Mars at Opposition - Earth at Transitition 210
On August 27th, Mars will be closer to Earth than in all of recorded history. The event is a rare display of orbital events in the cosmic clockwork of space. It is the chance of a lifetime for everyone to go out and see Mars and never before, and never again in our lifetimes!
The event is much more than just an opposition though because Martian oppositions occur about every 25 months.
What makes this opposition so special? This year, the Mars opposition occurs at the same time that Mars is at perihelion, which means Mars, in its orbit, is closest to the Sun and near when Earth is at aphelion (farthest point from Sun.)
At 5:51 a.m. EDT on the night of August 27, 2003, Mars will be within 34,646,418 miles (55,758,006 km) of Earth. To compare this to an earlier opposition: in 2001 when Mars was last at opposition, the red planet was more than 41 million miles (67 million km) from Earth. The most recent perihelion and opposition took place in September 1988 when Mars passed within 36.5 million miles (58.7 million km) of Earth.
When will Mars be this close to Earth again? The next, closer approach will occur on August 28, 2287 when Mars will be 34.62 million miles (55.69 million km) away. But we won't be around for that one, so you don't want to miss this close approach!
When and Where to see Mars - Best viewing is about midnight in the southern sky. One good way to find more precise viewing of Mars as well as identifying the various features, is using Xephem. We put together some tables which include local sunset times and Mars rising times for August 27th for various locations in the US, Europe, Middle East etc...
Currently Mars is moving the opposite direction from all the other planets. While the other plenets appear to be moving towards the east over time, Mars is displaying retrograde motion and moving westward.
Because Mars is so small it's difficult to see details most of the time or in small telescopes. Since Mars is going to be so much closer than usual, even a 4 inch telescope will show details not normally visible. There are also various filters you can use to enhance observing. Mars through a Telescope: Getting the Most from the Red Planet covers what equipment to use and what specific features to look for on Mars.
Although one night has been advertised as "the night" when Mars will be closest, the red planet will appear large and bright for the next few months. Mars will also be changing seasons and that means you will be able to spot changes in surface features over time. It's summer in the southern hemisphere of Mars and the south polar cap is melting rather quickly. If you observe over a period of days you will be able to see the terrain underneath the ice appear.
Go out and enjoy this cosmic show, but you needn't worry about any unexpected cosmic collisions, Mars Will Not Kill You."
Martians! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Martians! (Score:2)
well, (Score:3, Funny)
or something...
An astronaut friend (Score:1)
Re:An astronaut friend (Score:1)
Re:An astronaut friend (Score:2, Funny)
id software employees . . . (Score:3, Funny)
Carmack is cool, but he ain't an astronaut . . . yet.
Re:id software employees . . . (Score:2)
Makes me smile. (Score:5, Funny)
I love sentences like that. Mars will be the closest to Earth it's ever been, because Mars will be the closest to Earth it's ever been!
Re:Makes me smile. (Score:2, Informative)
as
Am I missing something? That's not how the sentence reads to me. It says that the distance will be small because of a rare coincidence of the orbital positions of Mars and Earth, specifically Mars at perihelion and opposition simultaneously. In other words, the orbital geometry le
Re:Makes me smile. (Score:1)
But that's not what the sentence said. It said the physical distance is small because of the orbital positions (think angular positions on a model of the solar system, not x,y,z positions in space).
I guess it's redundant if you've fully internalized the relationships of spatial separation to orbital geometry, i.e. an astronomer might immediately realize that minimal E-M separ
Mars? (Score:5, Funny)
The pyramids (Score:5, Interesting)
For an interesting read on the Face on Mars, I recommend the books by Graham Hancock. He doesn't actually say in his book that aliens built it or make any wild assumptions/conclusions but he does investigate it in a professional manner built solely on science and photographs and correspondence with reliable people working in NASA.
aliens and earth (Score:5, Funny)
Re:aliens and earth (Score:2, Funny)
So from the lack of contact, we can deduce that the aliens are (a) intelligent and (b) commie bastards. :)
Re:aliens and earth (Score:2)
Re:The pyramids (Score:1)
God I'm a dork.
