Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

My God! It's Full Of Stars!

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I believe that for half an ISS orbit it isn't facing a bright sunlit Earth.

I believe Commander Hadfield when he takes photographs of stars

canadian-space-agency.tumblr.com... 8224225045/chris-hadfield-people-ask-to-see-stars-my

I believe the astronaut that took this photograph of stars

www.dailymail.co.uk...


You can take photography lessons from Commander Hadfield and see the nice stars in that too:



So go ahead and cherry pick a statement and take it out of context to make it say what you believe, or you can believe what people who have been in space have actually said about seeing, and photographing, stars.
edit on 14-2-2014 by onebigmonkey because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by onebigmonkey
 


Both of those links go to images taken from inside the ISS, and are looking through the atmosphere around the Earth to see the stars. What part of that don't you understand? And I am not cherry picking Hadfields quotes, ot taking them out of context. He is on an EVA, he sees the Earth at one side, and at the other, looking into deep space, he sees nothing.




The contrast of your body and your mind inside ... essentially a one-person spaceship, which is your spacesuit, where you're holding on for dear life to the shuttle or the station with one hand, and you are inexplicably in between what is just a pouring glory of the world roaring by, silently next to you — just the kaleidoscope of it, it takes up your whole mind. It's like the most beautiful thing you've ever seen just screaming at you on the right side, and when you look left, it's the whole bottomless black of the universe and it goes in all directions. It's like a huge yawning endlessness on your left side and you're in between those two things and trying to rationalize it to yourself and trying to get some work done.


Could it be any clearer? If you want further clarification of his statement, you should ask him, not rag on me for simply quoting what he clearly states.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 01:00 AM
link   

GaryN
reply to post by onebigmonkey
 


Both of those links go to images taken from inside the ISS, and are looking through the atmosphere around the Earth to see the stars. What part of that don't you understand? And I am not cherry picking Hadfields quotes, ot taking them out of context. He is on an EVA, he sees the Earth at one side, and at the other, looking into deep space, he sees nothing.


No, they aren't. Yes, there is a thin layer of atmosphere, but the majority of the stars in the photographs are not taken through atmosphere. What part of this don't you understand?




The contrast of your body and your mind inside ... essentially a one-person spaceship, which is your spacesuit, where you're holding on for dear life to the shuttle or the station with one hand, and you are inexplicably in between what is just a pouring glory of the world roaring by, silently next to you — just the kaleidoscope of it, it takes up your whole mind. It's like the most beautiful thing you've ever seen just screaming at you on the right side, and when you look left, it's the whole bottomless black of the universe and it goes in all directions. It's like a huge yawning endlessness on your left side and you're in between those two things and trying to rationalize it to yourself and trying to get some work done.


Could it be any clearer? If you want further clarification of his statement, you should ask him, not rag on me for simply quoting what he clearly states.



I was mis-remembering the quote, and I apologise for my mistake. This does not stop you ignoring statements and evidence where stars are referenced in favour of an ambiguous quote,.

Hadfield does not specifically say "I couldn't see stars", whereas he makes reference to them in the page showing his photograph of them. The Iranian astronaut specifically mentions stars - why not listen to her?

Astronauts can see stars in space. Astronauts can take photographs of stars in space. What's the problem?
edit on 17-2-2014 by onebigmonkey because: missing words



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GaryN
 


In that quote, Hadfield described "a pouring glory of the world roaring by, [...] just the kaleidoscope of it". I think it quite clearly means he was looking at the day side of our planet, lit by the Sun. If you look away from that into space, you will most definitely see nothing but blackness, as your eyes won't have enough time to become dark-adapted to see stars. Parts of the ISS that are sunlit or earth-lit may also be present in your field of view and prevent dark adaptation.

Even when the space walkers are on the night side of Earth, they have helmet lights and external ISS lights on, so that they could carry on working. Only when all lights are turned off can an astronaut see stars. I recall reading about such an event, when the spacewalker (can't remember which, sorry) took a break during the EVA, the ISS was on the night side, and he asked for the lights to be turned off. He even reported seeing the moons of Jupiter, and those have approximately the same apaprent magnitude as many stars in the night sky.
edit on 17-2-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 12:03 PM
link   
More from Commander Hadfield:

www.asc-csa.gc.ca...




