December 2006 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Man (woman) in the moon
by Chuck Hards 04 Dec '06

04 Dec '06

Most of us are familiar with the profile of the woman's head seen on the face of the full moon, formed by the various "seas" and geologic formations. The crater Tycho forms a pearl at her neck. How many have noticed that when the moon is low in the west before sunrise, it appears more like a leaping rabbit than a face in profile? It seemed very apparent to me early this morning. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Testing the list, please delete
by Wayne Sumner 04 Dec '06

04 Dec '06

Hi Patrick, Sorry I was unable to pick up the stuff from your porch Saurday. I broke my arm while dismantling a stage set and ended up not going to Tooele. I'll catch you in a week or two if that's OK. Thanks, Wayne A. Sumner Math/Physics/Astronomy/Engineering Boy's Tennis Coach Northridge High School Davis School District (801) 402-8610 >>> Patrick Wiggins <paw(a)wirelessbeehive.com> 12/02/06 8:15 PM >>> Testing the list, please delete _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

1 0

Transit page
by Patrick Wiggins 03 Dec '06

03 Dec '06

It's been a month since the transit so I've removed Rob's transit page from my page. However, the page still exists. Find it at: http://www.astroday.net/MercTransit06.html pw

2 1

Testing the list, please delete
by Patrick Wiggins 02 Dec '06

02 Dec '06

Testing the list, please delete

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] (no subject)
by astrodeb＠charter.net 01 Dec '06

01 Dec '06

Awesome image Tyler! I've always loved the M52 cluster. As I recall, the Ha (which is a red wavelength) , is immune to light pollution. Is the Ha filter harder to focus than just regular imaging? Debbie ---- Tyler Allred <tylerallred(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > Thanks Rich. > > The PNe is right of center and about 5/6 of the way to the bottom of the > image. It looks like a red star, but there is also some filamentous > nebulosity around it. I'm not sure if it is related or not. > Cheers, > Tyler > _____________________________________________ > -----Original Message----- > From: utah-astronomy-bounces+tylerallred=earthlink.net(a)mailman.xmission.com > [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+tylerallred=earthlink.net@mailman.xmission.co > m] On Behalf Of Richard Tenney > Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 12:30 PM > To: Utah Astronomy > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] (no subject) > > Superb work as usual Tyler. Where is the PNe? I'm > not seeing it with all the other nebulosity (or is it > just real small and stellar)? > > --- Tyler Allred <tylerallred(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > > Hi all. > > > > I just posted a new image to my website.. it shows > > the Bubble Nebula area, > > which includes M52 (open cluster) and a dim > > planetary nebula PLN 112-0.1 > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. > http://new.mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

1 0

January occultation
by Patrick Wiggins 01 Dec '06

01 Dec '06

For those who may not have seen it, the January issue of S&T (page 80) reports on an occultation the morning of Friday, 26 January in which an asteroid will pass in front of a relatively bright (mag 6.3) star. The result will be the star winking out for up to 14 seconds. Few stellar occultations involve stars bright enough to be seen with binoculars so this event is special. It looks like SPOC may be a bit too far south to be in the path but one will not have to go much further north to see it. pw

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Climate chaos?
by Tyler Allred 30 Nov '06

