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.
Did you look for an answer? An extensive sky survey was completed in its first year, even with those puny telescopes.
The international project makes use of the 1.3 meter "Warsaw" telescope at Las Campanas, Chile, to search for microlensing events.
Finally, microlensing is dependent on rare and random events - the passage of one star precisely in front of another, as seen from Earth. This makes the discovery of planets by this method both difficult and unpredictable. As a result, despite years of intense observations, OGLE–2005-BLG-390Lb, announced in January 2006, was only the third planet ever detected by microlensing.
Whenever OGLE detects a microlensing event, it contacts a network of telescopes that specialize in searching for signs of the presence of a planet. The networks, known as PLANET (Probing Lensing Anomalies), Robonet, and microFUN (Microlensing Follow-Up Network), include 1 and 2 meter telescopes across the globe.
Not quite. Don't you ever bother to look anything up? Mt. Everest: 8850 meters
PLATO: 4093 meters. Yes, the summit of Everest is a pleasant stroll.
The annual average temperature is -50°C (-58°F). Winter temperatures drop quickly, then level out. Summer is short, from mid-December to mid-January, however, temperatures can reach a balmy -30°C (-22°F)!
A: It’s a cold place. The temperature never rises above freezing. In January, the coldest month, it can drop to -76 degrees F (-60 C) and averages -33 F (-36 C). Even in July, the warmest month, it averages -2F(-19 C).
I have spent the last 4 hours photographing the sun. At first I had the camera on auto and was not looking into the lens, as the sun here in New Zealand is intensely bright. I grabbed my sunglasses and had a look through my canon digital SLR camera, and well I couldn’t believe it! I could see a perfectly circular object, slightly red in colour compared to the sun. I couldn’t fully believe what I was seeing so called my partner to confirm what I was seeing. He too saw it.
So I got out my other camera all digital SLR’s and began flicking off photos trying to find the right shutter speed and aperture that would capture it.
Please note that I am a professional photographer and processed these photos to check the object was not a sun spot or sun glare. Plus the fact that I could see it, not with a naked eye but through the lens, I really can’t believe I have seen it for myself!
Originally posted by Kr0nZ
The atmosphere is thinner, and a point in the sky will be viewable for a longer period at the poles (the earth rotates at the poles)
In my opinion Antarctica would be the best place for a observatory, it has solid land. The artic circle (north pole) is made up of mostly ice, so wouldnt be that great for buildings.
So I got out my other camera all digital SLR’s and began flicking off photos trying to find the right shutter speed and aperture that would capture it.
Please note that I am a professional photographer and processed these photos to check the object was not a sun spot or sun glare. Plus the fact that I could see it, not with a naked eye but through the lens, I really can’t believe I have seen it for myself!
I asked if you had looked for an answer about what CSTAR (those puny telescopes) was being used for. The answer is that it is being used for conducting photometric sky surveys. Those surveys serve a number of purposes, not just the detection of exoplanets.
What kind of a question is that? I am looking for an answer and an explanation for the puny telescopes.
Interesting. But as your link says, microlensing can be used to detect very distant exoplanets. As your link also says, nearer planets can be found by use of transit photometry. With it, a decrease in the brightness of a star is measured as the candidate passes (transits) across it. As I posted above, CSTAR has detected a single exoplanet candidate by use of this method.
These other telescopes used for microlensing viewing are 3.2 feet to 6.6 feet.
arxiv.org...
We used this photometric data set to derive site statistics for Dome A and to search for variable stars. Thanks to the nearly-uninterrupted synoptic coverage, we find 6× as many variables as previous surveys with similar magnitude limits. We detected 157 variable stars, of which 55% are unclassified, 27% are likely binaries and 17% are likely pulsating stars. The latter category includes Scuti, Doradus and RR Lyrae variables. One variable may be a transiting exoplanet.
Actually, it's "only" about 15,000 feet. "Only" half as high. "Only" a difference of almost 3 miles in altitude. Tell me, did the trip to Dome A require oxygen tanks? Tell me, do those who reach the summit of Everest get themselves and their equipment there on tractors? Tell me, how many have died attempting to reach and descend from the summit of Everest? "Closer than an 18 day journey?" Are you sure about that? www.rmiguides.com...
And Mt. Everest is 16,000 feet closer to the stars than the Antarctic Plateau. And it's also closer than an 18 day journey to all the comforts of home.
