Jupiter Impact 2009 Options

[Guest_Sunspot_*]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1749...rom-impact.html

Well, pleased to the New Scientist article gives Mr Wesley full credit

[nprev]

Just name the deceased impactor after him.

That'd be an IAU call, but it's an interesting thought. The object was never spotted (and my guess is that it probably won't turn up in any old images, either), yet there is unmistakable, observable, confirmed evidence that it once existed...

[ugordan]

Wow, the Keck image really shows some interesting structure in the infrared. Almost looks like two discrete impacts.

[nprev]

Yes, it does indeed, Gordan!

VERY interesting, actually. For starters, it looks like the prevailing winds are coming from about 1 o'clock (with respect to the orientation of the image). What's really cool is that slightly fainter yet broader patch at 5 o'clock just next to the bright spot of the presumed main impact. I'm guessing that this might just be the main "ejecta" zone, and that the impactor hit Jupiter slightly obliquely from the 10 o'clock direction.

[Floyd]

Just received the following:
Hi Floyd,

We were rushing to get this out the door today. We will add the name and issue an update.

Thanks,
Carolina

[nprev]

Well done, Floyd!!!!!

[rogelio]

Why not honor the discoverer by referring to this feature (and all future features of this type; that is, caused by the impact of undetected comets and asteroids) as Wesley’s Spot? As we honor the discoverers of comets, be they amateur or professional?

A more original name for this type of feature would be nice (admittedly "spot" is kind of uninspired). “Macula” is already in use for features on solid planetary and moon surfaces. This “spot” resembles and is in fact a kind of bruise or contusion – Latin for bruise is cicatrix, but Wesley’s Cicatrix doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue...

[nprev]

Problem is that it's extremely transient, Rogelio. It'll probably be completely gone in a few weeks, a few months at most.

[john_s]

Wow, the Keck image really shows some interesting structure in the infrared. Almost looks like two discrete impacts.

I'm not sure- notice that the "cusp" of the bright south polar hood also looks doubled. I think this might be a seeing artifact or a hiccup in the AO system, if they were using AO.

John.

[nprev]

Hmm. I see what you mean, John. If this is the cause, then it's logical that the secondary image would be so pronounced since the primary's so bright.

In fact, at second glance it looked oddly 3D to me as well, almost as if the faint image was a reflection underneath the bright one, and THAT ain't real!

EDIT: Well...I dunno now, maybe it is a reflection @ Jupiter (not an AO artifact), but on an upper cloud layer. Presumably the bright IR source is deeper if both features are real.

EDIT2: JPL has updated their press release by adding Mr. Wesley's name. However, SpaceflightNow is running the earlier version as its lead story without his name. There ain't no justice.

[Pertinax]

Saw a mention of this on SpaceWeather this morning:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/fea...p-20090720.html


-- Pertinax

[ynyralmaen]

Why is it a postdoc student is worthy of mentioning and even eligible for a comment and the original discoverer (whom Spaceweather.com labeled as "veteran Jupiter observer") isn't?

I absolutely agree that Wesley's name should have been given from the outset, but note that "postdoctoral fellow" doesn't mean student. The person you're referring to definitely has a PhD and is playing a key role in the JPL observations (and it's his informative tweets that many of us are following!).

Edit: Sorry ugordan, I've now seen the original version of the JPL release, and can see that it's the release's authors who erroneously used the term "postdoctoral student" (corrected in the newer version that I first read).

[dtolman]

This has been picked up on the NY Times breaking news blog (explicitly a blog, so not held to whatever standards [insert joke here] for official/published stories). From a viewpoint of someone familiar with NASA and astronomy, the comments are an interesting window to the public at large.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/2...ark-on-jupiter/

[SFJCody]

From a viewpoint of someone familiar with NASA and astronomy, the comments are an interesting window to the public at large.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/2...ark-on-jupiter/

Yeah, there's a scattering of crazies in there, but the comments don't seem too bad, on the whole. A word of caution- never read the comments on any youtube video, astronomy related or otherwise. Your brain will leak out of your ears!

[imipak]

...an interesting window to the public at large.

Pass.