1190: "Time"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

ucim
Posts: 6827
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Blindposted from the present - a long story.
jovialbard wrote:I find it hard to buy that no matter where you look in the night sky, at no matter what angle, any object movement will be perpendicular to a line at an angle equivalent to your latitude. If that were the case, why is it not true for a setting sun? Does the earth move around the sun fast enough that during the time of a sunset it would affect the angle that the sun sets??? If not then the sun is static in the night(/day) sky and should be moving at the same angle as everything else up there... right??? (eta: I'm probably not getting something)
The earth is the center of the universe. It is motionless.

The entire universe revolves around the earth. The fixed stars, of course, revolve around it the same way every time. There is a train track that runs around the earth, roughly above the equator, but at a 22.5 degree angle to it. It is attached to the universe, not the earth. So, that track also moves with the fixed stars. If you happen to be near the equator and see the track, don't touch it. It's moving at a thousand miles an hour and will give you a smackdown.

The sun is a 93 million mile high candle, carried by a train that runs on that track (which itself is moving around the earth with the fixed stars). The train that carries it runs around the (moving) track once a year. 365 days in the year, 360 degrees in a circle, close enough. So, the sun seems to lag behind the stars by a degree a day - the same amount that the train has moved. But because the track is tilted, the sun also moves "up" and "down" (North and South) depending on where the train is on the track. It covers about 45 degrees of north-southness in half a year, and then comes back.

In one day (one 180th of a half-year) the sun moves (warning - linear approximation of a sine wave) one 180-th of 45 degrees, or about a quarter of a degree.

So, not much. But since the sun actually does change position (north to south) throughout the year, it will also change descent angle throughout the year, because the angle made by the fixed stars against the horizon depends on where on the horizon (wrt west) the stars are setting, since they move in a circle around the earth, not in a straight line.

Jose
edits in green
Last edited by ucim on Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:54 am UTC, edited 4 times in total.
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

BlueCrab
Posts: 304
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:10 am UTC
Location: Connecticut Yankee in Virginia

Re: 1190: "Time"

ofvn2vw1872 wrote:
Latent22 wrote:
Spoiler:
Ok I've just solved it!!!!
They live in a world with more than one sun! This is why they have walked for so many days and had no sunset. Until this night when they have hit a night with all the other extra sun's below the horizon and then the final visible one setting allowing it to finally go dark. All the previous sunsets were hidden by the extra suns in the sky.
Also this also solves the big running question of why the sea is acting strange and rising far beyond normal. It is just because of the solar alignment that happens to be pulling the sea up more than normal!
Spoiler:
It reminds me of a short story (by someone, I don't remember who), in which this event (a darkness in a multi-star system) occurred, regularly, but with enough spacing that it threw the whole world in to chaos. Let's hope we don't find hoards of villagers chasing astronomers down the mountain in the next few newpix.

This question's been answered, but for extra points who's read Flying Sorcerers by David Gerrold and Larry Niven?

mscha wrote:I'm pretty sure they slept, probably overnight:
1. When Megan was sleeping at the beach, on the sandcastle. (Around frame 259.)
2. By the river³. (around frame 1130.)
3. Under the tree⁴. (around frame 1350.)
And who knows what happened during the first fade...

I guess my giant hedgemolpy/out of water snapping turtle is a topiary. So who's going around sculpting topiaries?!
Wiki Wiki Wiki Wiki Grapevine, Grapevine

"Kvetcher-upper" -- one who complains while ketchupping? - CasCat

“Pretty much everything tastes better if you eat it in the shower.” - ggh

Eternal Density
Posts: 5574
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

But on the other paw... Squirpy!

jjjdavidson wrote:Also, I'm not ignoring all the people who are asking for charts of their personal posting history. It's just going to be a few days before I can run the results─especially since I've decided that they would look cooler as polar charts, which will require some recoding (if I can make them work at all).

