×

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!

Probe Shows Jupiter Moon 'Puking' Into Space

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the intergalactic-bodily-fluids dept.

NASA 152

Tablizer writes "The New Horizons probe caught the moon Io in the act of 'barfing' into space. A five-frame sequence from the New Horizons probe captured a beautiful plume of ash from Io's Tvashtar volcano. "Snapped by the probe's Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (LORRI) as the spacecraft flew past Jupiter earlier this year, this first-ever "movie" of an Io plume clearly shows motion in the cloud of volcanic debris, which extends 330 kilometers (200 miles) above the moon's surface ... The appearance and motion of the plume is remarkably similar to an ornamental fountain on Earth, replicated on a gigantic scale.""

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

152 comments

Not so schön as the Goatse ! (0, Troll)

Adolf Hitroll (562418) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459811)

Really! [goatse.ch]

Re:Not so schön as the Goatse ! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461497)

do you sit here at slashdot all day and night, with no life, no girlfriend, no job, jerking off, clicking that refresh button every second just to see if you can get a first post to show goatse? you must really get some extreme personal gratitude for yourself with every first post..

Dizzy (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19459817)

It's probably just dizzy from all that spinning.

Re:Dizzy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460095)

If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
If the name "Clarus" means nothing to you, GTFO.

Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real [imageshack.us] Mac [imageshack.us] users [imageshack.us]. Keep your filthy, beige [imageshack.us] PC fingers to yourself.

Re:Dizzy (1)

Kwiik (655591) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460141)

sounds like it got as drunk as I did last night
I wonder if it's hang over is as terrible..

Re:Dizzy (1)

Miseph (979059) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461369)

Considering it projectile vomited hard enough to go orbital... yeah, I'd say it's at least as bad.

Re:Dizzy (4, Informative)

DiamondGeezer (872237) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460277)

Since its tidally locked to Jupiter (just like the Moon is to the Earth), then there's not much spinning to be concerned about.

Io is heated continually by tidal friction, leaving its core molten and its surface full of lava lakes and the vents and calderas of active volcanoes. The tide raising force of Jupiter raises the surface of Io in some places by several meters.

Re:Dizzy (1)

hazem (472289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460331)

Since its tidally locked to Jupiter (just like the Moon is to the Earth), then there's not much spinning to be concerned about.

Io appears to be rotating. Look at the features as they move past where the light and dark meet (I know there's a word for this - ahh, terminator). You can see features moving across the terminator fairly quickly in this 8 minute film clip. Either the light source is moving or the moon is rotating.

Am I missing something? Or is it merely that the rotation has little effect on what is happening here?

Re:Dizzy (2, Informative)

KingArthur10 (679328) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460377)

Tidal locking means that the same face is always facing the planet (or the sun, in the case of a planet). This means that the moon is rotating at the same speed as it orbits the planet. Since Io orbits Jupiter every 1.769 earth days, it also makes a complete rotation every 1.769 days, also. There is definitely plenty of spinning going on for that moon.

Re:Dizzy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461207)

Since its tidally locked to Jupiter (just like the Moon is to the Earth), then there's not much spinning to be concerned about.

So you think that our moon isn't rotating?

Re:Dizzy (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461001)

Or, Ganymede is secretly assfucking it while Jupiter is not looking. Expect Ganymede being ejected from Jupiter's orbit real soon now!

"Puking" and "barfing"? (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459829)

So, why does the summary title and text use the terms "puking" and "barfing" when the article itself doesn't make any such references? Gratuitous? "Submitter's license"?

I mean, was that really necessary? Or is the story not interesting enough itself without toilet humor?

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19459859)

I agree. BTW, doesn't it look like the moon is barfing onto itself? All that stuff coming back down on it? How is it hurling into space, when it's rather splattering it's own proverbial face with all that goo?

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (5, Funny)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459885)

If I had uranus in my vicinity all day long, I'd be barfing too!

Wait.. Maybe that comment wasn't what you were looking for :)

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (-1, Offtopic)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460967)

If I had uranus in my vicinity all day long
I once had met somebody who puked while my dick was in his anus... And he didn't even have the decency to puke into the toilet, but onto the floor next to it. And my shoes weren't that clean either was this "adventure".

