The Great Red Spot on Jupiter is not a great as it once was. But a Berkeley scientist says that it is not dying just yet.https://nyti.ms/2qBlXNp by @kchangnyt
-
-
Replying to @NYTScience @kchangnyt
Strictly speaking, "he [Cassini] and others" didn't "continue[] observing it until 1713" if "he died in 1712." That's like saying "Cassini and others stayed at the party until 10 (Cassini went home at 8 and died)." It's self-contradictory.pic.twitter.com/e9EpGsy9X1
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
To make this make sense you really have to say that Cassini observed the spot with others until 1712, when he died; the others continued for a year afterwards.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nyttypos @NYTScience
Cassini and his successor at the observatory observed the spot until 1713. That's true. You're saying that the parenthetical somehow makes it not true.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt @NYTScience
If you use the word successor, instead of "others," now you're implying that Cassini's observation ceased before that date. If you say, however, "Cassini and others stood watching the paint dry for twelve hours (Cassini was indisposed and left after eight)," you have a problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There, "Cassini and others stood watching for twelve hours" is false, just as false as "I and 45 others have served as President of the United States." "Cassini and his successor watched the paint dry for twelve hours" would be fine because it indicates a switch midway.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nyttypos @NYTScience
How would you word it? Key pts are 1) Cassini made repeated observations, establishing that the spot was a lasting feature and 2) a gap started in 1713. Did not want to imply that Cassini made the last observation from the beyond the grave.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt @NYTScience
It's fine with me so long if you make "others" "his successor" or successors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nyttypos @NYTScience
I don't know who made the 1713 observation, so I was hedging a bit.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt @NYTScience
I guess some affiliation may be required for "successor." If their observation didn't overlap, you could just say that he observed it until his death in 1712, and someone else observed it in 1713.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Also don't know when Cassini made his last observation of the Great Red Spot. I was trying to avoid something that might be be factually wrong.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.