What does space look like?

It looks like a carpet of countless tiny perfect unblinking lights in endless velvet, with the Milky Way as a glowing area of paler texture.

Why don't you take photos of the stars or the moon?

Most of the windows on the Space Station face the Earth, and the view is so rare and magnificent that it draws most of our attention. To photograph the stars we also need to make it dark, and the upwards-facing windows are in brightly-lit locations. And finally, the stars, though clear and bright from here, are not significantly different than as-viewed on a very clear and dark night on Earth.


www.reddit.com...




Have you ever gone into the shadow of the ISS or another space ship while on a space walk? If so what was it like? Is it total darkness?
Edit: Thanks for the response! And good luck up there! I'll watch you every night you pass over Chicago!


[–]ColChrisHadfield[S] 43 points 1 year ago
When in space, if you look away from the Sun, it is total darkness. It's because there is no air to reflect and refract the light around you.
You can even take a picture looking at the Sun. The bright Sun will be blown out in the image, but space around it will be black.
The only light becomes the glow of the Earth and starlight. Very cool.


edit on 17-2-2014 by onebigmonkey because: boldly going



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   

AndyMayhew
Here's a picture taken from Earth of the Moon and Venus. AND OH MY GOD THERE ARE NO STARS!!!!



It's all down to exposure. As has been pointed out time and time and time again whenever non photographers question photos of stars or the Moon etc. You need a long exposure to capture distant stars, but that means over exposure of closer, brighter objects like planets or the Moon. So you adjust the exposure according to what it is you are photographing. Maybe a bit of background research before making yourself look silly next time? Girls go for clever guys, not ignorant ones
edit on 8-2-2014 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)


Thanks for posting that image.

I did agree earlier on in the thread that i suspected it was down to exposure time, so i'm not THAT ignorant or silly...perhaps just a little.

(BTW, i've found in my considerably varied experience of the many girls i've met, including my wife of 25 years, most of them like a bigheaded smartarse even less!
)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Star trails taken from the ISS

www.flickr.com...
Orion from the ISS

www.universetoday.com... tation-turns-on-its-afterburners-or-not/



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   

GaryN
an EVA astronaut can look away from the Earth, and the only one I can find who has talked about the view into deep space says it is totally black. I believe him until someone comes forward to challenge his statement.


Explain then, how does the Hubble Space Telescope System work?



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 01:25 AM
link   


I think it quite clearly means he was looking at the day side of our planet, lit by the Sun. If you look away from that into space, you will most definitely see nothing but blackness, as your eyes won't have enough time to become dark-adapted to see stars.


The human eye will adjust very quickly, not more than 4 or 5 seconds to be able to go from being blinded by a bright light to being able to see stars. I've tried it, you can too. If your pupils don't react quickly, then you have a problem, that's why doctors use a flashlight to check your response. If my old eyes can react within 5 seconds, I'm sure Chris Hadfields will. And he has much better eyesight too.




Even when the space walkers are on the night side of Earth, they have helmet lights and external ISS lights on, so that they could carry on working. Only when all lights are turned off can an astronaut see stars.


Nonsense, the helmet lights point away from them, the lights on the Canadarm or on the space station point to the work location. Any astronaut turning his back on the Earth and the ISS and looking into deep space should be able to see the Moon, planets and stars. None of them mention it. The only references to stars being seen are when looking through the Earth facing window, and the stars are visible in that band of atmosphere surrounding the Earth.
Here's a list of all EVA missions. Find any of them that talk about what deep space looks like. I got about half way through the list and gave up. Chris Hadfield is the only one who has stated clearly that it is black out there, but nobody will believe him, just shows how dumbed down the masses are.

List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999
en.wikipedia.org...
List of spacewalks since 2000
en.wikipedia.org...