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (5, Funny)

bushboy (112290) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459923)

I thought it was because of the high level of education in the USA?

"Whooa dude, that Io's like, err, like, err, barfing dude! - hehhehhhehehehhehhe"
"shwoaaah yeah, it's puking man! - kewl! - ehherrheehhheheh"

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19459955)

Cue idiocracy fanboys

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (1, Troll)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460711)

I thought it was because of the high level of education in the USA?

You assume that other nations don't like having a little word-play fun. Getting into college and reading for enjoyment are two different things.

And frankly, critizing the US education motivation is somewhat unfair because becomming a business owner or biz manager pays so much more *compared to* science and math in the US that there is far more motivation in those countries to focus on sci-math in the schools: they don't have the options we do. Outsourcing brainy work with 3rd-world wages hasn't helped the situation either. Our schools are training us in skills that are being offshored. We need sales skills, not Calculus, to compete *in* America.
           

would an american submitter (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461295)

put the distance in kilometers?

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461721)

We aint got nothin wrong with our goddamned edumacation!

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (4, Insightful)

TopSpin (753) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459963)

I saw this story in Firehose and thought; interesting story, too bad the puerile wording will keep it off the front page...

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (1, Troll)

h00pla (532294) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459977)

You have, of course, totally overestimated the taste of the editors.

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (2)

ari_j (90255) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460973)

Curiously enough, it's actually the use of words like puerile that will keep articles off the front page.*

I agree that this was just gratuitous. My favorite part is that the submitter put "barfing" into quotation marks, as if it wasn't his word. My second favorite part is that the use of the word combined with the phrase "into space" implies that it is spewing matter beyond its sphere of influence. Watching the animated gif from TFA makes it seem (at least to me, IANAE (I am not an exogeologist)) that the matter settles to the moon's surface.

* - Unless, of course, you spell it wrong or use it to mean something it doesn't.

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461283)

I saw this story in Firehose and thought; interesting story, too bad the puerile wording will keep it off the front page...

Yeah, me too. It'd be nice to be able to include a one-line comment explaining why you're voting no. Often there are reasonably interesting stories with poorly-written submissions. I vote no figuring someone else will submit the same story with a better write-up, but it would be better if I could somehow note that. (Such as on Wikipedia, where you can explain an edit.)

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460469)

Agreed. The use of quotation marks in the submission really makes it sound like those words were used in the article itself.

This may be a bit too much pop-psych, but I can't help but wonder if the desire to trivialize awesome natural events like this, Beavis-and-Butthead-style, comes from fear. A volcano with a 200-mile-high plume is not really the sort of thing the human mind handles very easily. I mean, we know what it is, and we can look at the pretty pictures on our screen and ooh and aah, but the caveman inside our heads is trembling at the wrath of the gods. Calling it "puking" makes it laughable, and therefore much less terrifying.

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (2, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460473)

So, why does the summary title and text use the terms "puking" and "barfing" when the article itself doesn't make any such references? Gratuitous? "Submitter's license"?

What rule says that titles and summaries must be verbatim?

I mean, was that really necessary? Or is the story not interesting enough itself without toilet humor?

It provides an interesting visual metaphor. Not everybody likes everything dry and clinical all the time. Otherwise, we wouldn't have overlord jokes.

-The Submitter- (but not the Decider)

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461049)

puking isnt just funny, its damn sexy too. ;)

Re:"Puking" and "barfing"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461175)

I completely agree.

What fun (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459835)

Dude!!! If only I had a boogie board, then I could ride the ash fountain to the top! What? George Lucas wants to use the idea for his next Starwars movie? Bummer :(

Great terminology... (4, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459847)

When did "puking" and "barfing" become scientific terms? Wouldn't "ejaculate" be a more appropriate term?

Re:Great terminology... (2, Funny)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459909)

I sure hope not... Saturn was a roman God, father of Jupiter, so that could be a nasty case of incest if it was destined for his neighbor. :-(

Re:Great terminology... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460037)

what about "tubgirling" ?

Re:Great terminology... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460375)

It you want to get technical, it's more like popping a pimple.

Re:Great terminology... (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460503)

When did "puking" and "barfing" become scientific terms? Wouldn't "ejaculate" be a more appropriate term?

