Starship Asterisk*

I'm trying to find info on the angular size of this view of SagA*. E.g., what is the field of view of the image?? The linked site says 10 microarcseconds (which sounds reasonable) but that's an old reference to previous imaging, not this new image with polarization info. https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu...

And this is astronomy how?

I've always loved deep pictures of globulars. Properly exposed bracketed images that show the wispy extents as well as resolved stars all the way to the core. Congrats on such a superb image Adam and as always, kudos to the APOD folks for keeping these gems coming.

Hats off to the astronomers and scientists responsible for an image like this. Actually catching the images of the planets over a significant time period to animate the arcs of their orbits - amazing! A great nerd-gasm start to the day.

This is the first time I've ever seen that degree of atmospheric distortion of stars near the horizon. I'm adding a photo like this to my own bucket list. Incredibly artistic capture with a nice scientific talking point.

Many milky way simulations suffer from this problem - the galaxy itself is presented as a generic agglomeration of stars (with the best information we have about the central bar and spiral arms guiding the overall appearance) but the data we have on the actual stars of our galaxy is known to within ...

I expect that the anticipated arc is not visible because of the field of view of the shot. He is zoomed in quite a bit given the angular size of the moon in the frame You need a surprisingly big field of view (and swath of sky) to get the expected curve. It is a creative and unique shot - a great de...

>>>>>
The Fornax galaxy cluster is said to be 62 light-years away
>>>>>

62 *million* light years away. Not a trivial error. Your point stands rstevenson.

Because some of Pluto's surface is visible in the thin crescent at the top, the geometry of this image did not have the sun directly behind Pluto, but somewhere obliquely off frame to the upper right? I know there was photography taken when Pluto occulted the sun, but they must have taken a series t...

I did a brief search to see if I could find any previous deep images of the Horsehead where so many tiny background galaxies were visible but I couldn't turn up any. Most images of this object are in visible wavelengths where I'm assuming the background galaxies are obscured by the dust and gas of t...

Definitely true about the rainbow. Not so sure about the anticrepuscular rays...

StareDecisis wrote: Uh, both effects ALWAYS occur so that each observer sees them exactly opposite the sun. Another guy 5 feet to the left sees a different rainbow and a different set of anticrepuscular rays.

Hi all, I'm the photographer of the Bryce Canyon image. Thanks to those who provided the explanation regarding the extreme wide angle and possible confusing shadow-play. Also, in answer to a question about anticrepuscular shots with the sun below the horizon, if you search google images for the word...