Eclipses, Moon, Sun

19th Century geographer and astronomer McCulloch recorded two incidences, one in his own lifetime (1837) and one in 1717. I can't profess to know what his source was for the latter - unsurprisingly I never met the guy. The Daily Telegraph reported a daytime lunar eclipse on July 16th, 1870 - a look at newspaper archives will verify this for you.

Obviously not the common lunar eclipse. If the ever occured at all. Firstly, there could be other causes, secondly, that image was pretty dark, don't you think? Probably taken at sunset, which would explain it.

Simply, the earth is round, therefore they were not lunar eclipses. However, all eclipses occur during the day in RE, it's just the people on the day side are facing away from the moon at the time.

There was one on the July 17th 1590, one on June 16th 1666, another on May 26th 1668, another on the 20th of September 1717, another on the 20th of April 1837. There was one on the 17th of January 1870.

They happen and have been recorded repeatedly throughout history.

It's interesting that none have been recorded since we've had camera's.

okay, on the round earth, it MIGHT be possible to see the moon and the sun during a lunar eclipse, IF you were in a very high place and it was EXACTLY dusk or dawn. if you weren't high enough, you would see neither.

on the FE, more than half the planet could see both, during every eclipse!


this discussion reminds me of a comic book where people were trying to live on a planet that always had the same face toward the sun, so half was always much too hot, and half was always much too cold, so they could only live in the place that was right at the sunrise/sunset portion.

and you know what the author called that area? the "twilight zone"!

So you can't provide a verifiable source?

The source is hard-copy (did a brief search for Telegraph internet archives and couldn't find any) - you have to find one in the real world rather than on the internet.

Dogplatter. take a flashlight (Sun), and a basketball (Earth), and a baseball (moon). Now hold the flashlight so its opposite the baseball and the basketball. Now slowly raise the flashlight and baseball. low and behold! part of the baseball is lit up AND covered by the basketball. Note that people in the "top" part of the basketball could see both items! I know a normal aviator like yourself could never have figured this out on your own, so I hope this helped. oh, and I'm not proving an eclipse during daylight, I'm showing you how the sun and moon can be seen in the sky at the same time (like in all those pictures).   

This analogy does not describe the phenomenon to which I am referring. The "baseball" is always partly illuminated as long as the Earth isn't obscuring its light. The only plausible explanation for a full lunar eclipse in daylight is that (gasp!) the Moon emits its own light.

It's interesting that none have been recorded since we've had camera's.

By the sparsity of the events throughout history - and the relative uncommonness of lunar eclipses in the first place - it's hardly surprising that one has not occured within the last hundred or so years. Of course, primitive cameras existed during all the occurences I have cited, but were not widespread enough for the event to receive photographic coverage.

here's a link to the wikipedia definition of "eclipse":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse

of course, FErs believe all space travel is a hoax, and that there are no satellites; INCLUDING the weather satellites your weatherman used to make today's forecast, or the GPS satellites, or the ones used by Dish Network and other "satellite TV" systems, or even the international space station!

My mother is watching auto racing on Dish Network as i write this, so telling me it doesn't exist...

Her dish is pointed at where the signals from a tower are bounced off the tropolayer.

Her dish is pointed at where the signals from a tower are bounced off the tropolayer.

Well now wait a sec... Radio being one of my strong points, I have to disagree with you here. Satellite signals (such as TV, VoIP, etc.) are in the GHz range of broadcast.

Now when you start getting to the extreme low end of UHF and below - those frequencies are of such a wavelength that they can indeed "bounce" off of things, and in rare cases, I've even seen low-power FM signals make it from Missouri to Florida via Troposheric Ducting on perfect and odd weather conditions. So I will grant you some very strange and cool things can happen with radio.

However, at such high and penetrating frequencies - line of sight is all you get. It doesn't matter what layer of atmosphere/atmolayer you wish to choose, it's going right on through. When it hits a solid object it has very little to no scatter / bounce effect due to the tight / constrained wavelength which is why it is ideal for such things. It carries for long distances without signal deterioration with smaller power requirements than if you were to try and use say VHF or UHF such as standard "air TV" which does indeed "bounce" - during certain weather conditions - even off of the atmosphere.

My 2 cents.

Take care,
John

Quote from: Username on November 13, 2007, 08:13:38 AM

Her dish is pointed at where the signals from a tower are bounced off the tropolayer.

Well now wait a sec... Radio being one of my strong points, I have to disagree with you here. Satellite signals (such as TV, VoIP, etc.) are in the GHz range of broadcast.

Now when you start getting to the extreme low end of UHF and below - those frequencies are of such a wavelength that they can indeed "bounce" off of things, and in rare cases, I've even seen low-power FM signals make it from Missouri to Florida via Troposheric Ducting on perfect and odd weather conditions. So I will grant you some very strange and cool things can happen with radio.

