FAR SIDE OF THE MOON

[nomuse]

This thread keeps making me think of this:

[bknight]

This thread keeps making me think of this:

Cool 

[tarkus]

For example, the Moon is smaller than Jupiter. But, if the Moon's transit where to happen in front of Jupiter, the Moon would leave Jupiter completely covered. Same thing happens between the Moon and the Earth. So, the Moon, would never look smaller than the Earth, as it's shown in that animation.

Possibly the most stupid thing ever written here.

He says stupid and makes a scene where the moon moves behind the earth ... who is stupid here? you are, because it does not distinguish between objects in the foreground or in the background.
Look again:



I do not remember seeing a NASA animation more ridiculous than this... 
The following image shows a ratio of more realistic size, I think the Earth should be even smaller still.

[tarkus]

...

For example, the Moon is smaller than Jupiter. But, if the Moon's transit where to happen in front of Jupiter, the Moon would leave Jupiter completely covered. Same thing happens between the Moon and the Earth. So, the Moon, would never look smaller than the Earth, as it's shown in that animation.

If you can show me that trick with the focal length, but with actual celestial bodies, then we'll talk.

That depends on the distance the observer is from the moon.

The observer is obviously on Earth, you're kidding?

[JayUtah]

The observer is obviously on Earth, you're kidding?

The observer is not always on Earth, such as in the animation in your original post.

[JayUtah]

The following image shows a ratio of more realistic size, I think the Earth should be even smaller still.

From what distance?  At what focal length?  Give actual numbers and show us how you computed them.  Your critics were kind enough to show you how to do the math.  Now do it.

[tarkus]

For example, the Moon is smaller than Jupiter. But, if the Moon's transit where to happen in front of Jupiter, the Moon would leave Jupiter completely covered. Same thing happens between the Moon and the Earth. So, the Moon, would never look smaller than the Earth, as it's shown in that animation.

Explain why not. The trigonometry is not hard. The Moon is smaller than Earth. I assume you have no problem with the idea that if the two are next to each other this will be obvious. So what if you were looking at it from a position significantly further away than the orbital distance between Earth and Moon. Why wouldn't the Moon appear smaller in front of the Earth under those circumstances?

Earth is 4 times larger than the Moon but this becomes apparent only when both bodies are lined up next to each other ... but if the Moon is in the foreground, the disc will completely cover the Earth, do not forget that Moon is about 400,000 km away and it looks like a small sphere of only about 2 degrees from the moon Earth, and if you turn away even more (as in the animated gif) Earth will be just like a point , come on!!! It is so difficult to understand?

[JayUtah]

...but if the Moon is in the foreground, the disc will completely cover the Earth

No.

..do not forget that Moon is about 400,000 km away...

Away from Earth, yes.  Not that far away from every point from which photographs can be taken.

It is so difficult to understand?

Your concept of the problem is wrong.  There's no comfortable way to say it -- you are entirely ignorant of the quantitative relationships that involve perspective and the focal length of lenses.  The ratio of distances among the photographer and the objects in the scene is a factor.  The focal length of the camera is a factor.  Your abject ignorance of these factors do not suddenly make your proposal valid.

[onebigmonkey]

He says stupid and makes a scene where the moon moves behind the earth ... who is stupid here? you are, because it does not distinguish between objects in the foreground or in the background.

Except the moon is not behind the Earth and I didn't make the image, the Galileo probe did. Your lack of spatial awareness and unfamiliarity with subject in which you are claiming expertise lets you down again - just as I suspected it would.

Have a look at this. It is a small bottle of Stella, and a much larger bottle of wine. Other alcoholic beverages are available. I'm not going to insult my own intelligence by explaining things, try using your own to work out what's going on.

[Jason Thompson]

For example, the Moon is smaller than Jupiter. But, if the Moon's transit where to happen in front of Jupiter, the Moon would leave Jupiter completely covered. Same thing happens between the Moon and the Earth. So, the Moon, would never look smaller than the Earth, as it's shown in that animation.

