the most popular pimple on one of our planets, I'd say we're doing enough, unless you feel for some reason that wasteful spending isn't quite up to par with the level of corruption elsewhere.

Would you prefer NASA take a page out of the financial sector? I'm sure they know what they're doing.

Re:Global warming (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016181)

Call Al Gore. He can't do anything about it, just like the rest of us, but at least he can make a slideshow that passes for a movie

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016377)

Sure, he can ! With that fortune from Politics, Apple, etc., he and other notable Studio 54 would-bes could pool their resources and Space-X a special rocket full of the politically correct, directly into the eye of the storm on a fact finding sub-committee . Donating corporations would have the ENTIRE donation knocked off any future taxes. It would reduce our carbon footprint. The entire rocket could be made of recycled MacBooks. It would set a good example for future colonization; an entire Left-Democratic Planet! Limited time ONLY! Hurry,come to Jupiter before the sphincter closes. Get out your mat and pray toward D.C. for a SPECIAL ticket to New Jupiter! special rates apply, not valid in Tenessee, New Hampshire or Montana, must reply before midnight tonight, no employess of Koch industries or any of their subsidiaries may benefit from this, offer limited to citizens of the United States, aliens from Mexico, North Korea, China and the Canary Islands and the southern tip of Guam.

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015865)

Don't be silly. It is Bush and his neo-cons fault, together with the banking and corporate companies, with the 1% cheering.

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016041)

Real life not enough, you have to force it into someone else's joke, then?

Re:Global warming (3, Funny)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about 4 months ago | (#47015875)

Must be global warming...

Nah, the Neocon delegation must have reached mount Doom and burned the communist manifesto so the great eye of Sauron will now shrink until it disappears and Jupiter implodes thus purging the threat of environmentalism from the face of the universe forever.

Re:Global warming (1)

Greyfox (87712) | about 4 months ago | (#47017415)

That'd work if it was a copy of "Atlas Shrugged" (Rand Paul's precioussss.)

Must be global cooling... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015925)

We all know it shrinks when it gets cold.

Re:Global warming (2, Insightful)

KeensMustard (655606) | about 4 months ago | (#47015933)

You might laugh, but I have heard people use similar astronomical events as proof against the anthropogenic cause of the recent warming. "Ice caps are melting on Mars!" etc. etc.

We will likely discover soon that the red spot is shrinking because in fact, it's jupiter's face and he is palming it at the the stupidity of the gullible.

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016235)

Using a term from the '60's is not helping. It prefers to be called Indian, uh i mean, Native Ameri, uh Native Jovian. Any confusion with commie's from Ukraine should be avoided.
We can discuss the little black spots on the Sun today, tomorrow. I for one believe that's our soul up there.

Re:Global warming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017479)

King of Pain in the @$$, eh?

Re:Global warming (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about 4 months ago | (#47016881)

Yes, because the fact that other planets in the same solar system are experiencing similar warming(if such is indeed the case) has absolutely no value in interpreting why this planet is doing the same. It's not like they all have something in common, such as receiving the bulk of their energy from the same source.

Re:Global warming (3, Insightful)

KeensMustard (655606) | about 4 months ago | (#47016951)

Yes, because the fact that other planets in the same solar system are experiencing similar warming(if such is indeed the case) has absolutely no value in interpreting why this planet is doing the same

Are you saying we can't (and aren't) measuring the output of the sun directly? Why would proxies be a better measure? Detail please.

Re:Global warming (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about 4 months ago | (#47017533)

If other planets are observed to be experiencing a similar warming to that being observed here, it seems likely that the warming is caused by something which all of the planers have in common. Whether or not that something can and is being otherwise monitored. If your explanation for earth's warming does not take into account the warming taking place at the same time on other planets(assuming that such warming is occurring), it is likely to be false.

Re:Global warming (1)

dryeo (100693) | about 4 months ago | (#47017689)

Except it was always some planets were getting warmer with the largest number being 4 which is half the planets. The real test of if its solar induced would be the planets (and nearby moon) without an atmosphere and all those were not getting warmer.

Re:Global warming (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | about 4 months ago | (#47017791)

But that is irrelevant to the point made by the poster I replied to. He dismissed the idea that warming on other planets might have relevance to warming on earth.

Re:Global warming (0)

argStyopa (232550) | about 4 months ago | (#47017237)

You're right, how incomprehensibly silly to point out that increasing temperatures observed on multiple planets in our solar system might suggest that the Earth's warming is primarily due to something other than yuppies driving SUVs.

I mean surely it's absurd that the SUN has something to do with climate change, right?

