APOD: Lick Observatory Moonrise (2008 Dec 12)

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: APOD: Lick Observatory Moonrise (2008 Dec 12)

Re: APOD: Lick Observatory Moonrise (2008 Dec 12)

by XB70man » Sat Mar 28, 2020 5:32 pm

I just saw this thread after almost 12 years!

I am the photographer.

Your analysis is quite good - at lease the last in the post.

Exact coordinates of the camera were -- 37.2629, -121.9953 at Marshall Lane School in Saratoga, CA 20.14 miles away from the Lick main buildings.

GOOD JOB!

Can someone figure out where I was for the better photo taken at: https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap120310.html ???


Rick Baldridge
Campbell, CA
rickbaldridge (at) comcast [dot] net

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by dull dave » Sun Dec 14, 2008 1:05 am

Thanks to everyone for such great replies! I love it when I ask a good question.....I'm better at that than I am at answering them :|

dull dave

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by neufer » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:24 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
neufer wrote:The time is probably the most accurately defined item:

1) At a distance of ~ 21.21 miles the moon was ~ 300 ft
over Lick Observatory at 17:26 PT Oct 14, 2008

This places the moon at an Azimuth of 106° (ESE)...
How did you derive this azimuth?

Code: Select all

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Solar

Solar System: Wed 2008 Oct 15 1:26 UT
(Solar System: Tue 2008 Oct 14 17:26 PT)

              Right                   Distance    From 37°25'35"N 122°0'43"W:
            Ascension    Declination      (AU)   Altitude Azimuth
Sun         13h 21m 34s    -8° 35.5'     0.997     0.244   78.967 Up
Moon         1h 25m 53s   +14°  4.7'   58.3 ER     2.306 -106.007 Up
[/b]
-------------------------------------
Chris Peterson wrote: By my reckoning, at that time, from Mt Hamilton, the Moon's azimuth was 74.3°. That also makes sense to me- I often take pictures of the full Moon rising behind Pikes Peak, and I know that in October the Moon rises north of east.
You are quite right...I guess I was having a senior moment.
The -106° above is precisely your 74° . :oops:
Chris Peterson wrote:That would place the photographer on a bearing of 254.3°, which if we use your adjusted distance of 21.2 miles would mean Saratoga, just NW of Los Gatos. Perhaps around N37.25878 W122.01293, without being too precise <g>. It also seems that the observatory structure itself is imaged from south of west.
Well...so much for forensic photography for me; but it was fun while it lasted. :)

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:09 pm

neufer wrote:1) At a distance of ~ 21.21 miles the moon was ~ 300 ft
over Lick Observatory at 17:26 PT Oct 14, 2008

This places the moon at an Azimuth of 106° (ESE)
I see what's going on. The Fourmilab site is using a non-standard definition of azimuth (rather, they're using an obsolete astronomical definition that uses south as the origin). Their value isn't 106°, it is -106°, which is a true azimuth of 74°. As we would expect for October, the Moon is rising north of east.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Indigo_Sunrise » Sat Dec 13, 2008 9:26 pm

Chris Peterson, et al.,
I didn't mean to say the distance wasn't accurate, just meaning that the image was amazing, considering the distance. Apologies for not being more clear.

And to my very untrained eye, I still think there is some believablity to the whole 'moon illusion' optical illusion thing. It appears that way to my ol' eyes, anyway........

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:55 pm

apodman wrote:Hedonism and indulgence everywhere.
And there ain't nothing like a hedonistic physicist!

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by apodman » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:34 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
apodman wrote:How much fun can you have with an un-timed test?
Plenty.
Bill Kerchen (for Commander Cody) wrote:I ain't never had too much fun.
Daryle Singletary wrote:I ain't never had too much fun.
Hedonism and indulgence everywhere.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:16 pm

apodman wrote:How much fun can you have with an un-timed test?
Plenty.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:14 pm

neufer wrote:The time is probably the most accurately defined item:

1) At a distance of ~ 21.21 miles the moon was ~ 300 ft
over Lick Observatory at 17:26 PT Oct 14, 2008

This places the moon at an Azimuth of 106° (ESE)...
How did you derive this azimuth? By my reckoning, at that time, from Mt Hamilton, the Moon's azimuth was 74.3°. That also makes sense to me- I often take pictures of the full Moon rising behind Pikes Peak, and I know that in October the Moon rises north of east.

