<ol>
<li>It is relatively easily to study storms on other planets. Forget advanced space telescopes. Bruh, you can hook up a rookie telescope and see Jupiter's Great Red Spot in 4K (Okay, that may have a bit of an overstatement).</li>
<li>Saturn's Hexagon was first spotted by the <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/voyager/hexagon_PIA_11682.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Voyager probes</a> in the late 1980s. Now, they have just exited the heliosphere and in the interstellar medium , in other words, &quot;out&quot; of the solar system. <s>That's, however, only if shenanigans like the Oort Cloud don't exist</s>. Second, the Cassini probes launched and reached Saturn in 2004, where they for the first time, imaged the Hexagon Storm in full quality.</li>
<li>Neptune and Uranus, these two planets were only closely imaged once, by the Voyager probes in the 1980s, I think. Sure, JWST has made some imagery of it, but that's irrevelant.</li>
<li>As for exoplanets, that is merely conceptual art and models based on what they would look like. The only exoplanet whose &quot;color&quot; or even just surface features have been known is HD 189733 B, and even then, the planet's color, is just cobalt-blue, revealed from polarimetry. The reason why we don't know a exoplanet's surface details exactly is due to the fact, that though telescopes are experts at capturing stars like Betelguese and heck yes, even black holes like M87 and Sgr A* in high quality, they are terribly inefficient at capturing planets. Forget trying to capture distant planets, if we were to turn around our telescopes and capture Proxima Centauri B or even just Pluto, all we would get is a fuzzy mumbo jumbo, or in Pluto's case, just a small blurry sphere. That's why the Hubble couldn't capture Pluto.</li>
<li>Most photos of exoplanets that you see online on internet, are just CGI generated by NASA based on the semi-major axis, orbital eccentricity etc etc. Meaning that they were generated by some sort of CGI software, so as to imagine what it would most probably look like.</li>
</ol>
<p>So to sum up, in 1st case, cyclones are studied on Jupiter and Saturn, as they are &quot;relatively&quot; close to the Earth, and we can easily capture their images. Neptune and Uranus, they were captured only once by the Voyager probes, and for exoplanets, they aren't actually studied, but simulations.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-04T17:02:40.780Z
2023-07-04T17:02:40.780Z
Arcturus
<p>I don't have access that sort of list so I will only be answering the first question, that is &quot;How are the cyclones on other planets studied?&quot;. So, there's a few ways.</p>
<p>First, there are <strong>space probes</strong>, often sent by NASA and other space agency to explore weather and other attributes of other planets, at least the one's in our solar system (and hopefully soon the one's not in our solar system too). They have cameras, spectrometers, and radar systems which tell scientists a lot about cyclones on other planets. For example, the Cassini mission to Saturn and the Juno mission to Jupiter have given much data on cyclones and a variety of other processes on their respective planets.</p>
<p>Second, there are <strong>telescopes</strong> and similar tools, used by anyone from professionals to amatuers, that can study nearly the entire observable universe for these cyclones and other phenomenon. They can also use imaging to capture detailed images of these cyclones and other occurences. It's chemical composition can be determined by spectroscopy by analyzing the light emitted, absorbed, and scattered by the cyclone or similar surface or atmospheric activities. These can share much about the dynamics and evolutions of interplanetary cyclones.</p>
<p>Third, there are <strong>computer models</strong> that are generally made by professionals and it is generally a much cheaper and easier method of &quot;studying&quot; cyclones. Other methods are still used as <strong>models may be inaccurate</strong> but they are still useful, albeit imperfect. Adding data about the planet's atmosphere (such as temperature, pressure, and wind patterns) let's scientists simulate cyclones and study their behavior and evolution. It helps them understand cyclones and make predictions about them.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-04T14:22:53.957Z
2023-07-04T14:22:53.957Z
Starship
<p>Cyclones have been observed throughout the universe as seen in the following examples:</p>
<ol>
