This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 |
I found
but the cited ref at
'Coldest place' found on the Moon doesn't support "just enough" (except combining the imprecise sense of "just" with the trivial fact that 2×1.54≈3).
Discussion of this requires dealing with distinction between its tilt relative to its orbit around the earth (6.68 degrees) and its tilt relative to the earth/moon system's orbit around the sun; i am not yet confident that subtracting the 5.14 degree tilt between the two orbits (to get 1.54) is valid, even in light of the tidal lock, rather than one of the numbers being some WP editor's defective original research, so i'm deferring writing all that is probably called for about angles. I think whoever wrote the caption blew it, and the 3-degree variation applies at lunar noon at all latitudes. In any case, the real story is not seasons but the near immunity of some near-polar points to summer increases.
--
Jerzy•
t
09:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed:
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)</ref>This is relevant to
Other moons of Earth, and presumably covered there. It is a non-sequitur where i found it (
Moon#Orbit and relationship to Earth, which i moved to
Moon#Orbit, and does not deserve more than footnote mention (which already occurs at "nb4", a footnote to the lead sent).
--
Jerzy•
t
10:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I modified the description of the image on the moon page. It's not, in fact, a full moon image as was previously indicated. You can tell by looking that it's not a full moon. Additionally, the date/time of the image is the evening following the date of actual full moon that month. I suggest another full moon image be used if one is available. If not, I may contact some photographer friends to possibly upload another one. Victor Engel ( talk) 15:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Both sides of the moon get exactly the same amount of sunlight? Can someone please either explain how that is possible, or find a reference that is accurate? As far as I knew, though the amount of sunlight is similar, it isn't exactly the same (or even nearly exactly the same). Something to do with the Earth being in the way when the near side of the moon is on the night side of the Earth, reducing the amount of light hitting it (what we know as phases).
Meanwhile, when the far side of the moon, when it is turning towards the sun, is not being blocked by the Earth (to nearly as large of an extent).
Perhaps I am misremembering my astronomy class. Hence my two part question above.
Thanks, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 03:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello. The lunar phase during the last quarter of the synodical cycle is called "waning crescent" in this article, and in some other pages, too. I didn't like this phrase so I have looked it up in my dictionary, and I found "decrescent" there. The "waning" and the "crescent" (increasing, greatening, waxing) are definitely contradictive words, the opposite direction of a "crescent" motion is "decrescent". So, I made a new (and proper) illustration about the phases, and I really would like to use the most and only correct phrases on that. I ask the native English speakers this question: which version is the correct, the official, the commonly used? Or if "decrescent" is as good as "waning crescent", am I allowed to change that in the text? - Orion 8 ( talk) 21:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Is there an article with all the artifacts on the moon surface ? Even the smallest objects like the golf balls (?), the NASA pin and the family photo in the zip bag, it would be interesting to have one. -- 79.168.10.241 ( talk) 07:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
J8079s deleted this sourced info, [1] claiming "failed verificaiton". Yet I have verified that this info is sourced properly and the source in question does indeed say that. (In restoring I have reworded the info, though the oriignal quote exists in the source). Bless sins ( talk) 23:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
For those that wish to follow up, and have access to suitable library facilities, here is a ref for a translation in English of Al-Hytham's work.
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |vol=
ignored (|volume=
suggested) (
help)
Rich
Farmbrough,
11:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC).
Ibn al-Haytham showed here that if the moon behaved like a mirror, the light it receives from the sun would be reflected to a given point on the earth from a smaller part of its surface than is actually observed. He accordingly argued that the moon sends out its borrowed light in the same manner as a self-luminous source, that is, from every point on its surface in all directions. This is confirmed through the use of an astronomical diopter having a slit of variable length through which various parts of the moon could be viewed from an opposite hole in a screen parallel to the slit. The treatise is a beautiful combination of mathematical deduction and experimental technique. The experiments do not, however, lead to the discovery of a new property, but only serve to prove that the mode of emission from the moon is of the same kind as the already known mode of emission from self-luminous objects.... (p. 195, "Ibn Al-Haytham", A. I. Sabra, article in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, vol. 6, pp. 189–210.)
Abschließend stellt Ibn al-Haytham die Forderungen zusammen, zu denen seine Untersuchungen zwingen: das Licht des Mondes darf nicht als von einer spiegelnden Fläche reflektiertes Licht der Sonne aufgefaßt werden. Der Mond verhält sich vielmehr in seiner Ausstrahlung wie ein selbstleuchtender Körper: von jedem seiner Oberflächenpunkte geht, im Gegensatz zu einer spiegelnden Fläche, Licht zu jedem außerhalb liegenden Punkt aus. Dennoch kann die Ausstrahlung nur in Abhängigkeit vom Sonnenlicht erfolgen. Durch Einwirkung der Sonne auf seine Substanz wird seine Farbe leuchtend.
