#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
I could mention a few other things like Supernovae, Neutron Stars (Pulsars), Cepheid Variables, but if you see if twinkling, there is no way it could be any of them because of the extraordinary distance that you are looking at and you would have to watch it for days, weeks, or months to see any significant changes. [/ QUOTE ] Is it just me, or does this come off like a name drop? Like, "oh my god look at me i know what a cepheid is"? And that last part is wrong. do you see why? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I could mention a few other things like Supernovae, Neutron Stars (Pulsars), Cepheid Variables, but if you see if twinkling, there is no way it could be any of them because of the extraordinary distance that you are looking at and you would have to watch it for days, weeks, or months to see any significant changes. [/ QUOTE ] Is it just me, or does this come off like a name drop? Like, "oh my god look at me i know what a cepheid is"? And that last part is wrong. do you see why? [/ QUOTE ] I had an Astronomy class. So Venus is a star and now you're telling me the last part is wrong. I could be wrong, but please correct me and tell me why. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
Stars don't twinkle. Venus. Ship it. [/ QUOTE ] In reality stars don't "twinkle." It is due to the dust and other things in the atmosphere that make it look that way. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Stars don't twinkle. Venus. Ship it. [/ QUOTE ] In reality stars don't "twinkle." It is due to the dust and other things in the atmosphere that make it look that way. [/ QUOTE ] You are both wrong. Just . . . stop. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Stars don't twinkle. Venus. Ship it. [/ QUOTE ] In reality stars don't "twinkle." It is due to the dust and other things in the atmosphere that make it look that way. [/ QUOTE ] You are both wrong. Just . . . stop. [/ QUOTE ] haha well, I know you know, so please tell us? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Stars don't twinkle. Venus. Ship it. [/ QUOTE ] In reality stars don't "twinkle." It is due to the dust and other things in the atmosphere that make it look that way. [/ QUOTE ] You are both wrong. Just . . . stop. [/ QUOTE ] And how am I wrong? I'm only suggesting it's Venus, btw. I certainly know a lot more about astronomy than this donk who "took an astronomy class". |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Stars don't twinkle. Venus. Ship it. [/ QUOTE ] In reality stars don't "twinkle." It is due to the dust and other things in the atmosphere that make it look that way. [/ QUOTE ] You are both wrong. Just . . . stop. [/ QUOTE ] And how am I wrong? I'm only suggesting it's Venus, btw. I certainly know a lot more about astronomy than this donk who "took an astronomy class". [/ QUOTE ] I never said I know everything. And anyways, all you're doing is coming in here and being a troll. If you're going to "know so much about astronomy," then provide some relevant material and have a civil conversation. Otherwise, keep your comments to yourself. Thanks. Merry Christmas! |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I could mention a few other things like Supernovae, Neutron Stars (Pulsars), Cepheid Variables, but if you see if twinkling, there is no way it could be any of them because of the extraordinary distance that you are looking at and you would have to watch it for days, weeks, or months to see any significant changes. [/ QUOTE ] Is it just me, or does this come off like a name drop? Like, "oh my god look at me i know what a cepheid is"? And that last part is wrong. do you see why? [/ QUOTE ] I had an Astronomy class. So Venus is a star and now you're telling me the last part is wrong. I could be wrong, but please correct me and tell me why. [/ QUOTE ] First, Venus is a planet. The reason that it would not be any of those objects is not because of the effect their large distance has on our ability to judge their variability. We still observe millisecond pulsars no problem. The reasons it would not be any of those objects is because they are either way too far away (cepheids), way too visual band dim (pulsars) or way too rare (supernova). I mean, I suppose it could be a supernova, but considering there hasn't been one that bright in hundreds of years, probably not. So the reason the last part is wrong is because distance does not affect the variability period, it affects the visual magnitude. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
[ QUOTE ]
I never said I know everything. And anyways, all you're doing is coming in here and being a troll. If you're going to "know so much about astronomy," then provide some relevant material and have a civil conversation. Otherwise, keep your comments to yourself. [/ QUOTE ] You were preaching like you knew what you were talking about, acting like an expert because you "took an astronomy class" (no doubt some hand wavy pretty pictures course). OKAY IM A RETARD. HAHAH LOl..ok i totally admit i totally donked this up. i apologize to ytou and everyone in this thread. stars twinkle planets dont LOLOLOLO..ok im officially a moran. SORRY. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A light in the sky.
Ok, had to get that apology for my EXTREME RETARDEDness out there right away. Now the explanation.
Stars twinkle because their angular diameter (cross section of the sky they take up, if you will) in the sky is such that they are subject to the debris in the atmosphere and its scattering effects. Planets do not twinkle because their size in the sky is big enough so that their image is not affected by the turbulence. Things to look up include "seeing", "scintillation" (sp?) and "adaptive optics". |
|
|