Jupiter's Great Red Spot Is Shrinking

cjstaples noted a CNN story proclaiming that Jupiter's signature red spot is shrinking. Over a 10 year study, the giant storm lost just over half a kilometer per day for a total loss of about 15%. Scientists know about shrinkage, right?

Comments

meme tag stole my post

[tjstork]

Here I was ready to make some crack about how global warming is causing jupiter's red spot to shrink and this shows that the sun is having some other effect, and there it is in the tags:

"globalwarming manbearpig globalshrinking...."

totally burst my bubble, stole my thunder... I might actually have to do some work.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[Thanshin]

Here I was ready to make some crack

I knew it!

Even drug dealers read Slashdot!

Re:meme tag stole my post

[bonch]

You're forgetting that politicians like Al Gore have a financial interest in making you feel guilty enough to pay his company carbon credits. You know, the company he started right before he released his film. The company he used to pay himself through carbon credits when he got called out for having an enormous house.

Making people feel guilty tricks them into sacrificing things to the government such as money, rights, and common sense. With the media playing along with Al Gore and shunning any detractors, the system is able to keep the public stupid and gullible while they pay more money and give the government more power.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[ColdWetDog]

Maybe one day the global warming alarmists and hoaxsters will realize that change is a *natural* thing

'Natural' doesn't equate to "OK". If mean sea levels are rising, and continue to rise to the point that a significant fraction of the human population is put at risk and a significant fraction of international economy is put at risk, it's still a problem. Whether the FSM causes it or human-derived CO2 is the main driver, it's still a problem.

Your assertion that "overall level of societal wealth, comfort and knowledge tends to move upwards over time" is true, so far, for very short values of 'time'. It's good to look ahead and see if there are issues that might cause you to rethink your assumptions and subsequently your behavior. In the end, the ecosystem of Earth will deal with anything either mankind or the universe throws at it. Your progeny just might feel more generous towards us if we took a longer view of things.

QOTD: "If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error." -- John Kenneth Galbraith

Re:meme tag stole my post

[Joe U]

Maybe one day the global warming alarmists and hoaxsters will realize that change is a *natural* thing in this universe whether caused by inanimate or animate forces

How about this, lets all declare global warming a myth and then go and convert to clean energy anyway, because maybe, just maybe, we could stop polluting our streams, rivers and lakes.

Even if global warming is a complete and total fabrication, polluting our land and water IS NOT.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[eln]

Must you turn something going on on an entirely different planet into a political rant?

Global warming may or may not be affected by humans (I find it hard to believe that it isn't to at least some degree), but that has nothing at all to do with this story.

Personally, I think the Red Spot is shrinking because illegal immigrants are taking jobs from the Americans that would normally be maintaining it.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[DikSeaCup]

No, the Red Spot shrinking is a sign that communism is failing.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[Chosen Reject]

If mean sea levels are rising, and continue to rise to the point that a significant fraction of the human population is put at risk and a significant fraction of international economy is put at risk, it's still a problem

It's not a problem for the dolphins. In fact, a great majority of the species on this planet would not notice, not care, or would benefit from us humans greatly shrinking our numbers.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[david.given]

'Natural' doesn't equate to "OK". If mean sea levels are rising, and continue to rise to the point that a significant fraction of the human population is put at risk and a significant fraction of international economy is put at risk, it's still a problem. Whether the FSM causes it or human-derived CO2 is the main driver, it's still a problem.

It's also worth remembering that some of the most populated parts of the Earth are also very close to sealevel. It wouldn't take much of a rise to displace very, very large numbers of people --- like, billions, and they're not just going to sit there and drown.

If this ever happens, you're going to have an extremely large number of intelligent, highly motivated people looking, in order, for (a) somewhere to live and (b) someone to blame.

The simple technical problems involved with climate change will be nothing compared to the political problems.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[averner]

"Natural" is a really tricky concept, in my opinion. Where should we draw the line between what happens "naturally" and what happens as a result of human activity, if at all? How are the decisions of humans, being subject to the laws of nature, any less natural than the actions of animals, plants, and weather?