<li>Jupiter's Great Red Spot is perhaps the most well-known cyclone in our solar system. It is a giant storm that has been raging on Jupiter's surface for at least 350 years, and it is much larger than any storm on Earth. The storm is thought to be fueled by the planet's internal heat, and it rotates counterclockwise.</li>
<li>Saturn also has a hexagonal-shaped cyclone at its north pole, which is much larger than any storm on Earth. The storm has been observed by spacecraft since the 1980s and is thought to be caused by the planet's unique atmospheric conditions.</li>
<li>Neptune has a series of dark spots on its surface that are thought to be cyclones, and they are often seen to be interacting with each other. Uranus also has storms on its surface, although they are less well-studied.</li>
<li>Cyclones have also been observed on the moons of Jupiter, particularly on Io, which has hundreds of active volcanoes that can create plumes of gas that form rotating storms.</li>
<li>Exoplanets, or planets outside our solar system, have also been observed with cyclones. In 2018, astronomers discovered a giant exoplanet called WASP-121b that has a glowing, red-hot atmosphere and a cyclone the size of the state of Texas.</li>
</ol>
<p>What is the most common method that a scientist uses to study the cyclones in the universe?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-27T20:20:18.073Z
The great red spot is actually and anticyclone. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/activity/jupiter-s-great-red-spot/print/#:~:text=One%20of%20Jupiter's%20most%20noticeable,storm%20in%20our%20solar%20system.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-27T20:21:47.113Z
What are you expecting in the answer beyond "they send probes to take photos (and do other science stuff)"  or "They look at the planet in a telescope."....? The question about exoplanets is different again.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-27T22:42:53.763Z
@JamesK A list of all the science stuff.
Arunabh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-28T07:30:47.420Z
They use observations and models (both theoretical and numerical).  What answer are you looking for?
gerrit
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-06-28T14:06:18.073Z
@gerrit Looking for a list of the models they use.
Arunabh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-04T16:34:41.760Z
Here are some useful posts: https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/a/43649/35206 ... https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/33469/35206
Nilay Ghosh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-05T11:59:20.080Z
Why the downvotes?
Arunabh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-06T12:02:48.423Z
Questions asking for lists are never well received on SE sites.  You are inviting downvotes and closure.
Chenmunka
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T00:34:58.337Z
@Chenmunka that's *not always* the case. cf. [Hijacked space data, notable instances of recovering images or other goodies from someone else's space mission?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/33359/12102) +9 with 6 answers, [Is it possible to see animals from space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/19537/12102) +32 with 7 answers. When new users ask a "what are the ways..." question the proper response is to leave a helpful comment or proactively make an edit for them adjusting the wording to avoid a list invitation. Don't blame the votes on the OP "You are inviting..." It's not their fault
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T00:37:57.610Z
@Chenmunka Pile-on downvoting for new users happens in the unfriendly sites for sure, but the more enlightened sites understand how to be helpful to new users without being discouraging. Astronomy SE is usually in the enlightened regime when it comes to new users, but there are some "new voters" who bring bad habits from the unenlightened sites.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-09T05:26:05.333Z
@Chenmunka more! [Examples of papers co-authored by parent/child, or siblings](https://hsm.stackexchange.com/q/8332/3869) +9, 17 answers, [Which mathematicians died very young or in a tragic way?](https://hsm.stackexchange.com/q/3131/3869) +42 *with 44 answers!*
uhoh
<planet><cyclones>
What is the most common method that a scientist uses to study the cyclones in the universe?
Arunabh
# What is the most common method that a scientist uses to study the cyclones in the universe?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-06-27)

