Jupiter's New Red Spot

<i>Originally posted by Astrodelugeologist</i>
<br />A Jovian spot, which formed when three storms merged into a single superstorm, has now turned red.

Are the red spots in the southern hemisphere of Jupiter?

Gregg Wilson

www.solarviews.com/raw/jup/redspot.jpg

On this picture I can only see white spots in the southern hemisphere. And I take it as the picture was taken with north up and south down.

Edit: Another good photo at www.space.com/images/031113_jupiter_cassini_02,0.jpg

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Astrodelugeologist</i>
<br />Doesn't this data contradict your hypothesis that the Great Red Spot is actually an exploded planet fragment floating in Jupiter's atmosphere?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">No. Spots have been appearing and disappearing or merging on Jupiter ever since the planet was first imaged by Galileo. Even the Great Red Spot changes its appearance drastically for long periods of time. It spent many decades as a grey spot before it turned red again.

My expectation is that each of these spots is caused by debris at an impact site. It would be natural for the spots with similar latitudes to merge if they came close together as the debris merged. But merger is not typical behavior for hurricanes or tornadoes. -|Tom|-

Tom,

There are a few parts of EPH that I just don't buy and the spots-as-impact-sites is one of them. I simply don't see the need to resort to that explanation. Pieces of exploded planets are going to leave all kinds of marks on the solar system, but not every interesting feature of a planet is the result of an impact with one of these pieces. There are other forces at work, like the ones that explode planets in the first place.

JR

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by jrich</i>
<br />I simply don't see the need to resort to that explanation.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The EPH has no need to explain spots, so the spots theory has no bearing on EPH.

The "need" is simply this: None of the standard explanations are consistent with known theory and observations. Especially, maintaining a vortex in a turbulent atmosphere for any significant length of time should be impossible, given known physics. What was needed to explain both the behavior and stability was something to block the planet's heat flow. Once I realized that anything surviving entry into Jupiter's atmosphere must necessarily float once it reaches a depth that displaces its own mass, the rest of the pieces fell neatly into place.

For more details, see my chapter on Jupiter in <i>Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets</i>. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The "need" is simply this: None of the standard explanations are consistent with known theory and observations. Especially, maintaining a vortex in a turbulent atmosphere for any significant length of time should be impossible, given known physics. What was needed to explain both the behavior and stability was something to block the planet's heat flow. Once I realized that anything surviving entry into Jupiter's atmosphere must necessarily float once it reaches a depth that displaces its own mass, the rest of the pieces fell neatly into place.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Tom, I'm a little bit confused now. Are you saying that the Great Red Spot and other spots are storms situated on top of floating impact debris?

Also, what do you think is the source of the red coloration?