home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!vtserf!vtcc1.cc.vt.edu!millnerrl
- From: millnerrl@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu
- Newsgroups: sci.astro
- Subject: Re: Moon Illusion (was Re: Lunar Astronaut ...)
- Message-ID: <20NOV199217051969@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu>
- Date: 20 Nov 92 22:05:00 GMT
- References: <1992Nov16.220542.15162@mav.com> <1992Nov17.122236.26582@hemlock.cray.com> <1992Nov17.174839.1@stsci.edu> <1eeh2lINNdrb@smaug.West.Sun.COM>
- Sender: usenet@vtserf.cc.vt.edu
- Distribution: na
- Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
- Lines: 25
- News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41
-
- In article <1eeh2lINNdrb@smaug.West.Sun.COM>,
- Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews) writes...
- >By symmetry, atmospheric refraction is purely vertical. The refraction
- >makes the image of the moon appear higher than it is. ..............
- ................
- >of the top of the moon. The height of the image is clearly reduced by
- >the refraction. QED. The atmospheric lensing effect only *shrinks* the
- >moon. There is no possibility whatsoever that atmospheric lensing can
- >make the moon appear bigger.
- >
- > Richard M. Mathews F oster
- > E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian
- >Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM I ndependence and
- > F reedom!
- I went ahead and repeated the experiment with the camera and calipers
- and, according to my data, the size of the moon stays roughly the same. In
- other words, any deviations due to atmospheric effects in the size would not be
- observable with the precision of the naked eye. This and the above statement
- by Richard Mathews seems to point to the idea that, "it really is in our
- heads." Hmmmmm.
- Cheers!
- Robert
-
- Youre crazy!
- No, I'm death, plain and simple.
-