Cyclones have been observed throughout the universe as seen in the following examples:

1. Jupiter's Great Red Spot is perhaps the most well-known cyclone in our solar system. It is a giant storm that has been raging on Jupiter's surface for at least 350 years, and it is much larger than any storm on Earth. The storm is thought to be fueled by the planet's internal heat, and it rotates counterclockwise.
2. Saturn also has a hexagonal-shaped cyclone at its north pole, which is much larger than any storm on Earth. The storm has been observed by spacecraft since the 1980s and is thought to be caused by the planet's unique atmospheric conditions.
3. Neptune has a series of dark spots on its surface that are thought to be cyclones, and they are often seen to be interacting with each other. Uranus also has storms on its surface, although they are less well-studied.
4. Cyclones have also been observed on the moons of Jupiter, particularly on Io, which has hundreds of active volcanoes that can create plumes of gas that form rotating storms.
5. Exoplanets, or planets outside our solar system, have also been observed with cyclones. In 2018, astronomers discovered a giant exoplanet called WASP-121b that has a glowing, red-hot atmosphere and a cyclone the size of the state of Texas.

What is the most common method that a scientist uses to study the cyclones in the universe?

**Tags:** planet, cyclones

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The great red spot is actually and anticyclone. https://www.nationalgeographic.org/activity/jupiter-s-great-red-spot/print/#:~:text=One%20of%20Jupiter's%20most%20noticeable,storm%20in%20our%20solar%20system.  
> **username_1**: What are you expecting in the answer beyond "they send probes to take photos (and do other science stuff)"  or "They look at the planet in a telescope."....? The question about exoplanets is different again.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 A list of all the science stuff.  
> **username_2**: They use observations and models (both theoretical and numerical).  What answer are you looking for?  
> **username_0**: @username_2 Looking for a list of the models they use.  
> **username_3**: Here are some useful posts: https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/a/43649/35206 ... https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/33469/35206  
> **username_0**: Why the downvotes?  
> **username_4**: Questions asking for lists are never well received on SE sites.  You are inviting downvotes and closure.  
> **username_5**: @username_4 that's *not always* the case. cf. [Hijacked space data, notable instances of recovering images or other goodies from someone else's space mission?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/33359/12102) +9 with 6 answers, [Is it possible to see animals from space?](https://space.stackexchange.com/q/19537/12102) +32 with 7 answers. When new users ask a "what are the ways..." question the proper response is to leave a helpful comment or proactively make an edit for them adjusting the wording to avoid a list invitation. Don't blame the votes on the OP "You are inviting..." It's not their fault  
> **username_5**: @username_4 Pile-on downvoting for new users happens in the unfriendly sites for sure, but the more enlightened sites understand how to be helpful to new users without being discouraging. Astronomy SE is usually in the enlightened regime when it comes to new users, but there are some "new voters" who bring bad habits from the unenlightened sites.  
> **username_5**: @username_4 more! [Examples of papers co-authored by parent/child, or siblings](https://hsm.stackexchange.com/q/8332/3869) +9, 17 answers, [Which mathematicians died very young or in a tragic way?](https://hsm.stackexchange.com/q/3131/3869) +42 *with 44 answers!*  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2023-07-04. Score: 3 | Accepted answer

1. It is relatively easily to study storms on other planets. Forget advanced space telescopes. Bruh, you can hook up a rookie telescope and see Jupiter's Great Red Spot in 4K (Okay, that may have a bit of an overstatement).
2. Saturn's Hexagon was first spotted by the [Voyager probes](https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/voyager/hexagon_PIA_11682.html) in the late 1980s. Now, they have just exited the heliosphere and in the interstellar medium , in other words, "out" of the solar system. ~~That's, however, only if shenanigans like the Oort Cloud don't exist~~. Second, the Cassini probes launched and reached Saturn in 2004, where they for the first time, imaged the Hexagon Storm in full quality.
3. Neptune and Uranus, these two planets were only closely imaged once, by the Voyager probes in the 1980s, I think. Sure, JWST has made some imagery of it, but that's irrevelant.
4. As for exoplanets, that is merely conceptual art and models based on what they would look like. The only exoplanet whose "color" or even just surface features have been known is HD 189733 B, and even then, the planet's color, is just cobalt-blue, revealed from polarimetry. The reason why we don't know a exoplanet's surface details exactly is due to the fact, that though telescopes are experts at capturing stars like Betelguese and heck yes, even black holes like M87 and Sgr A\* in high quality, they are terribly inefficient at capturing planets. Forget trying to capture distant planets, if we were to turn around our telescopes and capture Proxima Centauri B or even just Pluto, all we would get is a fuzzy mumbo jumbo, or in Pluto's case, just a small blurry sphere. That's why the Hubble couldn't capture Pluto.
5. Most photos of exoplanets that you see online on internet, are just CGI generated by NASA based on the semi-major axis, orbital eccentricity etc etc. Meaning that they were generated by some sort of CGI software, so as to imagine what it would most probably look like.

So to sum up, in 1st case, cyclones are studied on Jupiter and Saturn, as they are "relatively" close to the Earth, and we can easily capture their images. Neptune and Uranus, they were captured only once by the Voyager probes, and for exoplanets, they aren't actually studied, but simulations.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2023-07-04. Score: 0

I don't have access that sort of list so I will only be answering the first question, that is "How are the cyclones on other planets studied?". So, there's a few ways.

First, there are **space probes**, often sent by NASA and other space agency to explore weather and other attributes of other planets, at least the one's in our solar system (and hopefully soon the one's not in our solar system too). They have cameras, spectrometers, and radar systems which tell scientists a lot about cyclones on other planets. For example, the Cassini mission to Saturn and the Juno mission to Jupiter have given much data on cyclones and a variety of other processes on their respective planets.

Second, there are **telescopes** and similar tools, used by anyone from professionals to amatuers, that can study nearly the entire observable universe for these cyclones and other phenomenon. They can also use imaging to capture detailed images of these cyclones and other occurences. It's chemical composition can be determined by spectroscopy by analyzing the light emitted, absorbed, and scattered by the cyclone or similar surface or atmospheric activities. These can share much about the dynamics and evolutions of interplanetary cyclones.

Third, there are **computer models** that are generally made by professionals and it is generally a much cheaper and easier method of "studying" cyclones. Other methods are still used as **models may be inaccurate** but they are still useful, albeit imperfect. Adding data about the planet's atmosphere (such as temperature, pressure, and wind patterns) let's scientists simulate cyclones and study their behavior and evolution. It helps them understand cyclones and make predictions about them.


---