That would place the photographer on a bearing of 254.3°, which if we use your adjusted distance of 21.2 miles would mean Saratoga, just NW of Los Gatos. Perhaps around N37.25878 W122.01293, without being too precise <g>. It also seems that the observatory structure itself is imaged from south of west.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by apodman » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:30 pm

How much fun can you have with an un-timed test?

How much more forensics are y'all going to do before you just ask the photographer where he was standing and see how close you came?

I want to know. I'd ask him myself, but I don't want to cut your fun short and give away the ending.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by neufer » Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:13 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
neufer wrote:The full moon on Wed 2008 Oct 15 1:30 UT (Tues 2008 Oct 14 17:30 PT)
was at a distance of 58.3 ER = 106.78 x the moon's diameter.

75 x 14 x 106.78 / 5280 = 21.23 miles

Ortega Park in Sunnyvale is almost exactly 21.23 miles due west of the Lick Observatory
However, on 2008 Oct 14, the Moon rose at an azimuth of 66°, so the bearing of the photographer would have been 246°, not 270° (due west). Given your distance, that would put him in the hills on the southwest side of Los Gatos.

(BTW, what we're engaged in here is called forensic astronomy; if you're good, you can command excellent fees as an expert witness.)
I'm trying my best, Chris. :)
------------------------------------------------
The time is probably the most accurately defined item:

1) At a distance of ~ 21.21 miles the moon was ~ 300 ft
over Lick Observatory at 17:26 PT Oct 14, 2008

This places the moon at an Azimuth of 106° (ESE)
which is good since that's about the angle of
the valley road leading up to Lick Observatory
(down which San Jose is seen in:)
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050630.html

It is also good because at a horizontal distance of 21.21± 0.5 miles
the photographer is smack dab in the center of a sewage treatment plant
with just about only one possible DRY place to stand:

A sewer treatment causeway at: 37.4257N, 122.0127W
Lick Observatory : 37.3414N,121.643W

Using Google map: ( 37.4257,-122.0127 & 37.3414,-121.643)
-------------------------------------------
Great Circle Calculator results:
http://williams.best.vwh.net/gccalc.htm

Azimuth: 106.008
horizontal distance: 111603 ft
line of sight distance: 111693 ft

Moon to Lick Observatory dome ratio: 13.95 vs. Chris's measured 14.0
-------------------------------------
Solar System results:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Solar

Solar System: Wed 2008 Oct 15 1:26 UT
(Solar System: Tue 2008 Oct 14 17:26 PT)

Right Distance From 37°25'35"N 122°0'43"W:
Ascension Declination (AU) Altitude Azimuth
Sun 13h 21m 34s -8° 35.5' 0.997 0.244 78.967 Up
Moon 1h 25m 53s +14° 4.7' 58.3 ER 2.306 -106.007 Up
-------------------------------------

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by orin stepanek » Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:52 pm

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:42 am

neufer wrote:The full moon on Wed 2008 Oct 15 1:30 UT (Tues 2008 Oct 14 17:30 PT)
was at a distance of 58.3 ER = 106.78 x the moon's diameter.

75 x 14 x 106.78 / 5280 = 21.23 miles

Ortega Park in Sunnyvale is almost exactly 21.23 miles due west of the Lick Observatory
However, on 2008 Oct 14, the Moon rose at an azimuth of 66°, so the bearing of the photographer would have been 246°, not 270° (due west). Given your distance, that would put him in the hills on the southwest side of Los Gatos.

(BTW, what we're engaged in here is called forensic astronomy; if you're good, you can command excellent fees as an expert witness.)

