Starship Asterisk*

by **geckzilla** » Tue May 27, 2014 8:42 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:And it doesn't exactly generate images in the usual sense, although the data can be structured like an image (as here), or combined with optical data.

That picture is fantastic, too. It's not quite the same thing but the VLA has a public archive website. I tried downloading some but the data is so many gigs (hundreds!) and I was never sure I was selecting the correct thing. I'd love to figure it out someday.

by **DavidLeodis** » Tue May 27, 2014 7:04 pm

It was interesting to read in the information brought up through "the video" link that the car headlights are from "the car lights of the guards patrolling at the AOS" (Array Operations Site). I guess the bright lights do not affect the instruments at the ALMA as they are not optical instruments.

I also noticed that the video was released by the ESO on 18 August 2010, which was long before the ALMA began scientific observations in the second half of 2011 according to information from another link.

by **Beyond** » Mon May 26, 2014 9:05 pm

Well, so much for that. It would take me too long to figure out how to get to what I wouldn't know what it was anyway, so I'll just wait for the artist's renditions. Thanks anyway, Chris.

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 8:17 pm

Beyond wrote:Even though it is one of the wonders of the modern world, it would be nice to see how it sees those far off parts of the universe. Well, maybe one day...

Well, the observatory has only been operational for a year. And it doesn't exactly generate images in the usual sense, although the data can be structured like an image (as here), or combined with optical data. Access to unembargoed data is also available, although with such a new instrument I'm sure much of the data remains accessible only to the investigators.

by **Beyond** » Mon May 26, 2014 7:50 pm

Even though it is one of the wonders of the modern world, it would be nice to see how it sees those far off parts of the universe. Well, maybe one day...

And as for the "sexiest astrophysicist you'll ever see naked", I've never seen an astrophysicist in person, so it would be a double treat.

by **geckzilla** » Mon May 26, 2014 7:31 pm

ShaileshS wrote:
Faye Kane♀girl brain wrote:
Beyond wrote:I thought I was going to see a time lapse of what ALMA sees, but instead it's a time lapse of a few of the telescopes movements that make up the Array. Oh well.
I agree; pretty but boring. Would be cool if I hadn't seen dozens of other time lapse vids of the night sky.

BTW, why aren't the telescopes tracking an object? All three antennae slew in unison, then sit there unmoving while the sky revolves over them.

-faye kane
sexiest astrophysicist you'll ever see naked
I totally agree. Video shows nothing different than what we have seen in 100s of such. And, it's so short. I also thought we would see what the telescopes are seeing. Too bad ! And, what's up with the mysterious background music ? As if there's going to be something happening soon, we anticipate and nothing happens. Come on APOD !

You are mistaken if you think that we have seen hundreds of time lapses like this. APOD has covered ALMA very little, in fact. If you could stand at the array and really take it all in you might consider it to be one of the modern wonders of the world.

by **Boomer12k** » Mon May 26, 2014 7:15 pm

Neat!

I have RARELY seen the galaxy go 90 degrees to the horizon. Nor have I really noticed how close the Small and Large Magellanic Clouds are.

There also seems to be some "GLOW" to the atmosphere.

:---[===] *

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 4:13 pm

Alexander Thesoso wrote:What is wrong with this picture? Or... What is wrong with me?
I get a disturbing illusion that the stars are moving with respect to each other.
It isn't flicker. It surely isn't that the stars are changing position.

An optical illusion. Part caused, I think, by video compression and the resizing of the original, and part caused by projection artifacts created by the wide angle lens.

by **Alexander Thesoso** » Mon May 26, 2014 4:09 pm

What is wrong with this picture? Or... What is wrong with me?
I get a disturbing illusion that the stars are moving with respect to each other.
It isn't flicker. It surely isn't that the stars are changing position.

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:57 pm

owlice wrote:Chris, he's in China. Yes, the computer environment there is severely limiting, and since he works there, it's a little hard for him to do anything about the environment.