Day 19-64: Ascent of Mt Everest
Day 65: Withdraw to Base Camp
Day 66-68: Return trek to Namche Bazaar via Dingboche and Thyangboche
Day 69: Trek to Lukla
Day 70: Fly Lukla to Kathmandu
Day 71: Fly Back Home
Pretty much always when some "discovers" something next to the Sun. Yes, the "professional photographer" would see the lens flare when looking through the lens. It is the lens which causes a lens flare afterall. Just as the guy in the video I posted above could see it as he made the video. Too bad the "professional photographer" didn't perform a test like he did.
So it's always a lens flare...until it isn't...and at what point do we cross the line? and what do we do then?
Thanks for your opinions. And bon voyage with your travels to southern regions.
I don't really have a theory. I just have observations with no explanation to fit them all. In this particular thread I'm wondering what is going on at the South Pole. What are they looking for with those puny telescopes?
The telescope array is taking movies every 20 seconds of the same 20 degree part of the sky for 4 months at a time. This is how this non-orbiting array is set up to work. How would this work in orbit?
Originally posted by ColAngus
Originally posted by luxordelphi
poleshift.ning.com...
If the "planet" were truly as close as depicted in the pictures in your link, wouldn't the effects on the other planets and Earth be catastrophic by now?
Or can planets be that huge and merely whiz nearby with nothing so much as a few dozen fish/bird die-offs and a pesky earthquake or two?
Oh, the purpose is also to look for asteroids which may prove to be a problem for this planet at some point.
The image in your OP is an image of an "object" near the Sun. In March the Sun is visible in New Zealand and everywhere else on the planet except very near the North Pole. In March, anyone anywhere on the planet (except someone very near the North Pole) would have seen the "object" near the Sun unless it were very close to Earth (close as in Earth orbit). An object near the Sun would be visible where ever the Sun is visible. For example, in March the Sun is in Aquarius. No matter where you are on the planet the stars of Aquarius surround the Sun in March. If it weren't daytime when the Sun is visible, those stars (and any planets which happened to be there) would be visible to everyone.
Your example of Sirius is correct to a degree (Sirius is never visible at very high latitudes) but makes little sense in this context. Since it lies far south of the ecliptic (and thus not visible from very far north), it is never near the Sun.
Every year our sun conjoins the star Sirius, at 13.5 degrees Cancer, during the first week in July; that is, as seen from the earth, the sun lies in front of Sirius which lies at the same celestial longitude as the astrological sign of Cancer in the sky.
Eugene, Oregon is at 44º N. Do you consider Eugene very close to the North Pole?
Please note that I am a professional photographer and processed these photos to check the object was not a sun spot or sun glare.
Still wouldn't the same apply to the North Pole? Wouldn't a double pronged attack cover all bases? Why so exclusive?
The potential of polar regions for astronomy has long been recognized and first highlighted with measurements of exceptional seeing in Antarctica. On the basis of satellite data and topography we identified the western part of Ellesmere Island as having potential comparable to the Antarctic sites. Preliminary site seeing measurements find that Ellesmere has sites superior to the best known mid-latitude ones and does not suffer from the substantial ground layer of Antarctic plateau sites.
It is essential to fully characterize the astronomical properties of several Ellesmere sites and their operational feasibility before undertaking any major astronomical development.
No. It would be on the ecliptic. The Sun is on the ecliptic. When an object appears near the sun, it must be near the ecliptic as well.
In the photo, the object APPEARS to be on the ecliptic because of longitude/azimuth at that moment.
No.
It's a question of viewpoint and a hypothetical steep southern inclination. How would that look from an equidistant north and south hemisphere location.
I asked if you had looked for an answer about what CSTAR (those puny telescopes) was being used for. The answer is that it is being used for conducting photometric sky surveys. Those surveys serve a number of purposes, not just the detection of exoplanets.
Actually, it's "only" about 15,000 feet. "Only" half as high. "Only" a difference of almost 3 miles in altitude. Tell me, did the trip to Dome A require oxygen tanks? Tell me, do those who reach the summit of Everest get themselves and their equipment there on tractors? Tell me, how many have died attempting to reach and descend from the summit of Everest? "Closer than an 18 day journey?" Are you sure about that?
The name of this desert seems to come from the native Atacama Indians, who still inhabit the area. Another thing: Atacama harbors one of the largest astronomic observatories, the Very Large Telescope, as here is one of the clearest skies on Earth to look at the stars.