Only if the moon moans in pleasure.
         

Re:Great terminology... (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460837)

When did "puking" and "barfing" become scientific terms?

Since when is Slashdot about science :P ?

Re:Great terminology... (1)

chmod a+x mojo (965286) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461151)

I beleive the correct term for matter that get forcefully EJECTED from a volcano is called...... ejecta, not ejaculate.

Iota Omicron (IO) (4, Funny)

Orleron (835910) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459913)

...the slutty drunken sorority moon of Jupiter.

Re:Iota Omicron (IO) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461047)

That's not a mooon... That's a sorority girl.

speaking of puking (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19459925)

just last night, I went out and got shitfaced drunk. Who did I happen to see? Kathleen Fent. Yeah. Now, normally, she's just a fat, ugly cunt, but I was drunk, and she does have a decent rack. I stopped by to say hi, which turned into a 30 minute conversation (translation: I stared at her tits and drank PBR while she bitched about ... I don't know, I wasn't really listening). Anyhow, I ended up fucking her in the parking lot, bent over the back of her car.

How to punt as a columnist (4, Funny)

Dasher42 (514179) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459943)

Step 1: Find a science story about a well-observed and described phenomenon.
Step 2: Add a purile, irrelevant adjective, one that will set you apart from the pack.
Step 3: Write it up. Hello, interwebz. Let's move some ads!
Step 4: News aggregate sites filter out the best from all the... oh wait, here comes Zonk. Go, go Slashdot!
Step 5: Profit! :) :) :)

Re:How to punt as a columnist (2, Informative)

dkf (304284) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460553)

Step 3: Write it up. Hello, interwebz. Let's move some ads!
Except the only link in the whole story (including the "Tablizer writes:" preamble) is to an ad-free site and there's no link concealing or other sorts of nefarious stuff either. Nice theory of yours, but the facts don't support it. Looks instead exactly like a good story spoilt by a potty-mouthed submitter. Like that's never happened before...

Re:How to punt as a columnist (1)

Dasher42 (514179) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460691)

Upon second thought, "puking" didn't sound like something to appear on an .edu page. S'pose you're right.

In the end we will eventually discover (1, Offtopic)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19459995)

that the universe is a living thing and that we are just microbes.

Re:In the end we will eventually discover (0, Offtopic)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461903)

And that was offtopic in what way? I think not only was it totally on topic, it was deeply insightful.
Think about it..

Puking? (1, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460007)

Too much space mead?

Re:Puking? (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#19462085)

Too much space mead?
Offtopic? When the submitter uses "barf" and "puke" to describe astrophysical phenomena, offtopic no longer has any meaning.

To bring this post back "on topic," allow me to submit the latest findings about the Big Black Hole [space.com] at the center of our galaxy, or as the original submitter might refer to it, the "Goatse Nebula."

Incidentally, "space mead" was a great Cthulhu reference. Mod parent up or something unspeakable will eat you.

..0.o..
////|\\\\

Shit, my Cthulhu looks like the guy on the Pringles can. Mod me back down.

Amazing pics (2, Interesting)

Teun (17872) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460267)

I'm amazed by this short sequence.
Considering the distance it's a real neat proof of excellent space ship engineering.

Looking at the hight to which the venting reaches this is one hell of a volcano!

Re:Amazing pics (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460621)

this is one hell of a volcano!

I have read elsewhere that the Volcanoes on Io are probably no bigger than a hot spring geyser on Earth. The plume goes up a long way because of the very thin atmosphere and low gravity.

Even so, given the energy cost of getting there and the amount of radiation in the environment around it this moon is going to be unfinished business for the next 500 years or so.

Re:Amazing pics (4, Informative)

phulegart (997083) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461423)

Not sure where you read what you read, but it is obvious that you did not RTFA, since from the article we learn...

"Boosaule Mons, which at 18 kilometers (11 miles) is the highest mountain on Io and one of the highest mountains in the solar system, pokes above the edge of the disk on the right side." ... and although this is not the height of the volcano that is erupting, it points to structures on Io that are larger than anything here on earth.

You might have read this...

