# Superrotation on Venus. Really? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 6, 2016, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029 "2016-12-06T16:01:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![somepumpkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@somepumpkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/somepumpkin)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/1 "2016-12-06T16:01:30Z")
I just learned about the superrotating atmosphere on Venus (from listening to Stardate). I just gotta say, wow. The universe is constantly astounding me. This is all neat and shit, but how do they know that the atmosphere is going that fast? From my limited research it seems we have only visual data to confirm this, and I know that men’s eyes are easily deceived. Have we ruled-out any perception bias? Are we sure that the atmosphere is really moving that quickly or does it just \*appear \*to be moving that quickly? As an aside, the story of the Akatsuki Orbiter is fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/2 "2016-12-06T16:16:09Z")
A new theory to explain superrotation on Venus[http://phys.org/news/2010-05-theory-superrotation-venus.html](http://phys.org/news/2010-05-theory-superrotation-venus.html) > [@](#): > > Durand-Manterola and his team propose that the transterminator flow in the cryosphere could transfer flow momentum to the atmosphere below in the form of pressure waves as they dissipate. They propose the interaction on the night side between the flow on the dawn side and the flow on the dusk side generates waves because they flow at different speeds, with the dusk side flow being much faster. > > The waves travel down from the ionosphere, and through the thermosphere and mesosphere to the troposphere depositing most of the momentum and dissipating in the cloud layer, moving the atmosphere in a retrograde direction and driving the superrotation. [Why does Venus’ atmosphere rotate sixty times faster than its surface?](http://phys.org/news/2014-07-venus-atmosphere-rotate-sixty-faster.html) > [@](#): > > “We have for the first time solved the equations describing the movement of the atmospheric waves particular to Venus, which in turn has allowed us to identify the nature of the waves observed by the Venus Express mission”, says Javier Peralta (IAA-CSIC). The study, which has classified six different types of waves and has predicted their characteristics, provides a new systematic tool to classify waves. Henceforth it will be possible to assess their role in transporting, creating and dissipating the atmosphere’s energy. > > “Some of the waves we have found, such as the acoustic waves or the gravity waves, have properties almost identical to those on Earth,” says Javier Peralta (IAA-CSIC)-. “Other types of waves, however, do not exist on our planet, like the ones we have called centrifugal waves and are responsible for the two hundred and fifty five day oscillations displayed by the winds of Venus”. No eyes are involved, of course. It’s all instrument readings. ---
**Author:** ![somepumpkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@somepumpkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/somepumpkin)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/3 "2016-12-06T16:31:07Z")
Thanks for the links, **Harpo** :). I’ve actually read both of those. The Durand-Manterola is a “proposal” and the Peralta study mentions that they are “predictions” based on observations. And, with the math, we’re just bending/crunching numbers until they match what we _suspect_. What instruments and sensors are we using, anyway? What have we collected that is different than reflected light? The guys in the Peralta study even say, “…Other types of waves, however, do not exist on our planet”, which gets at the crux of my issue with all of this. How can we really say what happens in the cosmos when our only points of reference are earthbound? That last question is rhetorical; I’d like to stay focused on the Venusian atmosphere. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/4 "2016-12-06T17:38:18Z")
You’re perilously close to saying that scientists just make all this stuff up and we rubes won’t know the difference. If you read those links you’ll note that they further link to the original formal academic paper: [ANALYTICAL SOLUTION FOR WAVES IN PLANETS WITH ATMOSPHERIC SUPERROTATION. I. ACOUSTIC AND INERTIA-GRAVITY WAVES, the Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, Volume 213, Number 1](http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0067-0049/213/1/17/meta;jsessionid=D83AD5BDF7AA8F76CBB9B9433CD0D133.ip-10-40-1-114). The full paper, not just an abstract, is found there. You can take a look at the math to see how they calculate the various waveforms. It also states where the collected data comes from: > [@](#): > > In this sense, we can apply our dispersion graphs to classify the horizontal mesoscale waves found at different vertical levels of the Venus atmosphere with the imaging spectrometer VIRTIS-M and the Venus Monitoring Camera (VMC) on board the spacecraft Venus Express (Peralta et al. 2008; Piccialli et al. 2014). Basically, three levels of the Venus cloud region were sensed with these instruments while seeking atmospheric waves: the upper cloud at about 66 km in height with dayside 380 nm images, the base of the upper cloud at 61 km with dayside 980 nm observations, and the lower clouds with nightside images taken at 1.74 μm corresponding to the surface thermal radiation attenuated by clouds between 44 and 48 km (Peralta et al. 2008). In the case of the VIRTIS-M observations, these were made covering the southern hemisphere and both the horizontal wavelength and intrinsic phase velocities were measured when possible (Peralta et al. 2008). On the other hand, wave observations by VMC were made during the periapsis of the orbit, thus covering only the northern hemisphere and inhibiting the estimate of the corresponding phase velocities as a consequence of the high speed of the spacecraft (Piccialli et al. 2014). Again, none of this is “visual data” in the sense that eyes or what humans consider visible light is involved. It is of course possible that the data has been misinterpreted or was flawed in the getting, but it all appears to be standard satellite imagery as sound as anything else scientists based their conclusions on. ---