True enough.

by **owlice** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:54 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
southern cross wrote:Another APOD I can't see - presumably because it is a video file format ?
It's an absolutely conventional YouTube video, offered both in Flash and HTML5 formats. No special software required, nothing that isn't absolutely standard. If you can't see it, you are operating in a computer environment that is severely limiting you in ways that go far beyond the occasional unviewable APOD. Probably ought to fix that.

Chris, he's in China. Yes, the computer environment there is severely limiting, and since he works there, it's a little hard for him to do anything about the environment.

by **LocalColor** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:27 pm

Enjoyed the video, even tho we have seen many time lapse night sky videos, this one was unique. Imagining what the group of 3 is "listening" to. (And wondering if #4 is also busy?)

We have also seen the polls showing that our fellow Americans are either ignorant of astronomy or its not important to them. (Unfortunately this also impacts science and the future of their children.)

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:24 pm

southern cross wrote:Another APOD I can't see - presumably because it is a video file format ? :(

It's an absolutely conventional YouTube video, offered both in Flash and HTML5 formats. No special software required, nothing that isn't absolutely standard. If you can't see it, you are operating in a computer environment that is severely limiting you in ways that go far beyond the occasional unviewable APOD. Probably ought to fix that.

by **Ann** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:23 pm

RedFishBlueFish wrote:
tehanu wrote:I enjoy the way it feels like the earth turning, more than the stars rotating! Thanks!
Yes. That is quite the illusion is it not.

According to a recent international poll, 25% of Americans are aware of this illusion, and know that the stars do actually move around the stationary earth (as decreed by infallible Pope Paul V in 1616 at the conclusion of Galileo Galilei's inquisition).

Yes, sigh. I was trying to teach some of my really not so bright students about Copernicus. "He said something about the solar system that would have shocked most people at that time if they had paid attention, what do you think it was?" I asked them. "That the earth is round?" they answered, hopefully. "No, most scholars at that time already knew that," I replied. "No, Copernicus claimed that the Earth moves around the Sun, not the other way round." My students gave me blank, uncomprehending stares. The idea that the Earth moves around the Sun seemed to be quite new to them.

Ann

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:22 pm

dbooksta wrote:The telescopes seem to spend a lot of time pointed at lower angles. Wouldn't that increase atmospheric interference? Why not leave those observations to arrays in geographic locations where the observations could be made at higher angles (and hence through less atmosphere)?

There aren't any other large arrays of submillimeter telescopes, and just a few much smaller submillimeter observatories.

It looks to me like the observations encompass a range of altitudes, from low to high. While the atmospheric attenuation is certainly higher at low altitudes, that doesn't preclude doing good science.

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:15 pm

Faye Kane♀girl brain wrote:BTW, why aren't the telescopes tracking an object? All three antennae slew in unison, then sit there unmoving while the sky revolves over them.

Watch closely and you'll see that in some cases they are tracking the sky. I expect it depends on the observing program. Sometimes radio telescopes are kept stationary and the data is collected by allowing the sky to track past them, sometimes individual objects are tracked. Both approaches seem to be used during this time lapse. Also, there are probably intervals between data collection where the telescopes are pointed but not operating.

by **Chris Peterson** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:09 pm

geckzilla wrote:Oh come on, I don't believe this even for a second. People are ignorant, but not that ignorant. Even the Catholic church officially gave up that notion a long time ago. Either you aren't remembering it correctly or the question was confusing enough for them to answer it incorrectly.

The numbers are accurate. I've seen the same polls. I do think you're close to the explanation, however. It isn't that very many people are actually geocentrists, but they have such a poor grasp of what things look like that they can't competently answer questions about rotation and revolution and different frames of reference.

by **ShaileshS** » Mon May 26, 2014 3:00 pm

Faye Kane♀girl brain wrote:
Beyond wrote:I thought I was going to see a time lapse of what ALMA sees, but instead it's a time lapse of a few of the telescopes movements that make up the Array. Oh well.
I agree; pretty but boring. Would be cool if I hadn't seen dozens of other time lapse vids of the night sky.