Re:meme tag stole my post

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Maybe one day the global warming alarmists and hoaxsters will realize that change is a *natural* thing in this universe whether caused by inanimate or animate forces. Storms come and go. Icecaps expand and shrink. Glaciers advance and recede. Species thrive and decline. Get over it.

There is a difference between climate change alarmism and acceptance of anthropomorphic climate change. Due to the shoddy nature of science reporting, and the credulous attidude of many, the two have been confused.

Anthropomorphic climate change is the idea that humans, and more specifically, human industrial output, is having a measurable and significant effect on the climate of the earth. This argument is not so far away from the argument that industry has an effect on the environment, which is obviously true. The difference here is that anthropomorphic climate change states that the effects of human industry are now on a global scale. It's important to note at this point that climate scientists have the evidence to prove these claims.

Proponents of the idea of anthropomorphic climate change usually advocate measures to halt or reduce the effect of humans on the environment. There are adverse effects to climate change, as well as some beneficial ones, but ultimately they argue that we as a society should practice good husbandry and not risk causing adverse effects for ourselves or for others. A swift change in global or regional climates is ultimately in no ones best interests, and of least interest of all to our environment.

Climate change alarmism is different. Global warming alarmists typically take the most spectacular, alarming, devastating and ultimately least likely potential outcomes of climate change and loudly proclaim their inevitability. Usually, they advocate personal efforts by individuals. (but not by industry, ho hum). It's easy to dismiss many of their claims.

But dismissing alarmism is often extrapolated out to dismissing anthropomorphic climate change as a whole. You really shouldn't do this. The effects of climate change may not be worthy of a hollywood spectacle, but they will be real and probably permanent. If a few million of hectares of scrubland are turned to desert, or forests turn to grassland, or if your summers are too wet or too hot, of if a few species become extinct, or if your children will never be able to build a snowman, then it is true that you will not have lost a lot objectively. But you will have lost something. And needlessly.

You mentioned in your post that "Species thrive and decline." This is true, but species can and have been declined or destroyed not by natural causes but by the effect of human industry. Consider whales. Fished to the point of, and in effect probably to, extinction not by any natural cause, but by the will of human societies and industry. I think it's safe to say that no one wanted this to happen, but it did anyway and we cannot ever undo this. The greater tragedy is that is need never have happened.

It's the same with climate change. A few degrees may not sound like a lot to most people, but it is a big change. The earth will pull through, but it will be a slightly different place. But Things and places will be lost to us forever. And they will be lost not because we as a society did nothing, but because we refused to stop doing things which we could easily have done without. That doesn't sound like a lot of progress to me.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[danbert8]

The problem in your logic is that people won't be looking for somewhere else to live. The people will be whining to the government to create a way for them to live beneath sea level at the expense of all the people who don't live near the ocean.

Re:meme tag stole my post

[Thiez]

> From a purely evolutionary perspective, it really does equate to "OK."

Evolution is a mindless process, it has no perspective. Nor does it have a purpose, needs, wants, hopes and dreams. Most importantly, it doesn't have a goal. Saying 'from a evolutionary perspective' is about as insightful as saying 'from gravity's perspective' or 'from a cake's perspective'.

> Organisms die. Others survive. Get over it.

I wont stop you from laying down and starving to death, but personally, I'd rather live. Sure, organisms die, but I don't want to be one of those particular organisms for at least another few decades. Why should we accept death by drowning when we can do something to change it?

> It's only bad if you really think humans are a special part of the universe, rather than what they really are: just one little tiny product of an infinitely random spectacle.

Humans may not be special, but neither is the rest of the universe, so why SHOULDN'T we try to change the universe? We may be 'tiny products of an infinitely random spectacle' (is the universe infinitely random? I hope not!) but few things on our planet can resist us, so hell yes, lets use our power to change this rock to a better place for us. Fuck the natural changes in the climate, they are, after all, 'just one little tiny product of an infinitely random spectacle'.

In Jupiter's Defense

[eldavojohn]

Scientists know about shrinkage, right?

