The known moons of Neptune are:
Naiad
Thalassa
Despina
Galatea
Larissa
Hippocamp
Proteus
Triton
Nereid
Halimede
Sao
S/2002 N 5
Laomedeia
Psamathe
Neso
S/2021 N 1
The medieval "planets" (moving heavenly bodies) were:
Sun
Moon
Venus
Jupiter
Mercury
Mars
Saturn
They excluded:
Earth
anything that can only be seen to move through a telescope
Uranus was seen without a telescope but not seen to move. Neptune and Pluto were first seen with telescopes. (Post corrected. See combox.)
Proteus and Triton are mentioned in a sonnet by William Wordsworth:
The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
This Sea that bares her bosom to the moon;
The winds that will be howling at all hours,
And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers,
For this, for everything, we are out of tune;
It moves us not.—Great God! I’d rather be
A pagan suckled in a creed outworn;
So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,
Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;
Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;
Or hear old Triton blow his wreathèd horn.
This poem is in the public domain.
17 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I still have my old college astronomy textbook from half a century ago. It might be interesting to read what astronomers thought was known of Neptune in those days. I'm sure there has been corrections, advances in knowledge, and changes of mind since then.
Merry Christmas! Sean
"Neptune was seen without a telescope but not seen to move."
Correction, Neptune is not visible without a telescope.
Uranus is barely visible without a telescope in a dark sky to someone with *good* eyesight and was catalogued as a star several times before it was recognized to be a planet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranus#Discovery
After Uranus' discovery its movements didn't quite match predictions and some astronomers suggested that was due to the gravity of an unknown planet yet farther from the sun. This suggestion led to the discovery of Neptune.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptune#Discovery
Sean: I expect most of the revisions about both Uranus & Neptune are due to observations by the Voyager space probe and the telescopes in space. I would really like to see a spacecraft with the Kilopower nuclear reactor tested. So we can have spacecraft with a powerful electric drive and powerful instruments like ice penetrating radar to investigate the outer planets.
I was thinking of Uranus.
Kaor, Jim!
All of what you suggested are good ideas and would be worthy projects. And should be possible once the drastic cuts in the costs of shipping cargo from Earth because of the work of Musk/SpaceX ripples down.
Merry Christmas! Sean
Wordsworth's poem is a bit high-falutin'. You need to be free of material worries to adopt that attitude. Getting and spending are great if you -need- them to eat.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Absolutely, that kind of hoity toity condescension by Wordsworth is irritating. Most of us have no choice but to "get and spend" to survive. To say nothing of how we need bold, imaginative, risk-taking entrepreneurs if resources are going to be used in the imaginative ways needed for creating the kind of new wealth that gets widely spread among all classes.
Merry Christmas! Sean
Sean: precisely.
Sean,
Wealth generated by the imagination, actions and investments of entrepreneurs does not get widely spread among all classes. That is a pipe dream. In Britain now, billionaires are getting richer by the millions while many people have a cost of living crisis and food banks cannot cope.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Disagree, because you overlook how the Industrial and technological revolutions starting about 250 years ago led to the creation of vast new wealth that did eventually become widespread, precisely because of those entrepreneurs. The solution to the problems you cited is to get out of the way of those who want to be bold/imaginative, etc. That means chopping down huge chunks of the bureaucratic setups strangling the UK/US. It would open up new outlets for those billionaires investing their money productively in new inventions/technologies.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
Disagree. (Can we stop saying that? We know that we disagree.)
I do not overlook the fact that the industrial and technological revolutions have transformed life. I celebrate it and have said this before. But we must move forward from where we have got to. And the solution is not to let the billionaires have their way. They are destroying the environment. They preside over an arms industry and over bitter ideological and material conflict in a region of the world that just happens to have a lot of oil. Their increasing wealth means increasing poverty for entire populations. Society is moving backwards. The rate of profit is in long term decline. The global economic system is in a long term crisis and the social majority is supposed to pay for this with an increasing squeeze on public services. Wealth is generated and accumulated but not used for the common good. Much of it is used for outright destruction. And governments, serving economic interests, have given up any attempt to save the environment.
Paul.
Paul: a small share of a very large amount is a large amount; also, things become possible that weren't before.
Eg., any citizen of an advanced country has medical care that no Roman emperor (absolute ruler of a quarter of humanity) could have had. They have access to, effectively, all knowledge for the price of an internet connection.
Sure. And that's all good. We need to get every country and region advanced and more so.
Kaor, Paul!
The problem is your refusal to accept we have struggles for power because there is never going to be enough power to go around. Armaments industries exist because they satisfy a DEMAND for it.
We have the kind of wealth Stirling mentioned because of free enterprise economics, however strangled and hindered it's been. Because it productively channels the human drive for competition.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
The problem is that you think that I refuse to accept something when I am merely disagreeing with you about it. I have just replied yet again about "power" in another combox.
And I disagree with the DEMAND for armaments. We need to campaign against that industry and the vast profits that are made from it.
I have acknowledged innumerable times that free enterprise was good and necessary in the past but will have made itself redundant when wealth has become so abundant that there is no longer any need for economic competition.
We ourselves can channel competition in sport and other ways.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Sheer hopeless futility, "campaigning" against armaments industries. To the extent that "succeeds" it will disarm only the genuinely peaceful while having zero effect on the bellicose and warlike. The latter, of course, would be delighted to see their prey making themselves weak and helpless.
Nor do I believe at all that universal wealth will somehow make free enterprise economics redundant. That kind of wealth will remain possible only because of free enterprise.
Mere sports will not long satisfy the competitive human drive for prestige, status, power. I again refer you to Chapter 6 of GENESIS.
Happy New Year! Sean
Sean,
Economic competition will be redundant when wealth is abundant. This will not happen "somehow." It is obvious. The fact that the powers that be insist on continuing to compete to accumulate wealth completely unnecessarily is extremely destructive of societies and of the environment.
Which current government is "genuinely peaceful"? They are all bellicose and warlike. We need an international campaign against all war-mongering.
I have replied endlessly on "prestige, power, status." Power is ability to coerce and the means of coercion need not be reproduced. Again I point out that GENESIS, Chapter 6, does not describe a society in which technologically produced wealth is controlled democratically and is used to develop the fullest potential of each individual.
But what is the point of this repetition? I will do my best to avoid it in future.
Paul.
Sport, art and other human activities are not "mere."
Post a Comment