Re:Global warming (1)

dryeo (100693) | about 4 months ago | (#47017719)

It is silly when most of the planets were not getting warmer.

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015991)

Or DEMs, Tea Party, Progressives, Racists, Generation *, Kids Nowadays, Faceplant (lick me), #Twaddle.

Re:Global warming (2, Insightful)

huge (52607) | about 4 months ago | (#47016015)

No, it's not downsizing, it's just restructuring overlapping functions after all the mergers.

Re:Global warming (-1, Flamebait)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about 4 months ago | (#47016215)

Must be global warming...

Thanks, Obama!

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016339)

Yeah, I'm sure Obama singlehandedly started a giant fire that warmed the temperature of the earth.

Try again, Rush Limbaugh.

Re:Global warming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016303)

No, its climate change...er, I mean climate disruption. Yeath, that's it.

Re:Global warming (1)

Curunir_wolf (588405) | about 4 months ago | (#47016973)

No, its climate change...er, I mean climate disruption. Yeath, that's it.

Climate Chaos. Get with the program!

Re:Global warming (1)

therealkevinkretz (1585825) | about 4 months ago | (#47017345)

My first thought was: too bad they didn't find out in time to include it in the most recent AAAS report.

Global warming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017765)

Globalclimatewarmingdisruptionchange.

Monolith! (5, Funny)

gigne (990887) | about 4 months ago | (#47015885)

all these planets are yours except europa

Re:Monolith! (1)

sysrammer (446839) | about 4 months ago | (#47015905)

ybmti

Re:Monolith! (5, Funny)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | about 4 months ago | (#47015917)

Uranus is mine!!!

Re:Monolith! (1)

InsultsByThePound (3603437) | about 4 months ago | (#47015957)

I heard it's getting bigger all the time as well as it's frame, so you are welcome to it.

Re:Monolith! (2)

boristdog (133725) | about 4 months ago | (#47016691)

I haven't heard that since I did a nickle in Leavenworth.

Re:Monolith! (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 4 months ago | (#47015983)

Aren't we about to attempt a landing on Europa?

Re:Monolith! (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 4 months ago | (#47015985)

Quick, organize a mission to the Tycho crater, it's our only hope!

Re:Monolith! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016511)

So it's come to this. People can't even be bothered to get a quote from one of the most awesome science fiction films ever made right. Or even capitalise it.

Re:Monolith! (1)

Chordonblue (585047) | about 4 months ago | (#47017295)

Also in reference to the 2010 movie, after reading the title to this article, all I could here was Curnow screaming, "It's shrinking, IT'S SHRINKING!!!"

Re:Monolith! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017307)

TMI

It's all about gravity (3, Funny)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | about 4 months ago | (#47015907)

The average Jovian's carbon footprint is much heavier than a Terran's.

Re:It's all about gravity (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016449)

The average Jovian's carbon footprint is much heavier than a Terran's.

I think it's not so much gravity, but rather the division by zero in your calculations.

The big red eye is closing... (0)

Emmi59 (971727) | about 4 months ago | (#47015911)

The big red eye is closing. May be Jupiter is tired watching us destroying Earth...?

Re:The big red eye is closing... (1)

peragrin (659227) | about 4 months ago | (#47015959)

Or the Sun is getting ready to fire a plasma lance(solar flare) at us. The red eye is a count down when it disappears they fire.

I have always wondered what would happen if an earth sized object(like one of it's many moons) crashed into Jupiter? what would the resulting crash look like? The heat would last for a century or two as well. Enough heat to alter the winds of jupiter? I am probably wrong.

Re:The big red eye is closing... (0)

Wansu (846) | about 4 months ago | (#47017167)

Now a big brown eye will appear.

Hubble Rules! (3, Insightful)

thephydes (727739) | about 4 months ago | (#47015915)

Another testament to one of the most amazing "machines" ever created. Hubble is a truly awesome telescope, and the pictures that come from it continue to amaze and astound us.

Re:Hubble Rules! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015947)

Another testament to the fact that we are exploring space just fine from our computer chairs. No one actually had to be in space to take those pictures.

Re:Hubble Rules! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47015965)

Computers are garbage and will be wiped out in 2021. DUH

Slide rulers are the only technology capable of getting us to mars you ignorant idiot....

Re:Hubble Rules! (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 4 months ago | (#47016019)

Computers are a passing fad

Re:Hubble Rules! (4, Insightful)

S.O.B. (136083) | about 4 months ago | (#47016001)

I agree that we can learn a lot using telescopes and autonomous/semi-autonomous robots but nothing captures the imagination quite like one of us actually going there.

incorrect - 40 astronauts required to date. (5, Informative)

ferret4 (459105) | about 4 months ago | (#47016577)

5 crews of 7 astronauts have gone into space on repair missions, including the first mission to repair Hubble's faulty lenses that would have rendered it useless. Add to that the 5 astronauts that took Hubble into space in the first place and you have a total of 40 people in space. Some of those 40 may possibly be the same across 6 missions, I'll let you research that yourself.

