Friday, March 31, 2017

Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Get More Surreal Over Time

Peter Brennan

Mr.Ippolito

Core Biology

March 31 2017

Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Get More Surreal Over Time


In this article written by Nadia Drake titled “Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Get More Surreal Over Time” is a very important scientific article not because of the findings itself but because of what it will do to society and how people will perceive science. This article talks about the importance of the Juno spacecraft that was launched in order to gain more detailed pictures of Jupiter’s surface and study its topography. In the article Nadia talks about the details of How the Juno receives power through large solar wings and sends information back through a long range receiver. Juno is not their just to make maps though, it is carrying on board some of the most advanced technology in space, it is mapping the gravity field of Jupiter, the auroras that happen at the northern pole of the planet, and mapping out Jupiter's electrical field.They go into more detail however about how special Jupiter is in our solar system, saying that it has some of the most unique whether scientists have ever observed. A scientists in the article by the name of Bolton say that ““Maybe what you’re seeing is the fact that Jupiter is so big that it has triggered some other special dynamics that are star-like, to some extent.” This is a very interesting find and it was based off of the high resolution pictures and the data that Juno is sending back to earth.
    This article is very important to society because it could be something that rekindles america's love for space exploration and research. After the space race the US has lost its want to go out and explore the starts first and is now being left behind by other more invested countries. This document could make the people of America more interested in the other planets of our solar system and maybe get so invested that we start to fund NASA heavily again. The pictures themselves will have an impact in the scientific community because these are some of the most detailed images this close to jupiter's surface and that means more information,action can be gathered from one photo then before.
    This article was very well written by I feel that it did have some flaws. A major flaw in the article is the amount of information that is tossed at the reader, it sometimes become confusing to read after just hearing about a massive amount of details on another topic discussed in the article. I feel that this also contributed to this articles struggle to read because it did not flow well, some discussions were left to short and others to long, this contributed to the articles bad flow and struggle to read.

Citation:
Drake, Nadia. "Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time." National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 30 Mar. 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/jupiter-pictures-nasa-juno-storms-space-science/>.

3 comments:

  1. Alyssa Lee
    Mr. Ippolito
    Biology 10H
    13 April 2017

    Drake, Nadia. "Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time." National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 30 Mar. 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. .
    I decided to evaluate my classmate Peter’s review of the article “Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time”. His review discusses the impact of the Juno spacecraft taking photos of Jupiter in the long run and its importance to society, not only scientifically but also socially (i.e. catering to people’s interest in outer space). One aspect of Peter’s review that he did very well was that he not only explains the impact of the pictures taken, but he also explains how the Juno spacecraft works, which is essential to understanding the science behind its work. He states, “the Juno receives power through large solar wings and sends information back through a long range receiver”. Another aspect that Peter completed exceptionally well was his belief as to why this is important- he explains that although the photos will have a major impact on the scientific world as they are some of the most detailed images this close to Jupiter's surface”, they will also “rekindle America’s love for space exploration and research”. Peter also described the flaws of the article eloquently and succinctly, making it easy for the reader to understand why this flaw hindered the reading process. Peter comments, “A major flaw in the article is the amount of information that is tossed at the reader”, making it “sometimes confusing to read”. The readers are able to clearly understand that the sheer amount of knowledge present in the article makes it a difficult read to comprehend.
    Although Peter’s review was very well done, there are some improvements that could be made. For example, I found a multitude of grammatical errors throughout his review which sometimes obstructed the flow of the wording. For example, Peter states that Jupiter “has some of the most unique whether scientists have ever observed”, using “whether” instead of “weather”. I spent a short amount of time attempting to decipher what he had meant before understanding that it had been a typo of sorts. Other such spelling and capitalization errors were also noticed, and should be corrected for future reference. Another aspect that could be improved was his information on Juno- from what I gathered from his review, Juno was not extremely different/special compared to other spacecrafts. What made it so different from the other previous ones that orbited Jupiter? I believe that a deeper analysis and explanation of Juno’s structure would be helpful in understanding the answer to this question, as Peter only notes that “it is mapping the gravity field of Jupiter, the auroras that happen at the northern pole of the planet, and mapping out Jupiter's electrical field”. Even if the article itself did not discuss this in-depth, it would be beneficial for Peter to have conducted further research on Juno.
    From reading Peter’s review, I learned not only about the ways in which mankind is advancing space travel and photography in order to expand our knowledge today, but also the impact that it will possibly have for us in the future. As NASA is currently restricted in terms of space travel, perhaps strides in astronomy such as this Juno spacecraft will persuade the current government to begin investing in space travel and exploration. I chose to read this review because I have always found space interesting and was disappointed when NASA had stopped space travel. This offered some hope for me that there will be more humans in space in the near future. This review has changed my perspective on space due to the fact that I began to truly realize how vast and expansive space is and the importance of learning about more than just what we can see.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Luke Redman
    Mr. Ippolito
    Biology 10H
    April 17th 2017

    Drake, Nadia. "Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time." National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 30 Mar. 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. .