"Unlike most moons, Io has a "young" surface. Because there is so much volcanic activity, the surface is almost free of craters. Also, its volcanoes are quite unusual. Instead of erupting like a normal volcano, they erupt more like geysers do on earth." ...from http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_Solar_Syst em/Jupiter/Io [wikibooks.org] ...or you might have read this though...

"Io has lots of thermal areas just like Yellowstone," says JPL's Bill Smythe. "The volcanic plumes get most of the attention but there are probably also things like fumeroles and geysers. On a previous flyby the Particles and Fields instruments saw a deficit of energetic particles over Io where gas was probably coming out of the surface -- but no plumes were seen. We call this the 'stealth plume hypothesis.' The closest Earthly analog to what's happening would be a water geyser like Old Faithful. In fact, if you put Old Faithful on Io it would be about 37 km high!" ...which came from http://science.nasa.gov/NEWHOME/headlines/ast04oct 99_1.htm [nasa.gov] and only indicates that due to conditions on Io, a familiar geyser on earth would eject matter quite high. However, with this data from the article...

"the cloud of volcanic debris, which extends 330 kilometers (200 miles) above the moon's surface. Only the upper part of the plume is visible from this vantage point - the plume's source is 130 kilometers (80 miles) below the edge of Io's disk, on the far side of the moon." ... we can safely infer that the volcanoes erupting on Io are not similar to earth geysers in size, rather only in how they erupt.

Volcanoes on Io are rather different in general from their Earth cousins. From Wikipedia...

"Io's surface is dotted with volcanic depressions known as paterae. Paterae generally have flat floors bounded by steep walls. These features resemble terrestrial calderas, but it is unknown if they are produced through collapse over an emptied lava chamber as with their terrestrial cousins. One hypothesis suggests that these features are produced through the exhumation of volcanic sills, with the overlying material either being blasted out or integrated into the sill. Unlike similar features on Earth and Mars, these depressions generally do not lie at the peak of shield volcanoes and are normally larger, with an average diameter of 41 km (25½ mi), the largest being Loki Patera at 202 km (125½ mi)." ... in other words flat holes in the ground slightly similar to sinkholes. So personally, I wouldn't look forward to an eruption from the still active Loki, at a diameter of 125 miles. I mean, I wouldn't look forward to sitting ringside to that.

Re:Amazing pics (2, Informative)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461531)

I think the Wikijunior article on Io's volcanism is being a bit simplistic. Basically, Io's volcanoes erupt like Kilauea in Hawaii, except the lava is a little less viscous (similar in viscosity to olive oil) so they don't build up large shield volcanoes like on Earth or Mars. The output also tends to be much greater. The plumes we are see on Io are not themselves the volcano, but are byproducts of Io's volcanism. Their size is a combination of the lack of a substantial atmosphere on Io and that moon's low gravity. Volatiles, like sulfur and sulfur dioxide exsolve from Io's lava as it erupts, carrying small, dust-sized particles from the lava along with it. This gas and dust is what you see in this movie (actually, you are only looking at the dust, the gas is invisible in images like this). In this case, the gas and dust is exsolving from a 1-km tall fire fountain. Smaller plumes, like the one at Prometheus, form slightly differently. At these volcanoes, lava flows over terrain covered in sulfur and sulfur dioxide. The underlying sulfur dioxide heats up, and once reaching a critical pressure, bursts through the overlying lava. So these are not like geysers. These volcanoes erupt much like volcanoes on Earth, but the interplay between volatiles and lava, the near-vacumn environment, and the slightly less-viscous lava, help make spectacular displays like you see here at Tvashtar.

Re:Amazing pics (1)

phulegart (997083) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461723)

As I quoted from NASA, these volcanoes do NOT erupt like volcanoes on Earth. From my post...

"Io has lots of thermal areas just like Yellowstone," says JPL's Bill Smythe. "The volcanic plumes get most of the attention but there are probably also things like fumeroles and geysers. On a previous flyby the Particles and Fields instruments saw a deficit of energetic particles over Io where gas was probably coming out of the surface -- but no plumes were seen. We call this the 'stealth plume hypothesis.' The closest Earthly analog to what's happening would be a water geyser like Old Faithful. In fact, if you put Old Faithful on Io it would be about 37 km high!"