I've had enough of going round in circles with you guys though. I'll believe what Chris Hadfield says until someone comes up with a statement that contradicts him, and any images with the Earth in view don't count, they must be taken looking AWAY from Earth. I'll consider a video of the Moon, an image of the Sun through a Neutral density filter, or a photo of a planetary conjunction, as long as they can be shown to be looking away from Earth. Till then, I'm not going to keep repeating myself. Good, I hear some of you say!





Explain then, how does the Hubble Space Telescope System work?.


Only the Military have the technology to make Hubble work. The ESA and NASA are the only organisations with visible light space based telescopes, and that science is still classified as the ICBMs use it. Goddard is releasing SOME of the technology, through the "Can you see it now" program, but they will be selective about who they allow to license it.
ipp.gsfc.nasa.gov...
Hubble is not a regular telescope, and anyone who tries to put a regular telescope in space will see nothing, that's why nobody does it. The only device that uses more or less regular optics is the HIRISE camera orbiting Mars, and that is because mars has sufficient atmoshere to create the light that such a camera needs. Try putting the HIRISE camera in a Lunar orbit, I doubt it will see much at all. Why do you think there is no stereo, hi-res camera sending back images from Lunar orbit? All the devices that do send images back are using IR and UV spectrographic imagers, not regular cameras.



posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 02:26 AM
link   

GaryN

The only references to stars being seen are when looking through the Earth facing window, and the stars are visible in that band of atmosphere surrounding the Earth.


And, as the photographs to which I have posted links prove, also in the area above that thin band of atmosphere.



Here's a list of all EVA missions. Find any of them that talk about what deep space looks like. I got about half way through the list and gave up. Chris Hadfield is the only one who has stated clearly that it is black out there, but nobody will believe him, just shows how dumbed down the masses are.


Chris Hadfield also described what the stars looked like.

I've had enough of going round in circles with you guys though. I'll believe what Chris Hadfield says until someone comes up with a statement that contradicts him, and any images with the Earth in view don't count, they must be taken looking AWAY from Earth. I'll consider a video of the Moon, an image of the Sun through a Neutral density filter, or a photo of a planetary conjunction, as long as they can be shown to be looking away from Earth. Till then, I'm not going to keep repeating myself. Good, I hear some of you say!

Good


I've already supplied you with quotes, and photographs, by Hadfield and other astronauts that contradict your opinion of what he means but you are choosing to ignore them. I have also posted photographs taken in space by Apollo astronauts showing stars and planets taken from cislunar space and lunar orbit. Venus has also been photographed from the lunar surface.





Only the Military have the technology to make Hubble work.


Nonsense.



The ESA and NASA are the only organisations with visible light space based telescopes, and that science is still classified as the ICBMs use it. Goddard is releasing SOME of the technology, through the "Can you see it now" program, but they will be selective about who they allow to license it.
ipp.gsfc.nasa.gov...


You missed out Canada's MOST telescope. The reason visible spectrum scopes are not used so much outside our atmosphere is because they don't reveal all that much more than the other spectra, which are seriously hindered by our atmosphere. There is no secret technology in a visible spectrum telescope. It's a series of lenses pointed at an object and the resulting image sent back.



Hubble is not a regular telescope, and anyone who tries to put a regular telescope in space will see nothing, that's why nobody does it.


Apart from Canada, the ESA, NASA...



The only device that uses more or less regular optics is the HIRISE camera orbiting Mars, and that is because mars has sufficient atmoshere to create the light that such a camera needs. Try putting the HIRISE camera in a Lunar orbit, I doubt it will see much at all. Why do you think there is no stereo, hi-res camera sending back images from Lunar orbit? All the devices that do send images back are using IR and UV spectrographic imagers, not regular cameras.


Define 'regular optics'.

What about the cameras aboard GRAIL? The original Lunar Orbiter, Ranger and Surveyor probes looking at the moon taking photographs with film? The current LROC cameras? The Russian Zond probes? The Chinese probes? All the Apollo photographs quite happily showing the lunar surface?

You do not need an atmosphere to take photograph or see stars, planets or moons in space. Atmosphere scatters light, it does not create it.





new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join