Joe wrote:
For the first time I was definitely about to see a crater on the moon without magnification -- Copernicus. Its light floor stood out clearly from the darker mare regions surrounding it. I confirmed this by using the binoculars, checking back and forth several times. I could almost, but not quite, make out Tycho. I could see the curvature of the dark mare to its left, but because Tycho is surrounded by bright material I could not quite see it.
Thank you for the report. That's an interesting report based on observing a lower-sun angle Moon on March 7 and differing surface contrasts from those that I saw on the near full Moon last night. Here's some more background on the detection of extended object contrasting spots. The Moon was near perigee last night on this lunation at around 367,000 km, the crater rim and crater floor of the 93km dia Copernicus at full Moon illumination was not seen naked eye. I did not expect to be able to see Copernicous naked-eye. At that distance, the crater rim subtends about 50 arcsecs or at most, 1 arcmin. (60 arcsecs is generally taken as the minimum size of two spots that can be distinguished. Other visibility patterns apply to the detection of a spot that contrasts with its background.) The bright full Moon illumination would also tend to washout any contrast distinction between Copernicus and its ejecta curtain. In comparision to the crater itself, the ~400km diameter Copernician ejecta curtain, and that of the smaller ~200-300km dia Aristarchus plateau were easily seen contrasting against the darker surrounding mare at around 4 arcmins in diameter. Most of the smaller mares are 4 to 7 arcmins in diameter (e.g. Serenitatis, Crisum, Humorum, etc.). R.N. Clark and Nils Olaf Carlin summarize Blackwell's 1940's research on the detection of an extended spot that contrasts with its background. Very small, but very bright half-arcmin spots can be seen against a relatively bright background. Printing off Clark's contrast spot chart - which includes spots down to about 3 arcmins - is an instructive practical eye test. Clark's Contrast Spot Chart http://clarkvision.com/visastro/omva1/low-contrast-spots-1-c.gif Clark's notes on use of the Contrast Spot Chart "If you print this chart at 300 dpi, and hold it at 30 inches from your eye, the 27 pixel diameter spots appear about 10.3 arc-minutes across. Viewing the chart in low room light gets near the right side of Figure 2.7b. For the low contrast spots, how large do they have to be to be seen (just above the threshold)? I tried some various lighting conditions and found a range of about 6 to 13 arc-minutes were needed to detect the low contrast spots (e.g. the 2 DN brighter than the background). I did the experiment before computing the spot sizes so I did not know what the outcome would be." Clark's Blackwell Surface figure http://clarkvision.com/visastro/omva1/plot.bl.surf.3d.s1.gif in: http://clarkvision.com/visastro/omva1/index.html Nils Olof Carlin's Blackwell surface figure http://www.bbastrodesigns.com/IMG00001.GIF in http://www.bbastrodesigns.com/blackwel.html The sun angle and the contrasts of craters and their curtains changes daily, so one day is not representative of another. Joe, that's a good catch. I'll have to pay more attention to the naked eye visibility of craters in the future. - Kurt
Don't let NASA make a joke out of naming a node of the Space Station. See my blog: http://deseretnews.com/blogs/1,5322,10000034,00.html?bD=20090310 Thanks, Joe
Watching The Colbert Report the other night I got the impression he threw his name into the ring in part for laughs but also in an attempt to defeat "Xenu" which the honchos as Scientology are having their members vote for. Apparently Xenu is the name of the spaceship Scientologists believe brought their followers to Earth. Given my druthers I'd choose Colbert over Xenu but I'd be willing to bet that NASA will not allow either even if they win. BTW, I see BBC America has renewed Life On Mars for another season. Time to get a dish? patrick On 10 Mar 2009, at 22:57, Joe Bauman wrote:
Don't let NASA make a joke out of naming a node of the Space Station. See my blog:
http://deseretnews.com/blogs/1,5322,10000034,00.html?bD=20090310
Thanks, Joe
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Patrick Wiggins NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador to Utah & NE Nevada http://utahastro.info paw@wirelessbeehive.com 435.882.1209
Here's a follow up. Maybe the whole "Colbert Report" thing was a PR ploy from the beginning. :) http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009/apr/HQ_M09-057_Node3_Naming.html patrick On 10 Mar 2009, at 23:36, Patrick Wiggins wrote:
Watching The Colbert Report the other night I got the impression he threw his name into the ring in part for laughs but also in an attempt to defeat "Xenu" which the honchos as Scientology are having their members vote for. Apparently Xenu is the name of the spaceship Scientologists believe brought their followers to Earth.
