And looking at the big picture:


Here we have a nice, comfortable G2 star. And a tidally evolved moon, which is large enough to be reasonably spherical (but still possessing interesting topography), that as seen from the earth's surface is very close to exhibiting the same angular size as that G2 star. And to put some numbers to it, the sun is 400 times larger than the moon, but the sun is also 400 times (m/l) further away.

And as the moon's orbit tidally evolved (it receded from the earth) we infer in the past it was much closer and although eclipses would have been more frequent, they would have also been much less interesting as the apparent size of the moon would have blotted out the interesting sight of the suns prominences and corona. Additionally, in the future, as the moon continues to recede eventually total eclipses will cease and they will all be annular, that is, the moon will never appear large enough to blot out the entire disk of the sun's surface.

Add all this up, a comfy planet, apparent size of sun and moon being 'close enough', orbital parameters of the moon (inclination, eccentricity, nodes, apsides, saros, etc) and we quite possibly enjoy . . .


[drum roll]


the BEST eclipses in the galaxy.


ENJOY !!!

(August 18, 2017 at 11:10 pm)Jehanne Wrote:

(August 18, 2017 at 9:29 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: And a reminder, since I keep hearing confusion on TV:

If you are in the path of totality, during totality, you don't need the eclipse glasses.

When that part is over, you will definitely know it, a very bright point will appear on the opposite side from where the last bright point disappeared before totality and then  PUT YOUR GLASSES BACK ON

If you are not in the path of totality, you will need eclipse glasses EVERY TIME YOU LOOK AT THE SUN.

Absolutely correct, although, you may look at the Sun with your naked eye when (and, only when) it is at the horizon:

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing...een-flash/

The exception, of course, is during the total phase of a solar eclipse!!!!  Sadly, there will probably be thousands of people (many of them Trump supporters and/or regular Fox News viewers) who will miss the total eclipse because they refused to take their solar glasses off.

Seen the Green Flash a few times.

Hey!  I know what.  Let's start a rumor that the WLB's face will appear on the sun at the height of the eclipse but only if you take off the globalist glasses that the media is telling you to wear?

It will sort of be a Day of the Triffids for redneck asswipes.

None of this eclipse business is gonna matter since we're all dead once that planet gets too close to us during the eclipse.

IJS...even though I don't believe a word of that shit

(August 19, 2017 at 11:21 am)vorlon13 Wrote: And looking at the big picture:


Here we have a nice, comfortable G2 star.  And a tidally evolved moon, which is large enough to be reasonably spherical (but still possessing interesting topography), that as seen from the earth's surface is very close to exhibiting the same angular size as that G2 star.  And to put some numbers to it, the sun is 400 times larger than the moon, but the sun is also 400 times (m/l) further away.

And as the moon's orbit tidally evolved (it receded from the earth) we infer in the past it was much closer and although eclipses would have been more frequent, they would have also been much less interesting as the apparent size of the moon would have blotted out the interesting sight of the suns prominences and corona.  Additionally, in the future, as the moon continues to recede eventually total eclipses will cease and they will all be annular, that is, the moon will never appear large enough to blot out the entire disk of the sun's surface.

Add all this up, a comfy planet, apparent size of sun and moon being 'close enough', orbital parameters of the moon (inclination, eccentricity, nodes, apsides, saros, etc) and we quite possibly enjoy . . .


[drum roll]


the BEST eclipses in the galaxy.


ENJOY !!!

How about reducing the inclination of the lunar orbit so he get more eclipses?

I'll be on the Oregon coast right where the umbra first touches North America near Lincoln City. My dad lives there so yay, no outrageous lodging prices. The weather forecast is a bit troublesome, though. Too late to change plans, though.

Lots of clouds predicted for tomorrow.

(August 20, 2017 at 9:32 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(August 19, 2017 at 11:21 am)vorlon13 Wrote: And looking at the big picture:


Here we have a nice, comfortable G2 star.  And a tidally evolved moon, which is large enough to be reasonably spherical (but still possessing interesting topography), that as seen from the earth's surface is very close to exhibiting the same angular size as that G2 star.  And to put some numbers to it, the sun is 400 times larger than the moon, but the sun is also 400 times (m/l) further away.

And as the moon's orbit tidally evolved (it receded from the earth) we infer in the past it was much closer and although eclipses would have been more frequent, they would have also been much less interesting as the apparent size of the moon would have blotted out the interesting sight of the suns prominences and corona.  Additionally, in the future, as the moon continues to recede eventually total eclipses will cease and they will all be annular, that is, the moon will never appear large enough to blot out the entire disk of the sun's surface.

Add all this up, a comfy planet, apparent size of sun and moon being 'close enough', orbital parameters of the moon (inclination, eccentricity, nodes, apsides, saros, etc) and we quite possibly enjoy . . .


[drum roll]


the BEST eclipses in the galaxy.


ENJOY !!!

How about reducing the inclination of the lunar orbit so he get more eclipses?

I'd assume our moon formed in or near earth's equatorial plane.  "Somehow" as it's orbit tidally evolved it's inclination to that plane 'relaxed' (my term) and the moon's orbit wound up more aligned to the ecliptic than it had been originally. 

(I think there is a reason involving tidal interactions with the sun perpendicular to it's (tiny) equatorial bulge why that happened)

So, despite the moons great distance from earth (it's really out there !) we are experiencing more eclipses than if the moon were in an equatorial orbit.

If the moon's orbit were to be made more aligned with the ecliptic, while we would get more eclipses, more of them would be in polar regions too.

I note 2018 has no total solar eclipses, but 3 'sucky' partials.  If the lunar orbit were more aligned (somehow) 2018 might then have one or two total eclipses, but there might also be 2 to 4 more partials.

And don't get me started on annular eclipses, what an effin waste of an eclipse.  I probably won't live long enough, but my farm will be in one later this century.  Won't have to go anywhere, but meh!  Who cares?  It's at sunrise too, and I'm not a morning person . . .

(August 20, 2017 at 10:18 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Lots of clouds predicted for tomorrow.

Ugh!  Where I am at it is raining with thunderstorms predicted.  But, we are leaving to go south here soon, rain or shine!!  At least we will get to see the sky get dark.

Things look pretty crappy for Nebraska tomorrow.