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by neufer » Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:20 am

Chris Peterson wrote:
dull dave wrote:For the moon to appear so large and the observatory to be so small, how far away from the observatory did the photographer have to be?
I measure the 75' dome to be 1/14 the size of the Moon. That means it is subtending 0.035 degrees, and the distance to the photographer must be about 23 miles. That puts him on the west side of San Jose. Pretty remarkable to look horizontally across an entire city and not see more distortion from air currents.
The full moon on Wed 2008 Oct 15 1:30 UT (Tues 2008 Oct 14 17:30 PT)
was at a distance of 58.3 ER = 106.78 x the moon's diameter.

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Solar

75 x 14 x 106.78 / 5280 = 21.23 miles

Ortega Park in Sunnyvale is almost exactly
21.23 miles due west of the Lick Observatory

Does 55 Cancri really look like the Moon?

by neufer » Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:30 pm

--------------------------------------
Does 55 Cancri really look like the Moon?
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040901.html

<<Explanation: Is our Solar System unique? The discovery of a Neptune-mass planet in an sub-Mercury orbit around nearby Sun-like star 55 Cancri, announced yesterday along with the discovery of other similar systems, gives a new indication that planetary systems as complex as our own Solar System likely exist elsewhere. The planet, discovered in data from the Hobby-Eberly telescope in Texas, the Lick Observatory in California, and the orbiting Hubble Space Telescope, is one of four planets now known to orbit 55 Cancri -- the others being similar in mass to Jupiter. The finding involved noting subtle changes in the speed of the star caused by its orbiting planets. The above drawing depicts what this planet might look like, assuming a mass similar to Neptune, but a composition similar to Earth. The star 55 Cancri, only 40 light-years distant, is visible with binoculars towards the constellation of Cancer.>>
--------------------------------------
Do you know the way to San Jose?
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050630.html
-----------------------------------------
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020614.html
-------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/55_Cancri

<<55 Cancri, also catalogued Rho1 Cancri or abbreviated 55 Cnc, is a binary star approximately 41 light-years away in the constellation of Cancer. The system consists of a yellow dwarf star and a smaller red dwarf star, separated by over 1,000 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun.

As of 2007, five extrasolar planets have been confirmed to be orbiting the primary, 55 Cancri A (the yellow dwarf). The innermost planet is thought to be a terrestrial "super-Earth" planet, with a mass similar to Neptune, while the outermost planets are thought to be Jovian planets with masses similar to Jupiter. The 55 Cancri system is as of September 2008 the only planetary system known to have five planets, and may possibly have more. 55 Cancri A is ranked 63rd in the list of top 100 target stars for the NASA Terrestrial Planet Finder mission.

With five planets, the system cannot deviate far from coplanar in order to maintain stability. More planets are possible within the stable zone, between f and d at 0.9 to 3.8 AU with eccentricities below 0.4. Given hypothetical planet g of up to 50 Earth mass, stable mean motion resonance regions lie at 3f:2g, 2g:1d, and 3g:2d. As for the space outside d's orbit, its stability zone begins beyond 10 AU.

In 2008, astronomers investigated if the distances of the planets in this system fit a mathematical relationship, similar to the Titius-Bode law that was once proposed for our own solar system. A relationship was found and used to predict the existence of two additional planets: one between the orbits of planets f and d at a distance of ~2.0 AU (which would have an orbital period of ~1130 days), and one beyond the orbit of d at ~15 AU, which would have an orbital period of ~62 years. As yet, there is no evidence for the existence of these postulated planets.

[~15.000 AU]
. 05.900 AU
[~02.00 AU]
. 00.780 AU
. 00.240 AU
. 00.115 AU
. 00.038 AU

There was a METI message sent to 55 Cancri. It was transmitted from Eurasia's largest radar – 70-meter Eupatoria Planetary Radar. The message was named Cosmic Call 2, it was sent on July 6, 2003, and it will arrive at 55 Cancri in May 2044.

Image>>
-----------------------------------------
http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/55cnc.html

55 Cancri
Image

<<The circle shows the location of the class G star 55 Cancri (in the constellation Cancer), also known as Rho-1 Cancri (the "55" a Flamsteed number). The circle is actually centered on two stars that are not separated at the photo's resolution. The eastern one is 55 Cancri, the western 53 Cancri. (The bright body is our own Jupiter, which was passing through Cancer when the picture was taken.) Five planets are now known to orbit 55 Cancri (Cnc), making it appear rather like our own Solar System. In addition, the star has a distant red dwarf companion.