Re:The pyramids (Score:2)
Martians Shot Down NASA Probe. [uncoveror.com]
Mars Polar Lander Lost: See, The Uncoveror Told You So. [uncoveror.com]
Why Mars Will Never Be Colonized [uncoveror.com]
Power Outage Hid Martian Invasion [uncoveror.com]
Get out your tinfoil hats!
Re:The Face (Score:1)
Re:The Face (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.msss.com/education/edprog.html [msss.com]
Re:The Face (Score:5, Insightful)
No, this issue will never be "settled once and for all". The people who believe in the Face on Mars already believe it against photographic evidence, and they do not trust NASA. So why should they believe more proof from the "worldwide scientific conspiracy"?
Things like the Face cult are just the background noise we pay for having the ability to dream and to believe.
Re:The Face (Score:1, Insightful)
Of course there's always the chance that these photographs are doctored, but I doubt that it would have taken NASA this long to initiate some sort of coverup concerning the martians.
(Besides, allowing people to believe in things that seem outright lud
blackout? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:blackout? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, too bad all the people on emergency/medical devices, up 42nd floor ofices, in our 90degree weather or 15 miles from home w/o a subway would be screwed.
Not to mention people IN electrically driven devices when the power dies, such as elevators, rollercoasters, subways..
Re:blackout? (Score:2)
So ignore it.
Personally, I thought it was funny.
Re:blackout? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, excitement.
Re:blackout? (Score:1)
Someitmes living in a backwater has its advantages.
Re:blackout? (Score:1, Redundant)
The parent post would apply if you desired to view dim astronomical objects. You can see the moon and planets from the deepest urban center since they're so bright.
Retrograde motion (Score:5, Informative)
You mean it's not When Worlds Collide? (Score:5, Funny)
I can see it now... (Score:1)
Even cheapskates like me can see the disc. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Even cheapskates like me can see the disc. (Score:5, Informative)
For comparison, I have a 2 megapixel camera with 3x optical zoom, and when I hook it up to my 3.5" newtonian telescope, the disc is still tiny. You really need a telescope or a serious telephoto lens to be able to resolve the disc.
Re:Even cheapskates like me can see the disc. (Score:2)
Still doesn't look as nice as my 10" scope which was nowhere as nice as a friends 14" with the filters, $200 EP, etc...
Re:Even cheapskates like me can see the disc. (Score:3, Interesting)
theta = 115.8 / D
Where theta is the resolvable angle in seconds of arc and D is the objective lens diameter in millimetres.
At its closest, Mars' angular size will be a hair more than a giant 25". If your camera lens is more than five millimetres in diameter (probable), then you might be able to begin making claims about seeing a non-point. Mind, you've also got to have very good optics to claim diffraction-limited resolution.
St
Fun gravity calculations (Score:5, Informative)
I bet that won't stop the wackos getting worked up into a lather. After all, astrologers and their ilk have never let facts, figures or even reality get in the way before now, so it's doubtful they'll start any time soon.
Re:Fun gravity calculations (Score:2)
-a
Re:Fun gravity calculations (Score:2)
It has to be said that Velikovsky was so completely wrong that it's a wonder anyone can quote him and keep a straight face!
Martians knocking???!!!! (Score:1)
Look carefully.. (Score:2, Interesting)
If your eyesight is good you can see this.. [msss.com]
Close? (Score:5, Informative)
It's nice to see people taking an interest, but c'mon...Viking [nasa.gov] took better pictures.
Re:Close? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, Viking did take very nice pictures. The pictures show more detail than I could ever dream of seeing with my naked eye.
BUT looking at a picture is nothing like looking at it with my own eye(s).
Re:Close? (Score:1)
Million to one? (Score:1)
Terry Pratchett would have us believe (in Guards! Guards!) that events where the chance of something happening are EXACTLY a million to one, are guaranteed to happen ("It's a million to one chance, but it might just work!")
