APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Comments and questions about the APOD on the main view screen.
Boomer12k
:---[===] *
Posts: 2089
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:07 am

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Boomer12k » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:23 pm

Knight of Clear Skies wrote:Mystery solved. There is a short video here which shows lots of insects flying through the shot, and a fine selection of images before and after totality.


And yet... the none of the shots are THIS shot... he is too far left... they would have had to change camera placement to do it... which they may well have done, but some show him before, during, and after the "diamond ring" effect...

It still makes you wonder....

:---[===] *

barneywolff

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby barneywolff » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:25 pm

Without claiming that the pic is faked, I am confused by the location of the diamond ring effect. Can somebody who is better informed about the precise geometry explain it. I understand that Smith Rock is toward the south border of the totality zone, but still, how did that make the "diamond ring" appear where it does in the photo?

User avatar
BobStein-VisiBone
Ensign
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 7:34 am
Location: Lyme, NH

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby BobStein-VisiBone » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:32 pm

barneywolff wrote:I understand that Smith Rock is toward the south border of the totality zone, but still, how did that make the "diamond ring" appear where it does in the photo?


Oh good angle on this question, haha pun intended. Simply by moving laterally one could "put" the diamond ring at any position on the clock.

Just imagine the eclipse paused for a moment, that the circular umbra, the area of totality, were stopped on the ground. Then simply by walking around that circle, the edge of totality, one would see the diamond ring likewise walk 360 degrees around the sun.

Or imagine the umbra was 1 foot in diameter. Then one could easily move their head in a circle and make the diamond ring appear to move in a circle around the sun.

Conclusion: The orientation of the diamond ring is - by itself - no clue as to where along the track you are.
Last edited by BobStein-VisiBone on Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Elias Chasiotis
Ensign
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:59 am

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Elias Chasiotis » Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:11 am

For those who still doubt that the photo is a single shot: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YLiqrwjIPIQ

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8640
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby geckzilla » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:40 pm

Elias Chasiotis wrote:For those who still doubt that the photo is a single shot: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YLiqrwjIPIQ

I'm not sure that would prove anything to the doubters. I don't doubt it, myself. Some people I think know a little too much to accept photos at face value, but not quite enough to tell the difference when it's actually a well-executed, rarely, or never-before seen photo.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13273
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Chris Peterson » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:50 pm

geckzilla wrote:
Elias Chasiotis wrote:For those who still doubt that the photo is a single shot: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YLiqrwjIPIQ

I'm not sure that would prove anything to the doubters. I don't doubt it, myself. Some people I think know a little too much to accept photos at face value, but not quite enough to tell the difference when it's actually a well-executed, rarely, or never-before seen photo.

We have pictures of humans walking on the Moon, and there are still people who don't believe it!
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8640
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby geckzilla » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:57 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
geckzilla wrote:
Elias Chasiotis wrote:For those who still doubt that the photo is a single shot: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YLiqrwjIPIQ

I'm not sure that would prove anything to the doubters. I don't doubt it, myself. Some people I think know a little too much to accept photos at face value, but not quite enough to tell the difference when it's actually a well-executed, rarely, or never-before seen photo.

We have pictures of humans walking on the Moon, and there are still people who don't believe it!

To be fair, most of those people probably have different motivations, and that is an important distinction.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13273
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Chris Peterson » Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:59 pm

geckzilla wrote:
Chris Peterson wrote:
geckzilla wrote:I'm not sure that would prove anything to the doubters. I don't doubt it, myself. Some people I think know a little too much to accept photos at face value, but not quite enough to tell the difference when it's actually a well-executed, rarely, or never-before seen photo.

We have pictures of humans walking on the Moon, and there are still people who don't believe it!

To be fair, most of those people probably have different motivations, and that is an important distinction.

Yes, different motivations. But they are all operating with the same epistemological defect, a refusal to accept convincing photographic evidence if it conflicts with their existing biases.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
rstevenson
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Posts: 2440
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: Dartmouth, NS, Canada

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby rstevenson » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:35 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:... Yes, different motivations. But they are all operating with the same epistemological defect, a refusal to accept convincing photographic evidence if it conflicts with their existing biases.

Apropos of which...

Bizarro, trust media.jpg

Rob
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

bobFranke
Asternaut
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 4:00 am

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby bobFranke » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:43 pm

bobFranke wrote:That's a beautiful shot. But good grief, man!

With all the involved planning, why not take the extra five or 10 minutes to touch up the dust bunnies that are sooo distracting.


Well, I guess the "dust bunnies" should stay. :-}

Confused
Ensign
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:50 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Confused » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:42 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:Yes, different motivations. But they are all operating with the same epistemological defect, a refusal to accept convincing photographic evidence if it conflicts with their existing biases.

Something like "climate-change doubters"? And the fact that water definitely exists on Mars? Science is evolving and it is no longer necessary to have clear and convincing evidence of the truth.

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13273
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: The Climber and the Eclipse (2017 Sep 06)

Postby Chris Peterson » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:49 pm

Confused wrote:
Chris Peterson wrote:Yes, different motivations. But they are all operating with the same epistemological defect, a refusal to accept convincing photographic evidence if it conflicts with their existing biases.

Something like "climate-change doubters"? And the fact that water definitely exists on Mars? Science is evolving and it is no longer necessary to have clear and convincing evidence of the truth.

It was never necessary to have "clear and convincing evidence". But it is silly to not have a high degree of confidence in anything which actually is supported by such evidence. Just as it is silly to have a high degree of confidence in anything that isn't.

What we "believe" should be weighed by the amount and quality of supporting evidence.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com


Return to “The Bridge: Discuss an Astronomy Picture of the Day”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Sogou [Spider] and 3 guests