NASA's Juno mission captures incredible new images of Jupiter

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,375   +43
Staff
The big picture: On a flyby earlier this month, NASA's Juno spacecraft captured the clearest images of Jupiter's moon Io in over two decades. However, the same flyby also yielded stunning new shots of the giant planet itself. The satellite has been circling Jupiter and taking pictures of its moons since arriving there in 2016.

Since the Juno mission's most recent flyby of Jupiter and one of its moons, more detailed pictures of the gas giant have appeared in the official repository. Citizen scientists process the raw images and provide color correction to give viewers a comprehensible interpretation of the subjects NASA is studying.

An especially striking photo (above) shows Jupiter and its volcanic moon Io at the outer edges, with Europa between them in the distance. A diagram (below) illustrates the cylindrical layers of wind that penetrate the solar system's largest planet parallel to its spin axis. Scientists learned about the structure by studying gravitational data collected during Juno's December flyby. Other pictures provide a new, close look at Jupiter's famous clouds and storms.

NASA launched Juno in 2011, and it has spent almost six years observing the Jovian system, making dozens of passes by Jupiter. The satellite is studying the planet's gravitational field, magnetosphere, and other elements to help solve lingering fundamental questions about it. For example, scientists still aren't entirely sure how Jupiter formed or whether it has a solid core. The mission is planned to continue until September 2025, after which the spacecraft will dive into the planet's surface.

Additionally, the spacecraft has provided close-up snapshots of the moons Ganymede, Europa, and Io. Pictures from the recent flyby deliver a stunning new look at the over 400 volcanoes covering Io's colorful surface. Juno made the closest flyby of the moon since the 2002 Galileo mission.

Juno isn't the only space mission planned for observation of Jupiter. The European Space Agency launched the Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer (JUICE) satellite last April, and it is expected to reach the planet's orbit in July 2031. One of its gravitational assists involves a flyby of Venus next year, and upon reaching its destination the satellite will provide more new images of Ganymede, Europa, and Callisto.

Additionally, NASA will launch the Europa Clipper spacecraft in October 2024. The mission is expected to reach Jupiter's orbit in April 2030, after which it will closely study Europa to determine whether the ocean beneath its surface has the conditions necessary for life.

Permalink to story.

 
Question 1 : The tech on earth is 20000% less than that satellite, how come we don't use it on earth.
Question 2 : If we do, how come we know such a little about earth
Question 3 : science says if we were 2km closer to the sun earth would burn up how close is Jupiter?
 
Question 1 : The tech on earth is 20000% less than that satellite, how come we don't use it on earth.
Question 2 : If we do, how come we know such a little about earth
Question 3 : science says if we were 2km closer to the sun earth would burn up how close is Jupiter?
I don't know if anything you said was actually true except that someone likely said all of that.
 
Question 1 : The tech on earth is 20000% less than that satellite, how come we don't use it on earth.
Question 2 : If we do, how come we know such a little about earth
Question 3 : science says if we were 2km closer to the sun earth would burn up how close is Jupiter?

I could only parse the 3rd one, and even that one was obviously BS, so I looked it up for you:

"Earth would become uninhabitable if its average distance from the Sun was reduced by as little as 1.5 million km"

The first 2 don't make any sense whatsoever.
 
"Earth would become uninhabitable if its average distance from the Sun was reduced by as little as 1.5 million km"
Even this figure is much too small. The so-called "Goldilocks zone" for earth is tens of millions of km wide, and using the Stefan-Boltzmann law, it's easy to calculate what effect such a move would have. A (far larger) move of 10 million km closer would raise surface temperatures by about 7.5C. That would make desert and tropical regions quite uncomfortable -- but vast swaths of land in Canada and Russia would suddenly become prime real estate. Far from an "uninhabitable" planet.
 
That would make desert and tropical regions quite uncomfortable -- but vast swaths of land in Canada and Russia would suddenly become prime real estate. Far from an "uninhabitable" planet.
No one wants to live in Russia (or Canada).
 
Question 1 : The tech on earth is 20000% less than that satellite, how come we don't use it on earth.
Assuming you mean how come we don't use any of the tech from this satellite on Earth - the answer is that tech that was developed by the space program is used on Earth every day and has been since the advent of the space program.
Try having a look at this and draw your own conclusions. https://scitechdaily.com/nasa-spino...t-technologies-are-revolutionizing-our-world/ or look at this one, which requires you to dig and actually look through what is there https://spinoff.nasa.gov/Other Spinoff Resources
That's the trouble with a few of the posts to this thread is that they ignore or refuse to see the benefits that the space program has and has had for everyday people on Earth.
 
These are Questions, I ask, because I want to learn, I like to know more and more all the time, the more science says god does not exist the more they point to Him and that for me is interesting, its illogical thinking, 90% of left thinking people are stupid not because I say so, but because He said so.. my questions are always to learn.

Why does NASA say its harder to go to the moon now than it was in 1969??????
 
Far from an "uninhabitable" planet.
[/QUOTE]
I like this..good thinking, open mind.

one side of science says plants are thriving because of the increase in Carbon (plant food), the opposition says the world will become uninhabitable.
Whatever the narrative is (follow the money) that is what the world media will push.

All interesting
 
These are Questions, I ask, because I want to learn, I like to know more and more all the time, the more science says god does not exist the more they point to Him and that for me is interesting, its illogical thinking, 90% of left thinking people are stupid not because I say so, but because He said so.. my questions are always to learn.

Why does NASA say its harder to go to the moon now than it was in 1969??????
I don't know the answer as I am unable to speak for NASA, however, I would not be surprised if it is, at least in part, due to politics since not everyone thinks that science and learning are causes worthy of the investment of public funds.

I think it not beyond reason that the space program has generated intense public interest throughout the years, and has inspired many people to become scientists, and probably not in the least, it has inspired many people to learn and dream of what they might accomplish. IMO, this aspect of the space program alone is worth the investment of public funds.
 
Let all this sink in...

Imagine even a movie-scene descent through the Planet's multiple atmosphere... just one layer is nearly 2,000 miles thick.
 
Back