It's all related!
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:
jjjdavidson wrote:Uh-oh. I'm disturbed by a closer look at the results from Astrometry.
Spoiler:
Zorin_75's results say "158 arcsec/pixel" over an image size of 1024 x 682. At 3600" per degree, that's about 23 pixels / degree. If Zorin used the full width of the original frame (553px), that converts to 292 arcsec/pixel, or about 12 pixels / degree. But the sun circles I was drawing yesterday, which I thought were a little undersized, run from 21 to 23 pixels, making the sun about four times its proper size. (If Zorin's submission was an enlargement of only part of the original width, the discrepancy gets even worse.)
Does this mean their sun is too big? Has earth moved closer, or has the sun enlarged? Can somebody with more of a clue than me check the sun's size against Sagittarius? (Or the moon's, since they're the nearly the same?)

That might be another explanation for the enormous tide.

Which begs the question, what planet are they on that they have the same constellations?

I had to think about this a little while. If the sun is enlarging, tides won't be affected (except by changes to sea level due to changing temperature). If they're currently moving closer to the sun, there's going to be more to attract their attention than rising seas. ("Holy mustard, it's hot! And where did the moon go?") If they've moved closer to the sun long ago, they should be used to the altered tides.

A shifted moon would be a better explanation. A relatively small shrinkage [ETA: Wrong!] of the moon's orbit would make the moon geostationary, which would cause a permanent high tide at two points on earth.

As for your second question: From anywhere in the solar system, parallax would be slight enough that to the unaided eye constellations would look pretty much unchanged.

BlueCrab wrote:...but for extra points who's read Flying Sorcerers by David Gerrold and Larry Niven?

I have; it was fun trying to decide which gods (or wives) corresponded to which F&SF writers. It's getting Randamned hard to find a copy.

ETA: Clerk of the Newpage! I decree that you write posts that I'll be able to read when I get up in the mornip (which generally happens at least a newpix before I actually wake up). If you want to mention a good F&SF book that hasn't already come up, that's a bonus.
Last edited by jjjdavidson on Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:04 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. Ex-Loopist.

ucim
Posts: 6827
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

jjjdavidson wrote:A relatively small shrinkage of the moon's orbit would make the moon geostationary, which would cause a permanent high tide at two points on earth.
Huh? Geostationary orbit is 25,000 miles up. The moon is 250,000 miles up. I guess the difference is just a zero. Really, nothing at all!

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

k.bookbinder
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

That was, quite possibly, one of the most entertaining ketchups I have had. I found it all incredibly exciting and informative. Once again, I am blown away by the brilliance that surrounds me here (and not without a fair amount of envy). I have nothing to add, really, other than to say that the analysis was terribly fun!

Oh, but I do have a question. All the analysis seemed to be based on the assumption that we, as observers, are facing due West, correct? Would it make a difference if we were, in fact, facing Northwest or West by Northwest?

jjjdavidson wrote:Completely off the current topic: Fellow Waiters, I'm still hoping for responses to my survey. I'm looking for your opinions about which frames of Time were the most significant. Not your favorite frames, but the ones that you think had the biggest impact when they first appeared. Please read details at the link above if you're interested.
Spoiler:
It's not a popularity contest, and I'm not going to tally the votes; your lists will be the starting data, not the result. I'll collect suggestions through at least the 10th-12th of July, so there's no rush. ☻
────────────────
Also, I'm not ignoring all the people who are asking for charts of their personal posting history. It's just going to be a few days before I can run the results─especially since I've decided that they would look cooler as polar charts, which will require some recoding (if I can make them work at all).

I'm going to have to go back through about 40NP looking for requests, because I foolishly haven't been taking notes as I read. But I'll do my best to get to all of you soon─even the 4-poster who piped up!

I'll ask here if that is OK, but did you get my PM about that? Also, I forgot to ask about my posting history, as well.
"HAL9000" This thread is a goldmine for signatures.
"StratPlayer" All in all, that sand paper rubbed me the wrong way.
"charlie_grumbles" The secret of the geeks. "Copy, Borrow, Steal, Succeed"
"ucim" There's a forestful of treeish people here.

Welcome! Confused? See here.

Khrushy
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 7:00 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

If I were Lord Randall, I'd almost certainly take a real starmap, then distort it just enough to fuck with us.

