[HN Gopher] Moon
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Moon
        
       Author : todsacerdoti
       Score  : 3047 points
       Date   : 2024-12-17 17:26 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ciechanow.ski)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ciechanow.ski)
        
       | doctoboggan wrote:
       | As a big fan of both the Moon and ciechanow.ski this article is
       | right up my alley.
       | 
       | During the 2024 solar eclipse I was explaining to people how an
       | eclipse _must_ occur during a new moon, and this article would
       | have really helped. The discussion also made me realize how
       | little most people spend thinking about the solar system and the
       | relationship between the moon, sun, and earth. These things
       | fascinate me (I think it 's just the sheer scale of it all), and
       | I hope to be able to get more people interested as well. The
       | solar eclipse was great for that!
        
         | halyconWays wrote:
         | People are impressed if you can name the current moon phase and
         | tell them what it'll be next. But it only takes a mental model
         | of where the sun, earth, and moon orbits are relative to each
         | other. I also find people are intrigued by the concept of
         | earthshine, and often haven't noticed it until you point it
         | out.
        
           | veunes wrote:
           | Earthshine is such a cool phenomenon to point out
        
           | GJim wrote:
           | > People are impressed if you can name the current moon phase
           | and tell them what it'll be next
           | 
           |  _I 'm speechless_
        
             | wiredfool wrote:
             | And once you internalize this, every image where there are
             | moons pasted into the sky without understanding this will
             | trigger you. It's like bad kerning. Once you see it, you
             | can't unsee it.
        
           | I_complete_me wrote:
           | For a waxing moon the circular arc is on the right hand side
           | and for a waning moon the circular arc is on the left hand
           | side [Here in the Northern Hemisphere]. It would have been
           | nice if the mnemonics Decreasing & Cresting worked but they
           | don't. I personally use Developing & Collapsing to refer,
           | respectively, to the waxing and waning moon. Has anyone a
           | better couple of words than these?
        
             | GuB-42 wrote:
             | In French we have "premier quartier" and "dernier quartier"
             | for "first quarter" and "last quarter" respectively. The
             | mnemonics work with lower case letters: p and d.
             | 
             | In English, the "d" for "decreasing" also works in
             | lowercase, I guess that you can use "p" for "progressing".
        
         | lifestyleguru wrote:
         | > solar eclipse I was explaining to people how an eclipse must
         | occur during a new moon
         | 
         | Hey, that's the first the time I realized this.
        
           | rqtwteye wrote:
           | And a lunar eclipse only during full moon.... These
           | constraints made it easier to predict eclipses in the past.
        
         | BoxOfRain wrote:
         | The really satisfying thing for me was when I was on a sailing
         | course and was instructed in how the moon causes the tides, and
         | how the phase of the moon corresponds to springs and neaps.
        
         | veunes wrote:
         | Thinking about how the Moon, a body over 380,000 kilometers
         | away, can perfectly block the Sun (something 400 times larger
         | than itself) because of their relative distances is just mind-
         | blowing for me
        
         | trymas wrote:
         | Similarly - as full moon must be opposite to the sun, full moon
         | moonrise happens around sunset and moonset happens around
         | sunrise.
         | 
         | Also full moon rises the highest in winter, contrary to the sun
         | - when it's at it's lowest[1].
         | 
         | Funny things happen at the poles where sun is above/below
         | horizon for half a year:
         | https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/a/27750
         | 
         | [1] the further from equator you are the more pronounced it is.
        
       | sbaner2k wrote:
       | the author is different gravy
        
       | rogual wrote:
       | This is what JavaScript is for.
        
       | halyconWays wrote:
       | We like the moon! Because it is so close to us.
        
         | buildsjets wrote:
         | And now I want a hot toasty sandwich.
        
       | wcrossbow wrote:
       | The Moon also plays currently a very special role in my life and
       | my work days are dictated to a large extent by the current Moon
       | phase :)
       | 
       | It's not discussed in the article but we have detailed models
       | (ROLO[0] and LIME[1]) for how much light is reflected from the
       | Moon and can be captured by a telescope. Like this one can
       | radiometrically calibrate a telescope, that is, find a mapping
       | between the digital numbers coming out from the sensor and actual
       | radiance values.
       | 
       | [0] https://www.usgs.gov/media/files/rolo-lunar-model-and-
       | databa... [1] https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/24/3649/2024/
        
         | triyambakam wrote:
         | > my work days are dictated to a large extent by the current
         | Moon phase
         | 
         | Could you explain further?
        
           | wcrossbow wrote:
           | At my current employer, Kuva Space, I'm among other things
           | responsible for the commisioning and in orbit calibration of
           | the payload. The Moon is a major calibration target for us,
           | and between waxing and waining crescents I spent a lot of
           | time analyzing Moon shots to perform radiometric calibration
           | and camera parameter optimizations. The Moon doesn't know
           | about weekends and images are not always downlinked at the
           | most convenient times so that makes my life a bit more
           | hectic.
        
           | andrelaszlo wrote:
           | Werewolf hunter? Sorority nurse? Doctor specializing in
           | Cushing syndrome?
        
           | bregma wrote:
           | My wife is a social worker at the county welfare office and
           | swears there is a strong correlation between phase of the
           | moon and the nature of her work with the homeless. To the
           | point where where she checks the calendar to schedule more
           | time for crisis handling around the time of the full moon.
        
       | gclawes wrote:
       | Moon should be a state
        
       | 725686 wrote:
       | You might also enjoy minutephysics video:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBcxuM-qXec
        
       | guax wrote:
       | Is there a name for this category of website? I am seeing content
       | like this -- elaborate, animated, interactive -- more often here
       | and I wonder if its part of a new corner of the internet I am not
       | familiar with. Looks dope.
        
         | rom1v wrote:
         | I think this category is named ciechanow.ski.
        
         | banannaise wrote:
         | It's hypertext - a text-based format enhanced with other
         | elements.
        
           | nuancebydefault wrote:
           | Amazing idea!
        
             | lifestyleguru wrote:
             | There are even dedicated markup and scripting languages for
             | this. I predict this technology will be hot in 2025.
        
               | guax wrote:
               | Everything will be XML!
        
               | banannaise wrote:
               | I've even heard rumors of a data transfer protocol based
               | on the concept.
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | https://explorabl.es/ calls them "Explorable Explanations".
        
       | max_ wrote:
       | This is the future of STEM education.
       | 
       | Well written, decently comprehensive interactive documents.
       | 
       | I think such formats should be prioritised instead of textbooks
       | for creating learning materials.
       | 
       | I am really surprised almost no one is doubling down on something
       | like this. Brilliant comes close, but its not at this level.
       | 
       | Everyone in Edtech seems to be running towards AI gimmicks.
       | 
       | Thank you Ciechanowski!
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | I've seen these called "explorables" or "explorable
         | explanations" before and I really like them. I've been
         | collecting notes on them here:
         | https://simonwillison.net/tags/explorables/
         | 
         | Here's the website that coined the term: https://explorabl.es/
        
           | BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
           | Thank you for collecting and sharing these. I was so
           | impressed by the submission that my first thought was to find
           | some repository that contains the samples of a similar
           | caliber.
        
           | jasonjmcghee wrote:
           | This is a really nice collection. Thanks for putting them
           | together. I'm very partial to this writing style as well.
           | 
           | I took a crack at making it slightly nicer to write this
           | style of blog post via markdown with codeblocks you can mark
           | to execute instead of display (and hot reload + gist
           | rendering support)
           | 
           | It makes the source easy to read, even on GitHub preview,
           | etc.
           | 
           | It's what I've been using to write my recent posts.
           | 
           | https://github.com/jasonjmcghee/mdxish
           | 
           | But at the end of the day, content itself and the code that
           | powers it is more important than any framework you might use.
        
