It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does the Moon stop moving during Full Solar Eclipse?

page: 7
4
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace




Wrong year and date. It was Nov 13 2012 en.wikipedia.org...


Wait a minute, it actually doesn't matter.

I may have calculated for the wrong location but the 2016 total eclipse was visible in Micronesia and the moon and sun distances for that are(off course) the same as in my calculations, so the point still stands, for the 2016 eclipse.

In 2016 the totality lasted for about 2 mins too.



Actually, in this NASA live feed the totality even seems to last for 4 minutes.



www.timeanddate.com...@2081187?month=3&year=2016

The link doesn't work for some reason but,

Distance to sun, from Woleai, Micronesia, March 8, 2016,

148,503,000 km.


Distance to moon,

363,866 km



It's the same numbers that both work out to a 0.54 deg. angular size for Sun and Moon during the total eclipse of 2016.


So there is still no explanation for this totality lasting for minutes.

edit on 9-5-2017 by Lemminggrad because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 9 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   
DP.

edit on 9-5-2017 by Lemminggrad because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People




Other times the Moon looks smaller, so logically totality will never happen, and I suppose the Moon and Sun could appear the EXACT same size, in which case we could use logic to deduce that totality would only last a few moments


I agree completely.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Many people here telling you the same thing. Here, try this little experiment-

1) Pick a sunny day and go outside

2) Find a large tree or even a building and stand in its shadow near one edge (make sure you're completely in the shadow).

3) Can you see the sun? Any of it? No, you can't.

4) Go to the opposite edge of the shadow and repeat. Same result? Yes.

The time the moon "stands still" is the time your body is completely in the shadow cast by the moon as it passes by. You are not going to see any of the sun from anywhere in an object's shadow.

Now, does that make sense?
edit on 5 9 2017 by underpass61 because: sp



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lemminggrad
a reply to: wildespace




Wrong year and date. It was Nov 13 2012 en.wikipedia.org...


Wait a minute, it actually doesn't matter.

I may have calculated for the wrong location but the 2016 total eclipse was visible in Micronesia and the moon and sun distances for that are(off course) the same as in my calculations, so the point still stands, for the 2016 eclipse.

In 2016 the totality lasted for about 2 mins too.



Actually, in this NASA live feed the totality even seems to last for 4 minutes.



www.timeanddate.com...@2081187?month=3&year=2016

The link doesn't work for some reason but,

Distance to sun, from Woleai, Micronesia, March 8, 2016,

148,503,000 km.


Distance to moon,

363,866 km



It's the same numbers that both work out to a 0.54 deg. angular size for Sun and Moon during the total eclipse of 2016.


So there is still no explanation for this totality lasting for minutes.

I accessed those pages for Woleai for March 8 2016, and the resultuing angular sizes come up as 0.53732 for the Sun and 0.54734 for the Moon, the difference being 0.01002, resulting in approx 1.2 minutes of totality for Woleai.

I used www.1728.org... for calculations.

So, sorry, the Moon is still shown to have been larger than the Sun on that day.



posted on May, 9 2017 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Lemmingrads gone.

Pretty sure he was the same guy that started this thread under a new name.

Attack of the flat earth spammers!



posted on May, 10 2017 @ 05:21 AM
link   
The duration of a total solar eclipse depends on the difference in angular size of the Moon and Sun, and the location that you are viewing the eclipse from Earth's surface. The difference in angular size between the Moon and Sun can be as much as 4 arc minutes, and this takes several minutes for the moon to cover (as seen from the Earth's surface). In addition, the Earth is rotating underneath the Moon's shadow, but the speed at which it is moving relative to the Moon depends on where you are observing from. If you are at the equator at noon, you can be travelling at up to a thousand miles per hour, and this rotational speed is effectively subtracted from the Moon's orbital velocity (very roughly two thousand miles per hour), which has to be taken into account when calculating how long the eclipse will last. If you catch an eclipse at sunrise (or sunset), the Moon is moving almost perpendicular to Earth's surface, which means that the Moon will move that full two thousand miles per hour relative to your location, and therefore the eclipse will not last as long (all other things being equal).

There is nothing strange about this. It is all to do with physics and geometry.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 06:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lemminggrad
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I would like to chime in here.



