Talk:2816: Types of Solar Eclipse

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search

Is the annular eclipse actually possible? 21:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. 21:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I interpret the Hug Eclipse as the sun wrapping around the moon giving it a hug, rather than the moon being pinched in on the sides. 21:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I amended that (twice, first time got blitzed in an Edit Conflict situation), when I thought of a better way (two slightly different better ways! ...might not even have used the better one, in instance #2) to describe it. But I rushed a bit anyway... I can see typos. (Not including the likes of "centre", which is not a typo but me defaulting to British English by default; though no doubt that 'needs' changing too.)
I'm still wondering if just "label" and "description" columns are needed (image details can be recycled into Transcript, per label). Or if it could be ";header" and ":...description" without the table, but I think it looks no worse than I had feared, as the current table form. Of course, others have added more prosaic explanation paragraphs, so I'll let it sit a while. Almost certainly the other active editors here are going to have ideas about how to merge/expunge my efforts, and I'll let them copyedit my errors/'errors' as well. But at least there's a framework answer (or several) now. 22:20, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

That must be a VERY scary dragonite. 02:20, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

I think I need an explain XKCD for the dragonite reference in the bot joke... 16:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Looks like it was originally just a dragon (consistent with various actual eclipse-myths). I'm not so sure whether it became a Pokemon creature (does that have Sun-eating capabilities?), which seems to be the main searchable reference, or something even less known to me. 17:17, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Presumably it's a dragon which has survived its atmospheric entry and landed on the earth's surface. 16:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I love this community, which will explain how a solar panel works and why the moon cannot give the sun a hug with the same level of rigor and detail. 04:26, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Arguably, the Sun is constantly hugging the Moon, through the warming arms of the Solar Winds. 16:15, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I have always wondered about solar eclipses... does anybody else think it's really weird that the Earth is not just the only planet with exactly the right ratios of star/satellite size/distance to make eclipses happen, but is also the only planet (so far as we know) where there's an evolved intelligence that can appreciate such a phenomenon? After all, a similar effect viewable only from Mars or Venus would be totally wasted... 06:35, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

It is indeed a weird thing. We don't know if it is a weird thing that is of significance for life or intelligence or civilisation, or if it is just a happenstance weird thing. The universe has all kinds of weird things. -- 07:22, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
"Right place, right time". It helps that we have a Moon roughly the same (angular) size of the Sun, which seems rare, but if we didn't know it was a thing then we might not miss the coincidence. And, because of the slightly drifting Moon, at some time in the past (tens/hundreds of millions of years ago), we never had annular eclipses – but then very few people appreciated that. In another few millions of years, we'll lose all possibility of total eclipses (imagine being there to witness that last one, everyone who makes effort to be there cramming into the short stretch of 'final, brief totality' in the literally-ultimate hybrid eclipse...).
On human scales, it's a fairly wide window that may very well out-spread the full reach of humanity (in fact, I'd bet on it, but do feel free to try to collect if we're both there jostling for room in that 'last eclipse sweet-spot' viewing platform). But imagine all the other astronomical co-inky-dinks that we might have witnessed if humanity were significantly shifted by time (and place) in the universe. Instead of "very edge of totality" eclipses, who knows what else might have been (surprisingly-)'normal'... Or at least totally different (not-)Earth (not-)Moon (not-)Sun eclipse combinations that are right-sized just like ours is. 08:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
postscript: of course, if large moons (created like ours was supposed to be) had to be settled down enough to allow life (after the Thea-like impact) but significant enough to cause tides (variously theorised as driving the chemical creation of life, if not the later development of advanced life forms or even the prerequisites of civilisation leading to scientific enquiry) then perhaps the chances of any equivalent beings to ourselves having any equivalent eclipses to what we see is slightly raised above that of 'any random planet with or without appreciative audience'. But, until we get very good at surveying exoplanetary systems (if we ever do) and/or visit them ourselves (ditto, with bells on), it'll be hard to quantify any inherant tendency to serve such things up on a platter to all those who might appreciate it. (again) 09:07ish, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't understand your 'evolved intelligence'. Whether planet that has intelligence is very not-correlated with its capacity to create eclipses. 18:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
SFAIK, there's no evidence from which to base any kind of correlation/non-correlation/anti-correlation between intelligence and eclipses, given that we have only one instance of a planet with intelligence upon it to study (and we might even learn of further eclipse-worthy planets well before we do of intelligence-populated ones). Speculative reasoning can try to fill in gaps, maybe (see just above), as long as one realises it's wild-ass-guessing. But, luckily, the thing you're replying to doesn't even try to suggest that by any reasonable reading of it. 21:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

By the time you see the cuboid eclipse, it's already too late. Resistance is futile. ProphetZarquon (talk) 23:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Not for everyone. The weak will perish. -- Hkmaly (talk) 20:33, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Given that the moon is slightly oblate, would an oblate eclipse be possible when the angular sizes of the moon and sun are almost the same? EHusmark (talk) 09:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

A good question, but the diagram shows the sun as being oblate, so I don't think the intention was to reference the slight (but real) oblate nature of the moon. Good catch, though. Dextrous Fred (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
The Moon has an equatorial diameter of ~3576.2km, polar diameter of ~3472.0km. 104ish km difference. The Sun is near-spherical, said to be less than 10km difference between equatorial and polar diameters, which projected inwards to 'Moon equivalent distance' is even more practically zero. But as it would be distorted at roughly the same angle as the Moon (spin axis of each varyies maybe +/-5 degrees, depending on what point of each orbit everything is) it would always be <105km difference so long as the Sun's oblativity weren't double that of the Moon (or prolate to any degree). Moon-'mountains' seem to be about 2.5km high, so local rim-variations won't actually add/subtract much from any oval-adjustments.
Anyway, 90km in 3500km(+/-) is around a quarter of a percent of variation. And a handful of millionths of a degree, subtended to the Earth observer, if my best-/worst-case calculations that I just did are correct (roughly 1/60th of an arc-second is one of the answers I pulled out, in case anyone wants to sanity-check what I just did on the back of this 'ere envelope). 18:56, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

"A normal Sun-Moon-Earth eclipse seen from the Moon would either be ineffectual or perfectly normal 'night-time'" -- The shadow on the Earth should be visible from the dark side, probably with the naked eye but certainly with modest optics. Perhaps it's not dramatic but it would still be interesting. 03:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, here's an example: NASA picture of Moon's shadow during solar eclipse Admiral Memo (talk) 05:53, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
As the author of the phrase, to clarify that I was refering mostly to: 1) ineffectual because you're sunlit on the far side and can't see the Earth at all, or 2) 'normal night-time' (ok, not perfectly, but nearly so) because you have a 99.9999...% "full-Earth" amount of earthshine illuminating you. As opposed to Earth-viewed eclipses where all (direct/reflected) illumination is conspicuously absent for a number of minutes. (Or much, for partial(solar/lunar) or annular(solar).)
Being on the Moon for a lunar-eclipse (even partial, if you're somewhere on the right bit) is far more significant. Unless you're on the far-side, in which case it's an extreme non-event just as being there during the solar eclipse is (but 'essentially normal night' instead of 'essentially normal day').
Perhaps some fun could be had by being out on the limbs/poles of the lunar surface, raised high enough against the local surface to have significant 'both sides' experience (become an actual bailey's bead/miniscule gap between them? ...not that it would be personally so obvious as such). Just remember to account for libration, when you choose your spot! ;) 09:49, 19 August 2023 (UTC)