             | simonw wrote:
             | That's a really neat system. Reminds me of Observable
             | Framework, which I tried here
             | https://github.com/simonw/observable-framework-
             | experiments/b... to create this:
             | https://simonw.github.io/observable-framework-
             | experiments/pa...
        
               | jasonjmcghee wrote:
               | ah ` echo` is smart - I didn't realize that would
               | properly render in markdown editors / github, hence the
               | comment approach.
               | 
               | That observable system you made here sure renders
               | beautifully.
        
         | BuyMyBitcoins wrote:
         | I consider Kerbal Space Program to be the most rewarding game I
         | have ever played. Going into this page I was already somewhat
         | familiar with many of the concepts it presented because I had
         | encountered them during gameplay. However, having the ability
         | to modify parameters was very helpful for visualizing different
         | kinds of gravity assists. The game does not provide a way to do
         | this, so it augments my understanding massively.
         | 
         | I agree that these interactive learning materials are
         | incredibly promising towards actually understanding what is
         | being presented. In other words, this is how I actually grok
         | the concept.
        
         | mattkevan wrote:
         | Brilliant.org[1] does a good job of using explorables in their
         | learning materials, some of the best I've seen in that
         | category.
         | 
         | That said, Ciechanowski is on another level entirely.
         | 
         | [1] https://brilliant.org/
        
         | triyambakam wrote:
         | I do think that explorables are useful in understanding, but
         | man I feel overwhelmed with them. I feel like I do my t know
         | when and where to stop. I feel less anxious with a plain PDF or
         | similar. I guess it's a skill issue.
        
         | n42 wrote:
         | > I am really surprised almost no one is doubling down on
         | something like this.
         | 
         | I've thought a lot about this - every time a new one is posted.
         | I wish we could live in a world where this is what STEM
         | education looks like. I think that, ultimately, it's just very
         | high labor cost, and edtech is not known for being highly
         | lucrative.
         | 
         | Bartosz does these as a labor of love, and the world is better
         | off for it.
        
         | ciabattabread wrote:
         | We used to have those educational multimedia CD-ROMs back in
         | the '90s. Look up Microsoft Encarta 97 on YouTube.
        
       | jcims wrote:
       | This is wonderful!!! Generalizing here but we really do take the
       | moon for granted.
       | 
       | I bought a 'big ass telescope' a few years ago in an effort to
       | bootstrap a hobby that I'd flirted with for decades but never
       | really committed to. It's a Celestron 11" SCT and I really had no
       | idea what I was getting into. When I think of space I think of
       | things that are really small in the night sky, planets, galaxies,
       | nebula...(turns out most of them aren't *that* small and I
       | overshot the targets I had in mind)
       | 
       | I kept trying to photo galaxies and star clusters and all of
       | these exotic things but had a bunch of trouble with tracking with
       | long exposures. Out of frustration I ended up just pointing it at
       | the boring ol' moon to at least get used to the equipment and
       | workflows.
       | 
       | I fell in love with Luna.
       | 
       | The magnification of this scope really allowed me to explore the
       | surface in a way I never had before. I got to know the 'map' and
       | suddenly related to our celestial neighbor in a whole new way. It
       | was also the very first image I was actually not embarrassed to
       | share - https://imgur.com/a/t9b1Uug
       | 
       | I since then improved my knowledge and technical skill but the
       | month of the moon at the end of 2021 was really pretty
       | spectacular for me.
        
         | PUSH_AX wrote:
         | It's a lovely shot.
        
         | swifthesitation wrote:
         | It really is a great shot. I always daydream of showing today's
         | technology to the great the great minds from centuries ago. Not
         | sure why, but I do.
        
           | mettamage wrote:
           | And I'm here for it! :D
        
           | jcims wrote:
           | I'm sure it's different for everyone but I think it would
           | just be the unbridled enthusiasm and love for the subject
           | that they would show, the tidal dopamine surge of all the
           | mysteries that have been unlocked, the validation of all the
           | mysteries that remain. It would be amazing.
        
           | arnarbi wrote:
           | I have the same fantasy. I think it's appealing because I
           | imagine they'd be able to appreciate all the amazing things
           | behind it more than most people, dead or alive.
        
           | yard2010 wrote:
           | Me too. Sometimes in big concerts I can't help but think
           | about what would the avg roman say if he would just appear
           | here?
           | 
           | "Wow so many lights" is the first answer I can think about
           | right away
        
         | js2 wrote:
         | An 11" SCT is a commitment to use. Do you have it on a
         | permanent mount?
        
           | jcims wrote:
           | No, but i did just get a wedge so I could start tinkering
           | with polar alignment.
           | 
           | I also bought a Seestar S50 last year and have been having an
           | absolute blast with it. Feels like a renaissance in astronomy
           | is upon us.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Welcome to the hobby (even if a few years late). Pretty much
         | everyone has the same experience as you. You buy the telescope,
         | and then realize you need to buy a telescope for your telescope
         | to use as a guide scope for accurate tracking for longer
         | exposures.
         | 
         | However, those long exposures are much more likely to get
         | photobombed by an airplane or satellite. So you're really
         | better off taking shorter exposures with the highest ISO you
         | can get away with, and then just stacking them.
         | 
         | I have a much wider scope that I can do 30s exposures unguided
         | before trailing starts to become noticeable. If you can get
         | away with 15s, you'd be amazed at what you can achieve with
         | newer sensors.
         | 
         | Just some hints to help the disappointment at bay and maybe get
         | you playing with the toys
        
         | gowld wrote:
         | Is there an information resource to find local telescope owners
         | who give access to the public for viewing?
         | 
         | (startup/app idea!)
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Just search for local star parties in your area. Although, be
           | willing to bend the definition of local depending on how
           | light polluted your area is. My local is 4 hours away. Also,
           | some colleges have viewing nights available. Even in light
           | polluted areas, you can still see things for public viewings.
           | They just suck for anyone wanting to image.
           | 
           | There are tons of sites listing them, but I doubt there's an
           | absolute exhaustive list as it's all self-reporting to each
           | of the sites. Your app idea would just be another in a list
           | of places, sort of like the xkcd app about yet another
           | standard.
           | 
           | https://www.go-astronomy.com/star-parties.htm
           | 
           | https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-resources/annual-
           | starg...
        
           | groby_b wrote:
           | Good God, no.
           | 
           | Pretty much every telescope owner will happily show you the
           | sky - after you've made an effort finding out where they
           | gather, or if you just happen to walk by. The
           | instagrammification of astronomy, with hordes of influencers
           | rolling by without concern for the subject matter, just to
           | insert themselves everywhere, is too horrible to consider.
           | 
           | It's not hard to find. Type "<city> astronomical society"
           | into your search box. They have public websites, horribly
           | outdated. Reach out to them, join the group, and you're more
           | than welcome. But may there never be "an app for that"
        
           | ghxst wrote:
           | Here in the EU you can look for "dark sky parks" which are
           | basically parks or areas in nature designated for night sky
           | viewing because of the low amount of light pollution and they
           | are great spots to meet people, I'm pretty sure you have
           | these in the US as well. I advise bringing a red light if you
           | have to do some walking. Another recommendation would be to
           | see if you have any actual observatories near you, some of
           | them have events for the public every now and then. The
           | people in this community are some of the friendliest I ever
           | met and love sharing their interest and enthusiasm.
        
