Discussion in 'Community' started by jp-30, Jul 16, 2010.
Can I see it?
[link=http://wvgazette.com/Opinion/Editorials/201102110927]Potentially 16,000 Earths[/link]
I don't know what its range is supposed to be, the article says it is "limited". So the number of possibles could be vastly larger.
[link=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1356748/Search-Tyche-believed-largest-planet-solar-system.html#ixzz1Dxf8y19n]Largest planet in the solar system could be about to be discovered - and it's up to four times the size of Jupiter[/link]
Well the Nibiru people will be all over this. It does say it may be higher in temperature than Pluto, and if it has moons that could make things warm enough for a liquid world at one thousand A.U., not only from heat but from tidal forces just like what happens with Jupiter and Europa.
Potential aurorae for more southerly latitudes?
I forgot to go out last night and check the skies for said light show.
[link=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/02/18/messengers-family-portrait/]From a probe orbiting Mercury[/link]
Link contains Sagan's Pale Blue Dot vid. And for fun here is [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlpyGhABXRA&feature=related]Sagan vs The Matrix[/link]
[link=http://io9.com/#!5770607/2-planets-share-the-same-orbit]Planets share the same orbit[/link]
[link=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/03/03/more-images-of-exoplanet-show-it-orbiting-its-star/]Exoplanet direct images[/link]
I see we all are about that.
I'm not sure I at all see the connection to suggest a liquid world (when contrasted with something like Europa, which might have liquid water underneath an icy outer surface)
Pure speculation on my part and nothing to do with anything in te article. It's just Planet-X/Nemsis nonsense I was speculating on. partly it came up as a result of another article talking about how a rogue planet, with no star, just roaming between stars, might have life due to an icy crust and geologic activity might produce an ocean as Europa might have.
My statement held in general, as I've tended to see liquid world referring to the surface, which isn't going to happen in this case. Or at least, doesn't seem physically possible.
That is apparently not an artists rendition.
It made me think of this:
Pics from the ISS.
Wow is right. Those pictures are fantastic.
What is humanity's most distant spacecraft? Launched in 1977, Voyager 1 now holds that distinction at 17.5 billion kilometers from the Sun. That corresponds to 16 light-hours or 117 Astronomical Units (AU). This graphic shows the position of Voyager 1 relative to the outer solar system (top and side views) along with other distant spacecraft contenders. Next most distant, Pioneer 10 is about 15.4 billion kilometers from the Sun, though on the opposite side of the solar system from Voyager 1. Voyager 2 and Pioneer 11, both also well beyond the orbit of Pluto, are 14.2 billion and 12.4 billion kilometers from the Sun respectively. Still outbound for Pluto, the New Horizons spacecraft is presently 3 billion kilometers from the Sun and will encounter the Pluto system in July of 2015. All these spacecraft have used sling-shot style gravity assist maneuvers to increase their speeds through the outer solar system. Voyager 1 is moving the fastest, escaping the solar system at about 17 kilometers per second. Still operational, both Voyagers are headed towards the outer boundary of the solar system, in search of the heliopause and the beginning of interstellar space.
Note that the inner solar system cannot be seen as the graphic is to scale; Saturn is the inner most world seen.
I don't know if anyone here actually uses a telescope etc... (not bother to read thread).
My daughter is really keen and has been using a pair of Binoculars and a very cheap Toys r us telescope for a while and wants to move onto something a bit better.
I've been reading around and I like the look of [link=http://www.pulsar-optical.co.uk/prod/skywatcher/starter-scope/Classic/70x900.html]this one[/link]
Does anyone have any experience with telescopes who could advise if this looks to be a decent deal or not?
Size matters and you get what you pay for. That particular item looks ok. Ever see those department store 'scopes that might say something like "500 POWER!"? Stay away from them. What you linked to looks like a decent step up.
No I do not own a telescope myself.
There are awesome binoculars for astronomy, and getting a special holder for them can work wonders.
While I am thinking about it, there is a large asteroid due to pass within 200,000 miles of Earth in November.
If you want a powerful telescope but can't afford a nice Schmidt-Cassegrain with a motor mount, keep an eye out for Dobsonian scopes. They're large reflecting scopes with a simple tilt and swivel base. It's hard to track objects as the Earth moves, and you'll never be able to use one for photography, but with a good sky chart and some practice you'll see incredible things.
There are equatorial mounting kits (which aren't cheap) that they can be adapted to later when your budget improves.
I have a an 8" reflecting Dobsonian by Celestron, and a collection of Plossl eyepieces. With the 5mm eyepiece I can separate the striations on Jupiter, I can see the red spot, and five of its moons. Same with Saturn, minus the spot of course, and I've been able to separate three of its rings. When I've used it to look at the Moon it gives me incredible surface detail, but it's so bright it practically burns a hole through your head.
I'd echo Mort's comments about an 8" Dob. I have swisher scopes now, but an 8" Dob is where I started. Specifically, an Orion SkyQuest XT8. I had to learn the night sky to use it (no automation on it, so I bought myself books and a red torch), but that was invaluable in the long run.
[link=http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-05-astronomers-alien-life-planets.html]US astronomers launch search for alien life on 86 planets[/link]
[link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bank_Telescope]Green Bank telescope[/link]
I have seen various pages talking about the range of radio SETI. In one Arcebo is lucky if it could detect something out to half a light year, in another it was a maximum 86 light years bringing something like a dozen stars in range. I don't know GBT does different, but 86 worlds is a better number obviously. I know not what the detection range is for a given military radar strength directed at us; hundreds of light years?
[link=http://www.primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/]This is rather good.[/link]
^That is really cool.
[link=http://www.space.com/11699-rogue-alien-planets-milky-common.html]There are more planets withut stars than there are with stars.[/link]
Wasn't expecting that.
So can you guys, like, tell me my horoscope and stuff?
This is an actual science thread, so no.