I was just doing some day dreaming, trying to imagine what a 'day' on the moon would be like, quickly realizing the importance of position on the surface. 'Daily' (every 24 hours) sunrises and sunsets would be highly unlikely, I thought, and off in search I went. Wouldn't here be a good place to have a chart for various strategic positions on the surface of the moon and how much sunlight they get? I'm gonna keep looking to see if it's been done anywhere else? I wanna a job on the moon. 74.124.87.189 ( talk) 19:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
This movie of the Moon at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration site, was removed from the article earlier this year, under the edit summary "External links: tidying up" and marked minor. I think it should be readded to the article. 2.97.19.174 ( talk) 21:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
On QI, it was stated that there was a secondary natural satellite of Earth that orbited every hundred or so years and there is no reference of it here. I forgot it's name but was wondering if someone who did know it could add such corrections. 220.244.162.100 ( talk) 00:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
We currently say this:
This tidal drag will continue until the spin of the Earth has slowed to match the orbital period of the Moon; however, long before this could happen, the Sun will have become a red giant, engulfing the Earth.
I think this is not quite true: if the Sun were to remain as it is, the moon would eventually leave the Earth's Hill sphere before it tidally locked the Earth. -- Doradus ( talk) 21:16, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
The article does not mention the temperatures on the "lit side of the moon" during sun exposure and during darkness. What are the lowest temperatures when there is no sunlight, and what are the temperatures when there is sunlight? Same for the "dark side of the moon" (not dark at all during sun eclipses), what are the temperatures over there? Currently, the article mentions only the freezing temperatures in the south pole craters. John Hyams ( talk) 21:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
It is of the utmost importance that Wikipedia be understandable to all who read it. It is unfortunate and still entirely true that a very large portion of people (especially in the US) who are not fully able to comprehend fractions and mental math procedures. In the case of comparing the size of the the Moon to Earth and the size of Charon to Pluto, it may be fully visible to you that 1/9 is a larger fraction than 1/81, but many others may not be able to comprehend that. Others may understand that 1/9 is larger than 1/81 but it then makes it difficult to understand how much larger it is relatively. It is for this reason, that I feel that stating, 'slightly more than 9/81' is vastly more informative to a wider audience than '1/9' is. I have left the original provided percentage in for those who wish for more accuracy and feel that 1/9 just isn't suitably informative. -- Xession ( talk) 09:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 |
I found
but the cited ref at
'Coldest place' found on the Moon doesn't support "just enough" (except combining the imprecise sense of "just" with the trivial fact that 2×1.54≈3).
Discussion of this requires dealing with distinction between its tilt relative to its orbit around the earth (6.68 degrees) and its tilt relative to the earth/moon system's orbit around the sun; i am not yet confident that subtracting the 5.14 degree tilt between the two orbits (to get 1.54) is valid, even in light of the tidal lock, rather than one of the numbers being some WP editor's defective original research, so i'm deferring writing all that is probably called for about angles. I think whoever wrote the caption blew it, and the 3-degree variation applies at lunar noon at all latitudes. In any case, the real story is not seasons but the near immunity of some near-polar points to summer increases.
--
Jerzy•
t
09:57, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed:
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)</ref>This is relevant to
Other moons of Earth, and presumably covered there. It is a non-sequitur where i found it (
Moon#Orbit and relationship to Earth, which i moved to
Moon#Orbit, and does not deserve more than footnote mention (which already occurs at "nb4", a footnote to the lead sent).
--
Jerzy•
t
10:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I modified the description of the image on the moon page. It's not, in fact, a full moon image as was previously indicated. You can tell by looking that it's not a full moon. Additionally, the date/time of the image is the evening following the date of actual full moon that month. I suggest another full moon image be used if one is available. If not, I may contact some photographer friends to possibly upload another one. Victor Engel ( talk) 15:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Both sides of the moon get exactly the same amount of sunlight? Can someone please either explain how that is possible, or find a reference that is accurate? As far as I knew, though the amount of sunlight is similar, it isn't exactly the same (or even nearly exactly the same). Something to do with the Earth being in the way when the near side of the moon is on the night side of the Earth, reducing the amount of light hitting it (what we know as phases).
Meanwhile, when the far side of the moon, when it is turning towards the sun, is not being blocked by the Earth (to nearly as large of an extent).
Perhaps I am misremembering my astronomy class. Hence my two part question above.