So far, that idea is looking pretty reasonable.

BlitzGirl
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Agreed. But he seems to be doing so in a very specific way.

Otherwise, why correct the teeny riverish mustard anomaly?
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:

<Profile
~.~.FAQ->

taixzo
Posts: 1617
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:54 am UTC
Location: The Present

Re: 1190: "Time"

WaitONG

Edit: I am also off-to-coma-ONG. I bid everyone, as has never been more appropriate in the OTT, a Good Night.
Last edited by taixzo on Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:03 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
BlitzGirl the Next
BlitzGirl the Fast
Knight Temporal
Bringer of the Light

Useless utilities: Newpix clock for Mac OS X, Newpix clock for Ubuntu

Sandgarden - a relaxing experience for Time Waiters

Best wishes to GnomeAnne, ColletArrow and january1may! One day you will all join me in the Present!

jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

ucim wrote:
jjjdavidson wrote:A relatively small shrinkage of the moon's orbit would make the moon geostationary, which would cause a permanent high tide at two points on earth.
Huh? Geostationary orbit is 25,000 miles up. The moon is 250,000 miles up. I guess the difference is just a zero. Really, nothing at all! :)

Jose

Oops; years ago some friends and I looked at this, and I think my memory has slipped a cog. Geostationary for the moon would be higher than for a comsat, because, unlike man-made satellites, the moon has a significant fraction of the earth's mass, requiring a real two-body calculation. But it wouldn't be nearly as far out as the moon's current orbit; you're right. My bad.

Actually, I've been meaning to submit moving the moon to geosynch orbit as a What-If? question. All sorts of fun results: The earth becomes more egg-shaped (earthquakes and lava), we get two permanent high tides (much flooding), one hemisphere's lovers have ten times the moonlight while the other hemisphere's lovers have no moon at all, most of the regular geosynch comsats fall out of orbit─and lunar eclipses become much more common (and much longer).

A nearly geostationary moon would be even more fun, as the effects gradually creep across the globe, perhaps at the rate of a few miles a day.
Edit: Fixed punctuation.
Last edited by jjjdavidson on Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:07 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. Ex-Loopist.

HES
Posts: 4889
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1190: "Time"

Khrushy wrote:If I were Lord Randall, I'd almost certainly take a real starmap, then distort it just enough to fuck with us.

So far, that idea is looking pretty reasonable.

"My hobby: Taking something real then distorting it just enough to fuck with my captive and obsessive audience"

Last edited by HES on Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:09 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
He/Him/His

ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

jjjsurvey:
Spoiler:
Impact:
- 35, 1264, 1485, 1554, 1579, 2391
Suspense:
- 800, 1209, 1264, 1553, 2233

What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

HES
Posts: 4889
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

It's very cold
He/Him/His

BlitzGirl
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

It's the one on the left:
Spoiler:
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:

<Profile
~.~.FAQ->

jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:jjjsurvey:
Spoiler:
Impact:
- 35, 1264, 1485, 1554, 1579, 2391
Suspense:
- 800, 1209, 1264, 1553, 2233

What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

Technically, it's a plot of angles against radial distance from an origin (theta by r); I've read that matplotlib won't even allow negative values for r. Less stuffily, it's any plot that can be made to turn in a circle and bite its own tail. That's what I'll be doing (if it works): plotting post activity on a 24-hour clock dial, midnight to midnight.

BlitzGirl wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

It's the one on the left:
Spoiler:

...Or that works too. :D
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. Ex-Loopist.

wizpretz
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:28 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

jjjdavidson wrote:Completely off the current topic: Fellow Waiters, I'm still hoping for responses to my survey. I'm looking for your opinions about which frames of Time were the most significant. Not your favorite frames, but the ones that you think had the biggest impact when they first appeared. Please read details at the link above if you're interested.

