Eclipse
Archived15 replies · 324 views
Not just the UK, they ain't like solar eclipses, anyone in a nightime zone now can see it.
Tis one of the rare occassions when you can JUST appreciate the moon for what it is, for brief instants it becomes not "the moon", the like in the night sky, but suddenly reveals itself as a great big fuck off boulder a couple of hundred thousand miles away, forever falling through the emptiness.
Tell you one shot I want to see, the one looking back from the moon, that would be cool....the whole Earth, surrounded in a glowing anular sunset :wow:
BTW, did you know that recently it has been found that Earth has not one natural satellite, but as many as five, all the extra ones are in odd orbits rather than the more traditional common-sentred elipse that "Luna" follows. There are also inumerable La-grange objects, but they can never be said to be orbiting a single body, being as they are, at the "slack water" of the gravitic tides.
See what staring into space does to me :D
i saw it, quite impresive,not a total eclipse up here, but i was in formed in central europe it was a total eclipse
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote: i saw it, quite impresive,not a total eclipse up here, but i was in formed in central europe it was a total eclipse
Just had another look.........its beautiful!
Fookin' hell. It's been rainy and cold and cloudy all day. Still is. I can't see it.
And of all days it had to be tonight. Damn you, Mother Nature. 
Doctor? wrote: Tis one of the rare occassions when you can JUST appreciate the moon for what it is, for brief instants it becomes not "the moon", the like in the night sky, but suddenly reveals itself as a great big fuck off boulder a couple of hundred thousand miles away, forever falling through the emptiness.
BTW See what staring into space does to me :D
Explains it all. That's Beautiful. Ste. Dr.? Counting on some class- the pictures making it online.
patrick stewart appreciation society wrote: i wonder why a lunar ecipse lasts longer than a solar eclipse??
Cos the Earth's shadow is so much bigger than the moon's, and they happen so much more often cos the aligment needed is a lot easier to occur with the moon being so close.
I don't think it quite achieved true totallllity, there was always a lick of sunlight on it. They are not like solar eclipses.....where the moon's shadow sweeps a path accross Earth's surface....requiring you to be in it's path to see it.....with a lunar eclipse, the moon is in our shadow, no light is getting to it, so regardless of your position on the planet, if the moon is visible to you, you will see more or less the exact same thing as everyone else....so nobody seen it any more total than anyone else who was looking at that time.
If anyone was to try and convince me of an outside force shaping our existence on this rock....their best way would be to remind me that the moon is 400 times smaller tha our local star, and is exactly 400 times closer......that's the only reason solar eclipses work.
Doctor? wrote:
as they are, at the "slack water" of the gravitic tides.
See what staring into space does to me :D
Good job that ITV got Sept. 13th 1999 badly wrong!
Craig W wrote:
Doctor? wrote:
as they are, at the "slack water" of the gravitic tides.
See what staring into space does to me :D
Good job that ITV got Sept. 13th 1999 badly wrong!
I may regret this....but....
EH? the 1999 eclipse y'mean? I had 6 pairs of shades on :D
Bugger was nowhere NEAR totality this far north :( and after me looking forward to it since about 1977 (no, honestly I was, I always remember paddy Moore trotting out the fact every time eclipses were mentioned, and while I don't like to wait on people who are terrifically unlreliable.....the ole newtonian universe never lets me down :D
Doctor? wrote:
Craig W wrote:
Doctor? wrote:
as they are, at the "slack water" of the gravitic tides.
See what staring into space does to me :D
Good job that ITV got Sept. 13th 1999 badly wrong!
I may regret this....but....
EH? the 1999 eclipse y'mean? I had 6 pairs of shades on :D
Bugger was nowhere NEAR totality this far north :( and after me looking forward to it since about 1977 (no, honestly I was, I always remember paddy Moore trotting out the fact every time eclipses were mentioned, and while I don't like to wait on people who are terrifically unlreliable.....the ole newtonian universe never lets me down :D
Commander Koenig would be ashamed of you Cambo!
I saw the date flash accross my eyes as I read that.
Shame on me.
in my defence, it was never my fave Gerry show, too much nonsense and far too many shots of landau looking at the viewscreen with a baffled expression. Had a childhood crush on Barbara Bain mind you.
Really though, how fast was the moon meant to be moving in that show? about 100C judging by all the worlds they encountered. Gimme UFO anyday, or Dr Who, where at least the impossibility of things is just presented as such.
LOL Fortunately this show is not ratings dependent and will continue to happen regular as clockwork for the forseeable future.
I suppose you seen Halle Bopp back in 97 and thought "blurry star" too 
Aye had a quick look about 9pm.Partially eclipsed at that time.Didn't look later on.
Recall that eclipse of the sun in August 1999.Was alright but i didn't get my hands on any of them special sunglasses to observe the full effect or whatever it was we were supposed to see.Remember some thick twat explaining when asked what an eclipse of the sun was and replied it's when the sun comes BETWEEN the earth and the moon
