I If Jupiter had a 5th large moon until "recently", would we know?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the possibility of Jupiter having had a fifth large moon that was lost in the past billion years. Participants explore whether current astronomical tools could detect evidence of such a moon, emphasizing that while it's not impossible, there is no direct evidence to support the idea. The conversation highlights the need for hypotheses and models to explore celestial phenomena, noting that scientific understanding often evolves through research and analysis rather than definitive proof. It concludes that without substantial corroborating evidence, the existence of a lost moon remains speculative. Overall, the topic underscores the complexities of planetary science and the challenges in confirming historical celestial events.
xpell
Messages
139
Reaction score
16
TL;DR Summary
If Jupiter had had another large moon and lost it relatively recently (e.g. 1 billion yeas or so), would we be able to realize it nowadays? How?
Hi! I'm fascinated by the apparent "concentration" of the four large Galilean moons in a barely 1.5 million km "strip", and the vast, "empty" distance to the next moons (moonlets?) Out of a purely aesthetic sense of horror vacui, :wink: I've always wondered if there was at least another Jovian moon (or more) beween Callisto (orbital radius = 1,883,000 km) and the very tiny Themisto (7,405,000 km) or more possibly the Himalia Group (starting at 11.2 million km.)

I'm aware that the large "Jupiter system" is thought to have had several "generations" of moons that spiraled into the planet during or shortly after its formation, and that this process tended to favor the final stabilization of moons relatively close to the planet ---in that "strip." But I'm wondering if additional moons could have formed and survived beyond Callisto, only to be lost later by whatever reason (Impact? Orbital instability? A passing object that expelled it/them to the outer confines of the solar system or wherever?)

Whatever. My question is: if Jupiter had had a fifth moon and lost it in relatively recent astronomical times (let's say 1 billion years or so), would we be able to realize it nowadays? How, please?
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes Delta2 and Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it's not about "realizing" it; it's about some proponent creating an hypothesis and then a simulation that shows it's possible. But possible merely means it's not impossible.

That something is not impossible is not really evidence that it may have happened.

It would need some sort of corroborating evidence to support it.

I'm not sure what evidence you could get without the hypothesis including an existing culprit somewhere in the system. Perhaps an analysis of elemental ratios seem to match Jupiter or his children or somesuch.

Even my logic is hypothetical.
 
Hi, Dave, thank you very much. Yes, I fully agree that:

DaveC426913 said:
But possible merely means it's not impossible. That something is not impossible is not really evidence that it may have happened. It would need some sort of corroborating evidence to support it. (...) Even my logic is hypothetical.

Indeed. However, my question (in my mind, at least...) was more like, "If it had happened, do we have the tools to learn or deduct that it did? What are those tools? Or would it be immediately obvious because this-and-that?"
 
xpell said:
Indeed. However, my question (in my mind, at least...) was more like, "If it had happened, do we have the tools to learn or deduct that it did? What are those tools? Or would it be immediately obvious because this-and-that?"
That is indeed the question I attempted to answer, including a suggestion of some of the tools.

It's not as simple as 'did it happen'. Most celestial science is about 'This may have happened. Let's make a model to see if it makes sense, and look for more evidence.' You never know for certain, you just have a strong, well-supported theory. If it's compelling enough - and answers more question than it raises - then it has taken its first steps toward an accepted theory.

Compare to a similar (but unrelated) deep history hypothesis such as The Giant Impact Hypothesis of Earth's childhood for some ideas about how we look for evidence to bolster such concepts. (It was first proposed by Darwin in 1898 - and it's still "just" an hypothesis (i.e. not widely accepted.)TL;DR: No there is no immediate smoking gun that would tell us there used to be a fifth Galilaen moon. It would need a hypothesis that is then supported with evidence. That would take years of research and analysis.
 
DaveC426913 said:
TL;DR: No there is no immediate smoking gun that would tell us there used to be a fifth Galilaen moon.
Thank you again, Dave. :smile: This part was especially important for me. I didn't want to pass for an ignorant just by asking, "Hey, what if that big guy had another moon or a couple of them?" and be slammed with an avalanche of, "Are you silly?! That is totally impossible because of this obvious thing!" answers. Now I know that I can ask. :redface:
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'

Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'

Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
View full post »

Thread 'Off resonance driving of a MW/RF cavity'

Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
View full post »

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top