Starship Asterisk*

[url=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Word_of_the_day/Archive/2008/July#23]Wictionary: Word of the Day for 2008 July 23[/url]

[url=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Makemake][b]Makemake[/b][/url] [i]n[/i] [size=75](Proper Noun)[/size][list]1. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makemake_%28mythology%29][i](mythology)[/i] The creator deity in the mythology of Easter Island.[/url]
2. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makemake_%28dwarf_planet%29][i](astronomy)[/i] A dwarf planet and large Kuiper belt object, discovered in 2005.[/url][/list]

[quote="neufer"]And bade her a fire to MAKE, MAKE, MAKE[/quote]

Don't forget the [url=http://www.sushi-switzerland.ch/det-e-makimaker-860.html]Maki Maker[/url].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makemake_%28dwarf_planet%29

<<The designation 2005 FY9 was given to Makemake when the discovery was made public. Before that, the discovery team used the codename "Easterbunny" for the object because of the discovery time shortly after Easter. In 2008, in accordance with IAU rules for classical Kuiper belt objects, 2005 FY9 was given the name of a creator deity. The name of Makemake, the creator of humanity in the mythos of the Rapanui, the native people of Easter Island, was chosen in part to preserve the object's connection with Easter.>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:EightTNOs.png

<<Makemake is classified a classical Kuiper belt object, which means it lies in the region of the belt (between 42 and 48 AU) gravitationally unaffected by the orbit of Neptune. Unlike plutinos, which can cross Neptune's orbit due to their 2:3 resonance with the planet, the classical objects have perihelia further from the Sun, free from Neptune’s perturbation. Such objects have relatively low eccentricities and orbit the Sun in much the same way the planets do. Makemake is however a member of the "dynamically hot" class of classical KBOs, meaning that it has a high inclination compared to others in its population.

Makemake is currently at a distance of 52 AU from the Sun; almost as far from the Sun as it ever reaches in its orbit. Makemake follows an orbit very similar to that of 2003 EL61: highly inclined (29°) and moderately eccentric (e~0.15). Nevertheless, Makemake's orbit is slightly farther from the Sun (in terms of both the semi-major axis and perihelion). Its orbital period is nearly 310 years, more than Pluto's 248 years.

The diagram below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TheKuiperBelt_Orbits_2003EL61_2005FY9.svg

shows the similar orbits of the two objects contrasted with the orbit of Pluto. The perihelia (q) and the aphelia (Q) are marked with the dates of passage. The positions on April 2006 are marked with the spheres illustrating relative sizes and differences in albedo and colour. Both are currently far above the ecliptic (illustrated as Neptune's orbit in grey). Makemake is approaching its 2033 aphelion, while 2003 EL61 passed its aphelion in late 1991.>>
----------------------------------------------------
[list]There was a little man and he had a little gun,
And the bullets were made of lead, lead, lead.
He went to the brook and shot a little duck,
And the bullet went right through its head, head, head.
He carried it home to his good wife Joan,
And bade her a fire to MAKE, MAKE, MAKE,
While he went to the brook where he shot the little duck,
And tried for to shoot the drake, drake, drake. [/list]

interesting

apodman,
Thanx. That makes much sense.
Peace,
Phil G

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080716.html

Aside from the Sun's glare or the effects of any atmosphere you may be under, I think the Milky Way's appearance is about the same anywhere within a large neighborhood around the Sun.

Galactic distances are of the order 10^17 miles while far outer solar system distances are of the order 10^10 miles. When your vantage point zooms in or out by 1/10,000,000 of the total distance, the angle subtended by the portion of the Milky Way you're viewing changes negligibly. Similarly, the same distance moved side-to-side changes parallax negligibly.

If, on the other hand, you are talking about going [i]way out[/i] from the Sun and far away from the Galactic Center as well while remaining near the Galactic Plane, yes the Milky Way will appear narrower, denser, and more conspicuous (though maybe not as bright as one might think).

While we're at it, why does the light of the Milky Way appear against a dark background instead of the bright background of all the stars in the Universe? Because the light from all those distant stars hasn't had time to reach us yet, and because the most distant stars are red-shifted right out of the observable Universe. Maybe in the distant future the night sky will be full of light. See [url=http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/olbers.html]Olbers' Paradox[/url]. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers'_paradox ... but you have to type it yourself because the BBCode or whatever doesn't like the apostrophe in the URL and does not include the characters that follow as part of the link.

OK, it's only a co-opted drawing; no problem with that.
But am I correct in assuming that, the farther out you go
from the sun, the narrower and denser, therefore more
conspicuous, the Milky Way would appear?