Let me just point out that it's very cold in space. Even with the sun nearby, I think we'd all experience at least a little bit of shrinkage if we were in Jupiter's position and it's not fair for the other planets to laugh at him.

Re:In Jupiter's Defense

[girlintraining]

Let me just point out that it's very cold in space. Even with the sun nearby, I think we'd all experience at least a little bit of shrinkage if we were in Jupiter's position and it's not fair for the other planets to laugh at him.

Venus: That's what every man says. The truth is, you're just upset that Saturn has over 200 satellites to your... uhh... 63. Plus, you've completely lost control of your weight these past few millenia and have horrible acne. Seriously, clean up your atmosphere and do something about those red splotches and maybe you'll have a chance with some of the inner planets.

Re:In Jupiter's Defense

[Chris Burke]

Let me just point out that it's very cold in space. Even with the sun nearby, I think we'd all experience at least a little bit of shrinkage if we were in Jupiter's position and it's not fair for the other planets to laugh at him.

Well we sure have no room to laugh. Jupiter's spot, shrinkage and all, is still several times bigger than our entire planet.

Saturn probably has the right for a chuckle or two, though, and Neptune might join in. Uranus as usual will just try to avoid attention since it always ends up with it being made fun of.

Red spot shrinking?

[Thanshin]

Perfect time to send some spam to Jupiter.

Weather's clearing up

[Captain Spam]

Somewhere on Jupiter...

"Welp, reckon that storm front's finally breakin' up, Edgar."
"Ayup. Haven't seen a storm like that since the hundred-fifty-year* one back up near the poles."
"Yup, yup, that one had the cattle all rustled up somethin' fierce."
"Reckon y'don't see storms like that any more."

For some reason, this entire story strikes me as just realizing that Jupiter has weather systems. They just might be longer than Earth ones.

*: Jupiter years.

How about color?

[Tibor the Hun]

It's not getting blacker by chance is it?

Re:How about color?

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG its full of ponies!

Re:Global warming at fault?!

[SatanicPuppy]

It's a fricking storm. It's subject to entropy like everything else. Eventually, it will go away.

It's the scale that's messing with your head. That storm is about the same diameter as the entire Earth. It only seems permanent because it's so big that change happens slowly.

Re:Global warming at fault?!

[mea37]

Yes. And, so?

If humans are accelerating the change in equilibrium conditions on Earth, that is against our own interests, as we are adapted to current conditions. We should, in that case, be interested in how to stop doing that.

On the other hand, if the equilibrum conditions on Earth are changing naturally, then allowing that to happen unchecked is against our interests, as we are adapted to current conditions. We should, in that case, be interested in how to slow those naturally-occuring changes.

Time for a bailout

[Lord Byron II]

Let me be the first to say that the Great Red Spot is too big to fail!

Re:Global warming at fault?!

[MozeeToby]

Storms are created by temperatures differences, which are in turn created by sunlight warming different areas at different rates. So yes, the same kinds of things will happen on Jupiter, if nothing else based on the temperature difference from the day to the night side. The real question is, why has the Red Spot been so stable for so long?

Think about it; surface features shouldn't effect warming rates since all solar radiation is absorbed long before it gets to the surface. Pockets of atmosphere will absorb heat at different rates, but those pockets aren't stationary. That leaves complex, self-correcting fluid dynamics or massive surface features that significantly change the wind patterns hundreds or thousands of miles up or something we just don't understand yet. All of which are pretty interesting.

Re:Global warming at fault?!

[Bemopolis]

Storms are created by temperatures differences, which are in turn created by sunlight warming different areas at different rates. So yes, the same kinds of things will happen on Jupiter, if nothing else based on the temperature difference from the day to the night side. The real question is, why has the Red Spot been so stable for so long?

You are overlooking one important energy source: Jupiter itself. Because of ongoing differentiation, Jupiter produces about twice as much energy as it receives from the Sun. Given this and the fact that this source is coming from below rather than above, it is likely the more important contribution to the dynamics of the atmosphere.