To John Lear and Sleeper: Planet Neptune - A Waterworld?

reply to post by ChocoTaco369


Well, ChocoTaco,

I don't work at the JPL in Pasadena. I can imagine, though, that whether a deep space probe is being monitored from there, or from Houston, or from Tokyo, the people involved would know if there was a delay in acquiring data and someone somewhere would ring a bell.

Heck, a spectral analysis with a telescope and appropriate equipment would likely provide atmospheric results that are consistent. It's just, having a probe on site means more accuracy, and more data than can be imaged from our lonely planet.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Well, it must then the strike a chord with a lot of forum members, don't you think, Zorgon?

No actually I don't I am pretty sure I know who the five are And i know how many view the forum

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by ChocoTaco369

 

Well, ChocoTaco,

I don't work at the JPL in Pasadena. I can imagine, though, that whether a deep space probe is being monitored from there, or from Houston, or from Tokyo, the people involved would know if there was a delay in acquiring data and someone somewhere would ring a bell.

Why would they have a reason to? If the guidelines state "Information will reach you after an initial collection of the data", would you argue that? That's the thing about government policy - it can be as vague as possible, and you really can't argue with it. I'm sure if you ever worked for a government agency, you'd be used to things being as complicated and indirect as possible, full of useless steps. Ever been to the DMV?

When I watch shows in the Discovery channel and such, and the scientists in the room are all waiting for the first picture of the probe, it always just pops up after a long transmission. It doesn't download it bit by bit on the TV shows. It may very well be downloaded bit by bit somewhere, then sent to the scientists. If that's what the rulebook says, that's what you go by. Why would you feel the need to argue?

Originally posted by weedwhackerHeck, a spectral analysis with a telescope and appropriate equipment would likely provide atmospheric results that are consistent. It's just, having a probe on site means more accuracy, and more data than can be imaged from our lonely planet.

How does a "spectral analysis" give you the composition of the lower atmosphere? If a planet has 5 levels of atmosphere, all a spectral analysis is going to tell you is what's at the very top.

Again, take Earth for example. A spectral analysis of Earth would tell you the planet's atmosphere is almost completely Nitrogen. However, on the surface of the Earth, it's almost completely Oxygen. A spectral analysis wouldn't tell you that.

In the case of a big planet like Neptune where the atmosphere would be much more extensive than Earth's, the very top of the atmosphere could very well be Nitrogen, Methane and Hydrogen - the light gases that float to the top - and the lower atmosphere could be almost entirely Oxygen. That's why the models of the atmosphere of Neptune are completely theoretical - they're a guess. You can't see past the upper crust of the atmosphere, and since Neptune's atmosphere is surely more complex than our own (give the planet size), you could have a lower atmosphere full of gases invisible from spectroscopy.

Originally posted by ChocoTaco369Think of it like this: the photo gets sent from Neptune to some underground research facility to be sanitized, then it gets sent to the scientists at NASA to be released to the public.

They use the term 'reformatted' not 'sanitized'

It was transmitted from the moon to ground sites in [Honeysuckle Creek] Australia and the [Goldstone] Mojave Desert in California, where technicians reformatted the video for broadcast and transmitted long-distance over analog lines to Houston. A lot of video quality was lost during that process, turning clear, bright images into gray blobs and oddly moving shapes -- what Lebar now calls a "bastardized" version of the actual footage.

When it reached Houston the film was displayed on Mission Controls screen... and the news media set up their cameras and recorded off the screen

NO ONE saw live coverage of Apollo 11 (cept the ground crew at Honeysuckle Creek)

Says so right here - Missing Moon tapes

Honeysuckle Creek Australia NASA Ground Station






[edit on 9-12-2007 by zorgon]

Thanks, Zorgon. This is what I'm getting at - these scientists that get the images from the space probes aren't the first ones to see the images. I'm sure they like to think they're authentic - I mean, how much would it suck to sit there with the thought in the back of your mind that you dedicated years of your life, or even your entire career, to this probe, all to get doctored images? These scientists won't even entertain that possibility! They HAVE to be authentic because they just worked so darn hard. It can't be!