The Moon may take a couple of minutes between the leading edge starting totality to the time it takes the trailing edge to end totality (so all would appear black for two minutes, except fore the corona -- and maybe THAT is what you say is when the Moon stops), but the Moon would be in continuous motion and at a constant speed throughout those couple of minutes.




What is happing is that during those total eclipses that totality takes a little while (such as 2 minutes), totality isn't lasting that long because the moon stops, but rather because the moon (having an apparent size that is large than the Sun) takes 2 minutes to between the leading edge covering the sun and the trailing edge uncovering the Sun.


This is the ONLY argument that is relevant here. It is a good argument and it is the only argument that explains why it takes 2 minutes for the sun to appear again on the other side.

The argument is that the apparent diameter of the moon was bigger than the apparent diameter of the sun, on that day, March 8, 2016.

Let's test that hypothesis.

The angular diameter of the sun varies from 0.545 to 0.527 deg.

The angular diameter of the moon varies from 0.56 to 0.49 deg.

The first vid in the OP was shot in Cairns, Queensland, Australia, March 8, 2016.

Let's bring up the data.

Sun,

www.timeanddate.com...

Moon,

www.timeanddate.com...

Distance to sun: 148,503,000 km
Diameter of sun: 1,392,684 km

Using trig, this works out to a 0.54 deg. angular size.

Distance to moon: 363,887 km
Diameter of moon: 3476 km

And this works out to an angle of.......wait for it..........0.54 deg!

So on March 8/9, 2016, the Sun and the Moon had exactly the same size in the sky. You can all go calculate yourself.

This totally annihilates the only explaining argument in this thread that would have made at least some sense.

On March 8/9, 2016, the Sun and the Moon had exactly the same apparent size, so there is no explanation for the fact that totality lasted around two minutes.

The sun should have appeared from the other side of the moon almost immediately. They were the same size.

So the "video is doctored" card has already been used and disproven and the consensus is that totality did last for about two minutes. This is also supported by lots of other videos of this eclipse.

The only other possibly valid explanation, based on a supposed difference in angular size, can now be dismissed too.

So what's next? Only failed explanations so far.......



Consider two race cars almost the same size as each other, keeping pace with each other as they go around a track. Are you seriously suggesting that because they are the same size that one must immediately jump ahead of the other to prevent our view of one car from being blocked by the other?

Can you not see that if the apparent size is similar and the rate of transit from our point of view is similar that the time where one car blocks the other car from view can be quite extended?

Is the situation that different from the two apparent sizes being similar and the apparent rate of transit being similar for the Sun and Moon?

edit on 11/5/2017 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
The error in his argument is that he is assuming that the Sun and Moon were exactly the same apparent size in the sky as seen from that location on that date. He is incorrect. Leaving aside the fact that a calculation of 0.54 degree (to two decimal places) is nowhere near accurate enough for this kind of calculation, it is also worth noting that the stated Earth-Sun and Earth-Moon distances are centre to centre. Since observations of eclipses are done from the surface of the Earth, the distance to the Moon will be reduced (for an eclipse reasonably high in the sky) by several thousand kms. That makes a significant difference to the Moon's angular diameter. Of course, it also makes a difference to the Sun's angular diameter aswell, but since the Sun is roughly 400 times further away than the Moon, the difference is negligible in comparison.
edit on 11-5-2017 by Mogget because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2017 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: nothingiscoincidence
a reply to: wildespace
And because he works for this and is an astronomer makes you believe he's right? Come on, use your brain.. this guy tells the same lies like Wikipedia and NASA and ESA and any other wannabe scientist and space agency do.. they keep on telling you this # because otherwise their world picture would get wrecked. So they find it simple to "earn money" by keeping this whole hoax up




Flat Earther alert prove it wrong



posted on May, 12 2017 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: nothingiscoincidence
a reply to: wildespace
And because he works for this and is an astronomer makes you believe he's right? Come on, use your brain.. this guy tells the same lies like Wikipedia and NASA and ESA and any other wannabe scientist and space agency do.. they keep on telling you this # because otherwise their world picture would get wrecked. So they find it simple to "earn money" by keeping this whole hoax up




Flat Earther alert prove it wrong

Actually, it's pure comedy. That's what you'd expect to hear from a stand-up comedian.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join