**Author:** ![somepumpkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@somepumpkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/somepumpkin)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/5 "2016-12-06T18:44:55Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > You’re perilously close to saying that scientists just make all this stuff up and we rubes won’t know the difference. > \. Ha! Yes, as a matter of fact, I am. But that’s a discussion for which a different forum would be a better fit. Again, thanks for the feedback and for taking the time to explain what I might be missing. Your quoted text was _helpful_. I also just (briefly) read about the sensors on the Venus Express orbiter; it’s more than light. It has opened my eyes (get it :p) but now I’ve got more reading and understanding ahead of me. I think what I was looking for was something like; “they dropped a beer can down there and clocked its progress”. Though I realize that’s little more than writing a science fiction novel, that’s what I need to hear. If we’re watching a fluid moving around –without reference to any particles- then how do we confirm those measurements of velocity? It seems we’re only measuring wave energies and not absolute motion. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/6 "2016-12-06T19:00:04Z")
> [@somepumpkin](#): > > …If we’re watching a fluid moving around –without reference to any particles- then how do we confirm those measurements of velocity? It seems we’re only measuring wave energies and not absolute motion. What do you mean? There may be other evidence, but we’re seeing clouds move. Clouds are made of particles. [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v450/n7170/full/nature06320.html](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v450/n7170/full/nature06320.html) ---
**Author:** ![somepumpkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@somepumpkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/somepumpkin)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/7 "2016-12-06T19:06:53Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > What do you mean? We’re seeing clouds move. Clouds are made of particles. The clouds are homogeneous, though. How can we be absolutely sure that the cloud particles in this spot at this time are the same particles we were seeing over there at that time? I find this especially questionable since we’ve now all agreed that we’re actually \*watching \*waves, and not just particles moving linearly along a predicted pathway. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/8 "2016-12-06T19:25:59Z")
> [@somepumpkin](#): > > The clouds are homogeneous, though… They are quite obviously not homogenous at large scale, just look at any photo of Venus. What’s your basis for supposing that they are homogenous at smaller scales? The abstract of that Nature paper that I linked to certainly suggests not: > [@](#): > > …The cloud tops are in fast retrograde rotation (super-rotation), but the factors responsible for this super-rotation are unknown. Here we report observations of Venus with the Venus Monitoring Camera on board the Venus Express spacecraft. We investigate both global and small-scale properties of the clouds, their temporal and latitudinal variations, and derive wind velocities. The southern polar region is highly variable and can change dramatically on timescales as short as one day… ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/9 "2016-12-06T19:38:12Z")
Venus’ clouds in visual wavelengths are fairly homogenous and bland. But in UV light they show lots of detail. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/10 "2016-12-06T19:49:24Z")
> [@somepumpkin](#): > > How can we be absolutely sure that the cloud particles in this spot at this time are the same particles we were seeing over there at that time? This is not my field, but it appears we have spectroscopic measurements ([example](https://www.astro.uni-koeln.de/this/science/venus)) which show Doppler shift consistent with speed measured by other means. This is a direct measurement of the gas motion. ---
**Author:** ![Richox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@Richox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richox)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2016, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/11 "2016-12-06T22:47:25Z")
and of course the several direct measurement of wind speeds and pressures achieved by the mariner fly-bys and several successful soviet (venera) surface landings. > **[Observations and explorations of Venus | Early landings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observations_and_explorations_of_Venus#Early_landings)** > > On March 1, 1966, the Venera 3 Soviet space probe crash-landed on Venus, becoming the first spacecraft to reach the surface of another planet. Its sister craft Venera 2 had failed due to overheating shortly before completing its flyby mission. > The descent capsule of Venera 4 entered the atmosphere of Venus on October 18, 1967, making it the first probe to return direct measurements from another planet's atmosphere. The capsule measured temperature, pressure, density and performed 11 automatic ch... direct measurement of supporting evidence. ---
