It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by luxordelphi
So to answer your question - I'm looking for a quantity X to explain anomalies that I see by my own observations and also to explain the ones I read about like this one, as an example, from 2002 that says, according to MIT, that Pluto is undergoing global warming:
Still looking for a reasonable reason for all this carryon at the South Pole.
Dome A has been selected as one of the major goals of development for Chinese astronomy for the next decade; Major Instruments are proposed;
I'm not sure what you mean but a 20º field of view is not "limited". It is a wide field of view...which is good for photometric surveys. It doesn't really make sense to compare CSTAR to Keck, they serve completely different roles. The Keck telescopes have a maximum field of view of 20 arcmin (0.33º). That's the largest area of sky each can cover at one time. Keck would require 360 exposures to cover the same area as a single CSTAR exposure.
I wasn't able to determine if Keck is limiting themselves to a 20 degree section of sky or not.
Sure. great idea. The more the better. Of course, there is the problem of funding but there is at least one location considered suitable. Maybe someone will put an observatory there, especially if the work in Antarctica proves to be as fruitful as expected and testing shows the sites to be as promising as hoped.
In recent times, however, the ice shelf has begun to break up into a series of smaller units — thought to be the result of rising temperatures in the Arctic.
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.
No. If it was an object is visible "near" the Sun in New Zealand it would have been visible near the Sun everywhere on the planet where the Sun was visible
If it was an object far south of the ecliptic, it would not appear close to the Sun anywhere on the planet, even at the south pole.
COMET C/1970 K1 (WHITE-ORTIZ-BOLELLI; O.S. 1970 VI). Seen visually only from the 18th of May until the first week of June; T = 1970 May 14. A member of the Kreutz sungrazing group of comets. Observable strictly from the southern hemisphere. Visible only very briefly after sunset within the evening twilight.
COMET C/1948 V1 (ECLIPSE COMET; O.S. 1948 XI). Period of naked-eye visibility extended from Nov. 1 until about Dec. 20; T = 1948 October 27. Visibility was limited to the southern hemisphere and low Northern latitudes. First spotted as a brilliant object situated about 2 degrees southwest of the sun during the total solar eclipse of November 1, at magnitude about -2.
COMET C/1927 X1 (SKJELLERUP-MARISTANY; O.S. 1927 IX). Visible to the unaided eye from Nov. 27 until early Jan.; T = 1927 December 18. Comet visible almost exclusively from the southern hemisphere; very small perihelion distance. Already visible to the naked eye at discovery, situated in the southern constellation of Norma and moving rapidly northward to the sun. Reported as magnitude +3 on December 3, with a 3-degree tail. On December 18, visible in the daytime adjacent to the sun, magnitude -6!
COMET C/1910 A1 (DAYLIGHT COMET; O.S. 1910 I). Visible with the unaided eye from Jan. 12 until mid-Feb.; T = 1910 January 17. Spotted from the Southern Hemisphere in the morning twilight of January 12 as a brilliant object of magnitude -1. Moved quickly into conjunction with the sun. Between January 17 and 19, visible to the unaided eye in the daytime, its brightness peaking at magnitude -5. Beginning January 20, seen in the evening twilight from the northern hemisphere, looking like Venus but with a 10-degree tail.
COMET C/1901 G1 (GREAT COMET; O.S. 1901 I). Followed with the naked eye from Apr. 12 until May 23; T = 1901 April 24. Also known as "Comet Viscara", this object was observed exclusively from the southern hemisphere. Discovered in the morning twilight as an object of second magnitude with a noticeable tail. Moved eastward passing south of the sun.
COMET C/1887 B1 (GREAT SOUTHERN COMET; O.S. 1887 I). Period of naked-eye visibility extended from Jan. 18 to the 30th; T = 1887 January 12. Referred to in some old texts as "The Headless Wonder"! Seen only from the Southern Hemisphere. Very brief period of visibility. Object a member of the Kreutz sungrazing group of comets. Detected first on January 18 in the evening twilight as a bright, narrow ribbon of light 40 degrees long, terminating at the southwestern horizon. When situated further from the sun in the following days
COMET C/1880 C1 (GREAT SOUTHERN COMET; O.S. 1880 I). Seen with the naked eye from Jan. 31 until Feb. 15, T = 1880 January 28. A member of the Kreutz sungrazing group of comets. Visibility limited to the Southern Hemisphere. First detected on the evening of January 31 as a bright beam of light extending from below the southwestern horizon. Comet moved eastward away from the sun.