Re:Hubble Rules! (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about 4 months ago | (#47016651)

No one actually had to be in space to take those pictures.

Apart from when Hubble was launched or when it needed repairs.

Hubble needed fixin' (1)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about 4 months ago | (#47017053)

Another testament to the fact that we are exploring space just fine from our computer chairs. No one actually had to be in space to take those pictures.

Didn't they have to do a space walk to repair or adjust the telescope because it was taking blurry pictures? It seems someone did need to be in space for us to see these pictures!

Re:Hubble Rules! (2)

Solandri (704621) | about 4 months ago | (#47018057)

Just to put some perspective on this, the Shuttle was designed to launch NRO spy satellites [wikipedia.org] . The entire reason its cargo bay was as large as it was was so it could carry a spy satellite into orbit. Hubble was also designed to fit in this bay, so coincidentally ended up being almost the exact same size as a spy satellite.

Since the Shuttle began operating, 16 such spy satellites have been launched into orbit (not all aboard the shuttle - some go into polar orbits and are launched from Vandenberg AFB). 13 KH-11, 2 Misty, 1 EIS. So that's basically 16 Hubble-like satellites for spying vs. 1 Hubble for exploration (though to be fair there have been 5 service missions to Hubble). And I'm not including the spy satellites which used film [wikipedia.org] and were operational until the 1980s. The NRO even donated two Hubble-sized optical assemblies [wikipedia.org] (main and secondary mirrors) believed to be from unused or canceled spy satellites to NASA.

This probably comes across like an anti-NRO rant. I don't mean it that way - the NRO is simply doing the job it's been tasked with by our politicians. I'm just pointing out that our mistrust and suspicion of each other consumes a helluva lot more of our time and money than our desire to explore and discover new things (not created by other people).

Climate Change is Real (-1, Flamebait)

buybuydandavis (644487) | about 4 months ago | (#47015949)

We're raping another planet now. We're EVIL.

This downsizing (3, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 4 months ago | (#47015969)

downsizing

In my organization, we call it rightsizing. Of course, we didn't call it that while we were expanding.

Better question (4, Interesting)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 4 months ago | (#47016021)

What has keep it going all these years?

Re:Better question (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | about 4 months ago | (#47016905)

There's not much to stop it and disrupt the circulation (e.g. mountains).

It eats smaller spots. (2)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | about 4 months ago | (#47017907)

What has keep it going all these years?

As I understand it (I DON'T study this, but just recall previous articles):

The Great Red Spot is a big storm. It happens that the dynamics of storms on Jupiter is such that they move east/west at different speeds, and when they collide they combine. So Jupiter usually has a big Borg storm that has been growig by assimilating little storms more than it has been shrinking by "blowing out".

I have also read that such storms, though very long-lived, have died out even in the geologically-short period Jupiter has been observed, and new ones grown up later - not necessarily in the same hemisphere.

I haven't heard of a situation where there have been two or more of them - either one each in the northern and soutern hemisphere or two in the same hemisphere at different lattitudes. But observation of Jupiter is young in terms of the length of its weather cycles.

Similarly, Earth's ocean currents are also apparently "weather" - exhibiting positive feedback and chaotic behavior, not just a constant response to heat sources, sinks, and seabed geometry - but with an even longer time scale than Jupiter's storms.

2001 (2)

docwatson223 (986360) | about 4 months ago | (#47016025)

Didn't Arthur C. Clarke write about this - like right before the Monolith ignited Jupiter? ;)

Rate of shrinkage (5, Informative)

Zocalo (252965) | about 4 months ago | (#47016065)

For those that don't RTFA it seems like the rate of shrinkage has dramatically accelerated in the last few years - the extent of this being something that probably ought to be included in the summary. It was ~23,500km across when the Voyager probes imaged it in 1979/1980 and is down to ~16,500km in the latest Hubble image, yet the current rate of shrinkage is quoted at almost 1,000km/year since 2012. That makes me think it's behaving like many Terrestial storms and it's going to blow over and dissipate quite quickly, which could mean that it could be gone entirely before the end of the decade. While it was never going to be around indefinitely I'm still somewhat stunned at the notion that I'm probably going to outlive something that has always seemed like a permanent fixture and a defining feature of Jupiter akin to Saturn's rings.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about 4 months ago | (#47016207)

Interesting. Makes me wonder, what is they age of the feature?

