APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

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: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by orin stepanek » Fri Jul 02, 2010 9:49 pm

Image
Jean Luc Sweedish :?:

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by DavidLeodis » Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:58 pm

I've just used the "southern lights" link and I found that it is currently -72C at the South Pole. Brrrr that's cold!

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Ann » Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:10 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
Ann wrote:Krsfru gbrå grääähngf brifii!
Klingon with a Swedish accent?
Klingons are descended from Sweden, didn't you know that, Chris?

Ann

P.S. No, sorry, I mixed that up. I mean that the Borg is/are descended from Sweden.

Image

Gxtraaahhh kh-kh-kh jeeebrdjstr Borg. (My name is Borg.)

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Chris Peterson » Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:45 pm

Ann wrote:Krsfru gbrå grääähngf brifii!
Klingon with a Swedish accent?

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by neufer » Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:15 pm

Ann wrote:
Krsfru gbrå grääähngf brifii!
Gkrraaa brrlrll gakaka Borg.
Image

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Ann » Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:20 pm

Thanks for the English lesson, Ann.... 15-love
Krsfru gbrå grääähngf brifii! (Game, set and match!)

Image

Gkrraaa brrlrll gakaka Borg. Björn Borg. (My name is Borg. Bjorn Borg.)

Ann

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by neufer » Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:07 am

Ann wrote:To me, Otto's post sounds perfectly correct. The sentence he used is an example of a contracted sentence, where parts of a clause which would normally be included are omitted, and the reader is supposed to "fill in" the missing words for himself or herself.

It works like this: "Bored with his life, he took up gambling" is a shortened form of "Since he was bored with his life, he took up gambling".

Being a Swede, I have had to pay special attention to such contracted sentences in English, since they don't exist in Swedish.

Otto's post is a somewhat more complicated example of a contracted sentence.
  • Thanks for the English lesson, Ann.... 15-love
Click to play embedded YouTube video.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Ann » Fri Jul 02, 2010 7:26 am

To me, Otto's post sounds perfectly correct. The sentence he used is an example of a contracted sentence, where parts of a clause which would normally be included are omitted, and the reader is supposed to "fill in" the missing words for himself or herself.

It works like this: "Bored with his life, he took up gambling" is a shortened form of "Since he was bored with his life, he took up gambling".

Being a Swede, I have had to pay special attention to such contracted sentences in English, since they don't exist in Swedish.

Otto's post is a somewhat more complicated example of a contracted sentence. Otto wrote:
Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well, there known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
Otto's sentence may be "lengthened" like this:

Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well, and there they are known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.

Another way of lengthening Otto's sentence forces you to replace "there" with "where":

Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well, where they are known as the aurora borealis or northern lights..

<stepping down from the pulpit>

Ann

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by moonstruck » Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:38 am

I'm sticking with "there". There ain't er..wasn't ..nothing..er..anything wrong with it in the first place. Sheesh... :cry:

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by orin stepanek » Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:20 pm

APOD Robot wrote:Image Above Aurora Australis

Explanation: On May 29, looking southward from a vantage point about 350 kilometers above the southern Indian Ocean, astronauts onboard the International Space Station watched this enormous, green ribbon shimmering below. Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well, there known as the aurora borealis or northern lights. North or south their cause is the same though, as energetic charged particles from the magnetosphere pile into the atmosphere near the Earth's poles. To produce the characteristic greenish glow, the energetic particles excite oxygen atoms at altitudes of 100 kilometers or more. Aurora on May 29 were likely triggered by the interaction of the magnetosphere with a coronal mass ejection erupting from the Sun on May 24.
bystander wrote:
neufer wrote:If it was wrong in the first place ( :?: )
But is not at all clear that this WAS necessarily wrong in the first place:
orin stepanik wrote:As in over there in the North? :? That possible; but a bit of a confusing way to word it. :roll:
Indigo Sunrise wrote:Confusing, indeed.

Some people post just for the sake of posting, even if it's nonsensical ramblings........
Not confusing at all, nor nonsensical. I thought the same when I saw Indigo's first post. I might have used there they are, but technically there is correct and makes more sense in the sentence structure than they're.
Try reading the paragraph and leave there out completly if that is what is ment to be conveyed and that seems to be a little clearer; but that is my opinion; anyway I make plenty of my own mistakes so who am I to rag on this. :?

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by bystander » Thu Jul 01, 2010 5:49 pm

neufer wrote:If it was wrong in the first place ( :?: )
But is not at all clear that this WAS necessarily wrong in the first place:
orin stepanik wrote:As in over there in the North? :? That possible; but a bit of a confusing way to word it. :roll:
Indigo Sunrise wrote:Confusing, indeed.