Are the images doctored? I don't know, but even the scientists on the team that designed the probes don't know that for a fact. They weren't the first ones to see them.

We need to be open to ALL possibilities. That's what denying ignorance is all about. The thing that ATS is here to teach you is that even fact isn't always fact, and we cannot believe everything we see and hear. If something is in a text book, it doesn't mean it's true. If something is printed in a newspaper, it doesn't mean it's true. If an idea has been entertained as fact by the mainstream scientific community for 40 years or more - like, I don't know, the moon is airless? - it doesn't mean it's true. None of us have been there, so how can we truly know?

reply to post by ChocoTaco369


Zorgon linked to a 45 year old movie about the moon landing that explains how the images was processed before the big audience could watch it on television. For many reasons, this was the case because the astronauts had enough press on them as it was.

He did not back up your claim that the images from probes in deep space goes through a secret place before the real scientist that originally build the freakin' probe gets to see it.

Neptune rock/ice core??? That sounds ridiculous!

Originally posted by tep200377
this was the case because the astronauts had enough press on them as it was.

Thats a load of troll manure... did you actually ready the articles as to why the signals went there first? Besides that may be an old movie but its a new release... the missing tapes and the Honeysuckle Creek Affair only came to light in 2002

He did not back up your claim that the images from probes in deep space goes through a secret place before the real scientist that originally build the freakin' probe gets to see it.

You really know very little. I don't know yet where the outer planet images go first but the new HiRISE ones from Mars go to Lockheed Martin Space Systems first

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, manages the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Washington

Malin Space Systems has the Mars Global Surveyor Mars Orbiter Camera

Clementine images went to the DoD first... 1994 They only released the final color set in 2006

Lunar Orbiter went to Langley, then DoD before NASA got them

Apollo images went through Langley first...


[edit on 9-12-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by sean
Neptune rock/ice core??? That sounds ridiculous!

Neptune's core is composed of rock and ice, and is likely no more than one Earth mass.
www.solarviews.com...

Neptune's core is made of melted rock, liquid hydrogen, ammonia, methane, and an ocean of water.
library.thinkquest.org...

I love this one 'solid hydrogen'

Hydrogen remains as a liquid all the way down to Neptune's core, because its internal pressure is not high enough to change liquid hydrogen into its solid
library.thinkquest.org...

Neptune's core contains more rock and metal than the cores of other gas giant planets. The planet has a magnetic field
www.astronomytoday.com...

Neptune’s core may be small because most of the rock composing the planet remains mixed with the vast ocean that extends upward from the core
encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia

One of the unique features of Neptune is that scientists have determined that Neptune's core causes the planet to give off more heat than it absorbs from the sun
www.adlerplanetarium.org...

I hear these puppies are as big as cars... so if all these diamonds are falling causing friction to account for all that heat... there must be a pretty big pile of diamonds by now

Hence, a rain of diamonds may be falling toward Neptune's core, which release heat through friction with its heavy atmosphere
www.solstation.com...

The core of Neptune is probably composed of liquid rock. Then, farther up, the liquid rock slowly gives way to an ocean, primarily containing hydrogen
filer.case.edu...

Most researchers had assumed that rock accounts for 25 percent of the mass of Neptune's core, making it more like Earth's interior than Uranus'.
findarticles.com...

Neptune probably has a rocky core wrapped in a layer of frozen water and other ices. The core is fairly large, so Neptune is actually the third most massive planet
stardate.org/resources/ssguide/neptune.html

That was Page one in a google search...

So much for main stream science...

And they call US crazy...




[edit on 9-12-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by sean
Neptune rock/ice core??? That sounds ridiculous!

Neptune's core is composed of rock and ice, and is likely no more than one Earth mass.
www.solarviews.com...

Neptune's core is made of melted rock, liquid hydrogen, ammonia, methane, and an ocean of water.
library.thinkquest.org...

I love this one 'solid hydrogen'

Hydrogen remains as a liquid all the way down to Neptune's core, because its internal pressure is not high enough to change liquid hydrogen into its solid
library.thinkquest.org...

Neptune's core contains more rock and metal than the cores of other gas giant planets. The planet has a magnetic field
www.astronomytoday.com...