Thanks, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 03:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello. The lunar phase during the last quarter of the synodical cycle is called "waning crescent" in this article, and in some other pages, too. I didn't like this phrase so I have looked it up in my dictionary, and I found "decrescent" there. The "waning" and the "crescent" (increasing, greatening, waxing) are definitely contradictive words, the opposite direction of a "crescent" motion is "decrescent". So, I made a new (and proper) illustration about the phases, and I really would like to use the most and only correct phrases on that. I ask the native English speakers this question: which version is the correct, the official, the commonly used? Or if "decrescent" is as good as "waning crescent", am I allowed to change that in the text? - Orion 8 ( talk) 21:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Is there an article with all the artifacts on the moon surface ? Even the smallest objects like the golf balls (?), the NASA pin and the family photo in the zip bag, it would be interesting to have one. -- 79.168.10.241 ( talk) 07:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
J8079s deleted this sourced info, [1] claiming "failed verificaiton". Yet I have verified that this info is sourced properly and the source in question does indeed say that. (In restoring I have reworded the info, though the oriignal quote exists in the source). Bless sins ( talk) 23:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
For those that wish to follow up, and have access to suitable library facilities, here is a ref for a translation in English of Al-Hytham's work.
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |vol=
ignored (|volume=
suggested) (
help)
Rich
Farmbrough,
11:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC).
Ibn al-Haytham showed here that if the moon behaved like a mirror, the light it receives from the sun would be reflected to a given point on the earth from a smaller part of its surface than is actually observed. He accordingly argued that the moon sends out its borrowed light in the same manner as a self-luminous source, that is, from every point on its surface in all directions. This is confirmed through the use of an astronomical diopter having a slit of variable length through which various parts of the moon could be viewed from an opposite hole in a screen parallel to the slit. The treatise is a beautiful combination of mathematical deduction and experimental technique. The experiments do not, however, lead to the discovery of a new property, but only serve to prove that the mode of emission from the moon is of the same kind as the already known mode of emission from self-luminous objects.... (p. 195, "Ibn Al-Haytham", A. I. Sabra, article in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, vol. 6, pp. 189–210.)
Abschließend stellt Ibn al-Haytham die Forderungen zusammen, zu denen seine Untersuchungen zwingen: das Licht des Mondes darf nicht als von einer spiegelnden Fläche reflektiertes Licht der Sonne aufgefaßt werden. Der Mond verhält sich vielmehr in seiner Ausstrahlung wie ein selbstleuchtender Körper: von jedem seiner Oberflächenpunkte geht, im Gegensatz zu einer spiegelnden Fläche, Licht zu jedem außerhalb liegenden Punkt aus. Dennoch kann die Ausstrahlung nur in Abhängigkeit vom Sonnenlicht erfolgen. Durch Einwirkung der Sonne auf seine Substanz wird seine Farbe leuchtend.
I was just doing some day dreaming, trying to imagine what a 'day' on the moon would be like, quickly realizing the importance of position on the surface. 'Daily' (every 24 hours) sunrises and sunsets would be highly unlikely, I thought, and off in search I went. Wouldn't here be a good place to have a chart for various strategic positions on the surface of the moon and how much sunlight they get? I'm gonna keep looking to see if it's been done anywhere else? I wanna a job on the moon. 74.124.87.189 ( talk) 19:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
This movie of the Moon at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration site, was removed from the article earlier this year, under the edit summary "External links: tidying up" and marked minor. I think it should be readded to the article. 2.97.19.174 ( talk) 21:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
On QI, it was stated that there was a secondary natural satellite of Earth that orbited every hundred or so years and there is no reference of it here. I forgot it's name but was wondering if someone who did know it could add such corrections. 220.244.162.100 ( talk) 00:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
We currently say this:
This tidal drag will continue until the spin of the Earth has slowed to match the orbital period of the Moon; however, long before this could happen, the Sun will have become a red giant, engulfing the Earth.
I think this is not quite true: if the Sun were to remain as it is, the moon would eventually leave the Earth's Hill sphere before it tidally locked the Earth. -- Doradus ( talk) 21:16, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
The article does not mention the temperatures on the "lit side of the moon" during sun exposure and during darkness. What are the lowest temperatures when there is no sunlight, and what are the temperatures when there is sunlight? Same for the "dark side of the moon" (not dark at all during sun eclipses), what are the temperatures over there? Currently, the article mentions only the freezing temperatures in the south pole craters. John Hyams ( talk) 21:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
It is of the utmost importance that Wikipedia be understandable to all who read it. It is unfortunate and still entirely true that a very large portion of people (especially in the US) who are not fully able to comprehend fractions and mental math procedures. In the case of comparing the size of the the Moon to Earth and the size of Charon to Pluto, it may be fully visible to you that 1/9 is a larger fraction than 1/81, but many others may not be able to comprehend that. Others may understand that 1/9 is larger than 1/81 but it then makes it difficult to understand how much larger it is relatively. It is for this reason, that I feel that stating, 'slightly more than 9/81' is vastly more informative to a wider audience than '1/9' is. I have left the original provided percentage in for those who wish for more accuracy and feel that 1/9 just isn't suitably informative. -- Xession ( talk) 09:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)