Searching \ for '[OT]: Which way is up? (Was:Total Lunar Eclipse)' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=total+lunar+eclipse
Search entire site for: 'Which way is up? (Was:Total Lunar Eclipse)'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]: Which way is up? (Was:Total Lunar Eclipse)'
2007\10\31@154821 by Barry Gershenfeld

face picon face

>I've just noticed the crater just above the equator, to the right of the
>picture.  The ejector tracks extend for an incredibly long way - it's a
>good job
>Howard Winter

Said crater, Tycho, is visible using anything from binoculars on up.   What
I note, though, is that It is located in the lower left when viewed from
the States.  Granted, Russell could mount his camera at any angle (and
probably would, given any reason, including the opportunity to confuse us
Yanks), but I have reason to believe that this is how the Moon looks from
35 S latitude.  This would, incidentally, put the "man in the moon" on his
side.     Am I imagining this?

Barry


'[OT]: Which way is up? (Was:Total Lunar Eclipse)'
2007\11\26@154139 by Barry Gershenfeld
face picon face

> >I've just noticed the crater just above the equator, to the right of the
> >picture.  The ejector tracks extend for an incredibly long way - it's a
> >good job
> >Howard Winter
>
>Said crater, Tycho, is visible using anything from binoculars on up.   What
>I note, though, is that It is located in the lower left when viewed from
>the States.  Granted, Russell could mount his camera at any angle (and
>probably would, given any reason, including the opportunity to confuse us
>Yanks), but I have reason to believe that this is how the Moon looks from
>35 S latitude.  This would, incidentally, put the "man in the moon" on his
>side.     Am I imagining this?

I am still researching this question.  I talked to one person who lived
down under for a time.  Seems most folks don't really notice which way is
"up" on the moon.  She did say what's more impressive is that they have a
lot more stars visible down there.

Barry

2007\11\26@162340 by piclist

flavicon
face
The moon does indeed looks different when observed from diferent
latitudes.  The
amount of ration is only dependent on the distance between the point of
observation. ASCII art follows:


A
|
|
|            /
|           /D
B          <
|           \E
|            \
|
|
C

Imagine yourself stading at A, B or C (on the earth) and you can easily
see what
the moon (D and E reprense craters on the moon) would look like from each of
those locations.

As for the amount of stars visible in the southern hemisfere versus the
northern, I cannot confirm nor deny right now, but there is a lot less light
polution in the southern hemisfere than there is in the northern.  Given equal
number of stars in the celestial sphere, you're bound to see more of them if
you're down under.  Obviously, this is subjective to the local light polution
conditions too.  If you're standing in the middle of the Arizona
desert, you're
going to see more stars than if you were in downtown Sidney.  Even just a few
miles away from major cities makes an enormous diference in a clear night.  I
can see a lot more stars from my back yard in Bedford, MA, than I can in
Cambridge, MA, and that's only ~12 miles between the tow locations.


Quoting Barry Gershenfeld <spam_OUTbarry_gTakeThisOuTspamzmicro.com>:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\11\26@215827 by Apptech

face
flavicon
face
>>I've just noticed the crater just above the equator, to
>>the right of the
>>picture.  The ejector tracks extend for an incredibly long
>>way - it's a
>>good job

> Said crater, Tycho, is visible using anything from
> binoculars on up.   What
> I note, though, is that It is located in the lower left
> when viewed from
> the States.  Granted, Russell could mount his camera at
> any angle (and
> probably would, given any reason, including the
> opportunity to confuse us
> Yanks), but I have reason to believe that this is how the
> Moon looks from
> 35 S latitude.  This would, incidentally, put the "man in
> the moon" on his
> side.     Am I imagining this?

All 4 Moons are correct way up from here AFAIR.
People in the northern hemisphere are looking "down on the
moon from above" whereas we here are looking "up from
underneath". The fact that this will invert your view has
never occurred to me before :-).

