Explanation: Near the horizon the Full Moon often seems to loom large, swollen in appearance by the famous Moon illusion. But timelapse images demonstrate that the Moon's apparent size doesn't really change as it climbs toward the zenith. Its color does, though. Recording a frame every 10 seconds, this image shows how dramatic that color change can be. The composite follows a solstice Full Moon climbing above a rugged horizon over northwestern Indiana. A shrinking line-of-sight through planet Earth's dense and dusty atmosphere shifted the moonlight from strawberry red through honey-colored and paler yellowish hues. That change seems appropriate for a northern June Full Moon also known as the Strawberry or Honey Moon.
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 demonstration of the constancy of the angular size of the moon regardless of the altitude.
dave g wrote:
WHY IS THERE NO SIGNS OF ANY ARC?
I WOULD EXPECT AN ARC TO APPEAR, DUE TO THE ROTATION OF THE EARTH!
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.
The "ARC" one would expect (at Summer Solstice from Indiana) is actually a nearly linear section of a sine wave such that there is:
1) a weak cubic curve concave upward at the start
2) juxtaposed with a weak cubic curve concave downward at the end.
dave g wrote:WHY IS THERE NO SIGNS OF ANY ARC?
I WOULD EXPECT AN ARC TO APPEAR, DUE TO THE ROTATION OF THE EARTH!
So the earth really isn't rotating .. is really not a sphere .. is really a stationary disc surrounded by the sun and stars and planets? Who'd a thunked the wonders learned on Asterix!!??
"Rugged." I remember reading about a person who went to northern India in hopes of seeing Mount Everest, knowing it was often too cloudy. They got up early, and they looked north, and they saw ... clouds, clouds, clouds! But, before they returned to bed, they happened to ... look up! Everest! Enormous above their view!
<<Fred Flintstone physically resembles both the voice actor who played him, Alan Reed, and Jackie Gleason, whose series The Honeymooners was said to be an inspiration for The Flintstones. The voice of Barney Rubble was provided by voice actor Mel Blanc. Additional similarities with The Honeymooners included the fact that Reed based Fred's voice upon Gleason's interpretation of Ralph Kramden, while Blanc, after a season of using a nasal, high-pitched voice for Barney, eventually adopted a style of voice similar to that used by Art Carney in his portrayal of Ed Norton.>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Honeymooners wrote:
<<Alice Kramden (née Alice Gibson) has grown accustomed to Ralph's empty threats: "One of these days... POW!!! Right in the kisser!" or "BANG, ZOOM! Straight to the moon!", to which she usually replies, "Ahhh, shaddap!". Wilma Flintstone is based on Alice Kramden.>>
darksky2500@gmail.com wrote: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 demonstration of the constancy of the angular size of the moon regardless of the altitude.
Actually, with the moon at its highest, you're one earth radius closer to the moon than at moon rise or moon set. The moon has an angular diameter about 30 seconds larger. There was an APOD demonstrating that some time ago.
darksky2500@gmail.com wrote: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 demonstration of the constancy of the angular size of the moon regardless of the altitude.
Actually, with the moon at its highest, you're one earth radius closer to the moon than at moon rise or moon set. The moon has an angular diameter about 30 seconds larger. There was an APOD demonstrating that some time ago.
Isn't this lunar apogee and perigee, not the Moon's position in the sky? More to do with variations in the lunar orbit than one's position in space as Earth rotates.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.
darksky2500@gmail.com wrote:
It is a creative and unique shot - a great demonstration of the constancy of the angular size of the moon regardless of the altitude.
Actually, with the moon at its highest, you're one earth radius closer to the moon than at moon rise or moon set. The moon has an angular diameter about 30 seconds larger. There was an APOD demonstrating that some time ago.
Isn't this lunar apogee and perigee, not the Moon's position in the sky? More to do with variations in the lunar orbit than one's position in space as Earth rotates.
The most the Moon moves radially in ~6 hours is about 1150 km ... quite a bit less than the radius of the Earth.
Gubby wrote:
Actually, with the moon at its highest, you're one earth radius closer to the moon than at moon rise or moon set. The moon has an angular diameter about 30 seconds larger. There was an APOD demonstrating that some time ago.
Isn't this lunar apogee and perigee, not the Moon's position in the sky? More to do with variations in the lunar orbit than one's position in space as Earth rotates.
The most the Moon moves radially in ~6 hours is about 1150 km ... quite a bit less than the radius of the Earth.
I think Gubby is saying that at Moon rise/set, an observer at Earth's equator is ~1 Earth radius further away from the Moon, than when the Moon is at its zenith, simply because of the axial rotation of the Earth. An observer closer to the poles, sees less of a difference. Nothing to do with the orbits of the Earth/Moon system.
Strawberry to Honey Moonrise
