I was confused by your earlier post. Those big bright shiny things block out the relatively weak starlight. You actually see stars in different orientations in the video. Realizing what he had to do to please his customer. Recent individual performances within the period ofcopyright protection of the song may be protected by copyright. With each new response you continue to add more assertions and demand more responses, which is not an honest form of discussion.
Earth is the blueish-white speck approximately halfway down the brown band to the right. Here are two examples from the Cassini mission to Saturn showing long exposures that did capture stars. Capturing images of stars would require over exposing the moon substantially. The green line is airglow high in the atmosphere, caused by cosmic rays striking the gases up there. Take a ride in a boat on a great lake, and see the horizon. We see things when light strikes the retina in our eyes. What you need to do, Solon, is go get some psychiatric assistance and take the medicine they give you.
Come back with some actual scientific explanation of the proof, Mr. The difference is that Voyager was a survey and flyby mission, and its cameras were like long-range telescopes. Earth's atmosphere looks very thin when compared to the rest of the planet. Like on Earth, they are only not visible when it is light out! Your comment later in the paragraph about it being easier with the lights off still had me confused about what magnitude of stars could be seen. Of course we can see stars in space. Sunlight illuminates half the Earth and half the moon at all times. Time and time again it has been proved we cant control nuclear energy but it is still being exploited but not for the good of the many.
It's the same principle as light pollution on earth. They don't send cameras, the sort you can buy off the shelf, out into space, they are all but useless due to the exceedingly low light levels, even at Mercury. But we know that space is not illuminated so this suggests the sun does not emit much visible light. Baryonic matter emits and absorbs light, and therefore in astronomy we can observe the effects of light interacting with it. Up above the world so high, Like a diamond in the sky. Many composers, including the young Mozart, have … made compositions based on that tune.
Being the darkest black, Sirius would not be visible in the resulting image. We can see stars from space. How long was the exposure and what post-processing was performed? We can also observe the gravitational effects of matter. Up above the world so high, Like a diamond in the sky! At least according to my lazy google. This is because the light from stars near the horizon travels through more air than does the light of stars overhead, thus there is more refraction—more twinkling. But occasionally they will change those settings for a specific purpose or for personal experimentation.
The guys who you work for lie and cheat to maintain the right to experiment on us for their profit. In 1785, WolfgangAmadeus Mozart published his famous Ah! I doubt that we, Humanity, have the intelligence to avoid committing suicide as a species. The gases between galaxies are often there due to a galaxy collision that rips gases away from each of the galaxies in involved. Originally posted by longhornchris04: I think the implication was that if the lit moon was in your field of view it eye or camera it would overwhelm your dynamic range and render the rest of space invisible. Please get help and make sure it includes medication for your delusions. The second is proven false. You can reproduce the experiment.
The action is visible onlyfrom the other side of the moon. And they did so based upon observational evidence such as the round shadow of Earth during a lunar eclipse, the difference of stellar positions at different latitudes, and the fact that the Sun rises at different times on different points of the Earth. This is a complete waste of time, basically arguing with an insane person having psychotic delusions. If they know the Earth is round, but claim the Earth is flat with the intent to deceive such as selling a book then that would be a lie. So the implication is that neither were mentioned before 2012.
It's the same principle as light pollution on earth. Apollo 11 was particularly well equipped; you can read the list of cameras here: The claim that there were no cameras or that they didn't work appears to be complete fantasy. Like dust with gemstones everywhere, shining. Maybe weight restrictions meant they had to leave them behind. In space, that doesn't happen. Light travels in a straight line as long as it is traveling through material with a constant.
I'm not sure who was presenting it, but a look through the presentation list should find it. I have never seen overwhelming videos showing stars at night from space, ever. You equated the big bang model with the flat earth model. Lies are lies and partonizing me is not going to help your cause Author. This is totally outside the realm of sanity. Like Jose commented before: Armstrong clearly stated there were no stars visible from the moon nor in cislunar space. The visors and windows for later Apollo missions were fitted with filters to allow the stars to be visible.