THE PLANETS

The planets are labelled "b" through "f" (where "A" is the star) in order of discovery. Farthest out, at 5.9 Astronomical Units (AU) from the star, is the most massive, 55 Cnc-d, which is at least 3.8 times the mass of Jupiter and takes 14.2 years to orbit. The other four are much closer and less massive. Next closest in order are 55 Cnc f, c, b, and e with minimum masses of 0.14, 0.17, 0.82, 0.034 Jupiters, orbital radii of 0.78, 0.24, 0.115, 0.038 AU, and periods of 260, 44.3, 14.7, and 2.82 days. 55 Cnc-e has the smallest measured minimum mass, only that of 11 Earths, about 2/3 or that of Uranus or Neptune. It is also closest to its parent star, its orbit just 10 percent the size of that of Mercury.

THE STAR

55 Cancri is a mid-sixth magnitude star (magnitude 5.95) class G (G8) dwarf 41 years away. A bit cooler (5280 Kelvin) and carrying just under a solar mass, it shines at just 58 percent of the luminosity of the Sun, its radius 0.9 solar. Like most stars with planets, 55 Cnc is rich in metals, its iron content (relative to hydrogen) quite high, twice that of the Sun. 55 Cancri is also a double star . Moving along with it through space is a dim 13th magnitude (13.7) class M red dwarf (probably M6) that is at least 1040 AU away and takes at least 30,000 years to orbit. From 55 Cancri's planets, the neighbor would shine somewhat dimmer than Venus at her maximum as seen from Earth.>>
--------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/55_Cancri
.
<<The 55 Cancri system is located fairly close to our solar system: the Hipparcos astrometry satellite measured the parallax of 55 Cancri A as 79.80 milliarcseconds, corresponding to a distance of 12.5 parsecs (40.9 light years). 55 Cancri A has an apparent magnitude of 5.95, making it visible through binoculars. It is just visible to the naked eye under very dark skies. The red dwarf 55 Cancri B is of the 13th magnitude and only visible through a telescope.
.
The primary star 55 Cancri A is a yellow dwarf star of main sequence spectral type G8V. It is smaller in radius and slightly less massive than our Sun, and so is cooler and less luminous. The star has little or no variability and only low emission from its chromosphere. 55 Cancri A is more enriched than our sun in elements heavier than helium, with 186% the solar abundance of iron; it is therefore classified as a rare "super metal-rich" (SMR) star. This abundance of metal makes estimating the star's age and mass difficult, as evolutionary models are less well defined for such stars. One estimate based on chromospheric activity suggests an age of around 5,500 million years.

Observation of 55 Cancri A in the submillimeter region of the spectrum have thus far failed to detect any associated dust. The upper limit on emissions within 100 AU of this star is about 850 mJy, at a wavelength of 850 μm. This limits the total mass of fine dust around the star to less than 0.01% of the Earth's mass. Of course, this does not exclude the existence of an asteroid belt or a Kuiper belt equivalent.

55 Cancri B is a red dwarf star located at an estimated distance of 1065 AU from the primary star, and is much less massive and luminous than our Sun. Despite their wide separation, the two stars appear to be gravitationally bound, as they share a common proper motion. There are indications that component B may itself be a double star, though this is by no means certain.>>
--------------------------------------

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by apodman » Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:50 pm

The telephoto lens increases magnification and narrows the field of view. The benefit is using your photographic resolution on the subject rather than spreading it over the surrounding scenery. Quite necessary for a shot as long as this.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by neufer » Fri Dec 12, 2008 4:44 pm

Indigo_Sunrise wrote:30 Km...? That's pretty far away. Not saying you're wrong, art,
Actually, it is probably closer to Chris's 20 miles (=32 km) than my 30 km
since I was misreading that the moon was at perigee in this photo
(but that is not necessarily the case here).
Indigo_Sunrise wrote: just sayin'.

