Starship Asterisk*

True. But, we had such threads in past with no apparent need for any cross-reference listings. Yes, there have been multi-apod/single topic before. There are at least three ways to handle them: provide a xref per nereid, combine them all in a single thread as above, or just ignore it and leave it t...

.... (other content skipped) .... New thread: Comet Holmes threads It's a bit of an experiment; after a day or so I'll move it to the Discuss an APOD section. Perhaps I'll make it a sticky, for as long as the linked threads remain popular; perhaps I'll repeat for other, multi-APOD/single topics, in...

From Lance McVay's website http://sacredartichoke.com/coppermine/d ... m=8&pos=14 the photo was added to his collection on October 4, 2007. I don't know if this is when the photo was taken or not. Were there any visible comets in the scope of the picture on this date?

Ok, I'm curious. What are the two bright "stars" on the right edge on the moon? (About 2:00 and 3:30) Noel?

BTW - Great picture!

tkmoore1958 wrote:Exactly what I've wondered. I wonder if someone has made a Java applet that could make a mini-planetarium of your computer screen, where your point of view is the center of a cluster?

You might try A Star Cluster in Motion (APOD 20020730)

ablebodieman rules violations in Tunguska explosion and Was Tunguska a meteor or a comet?

Those two topics could also be merged with Tunguska event photograph (APOD 14 November)

Could we also merge all of the recent Comet Holmes threads even though they deal with multiple apods.

There is most certainly a largest number. Not in the way you think I mean, however. Just because one *can* count to a number one higher, doesn't mean that anyone has. Somewhere, sometime, someone has published the largest number ever expressed. This is a finite, specific value. Until someone repres...

Infinity means without boundaries. It is said there is no edge of the universe (no boundary). So, by definition, isn't it infinite? To say the set of integers is countably infinite is the same as saying there is no largest integer. You can't count them all because there is always one more to count. ...

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071021.html When I read the explanation, I see "speculation", "possibilities", and "controversial scenarios". In no way was the "Big Rip" presented as hard fact. I like seeing alternative theories presented. After all, every...

I retract that, Pandora is indeed at 8, just outside the F ring. That must be Prometheus on the inside of the F ring at 9.

It's in the gap between the outermost visible ring and the rest of the ring system, closer to 9 than 8.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071023.html

Why is the entire disk of Saturn visible? Why is there no occlusion by the rings?

Chris Peterson wrote:More precisely, it is capable of detecting individual stars at that distance if they are bright enough, and of splitting them if they are sufficiently separated. It is quite incapable of resolving any stars in other galaxies.

Not even the LMC or SMC?

Good job!!! you might want to add a link to this forum on your discussion page. For example, on the "Victoria Crater on Mars" add http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=12854 as a link on your "tech/story" page. You might want to do the same for the High Energy Astrophysics Pic...

In the description of the apod, it is stated

The above image was taken near Jupiter's terminator

That along with the "above image" url confirm it is the terminator.

jnichols wrote:Shouldn't it be Trailing instead of Tailing in the title on Tues, Oct 9?

Don't you mean Wed, Oct 10?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071010.html

No, Smitty. 47 Tuc is the larger one to the left, NGC 362 is the smaller one to the bottom right. They used the description from 2005 June 17; however, the image has a different orientation. They corrected the reference for 47 Tuc, but not NGC 362. See Case's links. I see marek posted the same infor...

If you check the apod, the circle of stars is not so circular, and the center isn't so blank. So, if it isn't geometrically perfect, it must be irrelevant. If you had taken a look at the apod that was posted, ( http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060314.html , quite possibly the same picture geckzilla used...

It is an unqualified assumption the universe started from a "Singularity", a singularity is one of the lesser probabilities of how exotic matter behaves. An alternative to the Big Bang is the Big Fizz where the creation of Space/time and Gravity/Mass was not created in one event but over ...

The beginning of the universe is a singularity: a point in space-time at which gravitational forces cause matter to have infinite density and infinitesimal volume, and space and time to become infinitely distorted. If, by a wild stretch of imagination, anything happened 'before' that, there is no w...

You don't think that high kinetic impacts have enough energy to be explosive?

Not necessarily. The object imaged would be unidentified when the image was captured on film. The identification would come later. UFO image capture is appropriate.

Bodies of water are not necessary for a triple rainbow. I have observed the phenomenom in the desert of Arizona on Hwy 89 between Tuba City and Paige.

I really don't see what any of this has to do with the apod, but if you follow the link in the article about the 440 pound behemoth there's another amusing tidbit... Spanish and American scientists were searching the sky for signs of megacryometeors, huge chunks of ice, weighing up to 440 pounds, th...

Because I don't believe in infinity, the "end of the universe" would be one Planck Length (1.6 ^ 10−35 meters) that would take a photon 46B years to cross. I understand that the classical concepts of gravity and space time cease to exist at distances this small, but Planck Time (the time ...