However, at such high and penetrating frequencies - line of sight is all you get. It doesn't matter what layer of atmosphere/atmolayer you wish to choose, it's going right on through. When it hits a solid object it has very little to no scatter / bounce effect due to the tight / constrained wavelength which is why it is ideal for such things. It carries for long distances without signal deterioration with smaller power requirements than if you were to try and use say VHF or UHF such as standard "air TV" which does indeed "bounce" - during certain weather conditions - even off of the atmosphere.

My 2 cents.

Take care,
John

good to know, I'll revise when possible

Lunar eclipses are caused by the alignment of the sun, moon, antimoon and mars. Mars is flat, reflective and slightly concave. About once a month, the sun's light (in particular the red part of the spectrum) are reflected and concentrated into a super-red laser by mars. The antimoon performs the role of creating a gravitational divergance lens, diverting all the light to the moon and spreading it over the lunar surface. This effect results in all the red light focused on the moon, and reflected to earth, so none of the light from mars reaches us. However on certain occasions, you can see mars as some light escapes the diverging gravitational lens.

Quote from: Roundy has been sacked on November 07, 2007, 03:01:34 PM

So you can't provide a verifiable source?

The source is hard-copy (did a brief search for Telegraph internet archives and couldn't find any) - you have to find one in the real world rather than on the internet.

Quote

Dogplatter. take a flashlight (Sun), and a basketball (Earth), and a baseball (moon). Now hold the flashlight so its opposite the baseball and the basketball. Now slowly raise the flashlight and baseball. low and behold! part of the baseball is lit up AND covered by the basketball. Note that people in the "top" part of the basketball could see both items! I know a normal aviator like yourself could never have figured this out on your own, so I hope this helped. oh, and I'm not proving an eclipse during daylight, I'm showing you how the sun and moon can be seen in the sky at the same time (like in all those pictures).   

This analogy does not describe the phenomenon to which I am referring. The "baseball" is always partly illuminated as long as the Earth isn't obscuring its light. The only plausible explanation for a full lunar eclipse in daylight is that (gasp!) the Moon emits its own light.

Quote

It's interesting that none have been recorded since we've had camera's.

By the sparsity of the events throughout history - and the relative uncommonness of lunar eclipses in the first place - it's hardly surprising that one has not occured within the last hundred or so years. Of course, primitive cameras existed during all the occurences I have cited, but were not widespread enough for the event to receive photographic coverage.

Oh well.  Guess we'll just have to wait until this happens for the first time in the digital age before this point has a shred of real credibility.  Shouldn't be too long; it's only been, what, 150 years since the last supposed occurence? 

Actually, you can look forward to the next total lunar eclipse:

2007 Aug 28    Total     1.481     01h31m    e Asia, Aus., Pacific, Americas
2008 Feb 21    Total    1.111    00h51m    c Pacific, Americas, Europe, Africa
2008 Aug 16    Partial    0.813    -    S. America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Aus.
2009 Feb 09    Penumbral    -0.083    -    e Europe, Asia, Aus., Pacific, w N.A.
2009 Jul 07    Penumbral    -0.909    -    Aus., Pacific, Americas
2009 Aug 06    Penumbral    -0.661    -    Americas, Europe, Africa, w Asia
2009 Dec 31    Partial    0.082    -    Europe, Africa, Asia, Aus.
2010 Jun 26    Partial    0.542    -    e Asia, Aus., Pacific, w Americas
2010 Dec 21    Total    1.262    01h13m    e Asia, Aus., Pacific, Americas, Europe

And as far as one not occurring in the last 150 years??? There was one earlier THIS year guys... come on... I included it in the list.

There are enough in there for everyone's observation, including 2 total eclipses - 1 of them being the beginning of next year!! I guess we can all collaborate on our collective locations, record data, and share our results eh?

And as far as one not occurring in the last 150 years??? There was one earlier THIS year guys... come on... I included it in the list.

Perhaps you should read through the topic first.

Quote from: Roundy has been sacked on November 07, 2007, 03:01:34 PM

So you can't provide a verifiable source?

The source is hard-copy (did a brief search for Telegraph internet archives and couldn't find any) - you have to find one in the real world rather than on the internet.

Scan it. Post it.

Quote from: semperround on November 07, 2007, 12:12:16 PM

maybe this pic is eaisier to understand.

Yeah. That's a partial eclipse, which could conceivably be spun as the Earth being partly in the way of the Sun's light with the Moon low on the (RE) horizon. What about total eclipses?

There's enough room in that photo for the moon to conceivably become totally eclipsed with the sun in the sky. It's a question of angles; there's a narrow line where you could both observe the setting sun and the eclipsed moon, but there not be a straight line from one to the other. This is an extreme form of the sinking ship phenomenon.