I think it's more likely one of those Moon Illusion things that we read about here from time to time. Or maybe using a telephoto lens adds to it, as in this beautiful image.
The moon appears big to us in this photo
BOTH because of the Moon Illusion and a telephoto lens
but neither affects the actual calculation of the distance.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:51 pm

Indigo_Sunrise wrote:30 Km...? That's pretty far away. Not saying you're wrong, art, just sayin'.

I think it's more likely one of those Moon Illusion things that we read about here from time to time.
Nope. The Moon illusion is purely an eye/brain thing, that fails completely under measurement (even so simple a measurement as comparing the low and high Moon sizes to your fingernail). This distance comes from measuring the relative size of the Moon and dome, and no illusion can change the simple math.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Indigo_Sunrise » Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:41 pm

30 Km...? That's pretty far away. Not saying you're wrong, art, just sayin'.

I think it's more likely one of those Moon Illusion things that we read about here from time to time. Or maybe using a telephoto lens adds to it, as in this beautiful image.

But what do I know...? It's a great image, however it was done!

Happy skygazing! :D

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by Chris Peterson » Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:41 pm

dull dave wrote:For the moon to appear so large and the observatory to be so small, how far away from the observatory did the photographer have to be?
I measure the 75' dome to be 1/14 the size of the Moon. That means it is subtending 0.035 degrees, and the distance to the photographer must be about 23 miles. That puts him on the west side of San Jose. Pretty remarkable to look horizontally across an entire city and not see more distortion from air currents.

Re: Lick observatory moonrise (December 12 '08)

by neufer » Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:19 pm

dull dave wrote:For the moon to appear so large and the observatory to be so small, how far away from the observatory did the photographer have to be? :?:
Google maps (satellite) would indicate that this picture is taken from due west of the original James Lick Telescope building which has north-south dimensions of ~ 75 meters.

The moon subtends and angle of about 0.01 radians (at Perigee)
and appears here ~4 times wider than the (north-south) building.

30,000 = 4 x 75 / 0.01

So one must be about 30 kilometers away in San Jose
(; and close to where my son Dr. Stephen Neuendorffer lives).
----------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lick ... _Telescope

<<The James Lick Telescope is an antique refracting 36 inch (91.44 cm) telescope built in 1889 that can still be viewed through today. Also called the "Great Lick Refractor" or simply "Lick Refractor", it is the third-largest refracting telescope in the world, surpassed by the Yerkes Observatory 40-inch and the 1 meter Swedish Solar Telescope. It is located at the University of California's Lick Observatory atop Mount Hamilton at an altitude of 4,209 feet (1,283 m) above sea-level. The telescope is housed inside a dome which is powered by hydraulics to raise and lower the floor, rotate the dome, and drive the clock mechanism to track the earth's rotation. The original hydraulic system still operates today, with the exception that the original wind-powered pumps to fill the reservoirs have been replaced with electric pumps. James Lick is himself entombed below the telescope's observing room's floor.>>
..............................................
[Another Hubble Telescope fiasco: :roll: ]

<<The telescope was the largest refractor until the 1897 construction of the Yerkes telescope, and the second largest up until 2002. The fabrication of the objective lens, a two element achromat, the largest lens ever made at the time, caused years of delay. The famous large telescope maker Alvan Clark was in charge of the optical design. He gave the contract for casting the high quality optical glass blanks, of a size never before attempted, to the firm of Charles Feil in Paris. One of the huge glass disks broke during shipping, and making a replacement was delayed. Finally, after 18 failed attempts, the lens was finished, transported safely across country, and on 1888-12-31 was carefully installed in the telescope tube. The builders had to wait for 3 days for a break in the clouds to test it. On the evening of January 3 the telescope saw 'first light' - and they found that the instrument couldn't be focused. An error in the estimate of the lens' focal length caused the tube to be built too long. A hacksaw was sent for, the great tube was unceremoniously cut back to the proper length, and the star Aldebaran came into focus.>>
----------------------------------------
<<These are some of the discoveries made with the Lick telescope:

1. Amalthea, the fifth satellite of Jupiter was discovered in September, 1892. It revolves around the planet once in 11h 57m 22.6s, and is probably about 100 miles in diameter. It is so difficult of observation that, besides members of the Lick Observatory staff, probably not more than twenty persons have seen it.