30 Nov '06

Joe, I am frankly amazed by your comments. I doesn't sound to me like you are keeping an open mind on this matter, but instead it almost seems like you are an advocate that global warming is a myth. You really need to speak with some informed people on this matter, not just nay-sayers. You especially need to speak with informed people on the extent of temperature change in past ice ages. Changes of only a few degrees (6C to 8C) have caused many ice ages over the past 400,000 years. We know this from ice cores. It doesn't take 25 degrees.... it takes just a few. Likewise, it doesn't take a big change to cause melting.... just a few degrees. BIG change comes from SMALL global changes!!!!!! And, on the Gore issue, it is well understood that intense oceanic storms get most of their energy from warm water, and generally, the warmer the water, the more intense the storms. Do you dispute that? Does this fact mean that as water temperature increases, every year will be worse than the last.... of course it doesn't. That type of argument is an insult to the intelligence of most people, and Al Gore has never made such an idiotic statement. But, it probably does mean that the likelihood of intense storms will increase over time if water temperature increases. Do you dispute that? More total energy = greater probability of more intense storms A small change in water temperature amounts to an ENORMOUS change in total energy, and that energy will manifest itself in many ways that we may or may not be able to predict. As I said before, I am glad that the economic argument didn't stop previous generations from taking action on pollution, and I hope it doesn't stop us. It would be a shame if the poor energy companies had to loose a little of those record profits to benefit our generation and those to come. Again, no offense. Cheers, Tyler _____________________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+tylerallred=earthlink.net(a)mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+tylerallred=earthlink.net@mailman.xmission.co m] On Behalf Of Joe Bauman Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 1:29 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Climate chaos? Warning: those bored by the debate, please delete this note. Absolutely, no offense, Tyler! And again, I am sorry I ever was so misguided as to get rude with people I truly do like. Yours is a good, reasoned argument and may well be the correct explanation. But I'm baffled that what most concede is a small temperature change could cause all this chaos. What if there is a different scenario? Let me propose an alternative: Let's assume Mr. Gettings is correct and the temperature change was something like .5 degree C. in 200 years. Even assuming it's our doing, that is not much of a contribution by humans, and we haven't been industrialized longer than that. But for the sake of argument, let's further assume it isn't human-caused, and that 0.5 degrees C. per 200 years is a fairly steady temperature increase. If we were to project that backward 10,000 years, when the last ice age was about to end, that would give us 25 degrees C. in that period. Does today's temperature minus 25 degrees C. seem a likely average temperature during the last ice age? We know the various ice ages had much colder temperatures and that they did end. Why did they end? Maybe volcanism, maybe a hot solar cycle, maybe some perturbation in Earth's orbit -- who knows? But several times, something changed and they did end. What if we are at the tail end of that change? In other words, we're still exiting the last big ice age. Earth's cycles could be so slow they are hard to detect from our short perspective. If so, is it unreasonable to assume that maybe the ice caps need generally much colder conditions than in the last 200 years in order to maintain themselves? What if the retreat of the ice in Greenland is part of the retreat of the ice cap that once covered northern North America? What if ice caps passed some temperature tipping point long ago and are simply continuing to thaw? Is that such a ridiculous idea? Just for fun, I checked the average temperature in New York, an area that was under ice 10,000 years ago. In July the 24-hour average temperature for Central Park is 75.6 degrees F., or 24.2 degrees C. Take away 25 degrees C. and you get just under 0 C., or just below freezing. Is that reasonable for an average 24-hour period in July in New York during the ice age? Seems reasonable, if not too warm. I agree that our release of CO and CO2 may be extraordinary (though I still think volcanoes could likely be a far bigger source). Does that translate into a temperature increase? How do you explain the fact that the ice caps are melting without any high temperature rise? Maybe air pollution is a separate issue, something that has not yet contributed significantly to global warming. A lot of the problem with forests dying apparently is acid rain, which is terrible but, as far as I know, not a contributor to global warming. To answer the question, why not do something even if we don't know that it will help? (I'm paraphrasing.) Every tax dollar you slap on gas in a possibly-misguided attempt to stop global warming is a dollar out of everyone's pockets. It would damage commerce. People who are scraping by and putting aside everything they can to send their children to college may find themselves unable to pay tuition. Or buy food that has a higher shipping cost. I remember when a new tax was placed on 2nd class postage, or whatever it was that applied to magazines, and it wiped out a lot of fine weeklies like Life Magazine. What difference would another few cents make? Plenty. Anyway, I don't mean to belabor the subject, but I think there are two sides to it. I don't think global warming is as cut-and-dried as many believe. I want to keep an open mind but I see a great deal of propaganda -- like Al Gore claiming global warming has spawned terrible hurricanes. A weather scientist I interviewed said that is untrue. If we believe Al Gore, this year's hurricane season was even worse than last year's -- was it? Best wishes, Joe _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

10 17