PDA

View Full Version : Night Sky



jagster
2002-Jun-14, 06:18 PM
Forgive me if this has been a topic recently, but which planet is currently shining so brightly in the sky very near the moon these days?

traztx
2002-Jun-14, 06:36 PM
That's venus /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

jagster
2002-Jun-14, 07:02 PM
I had a feeling but was not sure. Thanks a lot!

Jigsaw
2002-Jun-15, 03:18 AM
And as long as we're here, could somebody please tell me why the moon looked so yellow last night? At about 10:00 p.m. the moon was in the west, a nice crescent with Venus just exactly under it, and it was distinctly yellow-ish. Does the weather do that?

Central Illinois, and fairly humid, if that makes a difference.

GrapesOfWrath
2002-Jun-15, 02:08 PM
The moon moves about 13 degrees (360/27.3) each day, relative to the stars, so it was only real close to Venus on that one night.

But it was very noticeable, wasn't it?

Jigsaw
2002-Jun-16, 03:05 AM
It was VERY nifty. I was driving while trying to look at it out the side window (Note: do not try this /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif ) and finally ended up just sitting at a stoplight while it turned green (late-ish at night, nobody around anyway) so I could stare at it.

I kept thinking of one of those Pleistocene Sci-fi/fantasy stories, where the High Priest looks up at the sky and says something like, "Ah, tonight the Star Queen sleeps in the arms of the Sickle Moon--this means War!!" Or Famine, or Virgin Sacrifices, or what-have-you.

Silas
2002-Jun-16, 03:14 AM
On 2002-06-14 23:18, Jigsaw wrote:
And as long as we're here, could somebody please tell me why the moon looked so yellow last night? At about 10:00 p.m. the moon was in the west, a nice crescent with Venus just exactly under it, and it was distinctly yellow-ish. Does the weather do that?

Central Illinois, and fairly humid, if that makes a difference.





Could it have been smoke from the fires in Colorado?

(That might sound like a joke, but I promise you, it isn't. Smoke can travel for hundreds, even thousands of miles, and often can be seen from orbit.)

I have found, in my long life, that there are two things that can cause sunlight to turn "smoky." One is smoke from a fire, and the other is an eclipse. The effects are very similar.

Humidity tends not to lend color to the sky. Another possibility is good old-fashioned pollution...

Silas

Kaptain K
2002-Jun-16, 09:15 PM
I'm going to agree with Silas on this one. Downstate Illinois is in the path of the prevailing winds from Colorado and not too far for the effect to be visible. Here in central Texas, we get the same effect every spring when the farmers in the Yucatan burn off their fields.

Jigsaw
2002-Jun-17, 03:35 AM
Oh, great, so now I'm, like, totally creeped out. There I was enjoying a nifty yellow moon, and it was all because the entire state of Colorado was burning to the ground.

Bummer. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif

/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

jagster
2002-Jun-17, 04:15 AM
Because a park employee started the fire because she was burning a letter from her estranged husband and couldn't control the fire!!! No lie.

Real bummer. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_cry.gif

GrapesOfWrath
2002-Jun-17, 05:00 AM
On 2002-06-16 23:35, Jigsaw wrote:
it was all because the entire state of Colorado was burning to the ground.

Not quite the entire state. Less than a tenth of one percent, no?

Donnie B.
2002-Jun-17, 03:41 PM
On 2002-06-17 01:00, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
Not quite the entire state. Less than a tenth of one percent, no?

Well, yeah... but it was the best 0.1%... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2002-Jun-18, 05:35 AM
On 2002-06-17 11:41, Donnie B. wrote:


On 2002-06-17 01:00, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
Not quite the entire state. Less than a tenth of one percent, no?

Well, yeah... but it was the best 0.1%... /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


Not Anymore, it's Not /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif

beskeptical
2002-Jun-18, 07:04 AM
On 2002-06-17 01:00, GrapesOfWrath wrote:


On 2002-06-16 23:35, Jigsaw wrote:
it was all because the entire state of Colorado was burning to the ground.

Not quite the entire state. Less than a tenth of one percent, no?


Depends if you are talking about the combustible part. From Denver east is all desert plains, no forest. From the west, it's similar until you start to climb the mountains. I used to live there. It's sad but Yellowstone burned up too and it is recovering.

nebularain
2002-Jun-18, 04:04 PM
Yeah, fire is not a bad thing for nature. In some instances, it is actually good for it. For instance, some flowering plants require fire in order to germinate (they discovered this with the fires at Yellowstone and Yosemite when after the fire flowers were blooming that everyone believed were extinct!) Also, in places like the redwood forrests, fire helps keep it pristine (preventing other trees from taking over). Then there's places like southern California with the chaperel (sp?) bushes that promote a frequent-burn ecology (flamable sap). The Colorodo forrests will recover beautifully from this. It's only us who are stuck with the "short-term" inconvenience of the burning and burned forrest that will have the problem.