COMET C/1843 D1 (GREAT MARCH COMET; O.S. 1843 I). Followed with the unaided eye from Feb. 5 until Apr. 3; T = 1843 February 27. Object a member of the Kreutz sungrazing group of comets. Spotted on February 5, low in the southwestern sky following evening twilight, of magnitude perhaps 3 or 4. Moved rapidly to conjunction with the sun. On the 28th, visible throughout the day in both Europe and America as a brilliant object immediately adjacent to the sun; incredibly bright (mag -6 to -8) and displaying a 3-degree tail against the blue sky! For the next two weeks, visible mainly from the southern hemisphere.
But given your response to my questions about the "major effects" that would have to be resulting if those photos really did in fact identify a planet, I guess I'm having difficulty understanding the point then in posting the NZ photographer's link in your OP.
Based on your response it would seem you agree that those pics are not of a planet. Am I correct, or am I misinterpreting?
I've given a few examples below which also cover visibility at different latitudes for 'close to the sun' objects.
I've answered each of your questions. You've been given the reasons but you don't seem to understand astronomy well enough to understand them.
Because the seeing at Dome A is more than twice as good as it is on Mauna Kea.
Because the seeing at Dome A is three times better than it is at Cerro Paranal (Atacama, and yes, they had to build a road to the top of a 2,635 meter mountain to build a telescope there). Because the seeing is so good at Dome A that very good observations can be made with smaller telescopes.
The average annual rainfall is about one inch (25 mm) and in some mid-deserts spots, rain has never been recorded, at least as long as humans have measured it.
Not even cacti grow there. The air is so dry that metal objects never oxidize and the meat left for long on open air preserves for unlimited time. Without moisture nothing rots.
It is so arid, that mountains that reach as high as 6,885 metres (22,590 feet) lack glaciers and, in the southern part from 25�S to 27�S, have possibly been glacier-free throughout the Ice Age. Travellers relate that during summer the drought is so severe that hair and beard crumble and fall and the nails chap.
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.
The VLT has made an undisputed impact on observational astronomy. It is the most productive individual ground-based facility, and results from the VLT have led to the publication of an average of more than one peer-reviewed scientific paper per day. VLT contributes greatly to making ESO the most productive ground-based observatory in the world. The VLT has stimulated a new age of discoveries, with several notable scientific firsts, including the first image of an extrasolar planet (eso0428), tracking individual stars moving around the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way (eso0846), and observing the afterglow of the furthest known Gamma-Ray Burst.
Because the long sunless winter allows continuous observations of the light fluctuations of stars.
Because looking for exoplanets is only one of the things that can be accomplished with the surveys being conducted there.
Because the CSTAR telescope can be operated remotely.
The interior of Antarctica receives the most indirect rays from the sun which makes it cooler. For long periods in the winter it receives no sunlight at all. The interior has a very high altitude which adds to the very cold temperatures.
Because the interior of Antarctica is a land mass and far away from the ocean, it gets no warming effect from the water.The interior is characterized by extreme cold and light snowfall. Raging blizzards often occur, however, when winds pick up previously deposited snow and move it from place to place.
Do you think it was easy to build those huge telescopes on those mountaintops? Do you think it was cheap? Do you think those telescopes were built specifically to look for that "something" that you think is out there? What about the space telescopes? They can see the southern sky just as well as a telescope on the south pole could. Do you think the Hubble Space Telescope is part of that plan? Kepler? Webb? Why else spend all that money and do all that work? No, it couldn't be just to do astronomy. It must be something much more than that. You know those astronomers, they're always up to something. Just can't trust them.
Yes, an object may cross the ecliptic. But if it is near the Sun it will be near the Sun no matter where on Earth it is viewed from.
“…a transit of the planet Venus across the Sun - mobilized nations to spend today’s equivalent of tens of millions of dollars to commission special telescopes, outfit ships, fund expeditions, and send forth trained observers willing to sacrifice their health and even their lives, all to time four crucial instants.”
“…that same event repeatedly frustrated astronomers in their quest, and, ultimately, the prize was captured not by astronomers - but by electrical engineers.”
“THE COSMIC ‘HOLY GRAIL’ The ultimate object of the astronomers’ quest after Venus was the precise determination of one number: the astronomical unit - the mean distance from the Earth to the Sun.”
“…the one time Venus would be readily visible at its closest approach would be when the planet exactly transit’s the face of the Sun…At such a time, the same relatively small telescopes astronomers used to observe sunspots would reveal Venus as a black disc about 1/20th the Sun’s diameter silhouetted against the Sun’s bright disk.”
“More importantly, because Venus is so much closer to Earth than the Sun, observers south of the equator would see Venus across a different chord of the Sun’s disk than observers north of the equator. Thus the transit‘s duration would be greater for observers at some latitudes than in others.”