**Author:** ![somepumpkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@somepumpkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/somepumpkin)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/12 "2016-12-08T15:25:10Z")
Thanks to all for their time and conversation. I really should have chosen a better word than _homogeneous_. I’m glad you guys still got what I was gettin’ at. The link from \*\*Richox \*\*has the kind of info I was hoping for. Researching that will keep me busy this afternoon. I’m not fully sold that all of man’s astronomical conclusions are \*valid \*but you’ve almost convinced me about the winds on our nearest neighbor. 🙂 In any event, I’m astonished by what we can do and that we have such a desire to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/13 "2016-12-08T15:44:22Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m not fully sold that all of man’s astronomical conclusions are _valid_ (approaches container of worms with can opener) Which ones are you suspicious of, and why? ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/14 "2016-12-08T16:13:17Z")
[Widemann, Lelloucha & Donatib](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032063308002110): > [@](#): > > These observations consisted of high-resolution spectra of Fraunhofer lines in the entire visible range (0.37–1.05 μm) to measure the winds near 68 km using the Doppler shift of solar radiation scattered by clouds toward the observer’s direction. The observations included various points of the dayside hemisphere at a phase angle of ∼109°. We took advantage of two symmetrical elongations in July and September 2007 at Canada–France–Hawaii’s 3.6-m telescope. Kinematical fits to the Doppler winds provide a mean equatorial velocity of (104±10) m s−1 for the zonal retrograde flow. This velocity agrees quite well with the mean value obtained by tracking the UV markings from several spacecraft. This seems pretty conclusive evidence that the apparent cloud motions observed by spacecraft represent true bulk motion of the atmosphere. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/15 "2016-12-08T19:20:16Z")
I’m almost fully sold that _not_ all of our astronomical measurements are solid. There’s no specific measurement I can point to and say that I’m suspicious of that one, but there are so many that it’d be almost impossible for all of them to be right. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/16 "2016-12-08T22:09:21Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I’m almost fully sold that _not_ all of our astronomical measurements are solid. There’s no specific measurement I can point to and say that I’m suspicious of that one, but there are so many that it’d be almost impossible for all of them to be right. Sure. But it’s simply not true that we point a big telescope at Venus and try to watch the clouds move, as the OP implied. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/17 "2016-12-08T22:18:02Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Sure. But it’s simply not true that we point a big telescope at Venus and try to watch the clouds move, as the OP implied. Agreed, but it’s also not true that if this _were_ all we had that the data would be as weak as the OP implied. Clouds are indeed particles that move with the air current, and when we include all EM wavelength from IR through visual to UV passive observation does yield a lot more information than the OP supposed. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2016, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/18 "2016-12-08T23:46:58Z")
Clouds are particles, but the particles that make up a cloud aren’t always visible. It’s possible for the water droplets to evaporate on one end of a cloud, while vapor condenses into droplets on the other end, while none of the particles have any bulk movement at all. That would look like the cloud moving, even though it’s not. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2016, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/19 "2016-12-09T00:10:51Z")
The old saying that “any sufficiently sophisticated tech is indistinguishable from magic” applies. If somebody starts from the idea that they need to be able to understand the entire chain of measurements and reasoning from end to end, AND that person is only sophisticated enough to understand “drop a beer can and keep it in sight while timing its motion with a mechanical stopwatch”, then all the rest becomes magic by definition. And magic is untrustworthy. To his credit, the OP quickly recognized there are other ways to measure that are direct enough so they’re not magic to him. This whole thread is a cautionary tale about sophisticated science and unsophisticated audiences. A lot of Moon Hoax believers “thinking” can be summarized as “I can’t figure out how to get to the Moon, so therefore nobody could have figured out how to get to the Moon.” It’s nonsense of course. But popular nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2016, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029/20 "2016-12-09T00:23:46Z")
I’m fascinated by the discoveries and measurements made with very crude tools. Such as [Eratosthenes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes) calculating the size of the Earth armed with a stick and an anecdote about a well. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/superrotation-on-venus-really/774029.md?page=2)