Kaptain K
2002-Jun-18, 04:48 PM
From Denver east is all desert plains...
Plains? Yes! Desert? I don't think the western end of "America's breadbasket" exactly qualifies as a "desert". Admittedly, the current drought has put a damper on agricultural production, but this has not been the recent (last 60 years - since the "dust bowl") norm.

beskeptical
2002-Jun-20, 02:23 AM
On 2002-06-18 12:48, Kaptain K wrote:

From Denver east is all desert plains...
Plains? Yes! Desert? I don't think the western end of "America's breadbasket" exactly qualifies as a "desert". Admittedly, the current drought has put a damper on agricultural production, but this has not been the recent (last 60 years - since the "dust bowl") norm.



There ain't no trees. I'm a forest dweller. It's all relative. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

I was stuck in a Montana wheat field once. Couldn't get a ride to save your life. That was before I learned not to hitch hike.

aurorae
2002-Jun-20, 08:40 PM
On 2002-06-18 12:04, nebularain wrote:
Yeah, fire is not a bad thing for nature. In some instances, it is actually good for it. For instance, some flowering plants require fire in order to germinate (they discovered this with the fires at Yellowstone and Yosemite when after the fire flowers were blooming that everyone believed were extinct!) Also, in places like the redwood forrests, fire helps keep it pristine (preventing other trees from taking over). Then there's places like southern California with the chaperel (sp?) bushes that promote a frequent-burn ecology (flamable sap). The Colorodo forrests will recover beautifully from this. It's only us who are stuck with the "short-term" inconvenience of the burning and burned forrest that will have the problem.


One additional item, fires are now worse than they used to be before we had 100 years of total fire suppression in the western US.

When a fire used to go through an area (I'm speaking now of the eastern side of the Rockies, there are other forests that have very different situations) every 20 or so years, it kept the brush thinned out and the fire was not hot enough to kill the large trees. Now that there has been no fires, the fires are very hot and basically wipe everything.

Related to astro-biology, I was wondering how the amount of oxygen in a planet's atmosphere affects the rate of fire.

traztx
2002-Jun-20, 09:20 PM
Good points. A friend of mine said it wasn't breaking the fire law that caused the wildfire, it was the law against fire that caused it. Such irony.

I wonder if we'll be seeing terrorist-related forest fires.
--Tommy

GrapesOfWrath
2002-Jun-21, 09:32 AM
On 2002-06-20 17:20, traztx wrote:
Good points. A friend of mine said it wasn't breaking the fire law that caused the wildfire, it was the law against fire that caused it. Such irony.

You want irony? The fire was actually caused by the Big Bang--which also causes "not fires".

beskeptical
2002-Jun-22, 07:56 AM
On 2002-06-20 17:20, traztx wrote:
I wonder if we'll be seeing terrorist-related forest fires.
--Tommy


Do not bring it up!! We all know this. We don't need people to talk about it. No publicity, less motive.

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2002-Jun-22, 11:05 PM
On 2002-06-22 03:56, beskeptical wrote:


On 2002-06-20 17:20, traztx wrote:
I wonder if we'll be seeing terrorist-related forest fires.
--Tommy


Do not bring it up!! We all know this. We don't need people to talk about it. No publicity, less motive.


Well, it could be Worse; during World War II, The Japanese Tried, and Failed, to Set The American Northwest, Ablaze, now, if they had had access to the Incendiary Bombs, that The British, Were Using . . .

ljbrs
2002-Jun-23, 01:28 AM
Going back to the question about the *yellow* Moon last night (June 21) -- in Michigan it was yellow also, but the sky was overcast and no stars were visible, only the Moon. The Moon, being much more luminous (than the stars), was able to be observed through the slightly overcast sky, but it showed up as *yellow*. In fact, it was a pleasant, nearly-full Moon, and was much easier to observe without the usual glare.

Then again, perhaps the smoke from the fires has reached Michigan.

ljbrs /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif

_________________
*Nothing is more damaging to a new truth than an old error.* Goethe

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ljbrs on 2002-06-22 21:36 ]</font>

beskeptical
2002-Jun-23, 04:42 AM
When I lived in the LA area, the Moon on the horizon was always yellow, unless it was orange. My brothers keep telling me it's the haze, (IE not smog). I keep telling them to move.