Given my druthers I'd choose Colbert over Xenu but I'd be willing to bet that NASA will not allow either even if they win.
BTW, I see BBC America has renewed Life On Mars for another season. Time to get a dish?
patrick
On 10 Mar 2009, at 22:57, Joe Bauman wrote:
Don't let NASA make a joke out of naming a node of the Space Station. See my blog:
http://deseretnews.com/blogs/1,5322,10000034,00.html?bD=20090310
Thanks, Joe
He won with about 250,000 votes but he is really playing it up. Perhaps they are going to name it "Colbert" if they are going to announce it on his show. Isn't the module a urine recycling module?
Erik Here's a follow up. Maybe the whole "Colbert Report" thing was a PR
ploy from the beginning. :)
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009/apr/HQ_M09-057_Node3_Naming.html
patrick
On 10 Mar 2009, at 23:36, Patrick Wiggins wrote:
Watching The Colbert Report the other night I got the impression he threw his name into the ring in part for laughs but also in an attempt to defeat "Xenu" which the honchos as Scientology are having their members vote for. Apparently Xenu is the name of the spaceship Scientologists believe brought their followers to Earth.
Given my druthers I'd choose Colbert over Xenu but I'd be willing to bet that NASA will not allow either even if they win.
BTW, I see BBC America has renewed Life On Mars for another season. Time to get a dish?
patrick
On 10 Mar 2009, at 22:57, Joe Bauman wrote:
Don't let NASA make a joke out of naming a node of the Space Station. See my blog:
http://deseretnews.com/blogs/1,5322,10000034,00.html?bD=20090310
Thanks, Joe
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Why do we have this predisposition to name individual modules at all? What's next, naming pieces of furniture? Indvidual nuts and bolts? Yet the ISS itself gets named for...nothing. Just a description. The station should have been named better, and the modules be known only by their functions. Buncha crap.
Funny that you should mention that just now as there's currently a thread on the Minor Planet Mailing List about a similar feeling regarding naming minor planets. Personally I've no problem with naming things as long as it's done ethically. And oft times names are more descriptive, shorter and easier to remember than say, a serial number. Actually I rather like the way minor planets are handled. All of them that have been tracked long enough get a number and are then eligible to be named (the vast majority, BTW, have no names). patrick On 10 Apr 2009, at 20:02, Chuck Hards wrote:
Why do we have this predisposition to name individual modules at all?
What's next, naming pieces of furniture? Indvidual nuts and bolts?
Yet the ISS itself gets named for...nothing. Just a description. The station should have been named better, and the modules be known only by their functions.
Buncha crap.
I see nothing wrong with naming minor planets. We name some pretty tiny islands on this earth; we may as well name some fairly small space rocks. They are, after all, real estate. But naming a module on the ISS seems silly. It's not a wing of a hospital, after all. It's more like naming the galley in a large aircraft, or the toilet in an RV. It's stupid. People are getting paychecks for thinking this crap up and spending time on it. On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Patrick Wiggins <paw@wirelessbeehive.com>wrote:
Funny that you should mention that just now as there's currently a thread on the Minor Planet Mailing List about a similar feeling regarding naming minor planets.
Personally I've no problem with naming things as long as it's done ethically. And oft times names are more descriptive, shorter and easier to remember than say, a serial number.
Actually I rather like the way minor planets are handled. All of them that have been tracked long enough get a number and are then eligible to be named (the vast majority, BTW, have no names).
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:58:13 -0600 From: chuck.hards@gmail.com To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Space Station node may get awful name
I see nothing wrong with naming minor planets. We name some pretty tiny islands on this earth; we may as well name some fairly small space rocks. They are, after all, real estate.
But naming a module on the ISS seems silly. It's not a wing of a hospital, after all. It's more like naming the galley in a large aircraft, or the toilet in an RV. It's stupid. People are getting paychecks for thinking this crap up and spending time on it.