It's not a popularity contest, and I'm not going to tally the votes; your lists will be the starting data, not the result. I'll collect suggestions through at least the 10th-12th of July, so there's no rush. ☻

I'll just answer the cliffhangers for now, if that's fine. I'll make sure to answer the Wow!/Neat!/D'awww frames later on.
Cliffhangers:
884: Megan says "Bye".
1742: "Snake!"
2231: Raptorcat jumps onto Cueball's face
If you want more you could include Lapetite's first appearance and the first facebug.

I don't have much to contribute to the astronomy discussion, but I'll still be here, reading.

Rule110
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

k.bookbinder wrote:That was, quite possibly, one of the most entertaining ketchups I have had. I found it all incredibly exciting and informative. Once again, I am blown away by the brilliance that surrounds me here (and not without a fair amount of envy). I have nothing to add, really, other than to say that the analysis was terribly fun!

Oh, but I do have a question. All the analysis seemed to be based on the assumption that we, as observers, are facing due West, correct? Would it make a difference if we were, in fact, facing Northwest or West by Northwest?

Actually, it's kind of necessary for the sun to be setting (and therefore, because the sun set near the horizontal center of the frame, for the camera to be facing) south of west. That's because it must be around November for the sun to be in or near the constellation Scorpius, and in November the sun sets south of west, viewed from anywhere on earth except parts of the arctic and antarctic where it doesn't set at all.
If you're lost you can look--and you will find me
Time after Time...

IceIsNice
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 7:12 pm UTC
Location: Neat

Re: 1190: "Time"

Dang. Just when the OTT slows down enough that it seems like it's safe for me to join, we get stars.

Stars!

And I'm back to an evening's ketchup. Now to fire up Stellarium until I can't focus anymore. Needing to convince myself regarding some of the astronomical analyses going on.
Hi! Probably.

ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

jjjdavidson wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:jjjsurvey:
Spoiler:
Impact:
- 35, 1264, 1485, 1554, 1579, 2391
Suspense:
- 800, 1209, 1264, 1553, 2233

What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

Technically, it's a plot of angles against radial distance from an origin (theta by r); I've read that matplotlib won't even allow negative values for r. Less stuffily, it's any plot that can be made to turn in a circle and bite its own tail. That's what I'll be doing (if it works): plotting post activity on a 24-hour clock dial, midnight to midnight.

BlitzGirl wrote:
ChronosDragon wrote:What qualifies as a polar chart, by the way? Is it just a graph that happens to be on a polar coordinate system? Or is there another difference?

It's the one on the left:
Spoiler:

...Or that works too.

Ooooh, clever! Also, seems to me that negative values for r wouldn't make much sense on a clock - rather, should be displacement from some "normal" value of r.

Arky
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 7:23 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Song the OTC is putting into my head: "Under the Milky Way" by The Church

And it's something quite peculiar,
Something that's shimmering and white.
Under the milky way tonight

Wish I knew what you were looking for.
Might have known what you would find.
Wish I knew what you were looking for.
Might have known what you would find.
Veteran of the One True Thread. And now the Too True Thread?

MattTheTubaGuy
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Well I did some calculations on two stars that have moved quite a bit.

η Ser and ε Sco, the first one, I marked twice, not realising it was a star that had moved.
Using their proper motion, and their approximate distance in the sky (measured using Stellarium), I got 14,300 years for η Ser, and 12,900 for ε Sco, both in the future, which would be consistent with Antares going supernova, and is now only very faint.

ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

14000 years in the future O_o

That's like all of human civilization over again. Who knows what could have happened in that time. (Unless everyone did cryo-sleep for the whole thing).

ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

YEARSINTHEFUTUREONG

But not many

k.bookbinder
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:17 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Tis Time for coma. I should think Cueball would be sleepy as well, by now. It has been a most exciting dip todip. To all I say good night, coma well. And to those still gazing upon the starry wonder of Time, keep the faith, and wait for it.

Wait for it...
Wait for it...
Wait for it...
Wait for it...
Wait for it...
"HAL9000" This thread is a goldmine for signatures.
"StratPlayer" All in all, that sand paper rubbed me the wrong way.
"charlie_grumbles" The secret of the geeks. "Copy, Borrow, Steal, Succeed"
"ucim" There's a forestful of treeish people here.