         | yread wrote:
         | > turns out most of them aren't _that_ small
         | 
         | I haven't realized Andromeda is 4x bigger than the Moon until I
         | tried to take a picture of it
         | 
         | https://mikkolaine.blogspot.com/2014/01/size-of-deep-sky-obj...
         | (not my picture)
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _just imagine if you could see all those galaxies and
           | nebulae with your naked eye_
           | 
           | I think I'd wind up buying the Vision Pro if it can
           | realistically portray seeing the world in a wider spectrum
           | than our eyes can. I don't want cartoonish images of objects
           | pasted into the sky. I want to see what I would perceive if
           | we _e.g._ gene therapied a few extra cones into our eyes to
           | see more of the EM spectrum.
        
             | ghxst wrote:
             | Oh boy if you're willing to spend money to look at the
             | night sky - but feel like AR falls short currently - I
             | highly recommend looking into NODs, something like a
             | PVS-14, you might be able to pick one up second hand for
             | the price of a new vision pro. Unfortunately
             | photomultiplier are still quite expensive even if they are
             | only gen2 :( some really cool tech though.
        
               | veunes wrote:
               | Hmm, spending that much on seeing the stars vs. augmented
               | reality... I might lean toward the stars
        
               | ghxst wrote:
               | Definitely not arguing with you! Though I have a soft
               | spot for analog tech in this area. I think AR might still
               | have a very bright future, especially if you're learning
               | about the night sky. I've spent many hours scanning the
               | sky with an app I found that had an AR feature that
               | allows you to point your camera at the sky and get an
               | overlay on everything (including sattelites!).
        
               | Jolter wrote:
               | I'm interested in that app if you have a link.
        
               | ghxst wrote:
               | It's called Star Walk 2 https://play.google.com/store/app
               | s/details?id=com.vitotechno... Just a FYI that if you
               | choose to purchase the app you will still have to
               | purchase the "all in one bundle" inside the app, I
               | believe it's ~$5 and it gives you the sattelites,
               | extended solar system, deep space objects and more.
               | There's also a free ad supported version that offers the
               | same base catalogue.
        
             | carlosjobim wrote:
             | Night vision goggles have made immense improvements in
             | recent years. Although the new technology in night vision
             | is also very expensive. If they ever become accessible to
             | the average consumer, they will change the world
             | profoundly. Because you can walk during night as if it was
             | day.
             | 
             | For astronomy, they probably won't make a difference, but
             | it shouldn't be impossible to make goggle technology that
             | converts astronomically interesting wavelengths to the
             | visible spectrum.
        
             | danparsonson wrote:
             | It's not the wavelengths that are the problem but the
             | exposure times; even with our best sensors we still need
             | long exposures to capture compelling images of galaxies and
             | nebulae. I don't think it will ever be possible in real
             | time.
        
               | naikrovek wrote:
               | that's not a problem with _displaying_ that information.
               | 
               | the post you replied to is not wanting to see like Geordi
               | LaForge from Star Trek: The Next Generation; in real
               | time. they're (at least I think they are) wanting to
               | visualize already captured information, such as x-ray and
               | radio emissions overlaid a view of the night sky.
        
               | danparsonson wrote:
               | > ...I want to see what I would perceive if we e.g. gene
               | therapied a few extra cones into our eyes to see more of
               | the EM spectrum.
               | 
               | Maybe I misunderstood this part then?
        
           | pavlov wrote:
           | That's incredible. Illustrates how incomprehensibly big
           | galaxies really are. There's a thing 2.5 million light years
           | away which still appears 4x bigger than the Moon.
        
             | teleforce wrote:
             | Very much incomprehensible, not only for outer celestial
             | objects since we most probably will never fully discover
             | our own physical earth planet or human body, let alone our
             | thinking brain and our elusive consciousness.
             | 
             | Andromedia the closest galaxy to Milky Way (MW) is
             | estimated to have one trillion stars while MW itself is
             | estimated to have 250 billions. God really knows how many
             | of them really exist and who's counting anyway? It's a
             | blind faith at its worst to pretend we know the numbers
             | since it's most likely that the earth and its sun bound
             | astronomers (including the farthest distance ever Voyager
             | spacecraft) are several orders of magnitudes off the marks.
             | 
             | It's also estimated that's more than a trillion number of
             | stars inside the two galaxies (Andromeda and MW), not
             | number of planets, not even the number of moons (the very
             | title of this HN post).
             | 
             | Overall it's also estimated that there's more than a
             | trillion number of galaxies (not stars) inside our
             | universe.
             | 
             | To make matter even more complicated, all of these
             | celestial objects are moving in very high speed relative to
             | each others and none is static. These galaxy are millions
             | or billions light years away from earth and by the time
             | their EM signals has reached earth, they probably have
             | already dissappeared or morphed into something else.
             | 
             | How about non observable part of the universe?
             | 
             | How about other parallel universes that physicists claim to
             | exist?
             | 
             | My personal conclusion to this mind boggling facts is that
             | to assume and conclude there is only earth that has living
             | creatures is very much premature and naive.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | Similarly, I came to learn some selenography writing a "voxel"
         | (well, ray-casting) web game ... where you shuttle about the
         | moon from crater base to crater base.
         | 
         | I became kind of fascinated with the craters, names of the
         | craters (and history of those names), the "dark-side" and all
         | the wild topology there. (Although I think I have tiles for the
         | entire Moon, you don't have the fuel to get there.
        
           | haltcatchfire wrote:
           | Did you publish it? Can we see?
        
             | ddejohn wrote:
             | I was curious too. GP's github is in their profile and it
             | looks like this is what they were talking about:
             | 
             | https://github.com/EngineersNeedArt/Mooncraft2000
        
               | 4ggr0 wrote:
               | What a cute game, loved trying it out!
               | 
               | if y'all only care about the game:
               | https://mooncraft2000.com/
        
             | GloucesterBoy wrote:
             | If you're curious about the naming of the Lunar craters,
             | the first full English translation of the Almagestum Novum
             | is being worked on here:
             | 
             | https://www.amazon.com/dp/1739314565?ref_=pe_3052080_397514
             | 8...
        
           | Moru wrote:
           | I really like that one, so sad that the framerate tanks after
           | one or two flights. Tried all the settings on the debug menu
           | but only reload helps as you stated in the documentation.
           | Happens both in firefox, firefox developer without plugins
           | and in chrome.
           | 
           | I remember playing another moon lander 35 years ago in school
           | on the swedish computers "Compis". Was a very basic version
           | but I still loved it, it's something with slow heavy objects
           | where you need to plan ahead what, when and how much you need
           | to do.
        
         | typeofhuman wrote:
         | Can you see Saturn in good detail? I'm interested in picking up
         | a telescope.
        
           | malfist wrote:
           | An SCT11 should have no problem making out the rings of
           | Saturn and maybe a band or two. But it's not a good beginner
           | scope. Long focal lengths are hard to manage if you don't
           | know what you're doing
        
           | leeoniya wrote:
           | i have the 6" celestron sct, and on a clear night this is
           | pretty much the amount of detail i can make out directly:
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/telescopes/comments/pmlbne/jupiter_.
           | ..
           | 
           | i'm sure with tracking and stacking it would be much more.
        
             | ghxst wrote:
             | Just to clarify is that the detail you can make out with
             | the naked eye or a digital censor? If you meant digital
             | censor, how much of a difference with the naked eye would
             | you say it is? I've had this telescope on my list for some
             | time but am not sure if my expectations are realistic.
        
               | carl_dr wrote:
               | Yeah, naked eye, although with a 6" telescope, I'd expect
               | it to be a bit fainter - certainly that is the case
               | through my 9.25" scope. I can often see a band in its
               | rings.
               | 
               | It also depends a lot on atmospherics, if there is a lot
               | of turbulence in the atmosphere it makes things less
               | crisp (well, "dancey", like looking through a heat haze.)
               | 
               | Look up your local astronomy group and go along one
               | night, and see for yourself before buying anything.
               | Saturn isn't great at the moment (assuming London-ish
               | latitudes) but Jupiter is around all night and you should
               | be able to see it through a variety of scopes and
               | eyepieces if you went along to a sky party.
               | 
               | Honestly, the first time I saw Saturn through a telescope
               | I nearly cried. Truly amazing.
        