    I read Peter’s review of the National Geographic Article, “Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Get More Surreal Over Time”, by Nadia Drake. The article talks about the Juno spacecraft that is recording data about Jupiter. Peter does an amazing job of describing the functions of the Juno spacecraft. Peter mentions not only the primary objective of Juno, which is mapping the massive planet and taking high quality photos, he also includes information about how it maps the gravitational fields and how it records auroras. The spacecraft also maps out the electrical field around Jupiter. Peter also does an amazing job of conveying why these photos are important. He includes a quote which explains it well, “Maybe what you’re seeing is the fact that Jupiter is so big that it has triggered some other special dynamics that are star-like, to some extent.” These effects are very special to Jupiter since it is so large. He also obviously is interested in the topic as well, allowing his interests to infect the writing. He used language like “rekindles america's love for space exploration and research.” He explained why he thought that the article was important using words that engaged the reader. However, there were some areas where Peter could have improved. He had a grammatical error where he incorrectly used “whether” instead of “weather” when describing Jupiter. It was very confusing while reading, and I labelled it as a typo and a mistake by the author. Another aspect that Peter could have worked on is providing detailed descriptions of the findings in the article and how they differentiate from normal planets. He mentions that the findings are similar to stars but he doesn't elaborate on the information or provide any details. I learned about NASA’s attempts to collect even more information about the vastness that is space and the celestial bodies that populate the emptiness.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sarah Goodell
    Mr. Ippolito
    Current Event Comment #8
    5 April, 2017

    Drake, Nadia. "Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time." National
    Geographic. National Geographic Society, 30 Mar. 2017. Web. 31 Mar. 2017. .

    This month, my classmate, Peter Brennan, wrote a great review on the article "Pictures Show a Mysterious Planet Getting More Surreal Over Time” by author Nadia Drake from National Geographic. In Peter’s review, he established sufficient background on Juno, which is needed in order to properly set up for the rest of his review since the article is wholly based on Juno’s discoveries. Another aspect that Peter exemplified well was being able to properly organize his review. Although he claims that the original article was “confusing to read after just hearing a massive amount of details on another topic” and “it [the article] did not flow well.” Peter was able to successfully take the disorganized information from the article and transform it into something understandable for his readers, which is essential in attracting readers since we all would like something simple and easy to read. Finally, at the end of his review, Peter was very honest in detailing why he believed this article would be insufficient for many readers to understand and why he believed the author could have made it less of a “struggle to read.” It is important for a review to be brutally honest, and Peter was able to do that when examining Drake’s article. Peter’s job was to make readers well-informed on this article, as well as his topic, and he was able to do that through his writing.
    Overall, Peter’s article was well-organized, however, he could have improved on two things. Firstly, Peter does discuss Juno and the machine’s functions and purpose, although he does not sufficiently explain its findings related to this topic. If Peter had explained the photos and the finding more in detail, his readers would be able to better understand the topic that the author discusses and the point she is making. Peter should have examined the photos and discussed that data for his audience, instead of merely mentioning it. Secondly, Peter had quite a few grammatical errors within his piece. He mistakenly wrote “whether,” instead of “weather,” as well as writing “their,” instead of “there.” Peter also capitalized “How” in the middle of a sentence and did not capitalize “america.” He was also missing some punctuation in some sentences. As a result of this, Peter puzzled his audience in some parts of his review, making his readers believe that some of his piece may not be credible enough to be trusted or believed. If Peter were to improve in this area, his review would be thoroughly improved in preciseness, flow, and, most of all, believability and genuity.
    Peter’s review has led me to realize how our technology is still continuing to expand and grow as younger generations are being brought up under the influence of new technological advancements. This growth has allowed us to be able to recognize and map the gravitational and electrical fields on certain planets beside our own, even millions of miles away. For me, Peter has sparked the idea that this new technology could possibly lead to another Space Race or simply more development within NASA and their fundings. Peter’s article has also allowed me to understand the vastness of space, how there is so much more yet to be discovered, and how we may be getting even closer to sending humans to foreign planets and producing life there, far from Earth.

    ReplyDelete