Re:Rate of shrinkage (5, Interesting)

Noryungi (70322) | about 4 months ago | (#47016331)

Interesting. Makes me wonder, what is they age of the feature?

Oldest reports of the Red Spot on Jupiter have been tentatively dated (roughly) to the late 1600s. It was studied by Cassini (the original astronomer, not the satellite of the same name). It's been studied extensively since the early 1800s. So we are talking about a storm raging on Jupiter that has been going on for 400+ years at least.

Think about this: that storm -- 3 times to size of the Earth at its biggest -- has been visible from the Earth for 400+ years. With winds hundreds of kilometers an hour running inside.

And now it's dying, and we may be witnesses to an amzing events in the coming years. Thinking about it gives me chills.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016371)

It's not clear if the storm seen in the 1600s is the same as the one we're seeing now. It's only been continuously watched since 1878.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 4 months ago | (#47016419)

Think about this: that storm -- 3 times to size of the Earth at its biggest -- has been visible from the Earth for 400+ years.

Ah, but Jupiter rotates. How do you know it's the same spot each time?

Maybe Jupiter is blushing because it knows we've been looking at its bum.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (1)

StripedCow (776465) | about 4 months ago | (#47017467)

Even if it didn't rotate, how do you know it's still the same spot?

Its atoms could be renewing themselves every X planck time units.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47016695)

So we are talking about a storm raging on Jupiter that has been going on for 400+ years at least.

And, to put that into perspective, Jupiter is likely, what, several billion years old?

To expect that this has been a permanent feature of Jupiter is thinking on human timescales.

On astronomical timescales, this may well be a transient blip.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016277)

Things my kids will never learn about in school....first it was the planet Pluto, now it's the great red spot of Jupiter. Hopefully Saturn will still have will still have rings for a few years.

Re:Rate of shrinkage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016491)

It might not actually be shrinking.

To me it looks more like it may be changing the composition of the material actually IN the spot, thus the apparent change is an illusion.

The 2014 image shows two such swirls in the equatorial zone that are only slightly smaller (the band they are in is smaller too) - yet their color is white.

Suppose that all that is happening is that the colored material is just precipitating out...

Shrinkage? (2)

mu51c10rd (187182) | about 4 months ago | (#47016863)

Maybe it just got out of the pool...

Re:Rate of shrinkage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017651)

It's probably one of the most interesting planets to look at anyways. Saturn has its rings, but the planet that we see almost looks like a piece of sanded wood - it's just so smooth and peaceful in most cases. It had a storm in 2011, but that ran its course in short order. Uranus is similar, as it is mostly quiet, but its defining feature is being on its side; its auroras happen along its equator. Neptune has violent weather similar to Jupiter, but it lacks the kind of bands of gases that Jupiter displays so prominently. Heck, Neptune even has its own dark spot of a storm, though I doubt as many people are aware of it as the red spot on Jupiter.

Jupiter, however, is always a swirling torrent. The different bands of colors are always mixing and mingling. It's a bit sad that we'll lose the red spot that has identified that planet for as long as we - as individuals - have known it, but Jupiter will still have its own identity in its colored bands and erratic vortexes.

Reloading (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016095)

It is getting ready to fire.

Cosmetics! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016163)

Jupiter finally found out about Clearasil!

That monolith the Chinese found? (1)

INT_QRK (1043164) | about 4 months ago | (#47016177)

This have anything to do with that monolith the Chinese rover found on the moon? (...just thought I'd start that roomer.)

Re:That monolith the Chinese found? (1)

INT_QRK (1043164) | about 4 months ago | (#47016185)

make that "rumor"...too early and it's raining

Cure for cancer (1)

Racerdude (1006357) | about 4 months ago | (#47016243)

If we go there we could find the cure for cancer... or, well, at least melanoma

living under a racist corepirate nazi wmd cabal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016261)

cleansing they call it http://rt.com/op-edge/159384-uk-budget-defense-bilderberg/

The economy is worse than I thought (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016295)

Even Jupiter is downsizing.

Exactly to the word what my last girlfriend said (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016399)

I told here the cold does that to men. She didn't buy it. I told her it's normal as a man hits 30. She didn't buy it. I told her to suck it. She didn't buy it.

Downsizing? Really? (0)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 4 months ago | (#47016401)

Jupiter's trademark Great Red Spot — a swirling storm feature larger than Earth — is shrinking. This downsizing...

Or "shrinking" as it is usually known...

C'mon. I know "downsizing" has a specific and vaguely useful meaning but it is generally a pretty dumb-sounding word.