Next time I could, as suggested, rotate the camera by an
arbitrary amount to please :-)




       Russell

{Quote hidden}

2007\11\27@021208 by J FLETCHER

flavicon
face
I think the moon looks different from different longitudes, too.  As it moves across
 the sky (east to west) the disc appears to rotate clockwise. I've never tried to
 work out whether, if you flew east-west to keep the moon in your sky for a whole
 day (or rather, night), the disc of the moon would appear to turn a full circle.
 Sitting here near the Prime Meridian at about 52 degrees north, the Mare Crisium
 (small oval feature near the edge at 11 o'clock in the photographs) starts around
 12 o'clock at moonrise and finishes at around 3 o'clock.
 
 Can anyone from other longitudes add their observations?
 
 John

.....piclistKILLspamspam@spam@mmendes.com wrote:
 The moon does indeed looks different when observed from diferent
latitudes. The
amount of ration is only dependent on the distance between the point of
observation. ASCII art follows:

2007\11\27@114608 by piclist

flavicon
face
Quoting J FLETCHER <jfletcher427spamKILLspambtinternet.com>:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\11\27@115751 by piclist

flavicon
face
If you were to fly around the earth in order to always keep the moon
above your
head, you'd see it slowly go though it's phases (over the period of a month, a
full phase), but you'd always see the same face of the moon, because it's
rotation rate is the same as its orbit rate around the earth.  But if you were
to fly from one side of the globe to the other, really, really,
amazingly fast,
you'd probably be able to see this difference in longitude too, but
you'd still
see the same face.

When I was in sixth grade a teach demonstrated this with a lamp, an
orange and a
pencil.  Stick the pencil through the orange, stand a few feet away from the
lamp and holding the pencil-orange moon prototype at arms length, spin your
body in place.  For you, you always see the same face of the orange and how it
gets light and dark just like the moom.  For someone standing outside
your arms
radius, they'd see what someone standing on the surface of mars would see
looking at the earth and moon, and obviously, for someone standing between the
lamp and you, would see what someone standing in the surface of mercuy would
see.

From time to time I still do this at home, when no one is looking ;).  I also
show this to relatives' kids when they come over to peek through my telescope
and start asking questions.  It never fails, I always get a "wow! that's so
cool!".



-Mario


Quoting J FLETCHER <EraseMEjfletcher427spam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTbtinternet.com>:

{Quote hidden}

> -

2007\11\27@135506 by Richard Prosser

picon face
This seems to be related to the "fact" that the earth actually rotates in
slightly less than a day. I realised the other day that if it was exactlly
24 hours per rotation, then if the sun is overhead today at 12 noon, then in
6 months it will be overhead at midnight!

RP


On 28/11/2007, @spam@piclistKILLspamspammmendes.com <KILLspampiclistKILLspamspammmendes.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\11\27@142721 by Steve Baldwin

flavicon
face
Longitude doesn't make any difference. The apparent rotation is caused by
you changing your perspective as the moon moves across the sky. When it
rises, you see the horizon as being on the bottom. When it sets, your brain
still says the horizon is the bottom, but the moon hasn't changed. You have
by turning 180 degrees. It's easy to illustrate by holding your arm out and
putting your thumb upwards. Now swing your arm across to the other
horizon in the direction your thumb is pointing. Your thumb ends up pointing
down. It appears to have rotated 180 degrees.

I'm in the southern hemisphere and the rotation is anti-clockwise. Also, when
I got up this morning, the moon was halfway across the sky with Tycho near
the top right. It's about 75% illuminated at the moment with the fully
illuminated part on the right. Mars is a few degrees to the left of it.
Anyone want to compare what they see ?

If you've got a small telescope or reasonable binoculars and look at Venus
(the really bright thing in the east in the morning) you can see that the it's a
cresent at the moment. Which side is the bite out of ? Is that the same for
northern and southern hemispheres ?

Steve.


On 27 Nov 2007 at 7:12, J FLETCHER wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2007\11\27@143500 by Steve Baldwin

flavicon
face
That's something else called a sidereal day. The Earth rotates once per day
relative to the Sun, but only 364/365 of a day relative to the stars. Note the
number '365'.

Steve.