Put those two together and
If you see any large weird cylinders lying on the ground which look to be really, really hot
You don't need a great telescope... (Score:5, Interesting)
One poster mentioned software for star gazing. Go with kstars [kde.org] by Jason Harris et al. Cool graphics, neat features, and the next version will control your telescope for you (if your telescope supports this, of course, unless your computer has SkyNet support). Part of the KDE desktop.
What fooling around with telescopes has taught me is how unbelievably limited our general education is. Consider yourself well educated? Well then. Go out and look up at the Moon tonight -- you've seen it hundreds, thousands of times, right? Now name the features. Which is the Sea of Tranquility? Where is Tycho (now that is really easy)? Even worse are the stars: Yes, you can find the Polar Star (Australians and Neu Zealanders are excused), but then? Name ten stars, any ten stars.
If you are anything like me, you know the different classes of Quake II monsters better than the Moon. Somewhere, somehow, that bothers me; but then maybe I've just been staying up too late at night...
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:1, Insightful)
Your post is a serious one. We should all stop and ponder what you've written here and consider it prior to loading up our next favorite game of the moment, and consider how our time may be better spent. Sure, a lot of us are getting fatter as a result of sitting around most of our lives, but we're also gro
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2)
I wouldn't say a person who knows Quake II monsters is "dumber" than someone who knows moon features, but he's certainly more detached from the physical world.
That's not necessarily a bad thing -- the Quake II stuff could be described (at a stretch) as part of the "human" or "social" world rather than the "natural" world, and if you believe many modern biologists, the human world has been more important to each of us than the natural world has for a very long time.
Nevertheless, in a romantic way, if nothi
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2, Informative)
[shameless plug] If you're curious to see how they look like, go here: Some pictures of deep space objects [avrincianu.as.ro] [/shameless plug]
But I think you are right. The level of general education decreases over time. People read less (I know people that don't remember when was the last time they opened a non-techhie book). They use odd source of information and be
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:3, Informative)
The funny part is that most people spend about $300.00 - $400.00 on a piece of crap department store or camera shop telescope while something that will amaze them but doesn't have useless things like gear drives and other electronics is available for around the same price.
a Dobsonian telescope with a 6 inch aperature from Orion telescopes is about $350.00
an 8 inch version will take your breath away
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2)
THough it is funny watching the alignment people. I've seen people spend so much time getting it aligned that when they punch in something, the battery is already dead. And even though they can manually move it, they have no clue how to find anything because the computer does it all for them.
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2)
I use a simple flat/really really low table to set my dob on and it has a electric clock motor to do the work for me... I built it from a back issue of Sky and Scope with a handful of parts and less than 60 bucks spent. the AC version is easier, so I simply use a car battery (or the car it's self) and an inverter to get 60hz 120VAC to run
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:3, Funny)
D'oh! So that's how it starts! Robotic telescopes will someday evolve to take over and destroy us all!
Quick! Lets burn down the observatory so this never happens!
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2)
Re:You don't need a great telescope... (Score:2)
We've been lucky this year. (Score:5, Informative)
Of course, after you drag the scope outside and view Mars, point that thing a little further north and west and catch Uranus and Neptune too! (Ok, hold the jokes about our seventh planet.)
Obligatory disc world reference (Score:2)
sorry (Score:1, Informative)
Just to be a pedant:
The true gravity of the situation is much less benign.
This means it's worse than it seems, kind of like a double negative. Less benign = more malignant...
But view of Mars really is cool right now, I've been shooting it with a friends 8" telescope and getting some great photos.
What were they thinking? (Score:5, Funny)
Why? NASA asking the public for advice about planetary exploration is like, well, Nerds asking Slashdot for relationship advice.
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:1)
Not even close. It's more like NBA forwards asking Slashdot for relationship advice.
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:3)
"Don't commit sexual assault?"
(OK, he's a guard [nba.com], not a forward, but I think you get my point.)
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:2)
Re:What were they thinking? (Score:2)
Overhyped "once-in-a-lifetime" statements (Score:3, Troll)
And if you do care about sitting in the front row of the theatre instead of two rows back, well, Mars is in opposition near the point where the two orbits are closest every 15 or 16 years or so. In August of 1971 it subtended 24.8 seconds of arc.
