Posted on 05/11/2013 7:56:12 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
Explanation: This week the shadow of the New Moon fell on planet Earth, crossing Queensland's Cape York in northern Australia ... for the second time in six months. On the morning of May 10, the Moon's apparent size was too small to completely cover the Sun though, revealing a "ring of fire" along the central path of the annular solar eclipse. Near mid-eclipse from Coen, Australia, a webcast team captured this telescopic snapshot of the annular phase. Taken with a hydrogen-alpha filter, the dramatic image finds the Moon's silhouette just within the solar disk, and the limb of the active Sun spiked with solar prominences. Still, after hosting back-to-back solar eclipses, northern Australia will miss the next and final solar eclipse of 2013. This November, a rare hybrid eclipse will track across the North Atlantic and equatorial Africa.
(Excerpt) Read more at 129.164.179.22 ...
[Credit & Copyright: Cameron McCarty, Matthew Bartow, Michael Johnson -- MWV Observatory, Coca-Cola Space Science Center, Columbus State University Eclipse Team]
|
:: Nice enlargement ::
Cue to Steve Carrell...
So if I’m understanding this correctly, the reason the moon wasn’t quite “big enough” is because the picture was taken from somewhere technically farther away from the moon than normal solar eclipse images are taken from? This is hurting my brain - still on the first cup.
The thing that constantly astounds me is that there are so many in the physical sciences...medicine and astronomy,for example...who refuse to acknowledge even the *possibility* of God’s existence.
I'm no physicist or astronomer so I'm probably wrong but I think "apparent* size is the key here.For example,just the other day,on a crystal clear evening,I was driving east on I-90 in a hilly area of western Massachusetts.There,right in front of me,was the moon rising (or setting) and it was huge and yellow.I think the angle from horizon determines how large to moon "appears" at a given moment.
Astronomers...help me out here!
That phenomenon is due to comparative sizes. The moon looks larger at the horizon because you have something to compare it to.
The phenomenon does not apply in the case of an eclipse. The moon is either big enough to fully block the sun, or isn’t. In this case it wasn’t, but without sitting down with a notepad and calculator I can’t determine if being further away would have less of an effect on the sun than it does the moon. (I’m on the second cup now)
There was nowhere along the current path where the observer-to-Moon difference would’ve mattered much — very negligible here, as the relative angular sizes of the Moon vs Sun were just too great.
This WON’T be the case during November’s “hybrid” solar eclipse, where the viewer’s distance to the Moon will be significant...
Reminds me of the movie, “The Ring”. Thanks, Sunky!
No one mentioned it in this topic, or in any other topic where such a straw man observation gets made.
The Moon is on an elliptical orbit around the Earth and varies in distance by about 13,000 miles — hence when it’s further out, the Sun isn’t quite covered. Also, the closer to the Sun, the less the Moon will cover; the Earth is closest to the Sun in January, making the n hemisphere’s winters a bit warmer than those in the s hemisphere.
I knew it was elliptical, but didn’t know it was enough to do this. Thanks for the reply.
Assuming you're replying to #6 and you're criticizing me feel free to place me on your "pay no mind" list.Otherwise,perhaps you'd like to explain your comment.
OMGoodness! The enlarged version on the APOD site is really spectacular. Thank you, Mr. Civilizations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