         | Stratoscope wrote:
         | What a beautiful photo! You have a good eye.
         | 
         | I really like the way you caught the craters along the
         | terminator, including the one at the bottom where you see
         | sunlight on one rim and the rest is visible only because of
         | Earthshine.
         | 
         | The Moon is such a great subject that you can also get some
         | nice shots with just a camera and a telephoto lens. Here are a
         | couple of mine.
         | 
         | Moon over Menlo:
         | https://www.flickr.com/photos/geary/24118398766/
         | 
         | Moon, Mars, Venus:
         | https://www.flickr.com/photos/geary/16598905865/
        
           | jcims wrote:
           | Thank you! You as well!
           | 
           | The shadows are very much my favorite part of this kind of
           | shot. It provides so much visual texture to the surface,
           | showing not only how rough it is but how smooth it is. the
           | 'scar' to the bottom right (aka Alpine Valley
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallis_Alpes) is always one of
           | my favorites.
           | 
           | Thanks again!
        
         | drcwpl wrote:
         | Fantastic photo - you made me think about getting a telescope
        
         | wraptile wrote:
         | For people thinking of getting into moon gazing try binoculars
         | first!
         | 
         | Laying down on your back, plopping a nice pair on your eyes and
         | just looking at the moon is a fantastic experience. Aside from
         | much better UX, binoculars also have depth-perception which
         | makes the visuals all that more engaging.
         | 
         | If you have really nice clear sky in your area you can easily
         | do that with stars and some planets as well.
        
           | 0_____0 wrote:
           | If you got good bins try looking at Jupiter as well.
           | Typically on a clear night you can see several of the moons.
        
             | cogogo wrote:
             | This blew my mind a few years ago when I got some decent
             | binoculars. Depending on their positions you can see all
             | four of the Galilean moons - even from a vantage point in a
             | major city.
        
               | 0_____0 wrote:
               | I saw them entirely accidentally. I was looking at the
               | moon through bins and checked out The Other Bright Thing
               | nearby and was shocked to see what looks like little dots
               | next to the big one. As Galileo himself would have done,
               | I immediately went on the internet and consulted a sky
               | chart, which confirmed that I was seeing the moons of
               | Jupiter.
               | 
               | I still occasionally drag my friends out to look at the
               | moons on a clear night. It's my favorite bit of practical
               | astronomy to share.
        
             | agos wrote:
             | I was able to take pictures of them with a DSLR with a
             | decent zoom lens! I used Stellarium to check the positions,
             | waited for a very clear night, and was able to get a very
             | nice photograph of that and of the Pleiades.
        
           | ghxst wrote:
           | This is great advice! It's really amazing how much more you
           | can see with a regular decent pair of binoculars. I treasure
           | the memory of being able to see some of the star clusters
           | that I could only vaguely make out with the naked eye for the
           | first time, now I basically bring them every night walk :).
        
           | bb88 wrote:
           | I think the problem is that I would like to have an image
           | stabilized version of that. Even small ticks of you fingers
           | amplify quickly into shaky images.
           | 
           | I think instead of an eyepiece (or in addition to one) most
           | consumer telescopes should include a usb image sensor that
           | can screw into where the eyepiece is.
        
             | ghxst wrote:
             | A lot of binoculars have a mount for a tripod which I can
             | definitely recommend trying out of you happen to have both,
             | or at least consider if you are planning to pick up a new
             | pair.
        
             | pests wrote:
             | You can buy generic replacement electric eyepieces that fit
        
             | dkresge wrote:
             | There are also image stabilized binoculars. I have an older
             | Canon 10x30 that I absolutely love (enough to tolerate the
             | plasticizer now breaking down on the rubberized exterior)
        
               | cogogo wrote:
               | I have the same, about 10 yrs old and agree the image
               | stabilization is awesome.
        
           | speleding wrote:
           | Depth perception? I would think objects as far away as the
           | moon shouldn't produce a meaningful difference between the
           | left and right eye. But that does tell your brain they are
           | far away, so perhaps that's what you mean.
        
             | exitb wrote:
             | It's not really depth perception, but there is a
             | significant difference in how objects are perceived when
             | looking with both eyes. It's also applicable to binocular
             | splitters used with a single mirror/lens telescope.
        
               | Moru wrote:
               | Your brain can also do 1+1 and end up with 2.5 or even 3
               | in the brain :) I have really bad eye sight on both eyes,
               | one can not see enough alone but both together see much
               | better than I would expect on the same distance.
        
           | berkes wrote:
           | I was a kid living in Botswana when Halley passed earth.
           | 
           | We watched it every night through binoculars.
           | 
           | Marvelous clean air - humidity around 0%, just some dust. No
           | light pollution (there wasn't an electricity grid in some
           | 100km around, just a handful of small diesel aggregates).
           | 
           | The binoculars were more than enough to see the comet, its
           | tail. And even get a feeling of the tail arcing in three
           | dimensions.
        
           | yard2010 wrote:
           | Any specific binoculars you can recommend?
        
             | doetoe wrote:
             | The most important is that they capture enough light, for
             | which the lenses must have a large diameter. 50mm is
             | typical. Magnification around 10x is good. This is referred
             | to as 10x50. I have a Celestron Skymaster 15x70 myself,
             | which is specifically for night sky observation. The 70mm
             | is very good, but the weight and the magnification make it
             | difficult to hold still without a tripod, though you can
             | still use it without, e.g. lying on your back
        
               | eth0up wrote:
               | Try a good monopod. They're significantly more portable
               | and give just enough stability in most cases to give good
               | views whille allowing less restricted movement than most
               | tripods.
        
             | tonyarkles wrote:
             | I have a set of Vortex Diamondback HD 10x50s that are
             | pretty affordable and do a good job with the moon (and
             | hunting near dawn and dusk). The optics are definitely
             | better than I expected for the price.
        
           | darkwater wrote:
           | Some suggestions of mark/model of binoculars good for that?
           | With a budget of 1000$ /EUR(I could stretch it a bit more if
           | it's worth the extra money)
        
             | cogogo wrote:
             | I have the Cannon 10x30 IS from a long time ago and they
             | are the best binoculars I'd ever tried. I'm pretty shaky so
             | the image stabilizing is game changing. I'm sure the more
             | powerful pairs are incredible and in that case image
             | stabilization is a must.
             | https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/lenses/binoculars
        
           | yodsanklai wrote:
           | Are binocular superior to monocular for that use case? I
           | thought binocular were good for depth perception which I'd
           | assume doesn't matter here?
        
         | veunes wrote:
         | Sometimes the most meaningful connections are with what's been
         | right in front of us all along
        
         | varispeed wrote:
         | Why everyone is taking black and white pictures of the Moon?
         | It's 2024!
        
       | bradarner wrote:
       | This is why the internet is amazing!
       | 
       | Awe-inspiring. Beautiful.
       | 
       | How does the author build these pages? Looks like it is React.
       | The entire blog must be custom built, no? Or is this built on top
       | of an existing CMS?
        
         | maest wrote:
         | Hand crafted, artisanal JavaScript.
        
         | adrianh wrote:
         | No React to be found (and good riddance). It's two vanilla
         | JavaScript files:
         | 
         | https://ciechanow.ski/js/base.js
         | 
         | https://ciechanow.ski/js/moon.js
        
           | bradarner wrote:
           | Cheers...Chrome dev tools must have tricked me.
           | 
           | Also nice that the author didn't minify it. Interesting to
           | read through.
        