Which was not from a wikipedia junior article, but from http://science.nasa.gov/NEWHOME/headlines/ast04oct [nasa.gov] 99_1.htm again, as I previously posted.

Otherwise, your information is very scientific and appears well researched.

Re:Amazing pics (1)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19462067)

If you read that quote, you would note that Smythe is making a distinction between volcanoes and volcanic plumes (like is shown in the image linked in the article) and the possible fureroles and geysers that might exist on Io. So these volcanoes DO erupt like volcanoes on Earth, just on a different scale, with less viscous lava, and with no entrained water and carbon dioxide.

puke stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460373)

But is that ejaculant really ash per se? What does Io consist of?

Re:puke stuff (3, Informative)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461469)

What you are seeing in this image is mostly sulfur and sulfur dioxide that has condensed out of the gas in the plume. There is also a mix of basaltic ash. The plume consists of gas and dust that escapes from an erupting lava curtain on the surface.

Well... (2, Funny)

Toandeaf (1014715) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460381)

I don't have anything thoughtful to add about this, so I think I'll just do the cool thing and mock the title of the article. heh. it said puke.

Rovers and such (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460441)

Is there any way to privately donate money for the purpose of sending probes, rovers and such to other moons and planets?

Re:Rovers and such (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460517)

Is there any way to privately donate money for the purpose of sending probes, rovers and such to other moons and planets?

The Planetary Society privately funded a solar sail experiment. Unfortunately, the rocket exploded during launch. But they did select launchers on price instead of reliability (aging Soviet military equip.), so I guess its a case of you get what you pay for.
       

Re:Rovers and such (1)

pimpimpim (811140) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461095)

Aren't most of the current space missions done with space equipment based on soviet technology? And aren't a lot of those just going pretty nicely? (the modern european ariadne rockets seem to have less luck, also take a look at the far from unproblematic space shuttle launches). I wonder how much aging equipment there can be in rocket science, most of the stuff is not really made for re-use anyway. Everything that went up in space has to be built anew. The technological idea can be old, but 'old' is sometimes just a synonym for 'proven'.

Re:Rovers and such (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461419)

Aren't most of the current space missions done with space equipment based on soviet technology?

Because they are built by large international corporations, I'm sure there is a mix in most launches.

And aren't a lot of those just going pretty nicely?

They tried to take a short-cut, not using "regular" russian rockets. I am not bashing russian technology. The lowest-end US technology is probably not every good either. It is just that due to labor rates, the cheap russian technology is cheaper than the cheap US technology. IOW "outsourced". The Planetary Society tried to take a shortcut to cut costs, and it cost them. That's the bottom line.
           

puking the wonders of the universe for all to see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19460587)

Funny, I would have never equated "puking" and "beautiful plume" in the same breath. That must have been one amazing cosmic party!

Direction of spout (2, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460729)

At first I thought the direction of motion of the debri was from right-to-left. However, watching the animation loop for a while, it now appears that it is coming from the middle-to-right center of the plum and spreading out, but below the visible horizon. It is coming up, over the edge as it spreads out.
     

puking, barfing... (1)

AnonymousCactus (810364) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460745)

I prefer Ralphing.
For a science that's so concerned about nomenclature (i.e. Pluto) how does puking or barfing even get used by a writer?

Viking snapped this too (1979) (1)

toby (759) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460757)

Re:Viking snapped this too (1979) (1)

Chibi Merrow (226057) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461289)

Voyager, Voyager... Not Viking. Viking went to Mars. But yes, good point. I think the eruptions on Io were one of those things got really surprised and excited about when reviewing the mission data a few years later. First time a volcano was caught in the act outside of Earth. This image is, of course, about 1000x better quality than the old Voyager data. :) And done over a time lapse as well, where Voyager just snapped some quick shots as it screamed past.

Mea culpa (1)

toby (759) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461355)

Stupid mistake, thx ;)

Somehow I had it in my head that it was Viking. I remember seeing the pictures in National Geographic at the time - I'm sure the Io volcano was a cover image.

mass (1)

patrikor_007 (1094491) | more than 6 years ago | (#19460783)

I wonder how much mass Io lost when that thing blew up.

