3 ms·
That seems at odds, with something I previously learned about Jupiter: "As a result, Jupiter is thought to have about as large a diameter as a planet of its co
by lukan 1y ago
That seems at odds, with something I previously learned about Jupiter:
"As a result, Jupiter is thought to have about as large a diameter as a planet of its composition and evolutionary history can achieve."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter
So is this a significant new finding, changing previous assumptions, or is it part of the "evolutionary history" meaning it was assumed before, that in early times it was bigger?
- vlovich123 1y agoThe new part is probably the precise details about size and strength of the magnetic sphere in the past and that they used a different mechanism to fill in gaps in existing theories. > Importantly, these insights were achieved through independent constraints that bypass traditional uncertainties in planetary formation models—which often rely on assumptions about gas opacity, accretion rate, or the mass of the heavy element core > The results add crucial details to existing planet formation theories, which suggest that Jupiter and other giant planets around other stars formed via core accretion, a process by which a rocky and icy core rapidly gathers gas. These foundational models were developed over decades by many researchers, including Caltech's Dave Stevenson, the Marvin L. Goldberger Professor of Planetary Science, Emeritus. This new study builds upon that foundation by providing more exact measurements of Jupiter's size, spin rate, and magnetic conditions at an early, pivotal time https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/jupiter-was-formerly-twice-its-current-size-and-had-a-much-stronger-magnetic-field https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/jupiter-was-formerly-twic...