2. The speed of the planetary nebulae in their motions through space is of the same order of magnitude as the speed of the stars.

3. Twenty-five comets - 17 unexpected and 8 periodic - have been discovered.

4. The unequaled Lick series of comet photographs has taught us more as to the structure, formation, and dissolution of comets' tails than had been learned in all previous time.

5. About 1300 new double stars have been discovered.

6. The period of revolution of the double star delta Equulei has been shown to be 53/4 years, the shortest period previously known for any double star being 11.4 years. It is therefore in many ways the most interesting double star under observation.

7. Spectroscopic observations have shown that the atmosphere of Mars is of low density - probably much less dense at the surface of Mars than the Earth's atmosphere at the summit of the highest peak in the Himalayas.

8. The speed of the Solar System in its motion through space has been determined by means of the spectroscope to be 121/2 miles per second.

9. The average speed of the brighter stars is 21 miles per second.

10. The North Polar Star was found to be a triple star, in 1899, by means of spectroscopic observations. Two of its members are invisible in our largest telescopes. The bright star and one dark companion revolve around each other in four days; and these in turn revolve around the other dark body in several years.

11. Capella was discovered, in 1899, to be a spectroscopic binary star, period 104 days, the two nearly equal components being inseparable in our largest telescopes.

12. About 40 spectroscopic binaries - that is, stars seen single in ordinary telescopes, but proven to be double by means of the spectroscope - were discovered in 1898-1902. At least one star in seven has an invisible component, observable thus far only by spectroscopic means.

13. The Observatory possesses an unequaled series of photographs of the principal nebulae and star clusters.

14. About 10,000 nebulae have been discovered in the past at the various observatories; but the Lick photographs show that fully 100,000 nebulae await discovery. These photographs led to the unexpected discovery that the majority of the nebulae have a spiral form - undoubted evidence of their rotation.

15. The Observatory has an extensive set of large-scale photographs of the Solar Corona, secured at four total eclipses. They recorded for the first time the wonderful structure of the inner corona, and furnished invaluable evidence bearing upon the question of the origin of the coronal streamers.

16. Expeditions from the Lick Observatory successfully observed the following total Solar Eclipses: 1889, in Northern California; 1889, in French Guiana; 1893, in Chili; 1898, in India; 1900, in Georgia; and 1901, in Sumatra.

17. The light of the inner portion of the Solar Corona is largely inherent, whereas the light of the outer portion is largely reflected sunlight, as proven at the Sumatra eclipse by means of spectroscopic and polariscopic observations.

18. It has been shown that the principal "New Stars" have been converted into nebulae.

19. The extraordinary motion in the nebula surrounding Nova Persei was discovered from the photograph of November 7–8, 1901.

20. Many thousands of very accurate positions of stars have been secured with the Meridian Circle.

21. Very extensive and accurate observations of Double Stars, Comets, Planets, etc., have been made.

22. Very extensive additions have been made to our knowledge of the spectra of Nebulae, of Comets, of New Stars, of Bright-Line Stars, etc.

23. The speeds in the line of sight of about four hundred of the brighter stars in the northern sky have been measured by means of the spectroscope. The results for the various stars lie between the limits of sixty miles approach and sixty miles recession per second. A well-equipped expedition, provided for by Mr. D. O. Mills, will be sent from the Lick Observatory in the summer of 1902 to the vicinity of Santiago, Chili, for the purpose of determining the speeds of the brighter stars in the southern hemisphere of the sky.>>
---------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lick