           | undebuggable wrote:
           | Funnily, this JavaScript would not pass through most modern
           | job interviews.
        
             | floxy wrote:
             | For those of us not in the know, why not?
        
               | undebuggable wrote:
               | Inconsistent style. Once global functions (that's so
               | 2000), once prototypes (that's so 2010). No lazy loading,
               | no modularization, no state management. Mixing variable
               | declarations with initializations, one "var" declaration
               | in the code. He probably haven't heard about TypeScript,
               | transpilation, and doesn't understand static typing.
               | Fells like a show off. That guy is an absolute no-no.
        
               | ghxst wrote:
               | Was going to ignore this comment until the last 2
               | sentences. I rarely come across sites / articles that do
               | this good of a job at explaining something I think
               | calling it a "show off" and saying the author is an
               | "absolute no-no" is a bit rude and I don't agree with it
               | either. If anything I appreciate the code as it is, it's
               | very readable at least to me.
        
               | undebuggable wrote:
               | My comment was /s of course. JavaScript from 2000-2010
               | era can do wonders especially if you leverage modern APIs
               | and enormous performance of modern browsers, instead of
               | silting it up with transpilation, frameworks, and layers
               | of modules. Unfortunately simplicity is signalling a
               | beginner and amateur in enterprise working environment.
        
               | ghxst wrote:
               | Dang my bad, I feel silly for not catching the sarcasm in
               | hindsight. Apologies.
        
           | TrackerFF wrote:
           | 17.6k LOC just for one post to educate and entertain people.
           | Beautiful.
        
           | klabb3 wrote:
           | As usual, it's not the tech.. it's the business model.
        
         | jasonjmcghee wrote:
         | You definitely don't need a CMS for a blog. I'd expect most
         | HNer blogs you see here are either html files or markdown
         | processed/styled into html files. I bet various templating
         | solutions are popular too, which just output html files.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | IME the reasons to have one are that you want people to
           | comment and you want other people to write posts sometimes.
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | The very first interactive element is a great example of why
       | ciechanow.ski is so great. Similar animations from other sources
       | would probably limit to 28 frames and fake the image (using a
       | simple mask). On ciechanow.ski there are hundreds(?) of frames
       | and uses a bump map(?) to show accurate crater shadows on the
       | moon's surface.
        
         | neves wrote:
         | Which technology or frameworks is he using? The animations and
         | interactivity are great.
        
           | prabhu-yu wrote:
           | I have same question. Is it simple <canvas>
        
           | saagarjha wrote:
           | WebGL.
        
           | Sateeshm wrote:
           | Plain js and webgl
           | 
           | https://ciechanow.ski/js/moon.js
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Just as the founding fathers intended.
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | It goes way further than simple bump mapping. In terms of
         | texture, there is a color texture and a height map, and the
         | final rendering use real-time physically based rendering (PBR)
         | techniques that takes into account the properties of the lunar
         | regolith, as explained near the end of the article.
         | 
         | Color space is taken proper care of, and for images as rendered
         | from the Earth point of view, there is a model of the
         | atmosphere, so that the sky looks blue during the day and the
         | Moon looks red at the horizon.
         | 
         | There are no pre-calculated images and only 3 photos. All the
         | shading is done in real time using realistic models.
        
       | parpfish wrote:
       | years back i came across this moon-related modeling problem on
       | stackoverflow (i'm not the original poster)[0] and it's stuck
       | with me that this seems like something that should have an easy
       | solution.
       | 
       | An HN thread about how cool the moon is seems like a good place
       | to resurface it.
       | 
       | But the question is this:
       | 
       | The crescent of the moon face is tilted based and the angle of
       | that tile depends on the viewer's latitude on earth. Is there an
       | equation that maps viewer latitude to the tilt of the moon
       | crescent?
       | 
       | [0] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22392045/calculating-
       | moo...
        
       | axus wrote:
       | One thing I've noticed while looking at the Moon, the "dark" part
       | is lit enough to see that it's an orb and not really being eaten
       | by darkness. This webpage doesn't do that, I guess it's from a
       | different perspective without the earth shining on the Moon.
        
         | ribcage wrote:
         | I often wonder if it's just my imagination or is it really like
         | that. I am still not sure.
        
           | scoreandseven wrote:
           | Think of how when the moon is in the sky at night the ground
           | on Earth is lit up and not fully black. Same with the moon,
           | it's not totally dark on the night side of the moon if the
           | Earth is in the sky from the moon's perspective.
        
         | pierrec wrote:
         | I guess you alreay know this, but for reference this is caused
         | by earthlight (light diffused and reflected by the earth):
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthlight_(astronomy)
         | 
         | Sometimes it's clearly visible, but often I agree that it's
         | hard to tell if you're imagining it or not.
        
         | jval43 wrote:
         | There's a short paragraph on "earthshine" towards the end.
        
       | RALaBarge wrote:
       | Thank you, I am going to show parts of this to my daughter!
        
         | d42muna wrote:
         | This cracks me up. "Look at these beautiful orbital paths.
         | Cover your eyes when it's explaining the barycenter. Cover your
         | eyes!"
        
       | edferda wrote:
       | I haven't read the article but Bartosz articles are so good and
       | enjoyable to read that I get excited whenever I see a new one pop
       | up. I have already set some time aside tonight to read it with
       | care.
       | 
       | Bartosz if you are reading this: thank you so much for these
       | articles. You truly are an inspiration and I can only hope one
       | day I get to be as good a communicator as you are.
        
       | eitau_1 wrote:
       | On an unrelated note, on the Sunday we had a major lunar
       | standstill i.e. the full Moon at its highest orbit (as seen from
       | northern hemisphere). It happens every 18.5 years.
        
       | empath75 wrote:
       | I can't tell you how excited I get everyone time he does a new
       | one of these. They have all the delight and wonder of a child's
       | pop-up book, but with the depth of a college text book.
       | Consistently one of the best things on the internet.
        
       | dheera wrote:
       | Related personal story:
       | 
       | On January 6, 2023, at approximately noon, I happened to take a
       | flight from Svolvaer, Norway to Bodo, Norway, which, took me from
       | 21.8 degrees latitude to 22.8 degrees latitude, which took me
       | from [just inside polar night] to [just inside daytime].
       | 
       | I saw the moon at takeoff and the sun at landing.
       | 
       | It was an absolutely miraculous, specatular coincidence -- the
       | latitudes I was flying over, the time, the date, the moon phase,
       | the flight path.
       | 
       | This flight allowed me to have a full 3D view of space -- the
       | moon, the Earth, the sun, all within an hour.
       | 
       | It was the first time I felt that the moon and sun weren't just
       | discs flying around the sky randomly, but rather that I was the
       | one flying through space, had a 3D sense of where the moon was
       | behind me and where the sun was peeking ahead of me, and that the
       | Earth felt curved as I moved out of the view of the moon and into
       | the view of the sun.
       | 
       | My pictures and whiteboard illustration:
       | 
       | https://imgur.com/TYFAdoP
        
       | belfalas wrote:
       | The moon is so interesting, easy to forget how much it affects
       | life on Earth because we see it all the time.
       | 
       | Like others in the thread, I have a telescope and it's a
       | wonderful experience pointing it skyward while it's still light
       | out and the moon is visible. Then I can really see all the
       | craters and "pock marks" on the surface. (My telescope isn't good
       | enough to be able to see anything during a full moon, it all just
       | becomes washed out.)
        