On 28 Nov 2007 at 7:52, Richard Prosser wrote:

> This seems to be related to the "fact" that the earth actually rotates
> in slightly less than a day. I realised the other day that if it was
> exactlly 24 hours per rotation, then if the sun is overhead today at
> 12 noon, then in 6 months it will be overhead at midnight!
>
> RP

2007\11\27@144222 by Steve Baldwin

flavicon
face

>   I also
> show this to relatives' kids when they come over to peek through my
> telescope and start asking questions.  It never fails, I always get a
> "wow! that's so cool!".

Here's something else for you to think about.

The astronauts on Apollo 8 took a famous photo called "Earthrise". It's often
attributed to Apollo 11 astronauts and as being taken from the surface of the
moon. That can't be so. Why not ?

Steve.

2007\11\27@165649 by J FLETCHER

flavicon
face
Hi Mario,
 
 I know the moon keeps the same face towards us, more or less.
 I meant that the "disc" of the moon appears to rotate clockwise, like a
 disc on a record deck.
 
 A process called libration allows us to see sometimes a little more of the
 western limb of the moon, sometimes more of the eastern limb. I used to
 photograph every full moon I could, then compare the photographs. When
 viewed as a stereo pair it was possible to see the curvature of the moon's
 globe, with carefully chosen prints.
 
 John

RemoveMEpiclistspamTakeThisOuTmmendes.com wrote:
 If you were to fly around the earth in order to always keep the moon
above your
head, you'd see it slowly go though it's phases (over the period of a month, a
full phase), but you'd always see the same face of the moon, because it's
rotation rate is the same as its orbit rate around the earth.

-Mario


Quoting J FLETCHER :

> I think the moon looks different from different longitudes, too. As
> it moves across
> the sky (east to west) the disc appears to rotate clockwise.


2007\11\28@211030 by Piclist

flavicon
face
Hmmm, I actually had to think about this one for a few seconds and try
to picture it in my head.

It is because the if you can see the earth from where you're standing at
the surface of the moon, it means you're standing on the side that
ALWAYS faces the earth, and that meand that there is no Earth rise or
set in the lunar sky =)


-Mario

{Original Message removed}

2007\11\28@211209 by Piclist

flavicon
face
Cool!  I'm familiar with libration, but I did not know that you could
exploit to create a stereo picture of the moon.  I'll have to try that
sometime.

-Mario

{Original Message removed}

2007\11\29@020613 by J FLETCHER

flavicon
face
I used to use an Olympus OM1N (because it had mirror lock) with a 600mm
 telephoto lens and x2 converter on two tripods for stability. Exposures are
 short because the full moon is a brightly sunlit scene. Just as well because
 the moon appears to move its own diameter in about 2 minutes!
 
 John

piclistEraseMEspam.....mmendes.com wrote:
 Cool! I'm familiar with libration, but I did not know that you could
exploit to create a stereo picture of the moon. I'll have to try that
sometime.

-Mario

{Original Message removed}

2007\11\30@194727 by Robert Rolf

picon face
piclist@mmendes.com wrote:

> Cool!  I'm familiar with libration, but I did not know that you could
> exploit to create a stereo picture of the moon.  I'll have to try that
> sometime.

You mean  like this:
home.comcast.net/~jlballou/LunarStereo/index.html
or from google's cache
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:bw4GbFLkGK4J:home.comcast.net/~jlballou/LunarStereo/index.html&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ca

Or these?

http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatus/Astronomy/Moon_Stereo/Moon_Stereo.html

The not so gory math
http://www.stereoscopy.com/library/waack-ch-7.html

Somewhere on the web is a GIF movie made up of shots taken at
full moon over many many months, as it librated. Fascinating to watch.
I  don't think this is it, (I can't get it to play, but maybe others
can).

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/moon_phases

This is a  RENDERING to give you some idea of what libration looks like.
www.nightskyobserver.com/LunarPhaseCD/LibrationMovies.htm
http://www.nightskyobserver.com/LunarPhaseCD/LibrationMovie2.mpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libration


Robert

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...