Venus in UV 31.8.2017

[Pete Presland]

A tough nut to crack, another early rise to see what the conditions were like. The seeing wasn't too bad and the transparency better than last time. I think the transparency might be a little more important when imaging Venus in UV than other planets in RGB. When the transparency has been poor so much light is blocked by the filter already, I don't think I can afford to loose any more especially for my aperture. Definitely some cloud structure visible again, definitely aperture fever visible again!

Another go tomorrow morning weather permitting I think 

C9.25, ASI120mm + X1.8 Barlow.

[MarsG76]

Definitely some cloud detail coming through... do you think that the corrector plate is interfering with UV transmission on SCTs?

 

[Pete Presland]

5 hours ago, MarsG76 said:

Definitely some cloud detail coming through... do you think that the corrector plate is interfering with UV transmission on SCTs?

 

I read a lot of articles regarding UV imaging of Venus and that certainly seems a posibilty. I probably should try my 200PDS, a bit smaller aperture, but maybe less interference.  A 300mm newt might be the answer 

[Pete Presland]

This one is from the 1.9.2017 still some detail, but not as good I don't think as the image from the 31st.

[MarsG76]

20 hours ago, Pete Presland said:

I read a lot of articles regarding UV imaging of Venus and that certainly seems a posibilty. I probably should try my 200PDS, a bit smaller aperture, but maybe less interference.  A 300mm newt might be the answer 

I read that too and when I imaged Venus using the dobsonian I had a lot brighter image than in the SCT... the bigger mirror played a role but the brightness amount steers me into the side of believing that the corrector plate cuts a bit of uv... same barlow, CCD and UVenus filter were used when comparing.

Apparently some barlows block more UV than others too.

[Dave In Vermont]

I've been following the UV-Filters and the imaging of Venus with these for years. What I find quite interesting is how the cloud-formation people keep getting remains pretty much the same over many years. And while no one is certain of why this is, the most likely reason has to do with some topographical cause under the clouds. Maybe a mountain-range(s)? Here's an example of these constant features:

 

Note the year - 2008.

 

The exception was late in 2015 when a "wave" seemed to form - which was so unusual that it found itself being followed in the mainstream-press, which usually only mentions astronomy when someone claims they were picked-up by a flying-saucer and molested by some drunken Zeta-Reticulans on a Friday night.

Here's the 'wave' on Venus:

 

And in 3D:

 

 

Keep on going! We'll skin that Venus - the Onion Planet!

Dave

[Pete Presland]

5 hours ago, Dave In Vermont said:

I've been following the UV-Filters and the imaging of Venus with these for years. What I find quite interesting is how the cloud-formation people keep getting remains pretty much the same over many years. And while no one is certain of why this is, the most likely reason has to do with some topographical cause under the clouds. Maybe a mountain-range(s)? Here's an example of these constant features:

 

Note the year - 2008.

 

The exception was late in 2015 when a "wave" seemed to form - which was so unusual that it found itself being followed in the mainstream-press, which usually only mentions astronomy when someone claims they were picked-up by a flying-saucer and molested by some drunken Zeta-Reticulans on a Friday night.

Here's the 'wave' on Venus:

 

And in 3D:

 

 

Keep on going! We'll skin that Venus - the Onion Planet!

Dave

The consistent nature of the features at least allows us to be fairly sure whether we are capturing "real" detail or not. Something that always concerns me with my images.

[MarsG76]

11 hours ago, Dave In Vermont said:

I've been following the UV-Filters and the imaging of Venus with these for years. What I find quite interesting is how the cloud-formation people keep getting remains pretty much the same over many years. And while no one is certain of why this is, the most likely reason has to do with some topographical cause under the clouds. Maybe a mountain-range(s)? Here's an example of these constant features:

 

Note the year - 2008.

 

The exception was late in 2015 when a "wave" seemed to form - which was so unusual that it found itself being followed in the mainstream-press, which usually only mentions astronomy when someone claims they were picked-up by a flying-saucer and molested by some drunken Zeta-Reticulans on a Friday night.

Here's the 'wave' on Venus:

 

And in 3D:

 

 

Keep on going! We'll skin that Venus - the Onion Planet!

Dave

I was wondering exactly that... posted about it here with pictures...

Last December & January I captured Venus images using the UVenus filter and was surprised that the cloud structure was similar to cloud structure photographed in the late 70sL

Surely something is up when clouds don't change for 40 years!!!

[Dave In Vermont]

Indeed - a long time for a cloud to be unchanging - for sure! This is one of my favorite Venusian-Mysteries!

I went so far as to download the entire radar-map of the planet, which with a few narrow gaps, from NASA/JPL and go over them all with a microscope-application - looking for possible culprits. I didn't find anything to account for this phenomena. I still have well over a GB of Venus-By-Radar!

If you'd like to try your luck on such, and downloading over a GB of maps and other assorted software is not your idea of fun, the people behind the excellent Virtual Lunar Atlas came out with the equally excellent Virtual Planet Atlas - which contains all the surface details you'd need to mount a virtual-expedition on our so-called Sister-Planet. VPA is free, so here's a link:

http://www.ap-i.net/avp/en/start

Maybe the clouds of Venus are a semi-solid rather than a gaseous mixture? Some strange trick of chemistry with which we are unfamiliar? Who knows.....This is the reason I call Venus 'The Onion-Planet.' You peel off one layer of mystery - and there's another layer waiting!

Strange place,

Dave

 

[MarsG76]

On 7 September 2017 at 22:38, Dave In Vermont said:

You peel off one layer

And it brings a tear to your eye...

[Dave In Vermont]

Almost as if on cue - an article or two have just appeared on the subject of the Venusian clouds.

First one up I found was in EarthSky News:

http://earthsky.org/space/venus-mysterious-night-side-revealed

And this was taken out of the ESA Science, though this ESA take has much better & complete data:

http://sci.esa.int/venus-express/59498-venus-mysterious-night-side-revealed/

In a nutshell, we still don't have any answers to the questions surrounding these stationary clouds. No surprise there imho. But an excellent article! If anyone wants to read this/these and can't for some techie reason, let me know in this thread & I'll fire-off a Pdf. for you. I would have here, but too busy to get this done.

Enjoy -

Dave

 

 

[MarsG76]

Very interesting.... but like you said, they have no idea yet...

Personally I think its a combination of the slow rotation, high pressure/thick atmosphere and high temperature that makes the clouds and the atmosphere behave more like a high viscous fluid rather than a gas resulting in the "high viscosity" being "attached or dragged on by the surface resulting in a very slow cloud movement. I bet that there are deep valley or high mountain ranges that seem to hold the V shape on the cloud structure. 

[Dave In Vermont]

It looks like you and I are on the same page here. Especially the possibilities of the 'atmosphere' acting like a new form of substance - not quite acting as a gas, or as a solid. Acting as a hybridized amalgamation of these, and more.

Remaining fascinated -

Dave

[Pete Presland]

Fascinating articles. The more I read about these features, the more mysterious they become!