       | MaxGripe wrote:
       | De revolutionibus orbium coelestium
        
       | divbzero wrote:
       | What an amazing exploration, from watching the sun set over moon
       | craters in the first graphic to the simulation of how the Moon
       | formed and the lucid explanations of tidal locking and axial
       | precession.
       | 
       | As with many of the author's posts, the underlying code can be an
       | interesting read as well: https://ciechanow.ski/js/moon.js
        
       | throw-the-towel wrote:
       | ciechanow.ski on the frontpage? Instantly upvoted.
        
       | siavosh wrote:
       | It really is a marvel. I'm grateful society has such subject
       | matter experts, that they have the technical skills to share it,
       | have a passion to share it, and dedicate the time and effort to
       | do so at such a level.
        
         | mbb70 wrote:
         | Bartosz Ciechanowski is a subject matter expert of everything,
         | given enough time: https://ciechanow.ski/archives/. I still
         | remember reading 'Gears' and being completely blown away.
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | There's a collection of little facts I imagine being useful if a
       | human got stranded somewhere in the universe and helpful aliens
       | weren't sure where to take you. Without books and electronics,
       | what could you memorize that would help them search and identify
       | Sol/Earth in their big astral database?
       | 
       | This is one of them, the seemingly-pure-coincidence of solar
       | eclipses where the apparent size of the moon equals the apparent
       | size of the sun.
       | 
       | Ratios in general would be handy, since they would not depend on
       | difficult-to-calibrate units: The moon is ~1/6 times the mass of
       | our Earth; the biggest planet Jupiter/#5 is 2.5x the mass of all
       | the rest and 5.2x the distance from the sun compared to Earth/#3,
       | etc.
        
         | TomatoCo wrote:
         | Once more extrasolar surveys are done it would be cool to see
         | how unique we are. If something (possibly LLM based) could rate
         | your description and see how many systems you'd have to visit
         | to find Earth again.
         | 
         | "Eight major planets, the outer four are gas giants. Planets 2
         | and 3 are nearly the same size. All of the other planets, edge-
         | to-edge, fit just inside the orbit of my planet and its moon."
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | > If something (possibly LLM based)
           | 
           | Whoah, hold the "AI" hype train there: I didn't design it
           | that way, but an LLM is close to the _worst possible thing
           | you could use_ for this.
           | 
           | 1. LLMs are incapable of real math or symbolic logic, so they
           | aren't able to you whether your statement is approximately-
           | true, and they can't tell you if it's _useful_ either. (Lots
           | of planets are spherical.)
           | 
           | 2. You're trying to communicate with _literal aliens_ that
           | won 't have _any_ of that English training data the LLM draws
           | from. They don 't have any preconceptions about a "second"
           | and "year" being related but one is bigger, they won't see
           | the same colors or even have a 1:1 color sense, and they
           | absolutely won't be inferring that Jupiter and Saturn are
           | connected by pantheon-naming.
           | 
           | A lifetime exile from your entire species and culture is not
           | something you want to leave to an LLM.
        
             | TomatoCo wrote:
             | Ah, I think I wasn't clear enough and you misinterpreted
             | me! I'm absolutely not suggesting an LLM for solving the
             | "describe to aliens what our system looks like" problem or
             | doing the assessment of our description.
             | 
             | I was trying to describe how, in the future when we have
             | surveys of thousands of other star systems, it would be fun
             | if there was a website that played the role of the aliens.
             | We would describe to it in plain language what our system
             | looked like and it would tell us if we did a good enough
             | job to get home or not. To me, this means finding how many
             | rows match in a database. I'm not sure how to turn plain
             | language into a database query but, if pressed, today I'd
             | reach for an LLM.
        
       | hosolmaz wrote:
       | Wake up babe, new Bartosz Ciechanowski post dropped
        
         | bbx wrote:
         | I saw the domain name and thought the same thing. Always an
         | event to see a new post of his.
        
         | MarcelOlsz wrote:
         | Meredith, clear the rest of my day.
        
         | askvictor wrote:
         | I was just thinking about him yesterday while browsing HN,
         | wondering when the next post would drop.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | There was a post earlier today about mechanical watches, of
           | course this site was linked again.
        
         | funksta wrote:
         | Easily one of the best sites on the internet, in my opinion
        
         | andrepd wrote:
         | Early Christmas present!
        
       | praptak wrote:
       | The initial simulations might give you a slightly wrong idea
       | about the shape of Moon's orbit around the Sun. It doesn't form
       | any loops (you can see that in the later more precise simulation)
       | and is in fact convex (this one is a bit harder to see).
        
       | hassleblad23 wrote:
       | Ds
        
       | zombiwoof wrote:
       | Amazing
        
       | DiggyJohnson wrote:
       | Really excellent. Since I live in a high rise I've marked the
       | cardinal directions on the floor and walls and been trying to
       | develop a spatial intuition for the ecliptic, essentially trying
       | to be able to easily imagine myself tilted in the northern
       | hemisphere subtropics rotating around a sphere rotating around
       | the sun. End goal would be an automatic intuition of where to
       | look for the Sun, Moon, and all the visible planets. This sounds
       | insane typing it out but its very passive and genuinely
       | satisfying. Not being on the equator and the natural tilt of the
       | Earth are the two factors that make this most difficult, of
       | course.
        
         | FredPret wrote:
         | I get this. You've got me wondering how to get this project
         | Wife Approved Status
        
           | dmd wrote:
           | My wife came with 9 telescopes in various states of
           | disrepair.
        
             | ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
             | That's okay; we don't kinkshame here.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Nerds often marry other nerds ;)
        
         | seumars wrote:
         | Check out the North Paw Directional Anklet. It's basically a
         | compass that vibrates whenever you face magnetic north. From
         | what I've read people seem to develop a sense of direction
         | pretty quickly.
        
           | incognito124 wrote:
           | You'll be sad to find out the company went out of business a
           | long time ago
        
           | bregma wrote:
           | The one they gave me seems to vibrate when I face any
           | direction but only when I leave the house.
        
         | jmkd wrote:
         | I built an ecliptic pathfinder in the Black Desert in Egypt a
         | few weeks ago. It's a piece of land art comprising three piles
         | of rocks on the near horizon, each marking the position of
         | sunrise (if you are stood in an approx 200 metre by 5 metre
         | strip) for the summer solstice towards the north east, the
         | spring and autumn equinoxes to the east and the winter solstice
         | towards the south east.
        
         | jcims wrote:
         | It's not insane in the least. I try to always make a point of
         | observing the ecliptic when I travel, it creates a wonderful
         | interconnectedness to places all over the planet. There are
         | going to be some lovely conjunctions in the next few months
         | that will provide a great opportunity to share this with
         | people. It's actually pretty intuitive when there are 3 or 4
         | visible planets in a row once someone points it out.
        
       | lizmutton wrote:
       | Another masterpiece I am sure!
        
       | hassleblad23 wrote:
       | Amazing!
        
       | syncsynchalt wrote:
       | Bartosz has a patreon where you can sponsor these works, and on
       | it he posts very detailed explainers of why and how he created
       | each page.
       | 
       | The one for Moon is at https://www.patreon.com/posts/on-
       | moon-118130286
        
         | seumars wrote:
         | Thank you for sharing! Big fan of Bartosz's articles and
         | somehow didn't think of looking him up on other platforms
        
           | 4gotunameagain wrote:
           | You don't have to, the link is at the end of the article :)
        
             | 0xEF wrote:
             | You guys are reading articles to the end?
             | 
             | /s
        
               | IanCal wrote:
               | To be fair on this one, most of the times I complain
               | people haven't got to the end of some short story before
               | asking. This is an _enormous_ and dense resource. Great,
               | but I started scrolling and got surprised.
        
               | 0xEF wrote:
               | 100%, it is definitely a commitment but it is a really
               | incredible blog. I wish I could find more like it! I saw
               | the mechanical watch post the other day for the first
               | time and was hooked.
        
