Talk:Jupiter

"Real" color of the pole

South pole (2000)

South pole (2017)

The current image shows the polar view of Jupiter being very blue, and apparently that is a real phenomenon. Yet the photo we up on the left, right across from it in the article, that was pieced together from side views by Cassini shows it being the same color as the Jupiter we are used to. Question: did the pole change color, or does it appear different colors from different angles, or what? I can add a comment about the blue and about astronomers being surprised with the sources above, but it would help if there is a good explanation. Wnt (talk) 16:44, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@Wnt: FWIW - Thank you for your comments - yes - agreed - seems the color of the south polar region of Jupiter in the 2000 image and the 2017 image are different - adding a sourced explanation would be welcome I would think - iac - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

References

It isn't clear that the pole was bluer in 2016 than 2000. The references you cite say the pole is bluer than the equator (in the Juno 2016 images), but that image is very heavily processed and stretched. That's all consistent with a very slight, subtle blue coloration. If the 2000 Cassini image had been processed in the same way, it might look similar. The Cassini image was processed to be reasonably close to true color. Fcrary (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Potential core *size*?

Daft question, maybe, but as regards the (potential) rocky core, there's only an estimate for the mass - is there no corresponding estimate for what size this would equate to, either under the expected conditions and/or if it were a free-floating body without any atmosphere? 209.93.141.17 (talk) 13:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

It is unknown. It is not easy to probe the interior of this thick giant gas planet. UV, Doppler, radar, etc only go so deep, and probes crush under ~10 bars pressure; even if they penetrate deeper, they would be unable to transmit its data through the atmosphere. The best technique available so far is gravitational measurements. BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

It is not often said, but the gas giants may be structured just like the Sun, except that their nuclear fusion is not 'ignited'. And it is also possible that there is no core at all. It may be turtles all the way down. I mean gas. David Spector (talk) 00:19, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

It has been well known for centuries that there are turtles all the way down, supporting the planets so they don't fall into the ether. BatteryIncluded (talk) 14:01, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Questions

Sidebar

• Jupiter's equatorial radius: There's Jupiter's radius, and then on the next line is 11.209 Earths. I stumbled on this, and then realized that what is meant is 11.209 Earth equatorial radii. Without specifying a unit, it seems the natural thing is to think that 11.209 'Earths' (the planet) would fit in this distance, which would imply the diameter. Other options might be 11.209 times that of Earth, or 11.209 Earth's, or simply delete the statistic and let the reader do the calculation. Or is this a convention of some sort?
  
• Similarly for the polar radius.
• I don't have the same problem for the surface area, volume, or mass, because in each case the entirety is described.Mvsmith (talk) 06:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Update needed on cloud layer depth

This article currently states: "'The cloud layer is only about 50 km (31 mi) deep"
But new data from Juno reveals that the cloud layer is 3,000 kilometers deep: [1]. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

External links

Sometimes things just "creep in" so could someone look at the "External links" section for possible article integration or trimming. There are currently 12 links that certainly can be considered link farming. Otr500 (talk) 14:18, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2018

Scientists can't rule out life on the planet after the discovery of water clouds in Jupiter's Great Red Spot https://thespacereporter.com/article.php?n=scientists-say-they-cant-rule-out-alien-life-on-jupiter-after-new-discovery&id=165037 Ainger13 (talk) 12:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Nothing new or really important. Ruslik_Zero 13:15, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Updated magnitude range

The new values of brightest and faintest apparent magnitude in the 'infobox' were reported in a peer-reviewed journal article that includes updated equations for computing planetary magnitudes. Those formulas will be used to predict magnitudes for future issues of The Astronomical Almanac published by the U.S. Naval Observatory and Her Majesty’s Nautical Almanac Office. The equations were solved at daily intervals over long periods of time in order to determine the magnitude extremes. The paper in Astronomy and Computing can be located at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ascom.2018.08.002.Planet photometry (talk) 18:58, 10 September 2018 (UTC)