Starship Asterisk*

canesvenatici wrote:Stunning photography!
Re: our vantage point from Earth, I'm still confused on one thing: do we really see only what's around us in the Orion Spur (if that's the one) of the Milky Way? (I thought I read somewhere that the center of the MW lies in the direction of Saggitarius, which to me doesn't seem near the central band visible here in Colorado. Thanks for your patience.

canesvenatici wrote:
Re: our vantage point from Earth, I'm still confused on one thing: do we really see only what's around us in the Orion Spur (if that's the one) of the Milky Way? (I thought I read somewhere that the center of the MW lies in the direction of Sagittarius, which to me doesn't seem near the central band visible here in Colorado.

Gliese581d_bound wrote:The dictionary say an arch is an "upwardly curved construction." so, you are looking up at something that is curved.

my understanding of what today's APOD is saying is that the Milky way is made up of disks. it is like an old 45 RPM record on a turntable. the record is an arch to specific points on the spindle.

meanwhile, we look up at the center disk of the Milky way. so, we are the larger record and what we see is the 45 RPM record. We are outside of what we see in the sky. So, we are the arch to specific points on the disk that is in the sky. The third arch in the photograph is us, not the disk in the sky.

Gliese581d_bound wrote:Is this the correct answer? my understanding is that the disk where Earth resides is the arch to the central disk and not vice versa. I think the correct answer is the third arch is "our vantage point."

what we're looking at is the arch for the center of the galaxy.

How many arches can you count in the above image? If you count both spans of the Double Arch in the Arches National Park in Utah, USA, then two. But since the above image was taken during a clear dark night, it caught a photogenic third arch far in the distance -- that of the overreaching Milky Way Galaxy

APOD Robot wrote: Three Arches Above Utah

Explanation: The sandstone arches of the Double Arch were formed from the erosion of falling water. The larger arch rises over 30 meters above the surrounding salt bed and spans close to 50 meters across. The dark silhouettes across the image bottom are sandstone monoliths left over from silt-filled crevices in an evaporated 300 million year old salty sea.

wildcinders147@yahoo.com wrote:
Rangers at Arches National Park tell visitors that ARCHES are made by wind erosion and Natural Bridges are made by water..... The photo is amazing!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arches_National_Park wrote: <<Arches National Park is a U.S. National Park in eastern Utah. It is known for preserving over 2000 natural sandstone arches, including the world-famous Delicate Arch, in addition to a variety of unique geological resources and formations. The park is located just outside of Moab, Utah. Its highest elevation is 1,723 m at Elephant Butte, and its lowest elevation is 1,245 m at the visitor center. Forty-three arches have collapsed due to erosion since 1970.

The national park lies atop an underground evaporite layer or salt bed, which is the main cause of the formation of the arches, spires, balanced rocks, sandstone fins, and eroded monoliths in the area. This salt bed is thousands of feet thick in places, and was deposited in the Paradox Basin of the Colorado Plateau some 300 million years ago when a sea flowed into the region and eventually evaporated. Over millions of years, the salt bed was covered with debris eroded from the Uncompahgre Uplift to the northeast. During the Early Jurassic (about 210 Ma) desert conditions prevailed in the region and the vast Navajo Sandstone was deposited. An additional sequence of stream laid and windblown sediments, the Entrada Sandstone (about 140 Ma), was deposited on top of the Navajo. Over 5000 feet (1500 m) of younger sediments were deposited and have been mostly eroded away. Remnants of the cover exist in the area including exposures of the Cretaceous Mancos Shale. The arches of the area are developed mostly within the Entrada formation.

The weight of this cover caused the salt bed below it to liquefy and thrust up layers of rock into salt domes. The evaporites of the area formed more unusual salt anticlines or linear regions of uplift. Faulting occurred and whole sections of rock subsided into the areas between the domes. In some places, they turned almost on edge. The result of one such 2,500-foot (760 m) displacement, the Moab Fault, is seen from the visitor center.

As this subsurface movement of salt shaped the landscape, erosion removed the younger rock layers from the surface. Except for isolated remnants, the major formations visible in the park today are the salmon-colored Entrada Sandstone, in which most of the arches form, and the buff-colored Navajo Sandstone. These are visible in layer cake fashion throughout most of the park. Over time, water seeped into the surface cracks, joints, and folds of these layers. Ice formed in the fissures, expanding and putting pressure on surrounding rock, breaking off bits and pieces. Winds later cleaned out the loose particles. A series of free-standing fins remained. Wind and water attacked these fins until, in some, the cementing material gave way and chunks of rock tumbled out. Many damaged fins collapsed. Others, with the right degree of hardness and balance, survived despite their missing sections. These became the famous arches.>>

neufer wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milkshake wrote: The researchers determined that most of the customers were buying a milkshake to sip slowly during their "long, boring commute." They wanted a food product that could be consumed with one hand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milkshake wrote:

<<In the 1950s, a milkshake machine salesman named Ray Kroc bought exclusive rights to the 1930s-era Multimixer milkshake maker from inventor Earl Prince, and went on to use automated milkshake machines to speed up production at McDonald's restaurants.

In 2003, a "fast-food chain that wanted to improve milk shake sales and profits" initially tried using focus groups to find out what factors in milkshakes attracted customers (e.g., price, amount of chocolate), but the profits did not increase. The restaurant hired researchers to study why customers purchased fast-food milkshakes, as a way of finding out which factors would help the restaurant to increase sales. The researchers found that, contrary to their expectations, that "...nearly half of all milk shakes were bought in the early morning", and usually, the "...shake was the only item purchased, and it was rarely consumed in the restaurant." The researchers determined that most of the customers were buying a milkshake to sip slowly during their "long, boring commute." They wanted a food product that could be consumed with one hand, and that would not risk soiling their hands or work clothes (a danger with toast and jam or sausage and egg bagelwiches).>>

Indigo_Sunrise wrote:And is it just me, or does anyone else see a different thumbnail image in "APOD Robot's" initial post....?

Ann wrote:the red rock here and the white and blue color of the stars.