Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#21

Post by Aeolos »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #18
jnicholasp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

In the era of big hard drives and fat pipes, people forget that 6 megabytes is a lot of raw data if it's not packed with unnecessary GUI elements, high-res video, and inefficient code.

On the other hand, 6MB is the typical file size for the jpg-compressed images taken by my 20MP smartphone camera.

It is all a matter of perspective.

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#22

Post by daeken »

jnicholasp wrote: post #7
doikor wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solar panels that Juno has produce only 500 watts of power. You would need a lot more then that to be sending gigabytes of data in any meaningful timeframe. So yes it really is just six megabytes of data taking 30h+ to download. Btw the panels would produce 14kW at earth orbit but suns power goes down quite fast as you move away from it. Also the farthest from the Sun we've ever used solar panels. Traditionally m…

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

According to Wikipedia, the world's average energy consumption is 12.3Tw. Given that the Earth is gets 1366 W/m² of solar power at 149,597,870km, this means Mercury gets 9190 W/m² at 57,910,000km. Plugging these together, this tells us that a 12.3Tw solar array of 100% efficiency in Mercury's orbit would have a surface area of 1338 km².

Realistically, you'd at least double that, to produce the same power, as solar panels are <50% efficient.

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#23

Post by visakanv »

SilasX wrote: post #19
acupofnope wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. What's the point you're trying to make? (genuine question)

To express skepticism about >The largest planet in our solar system is truly unique.

Since we're in the business of nitpicking – unique means one of a kind, so the "truly" is redundant. That said, there are so many planets in the Universe that it's practically impossible for any single one to be unique – the term is being used here not in a technically accurate way, but in a loose, "I want you to be impressed" sense.

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#24

Post by frandroid »

Aeolos wrote: post #21
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the era of big hard drives and fat pipes, people forget that 6 megabytes is a lot of raw data if it's not packed with unnecessary GUI elements, high-res video, and inefficient code.

On the other hand, 6MB is the typical file size for the jpg-compressed images taken by my 20MP smartphone camera. It is all a matter of perspective.

That's pretty much packed with a lot of useless information, considering the average usage of uploading the picture to Facebook. :P

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#25

Post by jnicholasp »

daeken wrote: post #22
jnicholasp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

According to Wikipedia, the world's average energy consumption is 12.3Tw. Given that the Earth is gets 1366 W/m² of solar power at 149,597,870km, this means Mercury gets 9190 W/m² at 57,910,000km. Plugging these together, this tells us that a 12.3Tw solar array of 100% efficiency in Mercury's orbit would have a surface area of 1338 km². Realistically, you'd at least double that, to produce the same power, as solar pa…

Brilliant, thanks. So how long before we start putting solar panels in close, direct orbit around the Sun?

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#26

Post by parenthephobia »

jnicholasp wrote: post #7
doikor wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solar panels that Juno has produce only 500 watts of power. You would need a lot more then that to be sending gigabytes of data in any meaningful timeframe. So yes it really is just six megabytes of data taking 30h+ to download. Btw the panels would produce 14kW at earth orbit but suns power goes down quite fast as you move away from it. Also the farthest from the Sun we've ever used solar panels. Traditionally m…

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

In stellar terms, tiny. In human terms, huge.

Googling suggests that global energy usage is estimated to be around 15 terawatts.

Using the most efficient multi-junction solar cells available - which can convert 30% of the light hitting them into electricity - we could generate that with about 6.5 million km² of solar panels: that's about 80% of Australia.

Out at Earth's orbit, it'd need to be 68 million km^2: about the area of the Indian Ocean.

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#27

Post by iliis »

jnicholasp wrote: post #25
daeken wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Wikipedia, the world's average energy consumption is 12.3Tw. Given that the Earth is gets 1366 W/m² of solar power at 149,597,870km, this means Mercury gets 9190 W/m² at 57,910,000km. Plugging these together, this tells us that a 12.3Tw solar array of 100% efficiency in Mercury's orbit would have a surface area of 1338 km². Realistically, you'd at least double that, to produce the same power, as solar pa…

Brilliant, thanks. So how long before we start putting solar panels in close, direct orbit around the Sun?

As soon as somebody figures out how to get the energy from the panels back to earth? Assuming we figure out how to economically put them there in the first place...

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#29

Post by lallysingh »

daeken wrote: post #22
jnicholasp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

According to Wikipedia, the world's average energy consumption is 12.3Tw. Given that the Earth is gets 1366 W/m² of solar power at 149,597,870km, this means Mercury gets 9190 W/m² at 57,910,000km. Plugging these together, this tells us that a 12.3Tw solar array of 100% efficiency in Mercury's orbit would have a surface area of 1338 km². Realistically, you'd at least double that, to produce the same power, as solar pa…

You'd have to add some redundency for the rotation of the planet. 58 earth days per mercurial day.

Re: Jupiter’s North Pole Unlike Anything Encountered in Solar System

#30

Post by effie »

daeken wrote: post #22
jnicholasp wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transmission is one thing, but collection is another: did they really only collect 6 megabytes of data over the course of a 6 hour flyby? Off topic, ish: does anyone know how large a solar panel array would have to be to supply all of our current energy use, if the array orbited the Sun at the same distance Mercury does?

According to Wikipedia, the world's average energy consumption is 12.3Tw. Given that the Earth is gets 1366 W/m² of solar power at 149,597,870km, this means Mercury gets 9190 W/m² at 57,910,000km. Plugging these together, this tells us that a 12.3Tw solar array of 100% efficiency in Mercury's orbit would have a surface area of 1338 km². Realistically, you'd at least double that, to produce the same power, as solar pa…

Nitpick, the farthest distance of Mercury from the Sun on its orbit is closer to 0.46 AU and it spends most of the time there, so for safe estimate it is better to take this greater value for planet-Sun distance. I get around 100x100 km collecting square near the Earth and almost 50x50 km near the Mercury. Taking into account efficiency and design constraints, it's safer to estimate more like 200x200 km near the Earth and 100x100 km near the Mercury. Clearly, building this near the Mercury brings little benefit as opposed to building it near the Earth. If we built this on the surface of the Earth (seems cheapest, even if the area would have to be quadrupled due to night and atmosphere) it does look practically achievable in the future. Solar energy could sustain current consumption of the human civilization. Most alternative sources of energy are not rich enough to supplant nuclear energy. Solar energy seems to be the best contender.
Post reply on HN