Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Huge Volcanic Eruption Observed on Io

Posted by michael on from the things-that-go-boom dept.

minesweeper writes "Astronomers at the Keck Observatory in Hawaii recently monitored the largest volcanic eruption ever observed on Jupiter's moon Io. The eruption took place in February 2001, though image analysis was only recently completed by a team of University of California, Berkeley, astronomers. More info is available from the Berkeley press release, and an image is available here."

5 of 14 comments (clear)

  1. why so long? by teridon · · Score: 3

    Could someone please explain why it took so long to analyze the data?

    --
    I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing. -- Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:why so long? by oni · · Score: 5, Informative

      Could someone please explain why it took so long to analyze the data?

      Probably because the researchers had a lot of projects to work on.

      To answer the next logical question "Why weren;t the images released earlier?"

      Telescope time is booked years in advance. A lot of work goes into preparing and submitting the proposals for the research that is to be conducted. As a result, when the images are taken, they are not released to the general public. The scientists that did all the work to take the images are allowed the courtesy of working on the images themselves.

      So, these guys got a picture of an eruption. They did a lot of work analyzing it and are now (finally) ready to submit their findings to the scientific community. Hopefully, their findings are valid as well as valuable - that will be determined by peer review.

      The alternative is this: The image could have been released to the general public in Feb 2001. It's a cool picture, and would have been in the news and discussed by armatures like us all over the world. Then, we would get tired of it. When the real research was completed, it wouldn't gain the same kind of notoriety.

      Also, there would be a race among other scientists to submit analysis of the image. Undoubtedly, somebody with a lot of spare time would get a coherent analysis completed before these guys did. So, in a way, the hard work they put in to book the telescope etc. would have been wasted.

      The system is set up to allow the people that make the initial investment in getting the images some of the notoriety for the research done on them. The system therefore necessarily requires a delay before the image is released.

    2. Re:why so long? by scott1853 · · Score: 2

      They hired some new scientists that aren't as proficient with faking space imagery with Photoshop as the old timers are. You can tell by the liberal use of the Gaussian Blur effect they're amatuers.

      Back in the day they had to hand draw video of people walking on the moon. These new kids are spoiled with their 3D modellers and high-end paint programs!

  2. Article at New Scientist by minesweeper · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There's now an article at New Scientist: Titanic volcanic eruption seen on Io

    Interesting snip:

    The volcano is far more powerful than any eruption recorded by scientists on Earth, with an estimated power output of about 78,000 gigawatts. By comparison, the power produced by the last significant eruption of Mount Etna in Italy in 1992 was just 12 gigawatts.
  3. Obviously... by Tsar · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...this is the yet another result of global warming.

    People, we've already lost Venus to corporate carelessness and greed, and now Io is being turned into a wasteland! How many more Jovian moons must be covered in molten rock and sulfurous ash and before all the evil American companies wake up? The Face on Mars weeps for us all!!!

    Please forgive my emotional tirade; I'm just upset because Stephen King died again.
    __________

    As a counterweight to the preceding foolishness, I'll add some meaningful data to the discussion by correcting the following line of the press release:

    "The Surt eruption appears to cover an area of 1,900 square kilometers, which is larger than the city of Los Angeles and even larger than the entire city of London," Marchis said.

    The city of Los Angeles covers 5,959 km^2, and London covers 4,147 km^2, so the eruption wasn't even half as large as either of them. Even Melbourne, at 2,027 km^2, would not have been completely covered by the lava flow, though I'm sure tourism would have been affected.