This once-in-60000-years or whatever is a silly technicality. There will be one magic bit of time lasting--how long?--when it will set the Guinness record for closest approach in umpty-thousand years but your view of it will depend a lot more on the weather and the local street lighting and whether your neighbor's tree is in the way.
It's a great time to look up and see Mars looking so nice bright and red. Or, at least, distinctly orangish to a middle-aged eyeball who can barely detect a difference in color between Vega and Arcturus. And if you have any kind of telescope, you really should run out to your nearest schoolyard and point it at that bright orangy star in the southeast.
But almost equally good opportunities occur every couple of years.
"Have you heard/About the stars/Next July we collide with Mars/Well, did you evah?/What a swell party this is!"--Cole Porter
Re:Overhyped "once-in-a-lifetime" statements (Score:1)
Yes. Isn't that a huge difference... about 50% change in area for a disk? Yes it should look a lot bigger and brighter. Imagine if your monitor just got 25% wider and taller.
And it may be a once-in-a-lifetime chance... the weather here (on the east coast usa) is unusually clear right now, and so's the weather on mars, apparently. That's really great luck, with mar
Re:Overhyped? So what! (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm privileged enough to come from a 1st world country where it is still possible to escape the city lights and see the stars properly - which is something I reckon the vast majority of slashdotters would not have experienced.
When I read about a celestial event on
Re:Overhyped "once-in-a-lifetime" statements (Score:4, Informative)
Something I've pointed out many times is that while Mars is indeed closer than it was for the 2001 opposition, and, yes, marginally closer than it has been in a very long time, the view isn't all that hot for us Northern folks, because it's quite low in the sky, down in Aquarius. The last opposition was worse, even before the dust storms.
While Mars won't be quite as big at the next (2005) opposition, it will be much higher in the sky (Aries), and the view won't be as badly compromised by the atmosphere. I'll be ready.
I saw a report on the local news last night that originated with CNN. The illustrations were all Hubble pictures. I wish they would, once in a while, use pictures more representative of what you would actually see looking through a telescope. If I had a penny for every time somebody had looked through my telescope (a 5" Synta refractor), sniffed, and said "Is that it?"...
...laura
Re:Overhyped "once-in-a-lifetime" statements (Score:2)
The number one mistake most beginning Mars observers make is to not really look. A 30 second glance isn't enough. A five minute watch is better - that at least five actual minutes of eye against the eyepiece. Only watching for a long period of time will you see those moments of very good seeing (steadiness
Curmudgeonly "what's-the-big-deal" statements (Score:2, Insightful)
So was the clock rolling over to 2000 three years back. Even though it was an artifact of the dating system, and didn't actually signify a millenium in that system, people were still out partying. We like marking biggests, bests, and firsts.
I think anything that gets people looking up at the sky is a good thing. Maybe a sense of wonder needs a kick-start in some people. If the hype surrounding this particular opposition convinces people to
2287 (Score:1)
Take a Moment... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Take a Moment... (Score:2)
I think I remember reading a while ago that on any average dark night there will be about one meteor per minute or two that should be visible to the naked eye.
Re:Take a Moment... (Score:2)
Beautiful moment, so take off 5 minutes every night or so to stand outside and look upwards towards the stars. Nothing like it.
Yup, when I look up toward the stars from my Tokyo apartment, nothing is a pretty good description of what I see.
Any of you New York guys think you could send a blackout this way?
There are stars and planets in the sky? (Score:2, Interesting)
When asked where I want to go for my vacation coming up, all I can say is, "Somewhere away from the city where I can see the night sky."
Re:There are stars and planets in the sky? (Score:2)
I've seen Mars from our bathroom window, with the dirty glass pane and the screen in place, on a night which was distinctly hazy, despite the lights from the neighbors house and a streetligh
Re:There are stars and planets in the sky? (Score:2)
I looked out my bedroom window the other day and, having never seen Mars so bright and large, thought it must be an aircraft doing something weird. Except after a bit, I noticed it wasn't moving. It's pretty low in the sky, but we don't have any factories, billboards, and few cars or cities, so the pollution is very low.