Some people post just for the sake of posting, even if it's nonsensical ramblings........
Not confusing at all, nor nonsensical. I thought the same when I saw Indigo's first post. I might have used there they are, but technically there is correct and makes more sense in the sentence structure than they're.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by orin stepanek » Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:12 pm

Some nice Aurura pictures here. http://asterisk.apod.com/vie ... f=9&t=7436

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Chris Peterson » Thu Jul 01, 2010 3:30 pm

jman wrote:I've noticed some regions appear to consistently produce more frequent (and better quality) aurora borealis than others. Surprisingly the most northern of areas weren't the best ones.
Is there any science to support or explain this - or am I just crazy?
Charged particles are funneled down by the Earth's magnetic field into a band around the magnetic poles. So auroras show up best over rings of area equator-ward of the magnetic poles. On either side of this ring auroras are less active. Also, the magnetic poles are not aligned with the axial poles, so that moves the areas of auroral activity away from true north or south, as well.
pmapN.gif

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by jman » Thu Jul 01, 2010 3:04 pm

I've noticed some regions appear to consistently produce more frequent (and better quality) aurora borealis than others. Surprisingly the most northern of areas weren't the best ones.
Is there any science to support or explain this - or am I just crazy?

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by mina » Thu Jul 01, 2010 2:29 pm

What stars are behind in the picture with Aurora?

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Indigo_Sunrise » Thu Jul 01, 2010 2:14 pm

orin stepanek wrote:
neufer wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:Wat to go Indigo; Hey that rhymes! I didn't even catch the error til you fixed it. 8-) nice job! :)
If it was wrong in the first place ( :?: ) then the solution should be:
  • Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
    ; there they're known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
But is not at all clear that this WAS necessarily wrong in the first place:
Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
, there known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
As in over there in the North? :? That possible; but a bit of a confusing way to word it. :roll:

Confusing, indeed.

Some people post just for the sake of posting, even if it's nonsensical ramblings........ :blah:


And orin, you ARE the poet! 8-)

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by León » Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:49 pm

Five days of travel were required for the charged particles from the sun hit the south of the land hemisferioo. The calm green is no indication of violence of its origins, much less on the risk of damage to satellites.Cinco días de viaje fueron necesarios para que las partículas cargadas del sol impactaran en el hemisferioo sur de la tierra. El plácido color verde nada indica de la violencia de su génesis, mucho menos sobre el riesgo de daño en los satélites.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by neufer » Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:42 pm

orin stepanek wrote:
As in over there in the North? :? That possible; but a bit of a confusing way to word it. :roll:
Click to play embedded YouTube video.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by moonstruck » Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:35 pm

Oooh, the language police are lurking. I'll be afraid to post anything. So they're. :|

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Guest » Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:31 pm

Wow! That is totally amazing! Man I wish I was up there to see it from that point of view!! Perfectly beautiful! :mrgreen:



"When I see your heavens, the works of your fingers, The moon and the stars that you have prepared, What is mortal man that you keep him in mind, And the son of earthling man that you take care of him?"

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by orin stepanek » Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:19 pm

neufer wrote:
orin stepanek wrote:Wat to go Indigo; Hey that rhymes! I didn't even catch the error til you fixed it. 8-) nice job! :)
If it was wrong in the first place ( :?: ) then the solution should be:
  • Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
    ; there they're known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
But is not at all clear that this WAS necessarily wrong in the first place:
Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
, there known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
As in over there in the North? :? That possible; but a bit of a confusing way to word it. :roll:

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by neufer » Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:56 pm

orin stepanek wrote:Wat to go Indigo; Hey that rhymes! I didn't even catch the error til you fixed it. 8-) nice job! :)
If it was wrong in the first place ( :?: ) then the solution should be:
  • Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
    ; there they're known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.
But is not at all clear that this WAS necessarily wrong in the first place:
Known as aurora australis or southern lights, the shifting, luminous bands are commonly seen at high northern latitudes as well
, there known as the aurora borealis or northern lights.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by bystander » Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:45 pm

beyond wrote:According to what has been posted so far there aparently are two types of oxygen. A neutral version for green color and an Atomic one for red color.
So whats the difference(besides wavelength)between them and are there any other types of oxygen??
Atomic Oxygen (O), Molecular Oxygen (O2, what you breathe), Ozone (O3). They are all Oxygen, just different allotropes.

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by Beyond » Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:21 pm

According to what has been posted so far there aparently are two types of oxygen. A neutral version for green color and an Atomic one for red color.
So whats the difference(besides wavelength)between them and are there any other types of oxygen??

Re: APOD: Above Aurora Australis (2010 Jul 01)

by orin stepanek » Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:52 am

Wat to go Indigo; Hey that rhymes! I didn't even catch the error til you fixed it. 8-) nice job! :)
I love photos of aurora; I think they are so neat. 8-)

Top