         | danw1979 wrote:
         | Thanks for pointing this out. Bartosz absolutely deserves some
         | paid support for his efforts.
        
         | IanCal wrote:
         | Does this come with the page/code to store, or is there a good
         | way of doing this? I looked a while back for properly archiving
         | pages and their code but things were all in the works, maybe
         | that's more solved now.
         | 
         | This kind of thing seems like a truly outstanding resource, and
         | I'm happy to pay for it, with the desire to have this for when
         | my kids get older.
        
       | ustad wrote:
       | Holy crap! only afew hours ago i was scraping his site and
       | hoarding the delicious javascript. I wondered how long its been
       | since the airfoil post and, bam! , a new article! More juicy
       | javascript to hoard!
        
       | vldmrs wrote:
       | His blog posts are always amazing, very detailed and
       | exceptionally visual
        
       | hassleblad23 wrote:
       | It is fascinating how much the Moon matters to us, yet it is
       | largely ignored.
        
       | hei-lima wrote:
       | Wonderful! A masterpiece.
        
       | nikitasherman wrote:
       | I'm glad to know the author and me share the same earth (and the
       | moon)!
        
       | paulpauper wrote:
       | Without even clicking I now know what it is going to be. Single
       | word title and lots of votes.
       | 
       | I wonder if single word titles helps with SEO
       | 
       | https://www.google.com/search?q=Moon
       | 
       | right on front page #7 . good job
        
       | 0wis wrote:
       | Wonderful ! Even if I am not super interested in the topic, the
       | explanations are so clear and the animations so nice that I have
       | admiration for the work done. Full mastery of the web medium that
       | makes an explanation way clearer that any paper could. Would love
       | to work on a similar projet on economics & personal finance.
       | Thanks for sharing !
        
       | mopsi wrote:
       | Something has gone terribly wrong when such beautiful, but
       | essentially simple interactive graphics feel like an expensive
       | and exotic gift, rather than something readily supported by
       | widely used editors. A decade or more ago, I would've turned to
       | Flash to create something like this, but now I wouldn't even know
       | where to start.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | Well, you could read his source code. He doesn't "use"
         | anything, but if you want libraries I think Processing and
         | Three.js are popular.
        
       | ricardobeat wrote:
       | I had to wait ten or fifteen minutes for a couple orbits to see
       | if it would stick, but a little moon formed in the accretion
       | example:
       | 
       | https://postimg.cc/Y4LTzLBk
       | 
       | This made me happy.
        
       | beeforpork wrote:
       | Great as usual!
       | 
       | But I do prefer metric units.
        
         | FergusArgyll wrote:
         | As with all of his stuff, you can click on the unit to switch
         | it to metric
        
       | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
       | Related: last Sunday (December 15th) was the *luna*stice - the
       | northernmost endpoint of the moon's 18.6 year cycle during which
       | the rise/set points move between north and south. On Sunday it
       | was as far north as it gets, and for the next _generation_ it
       | will move slowly south and then back again.
       | 
       | This cycle has been known to some humans for more than 3000
       | years, and appears to have helped structure architecture/layout
       | at various American locations such as Chaco Canyon (New Mexico)
       | 1000 years ago. It takes a minimum of 3 generations to establish
       | the cycle, which indicates something about the level of social
       | and scientific organization in these societies.
        
       | erbdex wrote:
       | "And still, after all this time, the Sun has never said to the
       | Earth, "You owe me." Look what happens with love like that. It
       | lights up the sky."
       | 
       | -- Rumi
        
       | hubraumhugo wrote:
       | Ciechanowski is likely the best content producer of our time,
       | absolutely fascinating reads. Imagine having such a person as a
       | teacher - he could probably excite students about any scientific
       | topic.
       | 
       | I'd love to spend my time working on such articles when I'm
       | retired :)
        
         | danw1979 wrote:
         | This isn't an exaggeration ! We get but one or two of his
         | articles per year but they always delight the kids and big kids
         | too.
         | 
         | No cookie banner, no pop ups, no sponsored links or ads. Just
         | amazing hand-crafted web content.
        
         | zerop wrote:
         | Can we give reference of these articles to LLMs and get them to
         | write articles like this for educational contents and produce
         | similar WebGL graphics code to render images. I mean, just use
         | this style and produce educational content using AI. that might
         | make the studies more interesting.
        
       | markfsharp wrote:
       | Wow! Just wow! Very good.
        
       | thallavajhula wrote:
       | Huge fan of Bartosz. I love their posts. I saw the post link and
       | it instantly put a smile on my face 'cause I know I would love it
       | even before opening the link and the post did not disappoint.
       | 
       | In the 2nd graphic, they use of location to display the tiny
       | person on the globe _chef 's kiss_. The attention to details is
       | brilliant. I am 40% through with the post and I couldn't contain
       | my excitement to post here. This is lovely.
        
       | doawoo wrote:
       | as a kinesthetic learner I really cannot say how invaluable the
       | interactive widgets are, so wonderfully done.
        
       | Jun8 wrote:
       | I've always wondered how different human culture would be if we
       | had multiple moons. Related: the relationship between lunar and
       | menstrual cycles is an open question, eg see
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3716780/ or
       | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7840133/
        
       | unit149 wrote:
       | An order of magnitude above and below the speed of a falling
       | object - exporting the JSON file that has its unadulterated
       | gravitational force data. Dark matter and Newtonian mechanics are
       | epiphenomenal modes of interlocking processes.
        
       | CobrastanJorji wrote:
       | Could anyone recommend some introductory reading on orbital math?
       | I had an idea rolling around in my brain for a while to make a
       | little website simulating how various mathematicians and
       | philosophers visualized the moon's orbit over the centuries, but
       | I'm not great at math, lunar history, or math lunar history, so
       | I'm curious where I'd get started on the reading.
        
         | snicker7 wrote:
         | Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics by Arnold is a good
         | introductory book.
        
       | tejendrasingh90 wrote:
       | Your journey from frustration to fascination with the moon is
       | truly inspiring and beautifully captured!
        
       | GuB-42 wrote:
       | If you are interested in shaders, you can look at the source
       | code. https://ciechanow.ski/js/moon.js
       | 
       | Like with all the other articles, it is straight up readable JS,
       | with WebGL graphics, no dependencies.
        
         | kupopuffs wrote:
         | One file? Yeesh
         | 
         | Only kidding. Cool stuff, wish it were split up though
        
         | Sateeshm wrote:
         | This guy is a legend.
        
       | wwarner wrote:
       | bravo, really clear
        
       | aussieguy1234 wrote:
       | The other side of the moon looks quite different to the tidally
       | locked side we see from earth.
        
       | neves wrote:
       | Do you know Which technology or frameworks is he using?
       | 
       | The animations and interactivity are great. I'm really impressed.
        
         | spiderfarmer wrote:
         | It's almost all handmade. And he uses a lot of scripts to
         | generate his scripts.
        
       | Borzadaran wrote:
       | Wow, hats off to Bartosz! He has clearly poured so much time and
       | effort into crafting this incredible blog. Hold on, though--check
       | out their other articles too. Each one is a gem! Let's show some
       | respect for his hard work--here's his sponsor link. Go ahead and
       | support him!
       | 
       | https://www.patreon.com/posts/on-moon-118130286
        
       | sema4hacker wrote:
       | I could spend a lifetime trying and still not create a web page
       | as spectacular as this.
        