Fortunately it's starting to get dark around 10 or 11 p.m. now, and just the other night I got both Mars and the Northern Lights in one show.
If you ever come up in the wint
Earthquakes (Score:3, Funny)
We had a 7.2 earthquake here in southern New Zealand four days ago -- I need no further proof that mars is trying to kill us all.
[nzherald.co.nz]
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?stor
Mars at Opposition (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Mars at Opposition (Score:2)
'Cause Mars is the god of war, of course.
What to look at... (Score:1)
overheard... (Score:2, Funny)
Humph, _Worlds in Confusion_ (Score:2)
Um... (Score:2)
Don't you mean more benign? Or is mars' gravity going to suck the blood up from my feet?
Oh, and that's a very bad pun.
Our Astronomy club... (Score:2)
Everyone that has approached us seems to think that they must view Mars on the 27th...as if it's gonna be so much closer than on the 28th or Sept, etc... It's really pushing the limits of our very good natured "P.R." guy.
But it did look nice the other night...much better than last year.
All of which would be fascinating... (Score:2)
what a shame... (Score:2)
Not quite. (Score:2)
You wouldn't want to launch for mars NOW, it'll be moving AWAY by the time you get to it. You want to launch for mars three months AGO so you're there NOW. When it's closest.
Less fuel on the way out, or something.
Typo (Score:2)
Not Mars (Score:2)
Sounds more like the handiwork of Ming the Merciless.
Mars at its closest: a big, bright, blob of orange (Score:2)
Boy, was I wrong. It was big. It was really stinking bright (destroyed my night adaptation). It was a big, bright, orange/red blob. No details. There might have been a slight bit that was darker than the rest. That was it.
Now, granted, I don't spend much time viewing the planets. Jupiter and its moons, and
Re:Mars at its closest: a big, bright, blob of ora (Score:2)
Can't Wait To Hear (Score:2)
Probably thinks the neo-Nazi conspiracy to destroy us all and fly off to Mars in the UFOs will come to fruition this year.
Actually, I hope he's right. I'd love to see the ruling elite leave Earth forever - although I'd prefer in body bags.
(For those of you who don't know who he is, think "Art Bell permanent guest".)
Re:Mars... A rediculous liberal myth! (Score:2)
Re:Mars... A rediculous liberal myth! (Score:2)
I applaud you and offer to buy you a new, custom-made tin-foil hat.
Re:Mars... A rediculous liberal myth! (Score:2)
Re:Linux on the desktop (Score:2, Informative)
That depends on whether you're looking forward or back to count your lifetimes. It will be closer in 2287 than it is this time.
Mod parent up... (Score:2)
... +5 Funny
Re:Mod parent up... (Score:2)
This happens. That's why we are able to find Martian meteorites in Antarctica which hint at the possibility of life. A large enough meterorite hitting Mars will knock pieces loose with enough energy to escape Martian gravity. Once this is d
Re:Collisions with Mars? (Score:4, Funny)
Would "fragments of earth" that have been processed into spacecraft and landers and hurdled towards Mars be cause enough for alarm?
You have to realize the distances involved (Score:2)
I would not need to calculate the probability given the enormous odds AGAINST such an event occuring. Consider the variables:
- The distance from Earth to Mars. Mars is at perihelion (closest distance to the sun in its orbit) and Earth is at aphelion (farthest distance from sun in its o
Re:coming or going? (Score:2, Informative)
Theoretically, an orbiting body not affected by some mass other than its primary is not going to escape, and it's not going to "spiral in" unless it is under drag. In a sufficiently pure theoretical abstraction, ALL orbits are perfect.
Non-theoretically, there is drag on the planets, but it is so incredibly miniscule we can safely ignore it. (think about how many inches the moon has to move away from us to make any difference at all). So we're down to being affected by other masses. The planets (particu