<<James Lick was born in Stumpstown (now Fredericksburg) Pennsylvania on August 25, 1796. The son of a carpenter, Lick began learning the craft at an early age. When he was twenty one, after a failed romance with Barbara Snavely, Lick left Stumpstown for Baltimore, Maryland, where he learned the art of piano making. He quickly mastered the skill, and moved to New York and set up his own shop. In 1821 Lick moved to Argentina, after learning that his pianos were being exported to South America.
.
Lick found his time in Buenos Aires to be difficult, due to his ignorance of Spanish and the turbulent political situation in the country. However, his business thrived and in 1825 Lick left Argentina to tour Europe for a year. On his return trip, his ship was captured by the Portuguese, and the passengers and crew were taken to Montevideo as prisoners of war. Lick escaped captivity and returned to Buenos Aires on foot.
.
In 1832, Lick decided to return to Stumpstown. He failed to reunite with Barbara Snavely and their son and returned to Buenos Aires. He decided the political situation was too unstable and moved to Valparaíso, Chile. After four years, he again moved his business, this time to Lima, Peru.
.
In 1846, Lick decided to return to North America and, anticipating the Mexican-American War and the future annexation of California, he decided to settle there. However, a backlog of orders for his pianos delayed him an additional 18 months, as the Mexican workers he employed left to return to their homes and join the Mexican Army following the outbreak of war in April of that year; he finished the orders himself.
.
Lick arrived in San Francisco, California, in January 1848, bringing with him his tools, work bench, $30,000 in gold, and 600 pounds (300 kg) of chocolate. The chocolate quickly sold, and Lick convinced his neighbor in Peru, the confectioner Domingo Ghirardelli, to move to San Francisco, where he founded the Ghirardelli Chocolate Company.
.
Upon his arrival, Lick began buying real estate in the small village of San Francisco. The discovery of gold at Sutter's Mill near Sacramento a few days after Lick's arrival in the future state began the California Gold Rush and created a housing boom in San Francisco, which grew from about one thousand residents in 1848 to over twenty thousand by 1850. Lick himself got a touch of "gold fever" and went out to mine the metal, but after a week he decided his fortune was to be made by owning land, not digging in it. Lick continued buying land in San Francisco, and also began buying farmland in and around San Jose, where he planted orchards and built the largest flour mill in the state to feed the growing population in San Francisco.
.
In 1861, Lick began construction of a hotel, which became known as Lick House, at the intersection of Montgomery and Sutter Streets in San Francisco. The hotel had a dining room that could seat 400, based on a similar room at the palace of Versailles. Lick House was considered the finest hotel west of the Mississippi River. The hotel was destroyed in the fire following the San Francisco earthquake of 1906.
.
Following the construction, Lick returned to his San Jose orchards. In 1874, Lick suffered a massive stroke in the kitchen of his home in Santa Clara. The following morning, he was found by his employee, Thomas Fraser, and taken to Lick House, where he could be better cared for. At the time of his illness, his estates, outside his considerable area in Santa Clara County and San Francisco, included large holdings around Lake Tahoe, a large ranch in Los Angeles County, and all of Santa Catalina Island. James Lick was the richest man in California.
.
In the next three years, Lick spent his time determining how to dispense with his fortune. He originally wanted to build giant statues of himself and his parents, and erect a pyramid larger than the Great Pyramid of Giza in his own honor in Downtown San Francisco. However, through the efforts of George Davidson, President of the California Academy of Sciences, Lick was persuaded to leave the greatest portion of his fortune to the establishment of a mountain top observatory, with the largest, most powerful telescope yet built by man. Lick had had an interest in astronomy since at least 1860, when he and George Madeira, the founder of the first observatory in California, spent several nights observing. They had also met again in 1873 and Lick said that Madeira's telescopes were the only ones he had ever used. In 1875, Thomas Fraser recommended a site at the summit of Mount Hamilton, near San Jose. Lick approved, on the condition that Santa Clara County build a "first class" road to the site. The county agreed and the hand built road was completed by the fall of 1876.
.
On October 1, 1876, Lick died in his room in Lick House, San Francisco. In 1887, his body was moved to its final resting place, under the future home of the Great Lick Refracting Telescope.>>
----------------------------

APOD: Lick Observatory Moonrise (2008 Dec 12)

by dull dave » Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:27 pm

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap081212.html

For the moon to appear so large and the observatory to be so small, how far away from the observatory did the photographer have to be? :?:

thanks,
dull dave :?:

Top