Neptune’s core may be small because most of the rock composing the planet remains mixed with the vast ocean that extends upward from the core
encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia

One of the unique features of Neptune is that scientists have determined that Neptune's core causes the planet to give off more heat than it absorbs from the sun
www.adlerplanetarium.org...

I hear these puppies are as big as cars... so if all these diamonds are falling causing friction to account for all that heat... there must be a pretty big pile of diamonds by now

Hence, a rain of diamonds may be falling toward Neptune's core, which release heat through friction with its heavy atmosphere
www.solstation.com...

The core of Neptune is probably composed of liquid rock. Then, farther up, the liquid rock slowly gives way to an ocean, primarily containing hydrogen
filer.case.edu...

Most researchers had assumed that rock accounts for 25 percent of the mass of Neptune's core, making it more like Earth's interior than Uranus'.
findarticles.com...

Neptune probably has a rocky core wrapped in a layer of frozen water and other ices. The core is fairly large, so Neptune is actually the third most massive planet
stardate.org/resources/ssguide/neptune.html

That was Page one in a google search...

So much for main stream science...

And they call US crazy...

reply to post by ChocoTaco369


Choco, I do not know how to pull 'quotes' selectively, as many do, so I'll try to respond to your post from 8/12/2007 at about 14:50 EST (It's a few posts above this) where you said that a spectral analysis of the Earth's atmosphere from a distance would show it as mostly Nitrogen, but surface level analysis would show it mostly Oxygen...

Why has no one noticed this error and commented?

Dude, the Earth's atmoshere is MOSTLY Nitrogen...even at the surface...even Zorgon will agree to that??

About 23 or 24 percent O2....(please don't beat me up for estimating)...the rest CO2, of course Nitrogen, and then various other gases in minimal concentrations.

Come on...don't try to obfuscate the discussion with nonsense about not being able to determine a planet's atmospheric composition with an erroneous analogy.

edit for time of Choco's post...17:52 EST, if have my settings correct.



[edit on 9-12-2007 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by ChocoTaco369
How does a "spectral analysis" give you the composition of the lower atmosphere? If a planet has 5 levels of atmosphere, all a spectral analysis is going to tell you is what's at the very top.

I can see your point but in fact, technically, this statement has no merit. If you imagine a layered atmosphere whereby the layers don't have much in the way of absorption of the other layers' emission/reflection spectra, you could observe ALL of the layers at the same time.

Again, take Earth for example. A spectral analysis of Earth would tell you the planet's atmosphere is almost completely Nitrogen. However, on the surface of the Earth, it's almost completely Oxygen.

As other have already told you... I am sorry to inform you that this is completely wrong. On the surface of the Earth, the atmosphere IS NOT pure oxygen. Your education appears to be severely lacking.

In the case of a big planet like Neptune where the atmosphere would be much more extensive than Earth's, the very top of the atmosphere could very well be Nitrogen, Methane and Hydrogen - the light gases that float to the top - and the lower atmosphere could be almost entirely Oxygen.

Again, sir, respectfully, you don't seem to have a clue about thermodynamics and/or physics or gas mixes. The paragraph above is crock.

Although I'm not 100 percent sure,even though Neptune is composed of gas,I will stress the point that I read somewhere that we confine ouselves to the form we usually think of gas.But I've read that on these
plenets there is very little difference between liquid and gas.

Also,who isto say it isnt liquid hydrogen?

reply to post by John Guffey


True, John Guffey,

I'm no expert, but I would think that every High School science student would be able to tell you there is a relationship between temperature and pressure and how those variables will affect different gases.

As far as I remember, hydrogen will remain a liquid all the way down to absolute zero...it may well become a solid when then subjected to sufficient pressure.

Any chemical scientists/physicists out there? We'd love to hear more about it!

Thanks

...adding, OK, we know that under pressure and HEAT H can fuse into He...I'm wondering whether H can compress in cold conditions into something I thought I had heard about, metallic hydrogen?...