Explain why not. The trigonometry is not hard. The Moon is smaller than Earth. I assume you have no problem with the idea that if the two are next to each other this will be obvious. So what if you were looking at it from a position significantly further away than the orbital distance between Earth and Moon. Why wouldn't the Moon appear smaller in front of the Earth under those circumstances?

Earth is 4 times larger than the Moon but this becomes apparent only when both bodies are lined up next to each other ... but if the Moon is in the foreground, the disc will completely cover the Earth, do not forget that Moon is about 400,000 km away and it looks like a small sphere of only about 2 degrees from the moon Earth, and if you turn away even more (as in the animated gif) Earth will be just like a point , come on!!! It is so difficult to understand?

You are the one with difficulty understanding. The apparent size of any object depends on your distance from it. You have been shown the calculations that prove you to be wrong and shown images that do the same. Do you care to acknowledge the replies with actual numbers in or are you not actually capable of doing so?

And I await your response to my challenge regarding your being proved wrong on the Apollo 13 thread as well.

[ka9q]

http://i398.photobucket.com/albums/pp65/frenat/slide_truck_barn.gif
The truck and barn never move, only the focal length changes.

The truck and barn don't move, but the camera does.

[Peter B]

For example, the Moon is smaller than Jupiter. But, if the Moon's transit where to happen in front of Jupiter, the Moon would leave Jupiter completely covered. Same thing happens between the Moon and the Earth. So, the Moon, would never look smaller than the Earth, as it's shown in that animation.

Explain why not. The trigonometry is not hard. The Moon is smaller than Earth. I assume you have no problem with the idea that if the two are next to each other this will be obvious. So what if you were looking at it from a position significantly further away than the orbital distance between Earth and Moon. Why wouldn't the Moon appear smaller in front of the Earth under those circumstances?

Earth is 4 times larger than the Moon but this becomes apparent only when both bodies are lined up next to each other ... but if the Moon is in the foreground, the disc will completely cover the Earth...

Whether this is true literally depends on how far away from the Moon you are. If you are on a spacecraft 1.5 million kilometres from the Moon, with the Earth on the far side of the Moon, how big will the Moon be compared to the Earth (that is, with the Earth 1.9 million kilometres away).

...do not forget that Moon is about 400,000 km away and it looks like a small sphere of only about 2 degrees from the moon Earth...

When looked at from the Earth, the Moon is about 0.5 degrees across. When looked at from the Moon, the Earth is about 2 degrees across. But there are places other than the Moon and Earth from which both objects can be seen. Like out in deep space.

...and if you turn away even more (as in the animated gif) Earth will be just like a point , come on!!! It is so difficult to understand?

Apparently it is for you.

Here's a simple illustration:

E----------Mn----------------------------------------You
r
t
h

Imagine you're on one side of the Moon with the Earth on the other side. The distance You-Moon is four times the distance Moon-Earth, and the Earth's diameter is roughly four times that of the Moon.

How much of the Earth is the Moon going to cover?

Answer: Not all of it.

[Peter B]

This thread keeps making me think of this:

Oh my dear Lord, where did you get that from?

That gave me my biggest laugh today... :-)

[Paul]

I do not remember seeing a NASA animation more ridiculous than this... 
The following image shows a ratio of more realistic size, I think the Earth should be even smaller still.

Hi Tarkus, the image you intuitively believe should be realistic is only so if the observer is a distance of roughly 10,000 miles from the Moon.

Calcs to match your image:
Earth (at 260,000 miles): 7917 / 260,000 = 0.03045
Moon (at 10,000 miles): 2159 / 10,000 = 0.2159
Relative size of Moon/Earth: 0.2159 / 0.03045 = 7.09 = 709%

The DSCOVR satellite is not 10,000 miles from the Moon, it is 750,000 miles away.  From that distance the relative size would be 36% which is consistent with the NASA animation.

[Gazpar]

Tarkus, there is a difference between:
Being far away and zoom a lot.
Being close and not zooming at all.