Welcome! Confused? See here.

BlitzGirl
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:14000 years in the future O_o

That's like all of human civilization over again. Who knows what could have happened in that time. (Unless everyone did cryo-sleep for the whole thing).

Clearly it's enough Time for humans to evolve into two distinct races: innocent stick figures and that other kind that eats innocent stick figures.
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:

<Profile
~.~.FAQ->

sla29970
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: Santa Cruz

Re: 1190: "Time"

Rule110 wrote:Actually, it's kind of necessary for the sun to be setting (and therefore, because the sun set near the horizontal center of the frame, for the camera to be facing) south of west. That's because it must be around November for the sun to be in or near the constellation Scorpius, and in November the sun sets south of west, viewed from anywhere on earth except parts of the arctic and antarctic where it doesn't set at all.

If it's 13000 years hence that's half a precession cycle so the sun will be around Scorpius near the end of northern spring/start of summer.

Rule110
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Well I did some calculations on two stars that have moved quite a bit.
Spoiler:

η Ser and ε Sco, the first one, I marked twice, not realising it was a star that had moved.

Using their proper motion, and their approximate distance in the sky (measured using Stellarium), I got 14,300 years for η Ser, and 12,900 for ε Sco, both in the future, which would be consistent with Antares going supernova, and is now only very faint.

Hmm, that's just about half a cycle of axial precession, which changes things. It would make it May instead of November, so looking north of west instead of south of west. (Ninja'd!)

But... what about the stars that have not noticeably moved? Can you check whether they would be expected to have little or no movement over the same time period?
If you're lost you can look--and you will find me
Time after Time...

MattTheTubaGuy
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

I just realised something. Stellarium has the proper motion data, so if you put in a year around 15500, then the stars will move to the right place!
Now to work out exactly when (and where!)

SkUrRiEr
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:22 am UTC
Location: Stuck in the past: Newpage 961

Re: 1190: "Time"

Blindpost from np 955

BlitzGirl wrote:Wait - so foilman, edfel, and NoMouse share the November 7th birthday?

It's not one baby - it's triplets!

Do I need to quote the probability of two people in a group of 20 sharing a birthday? We have many more people than here, even including potential Randallettes.

BlueCrab
Posts: 304
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 12:10 am UTC
Location: Connecticut Yankee in Virginia

Re: 1190: "Time"

mscha wrote:Finally, anyone have an idea what Megan was doing on the right side of the frame in frame 2378?

newpixbot wrote:FONGERVILLE...
Spoiler:

[right][size=75][i]--

She might be pulling long grass for a small cushion, but it really looks to me like she's relieving herself.

And Latent22 has better eyes than me. Picking up a rock is good, too...
Wiki Wiki Wiki Wiki Grapevine, Grapevine

"Kvetcher-upper" -- one who complains while ketchupping? - CasCat

“Pretty much everything tastes better if you eat it in the shower.” - ggh

ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

I edited a couple pages on the wiki, in case anyone's interested to know. Tarot cards and newpixbot. Tarot cards is wanting of some actual tarot cards as of now

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:I just realised something. Stellarium has the proper motion data, so if you put in a year around 15500, then the stars will move to the right place!
Now to work out exactly when (and where!)

I'm anxious to see what you come up with!

sla29970 wrote:
Rule110 wrote:Actually, it's kind of necessary for the sun to be setting (and therefore, because the sun set near the horizontal center of the frame, for the camera to be facing) south of west. That's because it must be around November for the sun to be in or near the constellation Scorpius, and in November the sun sets south of west, viewed from anywhere on earth except parts of the arctic and antarctic where it doesn't set at all.

If it's 13000 years hence that's half a precession cycle so the sun will be around Scorpius near the end of northern spring/start of summer.

For the non-astronomically-informed, what's a precession cycle?

Exodies
Posts: 919
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:36 pm UTC
Location: Blackwaterside

Re: Hi buffygirl!

nerdsniped wrote:
mscha wrote:
BlitzGirl wrote:Oompa loompa doop-a-dee doo, I've got another puzzle for you: was looking back at my molpy drawing attachments (there were four in one post) and noticed that for some reason the normal and large sized attachments had identical views, and the small and mini attachments had identical views, but the two pairs were separated by roughly 40 views. Not sure why.