[added text]

[edit on 3-1-2008 by weedwhacker]

John or Zorgon (or whomever may know), I am curious as to the heat source for sustaining life on such a distant world as Neptune, as it would seem that Sol is just a bit far away to provide life-sustaining heat (or light, for that matter). Actually, I began reading a script by Sleeper the other day, where the main character winds up on Uranus, and there is ambient lighting there, though no light source is detectable.

reply to post by ChocoTaco369

2.) John Lear has stated that the sun is not a giant thermonuclear ball of fire, and that is actually an electromagnetic sphere. The sun's electromagnetism interacts with the atmospheres/electromagnetic properties of planets. This interaction then generates the planet's temperature. This would imply that a planet's distance from the sun does not dictate its temperature, and as long as the planet is within reach of the sun's energy (within the heliopause), the planet could be sufficiently warmed.

Here is a link to The surface of the Sun website along with this site that deals with the Electrical Universe. We already have satellite images of the sun's surface and it is solid iron. So when John said the sun was "not a giant thermonuclear ball of fire" he was correct.

As for Neptune being a water planet...could be, I personally don't know but would like to find out. As for people living there, well if it is habitable and has some islands I'm game to try sailing the Neptune seas.

There was a si-fi book called Chassolot many years ago about a waterworld. No Mermaids though...ratz.

Originally posted by pstrron
We already have satellite images of the sun's surface and it is solid iron. So when John said the sun was "not a giant thermonuclear ball of fire" he was correct.

I seriously don't know where to start with that one. But this is an example of what is wrong with the world, lack of common sense, reason and logic.

Solid ball of iron, please. Seriously, how much scientific data do you have to overlook in order to gravitate towards such an absurd conclusion? I know it's in fashion to "not believe anything the man tells you" and to "fight the power of mainstream science with alternative arguments" but for crying out loud man, pick your battles better than that at least.

reply to post by pstrron


pstrron...you linked to a 'false-color' image of the Sun...it is NOT a solid iron ball any more than the false-color images in '2001: A Space Odyssey' are showing 'solid' oceans on Earth undulating wierdly...

Happy New Year everybody .... Greeting's from the England.
Seems obvious to me (I am no scholar by the way & try my best with the spelling & punctuality for you Fella's) that all the information we all have about about Neptune is from the man. None of us have ever been there, so we take what we are spoon fed from birth as true. I for one applaud Mr Lear for giving us at least an option & I have to say it blows my imagination, so big thank you John

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts

Solid ball of iron, please. Seriously, how much scientific data do you have to overlook in order to gravitate towards such an absurd conclusion? I know it's in fashion to "not believe anything the man tells you" and to "fight the power of mainstream science with alternative arguments" but for crying out loud man, pick your battles better than that at least.

It appears that you did not read the linked site but to help with a more scientific doc here. However I should have more clearly stated an iron alloy transitional layer that rests beneath the visible photosphere.

In regards to

Seriously, how much scientific data do you have to overlook in order to gravitate towards such an absurd conclusion?

Actually none please note; NASA's SOHO satellite and the Trace satellite program have both imaged this transition layer of the sun that sits beneath the photosphere.

The running difference imaging technique used by both NASA and Lockheed Martin have revealed to us for the first time that the sun is not simply a ball of hydrogen gas; it has a hard and rigid ferrite surface below the visible photosphere that can be seen in all of the images on this page! Each of the images was produced by NASA or Lockheed Martin so you can verify these images for yourself. Please refer to the link previously posted.

Please explain how the scientific works of:
Dr. Kristian Birkeland, Dr. Charles Bruce and Dr. Oliver Manuel are not scientific and have been overlooked. Along with NASA's SOHO satellite and the Trace satellite programs.

Reply to weedwacker

you linked to a 'false-color' image of the Sun...it is NOT a solid iron ball any more than the false-color images in '2001: A Space Odyssey' are showing 'solid' oceans on Earth undulating wierdly...

Please read the linked sites fully. Please note that I should have more clearly stated an iron alloy transitional layer that rests beneath the visible photosphere.

On topic: With the theory that Neptune is blue and having liquid water instead of just ice could also be due to the presence of hydrogen in the atmosphere. Though the only way to tell is get some sat's there and find out for sure. Personally I like the waterworld theory since I like being on the sea.

[edit on 1/4/2008 by pstrron]