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

NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#31

Post by t1E9mE7JTRjf »

mritterhoff wrote: post #23
unkeen wrote: post #16

> the solar system’s undisputed heavyweight Now I feel the urge to dispute this!

It's an odd choice of words since 1. Most people know it's the largest and heaviest planet 2. They didn't specify planet but are still ignoring the sun, which is 1000x Jupiter's mass.

Interesting, for me it was quite poetic and a phrasing I specifically noticed and enjoyed. I guess I did know Jupiters the biggest, but wouldn't have been 100% on it, or on heaviest. Not that I'd have a better suggestion, just not something much in my mind, so the framing was nice. I didn't think of the sun at all for some reason. Guess my solar system association is with planets.

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#33

Post by Tuna-Fish »

ricksunny wrote: post #26
perihelions wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can read their paper here[0]. I agree it's very dodgy (and without even looking at that author's past). While the comet 3I/ATLAS approaches within 53 million km of Jupiter (0.3 au), all they can propose is, optimistically, to bring Juno to within half that distance–27 million km. Hardly seems worth the risks? And that'd end all of Juno's remaining Jupiter science (assuming the MAGA! FY26 budget doesn't get to it…

>Hardly seems worth the risks? Juno's mission is at end-of-life at the proposal's starting point. So now tell me again about the risks.

It's not going to be able to see anything at the closest approach that we can't see from earth. So there are no gains to be had, so no risks are worth it.

And even the 27Mkm number requires very optimistic assumptions, including that the main engine that has had huge problems during its mission would work perfectly for one continuous burn to exhaustion. Realistically, that's not going to happen.

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#34

Post by JdeBP »

lucb1e wrote: post #27
JdeBP wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frank B. Baird Jr. was the son of Frank B. Baird, of Buffalo New York, who died some time around 1947. His son, and Flora M. Baird, his widow, set up a charitable trust in his name which did things like donate to the Buffalo Museum of Science. The later Frank B. Baird Jr. Foundation made several donations to Harvard for scholarships and the like in the 1950s.

[flagged]

You're yet more proof that humans cannot competently administer the Turing Test. That was me writing.

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#35

Post by tomhow »

lucb1e wrote: post #27
JdeBP wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frank B. Baird Jr. was the son of Frank B. Baird, of Buffalo New York, who died some time around 1947. His son, and Flora M. Baird, his widow, set up a charitable trust in his name which did things like donate to the Buffalo Museum of Science. The later Frank B. Baird Jr. Foundation made several donations to Harvard for scholarships and the like in the 1950s.

[flagged]

Please don't do this here. If a comment seems unfit for HN, please flag it and email us at hn@ycombinator.com so we can have a look.

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#37

Post by mritterhoff »

euroderf wrote: post #36

OT: So if Jupiter is something of a "failed star", how much bigger would it have to be to be a successful star, and what would be the effect (if any) on other planets' orbits, and would it boil away a lot of Saturn ?

Wikipedia says it would need to be 75x more massive in order to start fusing hydrogen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter#Size_and_mass

Re: NASA's Juno mission leaves legacy of science at Jupiter

#39

Post by euroderf »

mritterhoff wrote: post #37
euroderf wrote: post #36

OT: So if Jupiter is something of a "failed star", how much bigger would it have to be to be a successful star, and what would be the effect (if any) on other planets' orbits, and would it boil away a lot of Saturn ?

Wikipedia says it would need to be 75x more massive in order to start fusing hydrogen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter#Size_and_mass

I wonder then how this idea of "failed star" got um started.
Post reply on HN