“Because Venus is closer to Earth than the Sun [in transit], observers at different latitudes on Earth would see Venus transit different chords on the face of the Sun, with northern observer A seeing the lower chord and southern observer B seeing the upper chord.”
the perceptible displacement of an object when it is viewed from two different lines of sight
The seeing is so much better than at Mauna Kea and yet Mauna Kea found 18 exoplanets to Dome A's one possibility of an exoplanet. The seeing is so much better than at Atacama and yet at Atacama:
The seeing is so much better than at Atacama and Mauna Kea that tiny telescopes are ok and yet Atacama and Mauna Kea seem to see so much more.
That's a good point and wasn't in the literature I read, however, so would the arctic allow that and climate in the arctic is not as harsh as the Antarctic Plateau.
And yet that's basically what they say the're looking for and judging by what they say their activities with the data have been that's basically what they're looking for.
The photometric catalog can be used for studying any variability in these sources, and for the discovery of transient sources such as supernovae, gamma-ray bursts, and minor planets.
It has to be operated remotely because of the climate. A climate which was originally deemed worse than other sites for viewing and now has been deemed so good that tiny telescopes can supposedly do the work of giants at Atacama and Mauna Kea.
Last: a 20 degree view of the sky out of a 180 degree field view, and that's not taking into consideration the length, is not a wide field of view. Limiting oneself to a certain section of sky implies that one expects to find something there.
The examples you give are based on data from ephemerides. The link you offered is to calculate ephemerides for comets or objects. I'm interested only in how it looks to the eye of an earth-based, latitudinally located, observer. In other words, how does it look to someone going outside and looking up.
Here is a link to the history of the 'Quest for the Astronomical Unit."
Here is a link describing observations from different latitudes of Saturn passing in front of a star.
As pointed out, the purpose of the PLATO sky surveys is to study variable stars.
“Over 100,000 variable stars are known and catalogued, and many thousands more are suspected to be variable.”
“Dome A on the Antarctic plateau is likely one of the best observing sites on Earth thanks to the excellent atmospheric conditions present at the site during the long polar winter night. We present high-cadence time-series aperture photometry of 10,000 stars with i < 14.5 mag located in a 23 square-degree region centered on the south celestial pole. The photometry was obtained with one of the CSTAR telescopes during 128 days of the 2008 Antarctic winter.”
“Some disadvantages that must be considered include aurorae, a reduced amount of the celestial sphere that is available for observations, and prolonged twilight.”
“An observatory that can operate year round without interruptions is required to best capitalize upon the advantages provided by the Antarctic Plateau.”
“The CSTAR telescopes were installed at Dome A in January 2008. During the following Antarctic winter season, there were technical problems with 3 of the 4 telescopes…which prevented them from obtaining any useful information.”
“…the fourth telescope…performed without any significant issues. Observations were conducted from 2008 March 20 through 2008 July 27...”
“49% of the data obtained in March was rejected due to the high sky background caused by the relatively large sun elevation angle.”
“Frame-by-frame registration was used to combine 3000 of the best images obtained during a 24-hour period of exceptionally good conditions (2008 June 29) to form a master reference image.”
“The brightest 10,000 of these are detected in most individual frames and correspond to the depth of a previous study of this area of the sky by the ASAS project (V ~ 14.5 mag Pojmanski 2005).”
The All Sky Automated Survey (ASAS) is a Polish project implemented on 7 April 1997 to do photometric monitoring of approximately 20 million stars brighter than 14 magnitude all over the sky. The automatic telescopes discovered two new comets in 2004 and 2006. The ASAS-South, located in Chile and ASAS-North, located in Hawai'i, are managed by Grzegorz Pojmański of the Warsaw University Observatory via the internet
The work on the ASAS program began in 1996 with a mere $1 million budget. The automatic telescope, located in Las Campanas Observatory, Chile, was designed to register the brightness of circa one million stars in the Southern Hemisphere. However, it proved very efficient and helped to find many new variable stars.
So far, ASAS has discovered 50,000 variables located south of declination +28°, which means that it has covered 3/4 of all the sky.
Originally posted by jeichelberg
reply to post by luxordelphi
Thanks for the reply...I understand what you stated about the East/West travel...I think that I understand the plane of the ecliptic to be more a function of dividing the hemispherical North/South...in other words, where I view the Sun in terms of the amount of degrees it rises above the latitude I am at on the globe...
I saw the list of comets you provided...I believe Phage already provided a response indicating those comets could also be seen in the Northern Hemisphere...edit on 12/4/2011 by jeichelberg because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by jeichelberg
reply to post by luxordelphi
I believe what you describe here might be related to parallax...I do not know for sure though...