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

31–40 of 91 posts

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

#31

Post by daeken »

lallysingh wrote: post #29
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…

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

You don't need to be concerned about Mercury's day unless they're on the surface, essentially. You do need to be concerned with the earth's, and their positions relative to the sun.

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

#32

Post by stcredzero »

SilasX wrote: post #12
ngoldbaum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know basically nothing about the details of cloud structure on exoplanets.

Then it's kind of a stretch to call Jupiter "truly unique" in this respect, isn't it? "Wow, only a quarter of known gas giants are like this!"

How about, "Truly unique in our experience?"

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

#33

Post by guelo »

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?

Then we could beam the energy back to earth using lasers so bright that they would burn plasma holes through our atmosphere and precisely target receiving stations where they would vaporize water which would power a steam turbine. Totally doable, I'd say we could get it up and running in a couple years.

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

#34

Post by effie »

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?

The cost would be astronomical, I do not think it would be worth it. Much better to build this here on Earth, only 4x more panels needed, still easier to build and maintain.

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

#36

Post by elbear »

visakanv wrote: post #23
SilasX wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well, if you think about it, there aren't two planets which are 100% alike, so each planet can be called unique.

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

#37

Post by GCA10 »

SilasX wrote: post #12
ngoldbaum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know basically nothing about the details of cloud structure on exoplanets.

Then it's kind of a stretch to call Jupiter "truly unique" in this respect, isn't it? "Wow, only a quarter of known gas giants are like this!"

It's an interesting story with an awkward headline and opening quote. The word "unique" is being pressed into duty as a terse synonym for "interesting in all sorts of ways that will require you to read entire paragraphs of information to understand."

I'm inclined to forgive NASA on this one. The accuracy/brevity trade-off tortures anyone who tries to popularize science.

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

#38

Post by undersuit »

tome wrote: post #14
undersuit wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saturn has a tilt just a bit more than the Earth and it experiences seasons; the pole is rotated something like 26 degrees into our field of vision in "winter". Uranus is actually rotating on it's side. http://www.setterfield.org/Astronomy/pictures/axial-tilt-pla...

" other solar systems"

The answer is we don't. Unlike the other three gas giants in the Solar System we can't see Jupiter's pole clearly. So Jupiter is unique to our solar system, and we don't know much about the visual details of exoplanets.

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

#39

Post by effie »

parenthephobia wrote: post #26
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 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 t…

I only get (15E12/1360/0.3) = 37 billion m², which is 190x190 km square or 36000 km². Little more than Taiwan, which looks as quite a little spot compared to the globe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Taiwan
Post reply on HN