As an opposing viewpoint, I think that this naming exercise is doing a lot of good. Yes it is pointless to name what amounts to a galley in an aircraft, but look at what it has done. It has gotten thousands of people that probably have never even been to NASA's website to log in and vote. So what if it is a silly name for a tiny piece of the space station? If it can spark the interest in even a couple of people that previously had none, it has served a good purpose. ~Jon Christensen
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And certainly there is questionable return here, for the costs involved. I can't see it. On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Jon Christensen <coldari@msn.com> wrote:
As an opposing viewpoint, I think that this naming exercise is doing a lot of good. Yes it is pointless to name what amounts to a galley in an aircraft, but look at what it has done. It has gotten thousands of people that probably have never even been to NASA's website to log in and vote. So what if it is a silly name for a tiny piece of the space station? If it can spark the interest in even a couple of people that previously had none, it has served a good purpose.
I suppose I just don't see what these huge costs are. A few lines of code to put up a survey? They already employ people to update and maintain the website. This effort would be minimal. They have named the other modules, with or without a survey, no extra cost there. I think it has been a very good publicity vehicle for NASA for what seems to be minimal cost. The road to hell may be paved with many things, but a silly name I am certain is not one of them. Humans are silly beings, at times, and it is no bad thing to inject a bit of it into any aspect of life.
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:58:54 -0600 From: chuck.hards@gmail.com To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Space Station node may get awful name
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And certainly there is questionable return here, for the costs involved. I can't see it.
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Jon Christensen <coldari@msn.com> wrote:
As an opposing viewpoint, I think that this naming exercise is doing a lot of good. Yes it is pointless to name what amounts to a galley in an aircraft, but look at what it has done. It has gotten thousands of people that probably have never even been to NASA's website to log in and vote. So what if it is a silly name for a tiny piece of the space station? If it can spark the interest in even a couple of people that previously had none, it has served a good purpose.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
I just see it as a waste of effort, along with a lot of other NASA "marketing" and PR efforts done with public dollars. I'm not big into proselytizing space or astronomy; I tend to believe that those who are really interested will find it just fine on their own without the contests and associated media hype. It's a kindergarten activity, at best. Looked at in that light, I might be able to live with it. On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Jon Christensen <coldari@msn.com> wrote:
I suppose I just don't see what these huge costs are. A few lines of code to put up a survey? They already employ people to update and maintain the website. This effort would be minimal. They have named the other modules, with or without a survey, no extra cost there. I think it has been a very good publicity vehicle for NASA for what seems to be minimal cost.
The road to hell may be paved with many things, but a silly name I am certain is not one of them. Humans are silly beings, at times, and it is no bad thing to inject a bit of it into any aspect of life.
And I meant to add that, thanks to this contest that you see as a good thing, the module is apparently going to be named "Colbert". The contest itself was turned into a joke, as Joe pointed out in his blog. A big waste of time and effort that lost all seriousness.
Scientific American is reporting that NASA is going to override the popular vote and go with Serenity (as Colbert says, "Like the adult diapers"). However with a surely tongue in cheek nod to the good Mr. Colbert, SA also reports that NASA may nickname one of the toilets "Colbert". patrick :)
Or, Serenity, of "Firefly" fame. Now I feel that the toilet deserves better treatment. Instead, just re-name the meteoric waste packages that are ejected from the toilet "Colberts". On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Patrick Wiggins <paw@wirelessbeehive.com>wrote:
Scientific American is reporting that NASA is going to override the popular vote and go with Serenity (as Colbert says, "Like the adult diapers").
However with a surely tongue in cheek nod to the good Mr. Colbert, SA also reports that NASA may nickname one of the toilets "Colbert".
I think it would be more fitting for the astronauts to just say it is time to take a "Colbert". ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Hards" <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:32 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Space Station node may get awful name
Or, Serenity, of "Firefly" fame.
Now I feel that the toilet deserves better treatment. Instead, just re-name the meteoric waste packages that are ejected from the toilet "Colberts".
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Patrick Wiggins <paw@wirelessbeehive.com>wrote:
Scientific American is reporting that NASA is going to override the popular vote and go with Serenity (as Colbert says, "Like the adult diapers").
However with a surely tongue in cheek nod to the good Mr. Colbert, SA also reports that NASA may nickname one of the toilets "Colbert".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
Colbert got more votes than many sitting US Senators (450,000)
Scientific American is reporting that NASA is going to override the
popular vote and go with Serenity (as Colbert says, "Like the adult diapers").
However with a surely tongue in cheek nod to the good Mr. Colbert, SA also reports that NASA may nickname one of the toilets "Colbert".
patrick :)
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
participants (7)
-
Canopus56 -
Chuck Hards -
erikhansen＠TheBlueZone.net -
Joe Bauman -
Jon Christensen -
Patrick Wiggins -
Rodger C. Fry