Its use here rankles me almost to a similar degree as hearing a comedian being introduced as a "funnyman."

Re:Downsizing? Really? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 4 months ago | (#47017163)

Either way, its meaning has nothing to do with the reduction in the size of an object.

Climate Disruption! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016515)

Forget Global Warming! It's (queue the scary music)... CLIMATE DIIISSSSSSRRRRUUUUPPPTTTTIIIOOOONNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gather all your politicians! Post on all your Social Media Sites! Humans, the cancer of The Most Holy Sacred Blessed Mother Earth, have now impacted Jupiter! It's too late for Mama Earth, but we can still SAVE JUPITER!

Oh, the HORROR of it all!

Damn, I feel old. (4, Funny)

B33rNinj4 (666756) | about 4 months ago | (#47016591)

Pluto isn't a planet, and now this? It's a sad day indeed.

Re:Damn, I feel old. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016797)

If you look at astronomic history you'll find that concepts come and go quickly. If you would have told Einstein that there were separate galaxies back when he was picking up his Nobel prize he would have been astounded.

Oh noooo (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016629)

I blame global warming.

#bringbackourspot (0, Troll)

T.E.D. (34228) | about 4 months ago | (#47016879)

Next we'll see pictures of a whole bunch of different celebrities holding up white cards with #bringbackourspot written on them.

My first guess would be Madonna, since her cheek seems to have lost a spot sometime around 1992. Also, Lady Gaga seems to keep losing hers and finding it again on another part of her face. So they can empathize.

The global warming comments (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47016929)

I have visited many sites that carry the news about Jupiter's Red Spot. In all of them, invariably, one could read lots of tongue-in-cheek comments blaming global warming. The truth is that, in their eagerness to promote their cause to get something done, by coming up with ever more alarming reports, the climate science community and their advocates have largely attained the opposite effect - i.e. in many groups (and unfortunately not all of them under the control of the Koch brothers and Big Oil) they are not taken seriously.

I remember being flabbergasted a few years ago, in conversation with an ardent supporter of the IPCC reports, when he acknowledged that, in his opinion, the grave short-/medium-term consequences of anthropogenic global warming listed in the report were (his words) to a large extent an exaggeration. Nevertheless, he stood by and supported them on the grounds that, otherwise, nothing would be done.

Re:The global warming comments (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017457)

"I remember being flabbergasted a few years ago, in conversation with an ardent supporter of the IPCC reports, when he acknowledged that, in his opinion, the grave short-/medium-term consequences of anthropogenic global warming listed in the report were (his words) to a large extent an exaggeration. Nevertheless, he stood by and supported them on the grounds that, otherwise, nothing would be done."

I have had the same experience. Whether they realize it or not, these people have crossed the line that separates scientist from priest.

You mean they have climate change there TOO!!?? (1)

marcgvky (949079) | about 4 months ago | (#47017173)

Wow, must people anthro climate change there, too!!!

Re:You mean they have climate change there TOO!!?? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 4 months ago | (#47018041)

no, it's just weather, which on gas giant large storms lasting decades to centuries are quite normal

Can we send Al Gore and the IPCC to investigate?? (0)

marcgvky (949079) | about 4 months ago | (#47017355)

That should free the rest of us up, to live out the next 20 years without them destroying our lives and economies.

Humans caused this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47017471)

I saw on a conspiracy website this morning that this shrinking is being caused by the Galileo satellite that we crashed into Jupiter, and that the mission of this satellite was not to study Jupiter, but to eliminate the spot, which is thought by the Illuminati to interfere with their mind control rays.

Outsourced (1)

dts3 (3578331) | about 4 months ago | (#47017473)

Global warming is just a clever attempt by Jupiter to outsource it's Giant Storm(tm) to the third-world planet known as "Earth"

Many Large Storms (1)

JMandingo (325160) | about 4 months ago | (#47017525)

Looking at that photo linked in the article, I just realized that there are many other large storms visible on Jupiter. There are three large off-white ones just above the red one that are comparable in size. They do not stand out as much because they lack the striking red color and instead blend into the surrounding clouds. There is a little orange one at bottom left. I wonder if those other storms have persisted as long as the big red eye?

You can watch it on the Internet! (0)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 4 months ago | (#47017761)

Boy, we haven't seen a giant dark spot that large that the public has seen start shrinking since Kim Kardashian had anal bleaching.

Call Dave Bowman! (1)

jpellino (202698) | about 4 months ago | (#47017895)

This time make sure his trusty cyberpal has a kill switch.

My God (1)

stonecutter2 (940299) | about 4 months ago | (#47017981)

It's full of stars.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>