Hmm, interesting...
BlitzGirl wrote:Edit to add more sizes.

Those wouldn't be the two smaller ones, by any chance?
Even if they would, the edit was only 7 minutesH later, and 40 views is perhaps a bit too much...
The only other thing I can note is that the two small ones are displayed in a different way (caption instead of a tooltip). But why that is (size?) or whether that could make a difference in view count, no idea.

Browsers are complicated beasts nowadays. Maybe one of the common browsers will prefetch at most N hidden images on a page, and there are N-2 other spoilered images upstream of your post on the same page? Or something of that nature.

"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly how a browser operates, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory, which states that this has already happened."

There may also be caching of the image files by various components - your ISP, the proxy servers of the hosting service - the counting code will not be told about requests fulfilled by these devices.
Ware2 guv? The Book of Dave

edo
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:05 pm UTC
Location: ~TrApPeD iN mY PhOnE~

Re: 1190: "Time"

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Well I did some calculations on two stars that have moved quite a bit.
Spoiler:

η Ser and ε Sco, the first one, I marked twice, not realising it was a star that had moved.
Using their proper motion, and their approximate distance in the sky (measured using Stellarium), I got 14,300 years for η Ser, and 12,900 for ε Sco, both in the future, which would be consistent with Antares going supernova, and is now only very faint.

If your right, we're going to have fun getting a latitude, or even a date(not that that matters anymore): procession - 1 degree every 70 years. IF spring equinox has progressed ~200 degrees, is it still on March 21st?

I'm getting a solar position of 14h 55m. Assuming we are still in the Age of Aquarius,putting the date at Nov 8th (w error of about a day)

other useful details:
I measure 7.9845 pixels/degree
the stars moved 190.55970193 pixels in 15 newpix (sqrt(36313)pixels)
there are 6.36 minutes of Time between Newpices
Co-proprietor of a Mome and Pope Shope

Exodies
Posts: 919
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:36 pm UTC
Location: Blackwaterside

Re: 1190: "Time"

slinches wrote:
nerdsniped wrote:How deep is that stream? Can they keep Megan's wound dry?

Depending on how clean the water is it might be a good idea to clean Megan's wound here before they move on. Who knows how unsanitary the moleopard's claws might have been prior to the attack.

I think she fell on something; wasn't clawed by the Leo.

OMR I'm getting behinder and behinder. Greetings from 34 NP ago.
Ware2 guv? The Book of Dave

Valarya
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:27 pm UTC
Location: Nashville

Re: 1190: "Time"

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:more in depth analysis comparison with Stellarium:
Spoiler:

Red = blank space where there should be a star
Green = new star (or possibly a planet)
Yellow = stars that have moved
Blue = constellations.

Thank you! I've been waiting for someone with skills to do this. This makes my brain hurt way less so, again, thank you. Awesome job.

yappobiscuits wrote:Time for a suitable song...

"Stars"
Ottification of the song of the same name from Les Misérables.
Spoiler:
There, out in the darkness
Cuegan are resting
Near a neat tree
On a mountainside
On their great journey
They never shall yield
Till they get to the top
Till they get to the top

They know their way in the dark
To learn and discover some more
And those who follow the path to the summit
Shall have their reward
And if a raptorcat should attack
The stick,
The claws!

Stars
Scarce to be counted
Filling the newpix
With order and light
You are the sentinels
Silent and sure
Keeping watch in the night
Keeping watch in the night

You know your place in the sky
Returns and returns
And is always the same
And if a raptorcat should attack
They'll fight back again

And so it must be, for Randall has written
That their journey must carry on
And we will see what comes if we wait
For the next ONG

That we may see them
Safe to the top
I will wait for it
Till then
This I swear
This I swear by the stars

I'm sorry newpixbot.. I think I found someone new. I might have to ask yappo to marry me.