BTW, why aren't the telescopes tracking an object? All three antennae slew in unison, then sit there unmoving while the sky revolves over them.

-faye kane
sexiest astrophysicist you'll ever see naked

I totally agree. Video shows nothing different than what we have seen in 100s of such. And, it's so short. I also thought we would see what the telescopes are seeing. Too bad ! And, what's up with the mysterious background music ? As if there's going to be something happening soon, we anticipate and nothing happens. Come on APOD !

by **geckzilla** » Mon May 26, 2014 2:18 pm

southern cross wrote:Another APOD I can't see - presumably because it is a video file format ?

It is a video, yes. Is YouTube blocked by The Great Firewall?

by **geckzilla** » Mon May 26, 2014 2:14 pm

RedFishBlueFish wrote: According to a recent international poll, 25% of Americans are aware of this illusion, and know that the stars do actually move around the stationary earth (as decreed by infallible Pope Paul V in 1616 at the conclusion of Galileo Galilei's inquisition).

Don't have time to look up the poll, so do not recall which of the major polling companies conducted it. I did read the report of it though within the last two months in either Free Inquiry, or in Sceptical Inquirer.

Oh come on, I don't believe this even for a second. People are ignorant, but not that ignorant. Even the Catholic church officially gave up that notion a long time ago. Either you aren't remembering it correctly or the question was confusing enough for them to answer it incorrectly.

by **dbooksta** » Mon May 26, 2014 2:10 pm

The telescopes seem to spend a lot of time pointed at lower angles. Wouldn't that increase atmospheric interference? Why not leave those observations to arrays in geographic locations where the observations could be made at higher angles (and hence through less atmosphere)?

by **southern cross** » Mon May 26, 2014 12:41 pm

Another APOD I can't see - presumably because it is a video file format ?

by **RedFishBlueFish** » Mon May 26, 2014 11:58 am

tehanu wrote:I enjoy the way it feels like the earth turning, more than the stars rotating! Thanks!

Yes. That is quite the illusion is it not.

According to a recent international poll, 25% of Americans are aware of this illusion, and know that the stars do actually move around the stationary earth (as decreed by infallible Pope Paul V in 1616 at the conclusion of Galileo Galilei's inquisition).

Don't have time to look up the poll, so do not recall which of the major polling companies conducted it. I did read the report of it though within the last two months in either Free Inquiry, or in Sceptical Inquirer.

Another finding from the poll: ~75% of Americans (and of Europeans) believe that all radiation is harmful and that it is created only by human technology. GMO plants also came in for a lashing.

My take: Be happy with the telescopes we have now, for there may not be many built in the future.

"Eppur si muove"

by **RedFishBlueFish** » Mon May 26, 2014 11:37 am

Interesting in general, and as I am just getting into time-lapse photography, to me in particular.

Watching the telescopes mysteriously point about, with the sky wheeling majestically behind them, was completely engrossing.

The soundtrack adds nothing but distraction. Something Baroque or New Age may have worked, but not every video needs audio - this being one that did not.

by **Faye Kane♀girl brain** » Mon May 26, 2014 9:39 am

Beyond wrote:I thought I was going to see a time lapse of what ALMA sees, but instead it's a time lapse of a few of the telescopes movements that make up the Array. Oh well.

I agree; pretty but boring. Would be cool if I hadn't seen dozens of other time lapse vids of the night sky.

BTW, why aren't the telescopes tracking an object? All three antennae slew in unison, then sit there unmoving while the sky revolves over them.

-faye kane
sexiest astrophysicist you'll ever see naked

Starship Asterisk*

APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: Time-Lapse - a lapse at APOD

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: Time-Lapse - a lapse at APOD

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: Time-Lapse - a lapse at APOD

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Re: APOD: An ALMA Telescope Array Time-Lapse (2014 May 26)

Time-Lapse - a lapse at APOD