Re:mass (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461311)

I wonder how much mass Io lost when that thing blew up.

Do you think it's being ejected at escape velocity? It looks to me like it's falling back down.

Re:mass (1)

niktemadur (793971) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461397)

It looks to me like it's falling back down.

Most of it, but not all. The resolution is not high enough to show matter escaping into space.
Keep in mind that Jupiter's ring is made of, and is replenished by, Io's volcanic ejecta.

Someone further up the thread said this event was created by something more similar to a geyser than a volcano. Imagine standing on the surface of Io, as you would on Yellowstone, watching this baby from, let's say, half a kilometer. A stream shooting into space and arching in filaments in all directions beyond the horizon, with Jupiter looming in the skies. JPL needs to put an artist's rendition on the website.

Re:mass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461599)

500 metres away ? Since the thing is about 330 kilometres high, I doubt the edge is clearly defined enough to be able to stand half a kilometre away from it. Watching it from 100 kilometres away would probably be beautiful, though.

Great image sequence, poor wording (1)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461133)

This movie is one of the best observations of Io's plumes taken. You can clearly see dust clumping within the plume and how those structures evolve over the 8-minute sequence. Galileo could have taken many movies like this, had it not been for the low bandwidth thanks to the broken high-gain antenna. This same praise can't be said for the description used in this article. First, this image was released almost a month ago. While very cool, and I'm certainly happy for Io to be discussed here (Uranus jokes not withstanding), but this is not news. Second, puking and barfing? Couldn't we use better terminology than puking and barfing... Makes Io sound ill, not the cool place it really is.

What a mess... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461161)

It's gonna take forever to clean all that crap off the side of Discovery.

Fake? (0, Troll)

Poseiden (575105) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461245)

Does this image look fake to anyone else? look how the light reflects off of the smoke plume. its like its lighted from the top when you see the sun hitting the satellite from the left.

agreed?

Subject (0, Flamebait)

Legion303 (97901) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461343)

A small tip for Slashdot submitters: don't put quotes around words that don't actually appear in the article, dumb fuck.

From looking at the animation (1)

Centurix (249778) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461351)

I'd say it was more pissing on itself. We may be witnessing the solar systems spring break.

Question: Why is the quality so poor? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19461467)

Many of us carry tiny mobile phones that are capable of better quality video. Why is the image data and video data returned by these probes so poor?

Well ok a phone cam only has to work a few meters in good lighting. Never the less, the size, power and bandwidth requirements for decent video is being reduced, in part by the consumer electronics industry. So what is the limiting factor these probes?

Re:Question: Why is the quality so poor? (2, Interesting)

volcanopele (537152) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461551)

Bandwidth and in this case, distance from the target. New Horizons required 3 months to return all the data it took during the mission, which included more than just images, but specta and in situ data as well. In addition, the images used to make this movie were taken from a distance of 3.8 million km! The image quality and resolution (~19 km/pixel) is actually much better than we would have gotten at a similar distance from Galileo, Cassini, or Voyager, the previous three missions to observe Io.

Re:Question: Why is the quality so poor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19462129)

Wow 3 months to return all its data. So it is a bandwidth problem. Still it's a shame they can't get great high quality images and video. Especially Huygens which was pretty disappointing. At the very least it would be great PR for NASA, more so than the ISS.

Re:Question: Why is the quality so poor? (2, Insightful)

IHC Navistar (967161) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461561)

Maybe it's because Jupiter is 365 MILLION miles from Earth.

The limiting factor of the space probes that took the photos would be CURRENT TECHNOLOGY.

New Astronomical Term..... (1)

IHC Navistar (967161) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461547)

"Pissing Into The Wind" -: A body the ejects material into space, only to have the same ejected material return to the same body that ejected it.

I think that would accurately describe what is going on in the article.
-

I think that the description of this article is a lowpoint for SlashDot submissions.

This is Enlarged Text (0, Offtopic)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 6 years ago | (#19461861)

I love "Enlarge Photo" buttons that open up the photo in the exact same dimensions and resolution as the one in the article. Anyone find a higher quality image?

Also I was under the impression that water is blue on Earth because it reflects our blue atmosphere. Why would water on Mars be blue? Or is that a false-color image?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...