       | veunes wrote:
       | This is a fantastic example of why the Internet can still be a
       | magical place
        
       | smusamashah wrote:
       | One thing which isn't clear (from the animations at least) is how
       | moon revolves around sun.
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon#/media/Fil...
       | 
       | When looked from distance, it looks more like revolving around
       | sun while getting effected by earth. Which is to say, th motion
       | does not look like a spring/spiral at all, but like a wave
       | instead.
       | 
       | https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/266426/what-does...
        
         | GuB-42 wrote:
         | Minutephysics did a video about this:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBcxuM-qXec
         | 
         | It looks like a dodecagon with rounded corners, but the video
         | goes into more details.
        
       | globular-toast wrote:
       | Whenever these get posted I always play with it a bit, then look
       | at the scroll bar and notice I'm about 10% through, if that. Has
       | anyone ever read one of these to the bottom?
       | 
       | I guess in my mind this is just entertainment. I enjoy the
       | visuals and interactivity, and marvel at the technical
       | implementation, but I don't need to spend hours going through it.
       | The only reason I would is if I actually wanted to learn this
       | stuff, but so far nothing has come up that I need/want to learn
       | at that level of detail.
       | 
       | I guess my question is, is this _actually_ useful for education?
       | Has anyone felt like they 've _really_ learnt something (ie. they
       | could teach it to other people), after reading through one of
       | these?
        
         | mjochim wrote:
         | I have worked through a significant portion of the GPS one, and
         | I learned a lot. I didn't do it in one go, though. Learning
         | takes time.
        
       | hejira wrote:
       | Fantastic!
        
       | pytonslange wrote:
       | Bartosz, your website is the most beautiful, glorious thing to
       | ever grace my browser. I'm not even sure how to put it into
       | words, but I LOVE YOU for doing what you do. Thank you for your
       | brilliance. Thank you for making my day every time I visit. Never
       | change. Please, just keep on being your awesome self.
        
       | red_admiral wrote:
       | Any time I see a new article on that domain, I know I'm going to
       | be distracted from work for an hour or so while I have a great
       | time. Bartosz, your work is amazing.
        
       | itissid wrote:
       | Very cool. Question about the interactive image at the top of the
       | page: why do the craters appear more distinct near the boundary
       | of the dark and bright side of the moon and kind of much less on
       | the brigh side surface far away from the boundary?
        
         | jackcooper wrote:
         | The craters appear more distinct because the low angle of
         | sunlight casts long shadows. Where sunlight hits more from
         | above, shadows are minimal, making the craters less pronounced.
        
       | _wire_ wrote:
       | > It was also the very first image I was actually not embarrassed
       | to share - https://imgur.com/a/t9b1Uug
       | 
       | I was goofing around with the ciechanowski moon model and noticed
       | that either this image or ciechanowski's simulation is flipped
       | 180 (mirrored not rotated).
       | 
       | https://ciechanow.ski/moon/
       | 
       | So I googled moon images to see which one might be flipped (it
       | would be amazing if the ciechanowski model was inverted) but
       | after looking at about 100 images, 90/100 or more seem to be
       | composites based on the same image. Not just that the moon
       | presents the same face, but all the google results look based on
       | literally the same image. So what if that image is flipped?
       | 
       | On an oblique note, I assume google reports such repetitions to
       | almost any search-- I've noticed there's a web dark pattern for
       | results repetitions; see Amazon and Netflix. And AI results
       | appear to be an obscenely amped-up repeater.
       | 
       | I'm interested in repetitiond news too: take Google news without
       | any personalization-- how the web may create an appearance of
       | copious information that's actually very limited, and maybe very
       | biased or completely wrong-- e.g., Mandela Effect.
       | 
       | For example news of U.S. foreign affairs is routinely absurdly
       | biased and narrow, such as the new leader in Syria leading
       | "rebels" as in SW rebel alliance and not noting we've got a
       | $10,000,000 bounty on his head for being a terrorist.
       | 
       | (Ask what you can do for Russia, not what Russia can do for you)
       | 
       | I keep second-guessing my own perceptions, like I'm
       | cherrypicking, but the effect seems rampant, where very narrow
       | and obviously contestable views are repeated as truisms and
       | appear as such across many outlets.
       | 
       | I just saw a documentary called "The Program" which one more in
       | and endless series of hype products about UFOs-- this one tries
       | to politicize the topic as a huge coverup a la JFK.
       | 
       | But what seems funny to me is term UFO! It's a fascinating term
       | in its own right as it is used as a determinative noun based on
       | an acronym where the key trait is "unidentified". In the truest
       | sense all studies of UFOs must reveal nothing, by definition. And
       | they do reveal nothing. As did this documentary. You may have
       | never noticed, but nothing is something!
       | 
       | The moon is sort of like this: the biggest nothing in world. Does
       | it even matter which is right (vs left vs correct) view?-- I
       | can't be bothered to look up. Besides some guys went there and
       | all they found was rocks. Who would have guessed?! They brought
       | some back and they've been completely forgotten about and
       | misplaced out of boredom and irrelevancy.
       | 
       | It was more interesting when the noon could still possibly be
       | green cheese. Now it's just orbital mechanics-- a celestial
       | pinball machine. A giant fusion reactor pours energy out across a
       | gradient and somehow gives rise to everything we are. (Yawn, I'm
       | sleepy).
       | 
       | Newton on gravity:
       | 
       | The last clause of your second Position I like very well. Tis
       | unconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without the
       | mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon &
       | affect other matter without mutual contact; as it must if
       | gravitation in the sense of Epicurus be essential & inherent in
       | it. And this is one reason why I desired you would not ascribe
       | innate gravity to me. That gravity should be innate inherent &
       | essential to matter so that one body may act upon another at a
       | distance through a vacuum without the mediation of any thing else
       | by & through which their action or force {may} be conveyed from
       | one to another is to me so great an absurdity that I beleive no
       | man who has in philosophical matters any competent faculty of
       | thinking can ever fall into it. Gravity must be caused by an
       | agent acting constantly according to certain laws, but whether
       | this agent be material or immaterial is a question I have left to
       | the consideration of my readers.
        
       | zoombippy wrote:
       | A big ass ham sandwich too.
        
       | hi41 wrote:
       | This feels like a beautiful work of art! Great job, OP!
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | Some of those interactable visualizations on scale and seeing the
       | sun/moon/earth rotate at the same time is the best anywhere.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | Miles deep in to what seem like a subject we take for granted in
       | everyday life.
        
       | zerop wrote:
       | Can we give reference of these articles to LLMs and get them to
       | write articles like this for educational contents and produce
       | similar WebGL graphics code to render images. I mean, just use
       | this style and produce educational content using AI. that might
       | make the studies more interesting.
        
         | The5thElephant wrote:
         | I'm guessing it will get nowhere close to as well considered,
         | written, and structured as what Bartosz makes himself.
         | 
         | I don't know how people don't see how poor quality so much AI
         | writing is, even when referencing good quality work.
         | 
         | Also making effective visualizations that do a good job of
         | illustrating a concept is not just a matter of being able to
         | write the code.
        
       | princemo4 wrote:
       | wow. can you imagine the amount of work that was put into this
       | website?
        
       | 01jonny01 wrote:
       | Amazing interactive article. It actually gave me hope in
       | humanity, over LLMs. I could feel the love, creativity and effort
       | that was put into it.
        
       | f3nter wrote:
       | Pretty cool post! I thought I knew the moon, but after your post
       | I guess I was wrong haha
        
       | pcunite wrote:
       | The solar system is like a mechanical clock, a timepiece.
        
       | omnee wrote:
       | I've already had the pleasure of learning from his previous post
       | on 'Sound', and this one on the Moon is equally informative and
       | beautiful. In the age of slop and pop-ups, it fills me with joy
       | that there still exists on the internet such a brilliantly
       | crafted blog that informs and educates the curious mind.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-20 23:02 UTC)