And now it's time to . But before, I have to say that I love jovialbard's recognition of the possible due-date! Happy OTT'ing.
Caridnal of Cupcakes | Friaress of Frosting | Pope of Pocket Pastries
Occasional basement dweller.

BlitzGirl
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:48 am UTC
Location: Out of the basement for Yip 6! Schizoblitz: 115/2672 NP
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Exodies wrote:I think she fell on something; wasn't clawed by the Leo.

OMR I'm getting behinder and behinder. Greetings from 34 NP ago.

Greetings, Exodies. Happy blitzing!

If you check back to newpix 2250, Megan refers to her wound as "claw marks."
Knight Temporal of the One True Comic
BlitzGirl the Pink, Mopey Molpy Mome
Spoiler:

<Profile
~.~.FAQ->

patzer
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:48 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:I edited a couple pages on the wiki, in case anyone's interested to know. Tarot cards and newpixbot. Tarot cards is wanting of some actual tarot cards as of now

ggh had added some tarot cards to the wiki, then removed them without explanation. I readded them. There's still a lot of work to be done, however.
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands. –Douglas Adams

Latent22
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:57 pm UTC
Location: NZ

Re: 1190: "Time"

STARSMOVEONG

And lets turn on the light switch

Spoiler:
Last edited by Latent22 on Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:09 am UTC, edited 3 times in total.

sla29970
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: Santa Cruz

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:For the non-astronomically-informed, what's a precession cycle?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_prec ... (astronomy)

and it is extraordinary hubris to presume that any calendar will be in use for more than 1000 years, so I am avoiding the names of months and choose to specify time of year by the seasons

Rule110
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 6:14 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

ChronosDragon wrote:
sla29970 wrote:
Rule110 wrote:Actually, it's kind of necessary for the sun to be setting (and therefore, because the sun set near the horizontal center of the frame, for the camera to be facing) south of west. That's because it must be around November for the sun to be in or near the constellation Scorpius, and in November the sun sets south of west, viewed from anywhere on earth except parts of the arctic and antarctic where it doesn't set at all.

If it's 13000 years hence that's half a precession cycle so the sun will be around Scorpius near the end of northern spring/start of summer.

For the non-astronomically-informed, what's a precession cycle?

The earth's axis moves relative to the rest of the sky, very slowly. It remains at the same 23-degree angle with respect to the plane of its orbit, but it wobbles so that the axis traces out the walls of a cone. It takes 26,000 years for the axis to precess (wobble) all the way around the cone back to where it started.

To imagine the effect of half a cycle, imagine that it is the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere, where the north pole points most toward the sun and sun is "in" (that is, appears juxtaposed with when looking from earth) the constellation Sagittarius. Directly opposite the sun (that is, in the exact opposite direction from earth) is the constellation Gemini, which is therefore visible in the night sky all night from nearly anywhere on earth.

Now, reverse the tilt of the axis, so that the north axis points away from the sun at the same angle that it previously pointed toward it. This makes it the summer solstice instead of the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere. But Gemini is still directly opposite the sun, and the sun is still in Sagittarius. So Gemini is now prominent in the night sky in summer instead of in winter. If we keep the months of the year aligned with the astronomical seasons, then the sun is now in Sagittarius in December instead of in June. In related effects, some constellations such as Sagittarius and Scorpius that were on the southern hemisphere of the star globe, south of the star globe's equator, are now north of it, and so are more prominent in the northern hemisphere's sky for more of the year than before. And the reverse is true for other constellations. The earth's axis is also no longer aligned with Polaris; instead, Polaris is now 47 degrees away from the celestial north pole and traces out a circle with a 47 degree radius instead of being nearly fixed in the sky.

The precession is so slow that only a very long-lived creature that is very interested in time would tend to notice. (A TemporalKraken, perhaps.) However, if I recall correctly, there's at least one Renaissance-era clock that includes a mechanism that rotates once in 26,000 years to track and display the precession.
Last edited by Rule110 on Fri Jun 28, 2013 5:11 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
If you're lost you can look--and you will find me
Time after Time...