The ULTIMATE Astronomy Quiz 2

[antoniseb]

OK, I asked a question that was outside your areas of interest, or was perhaps too difficult.
I'm going to have very limited internet access of the next Nine days, so I'm handing it off to George to ask a question, and get us started again.
BTW, the answer to the above was MKIDs (Microwave Kinetic Inductance Detectors). Pretty amazing tool compared to the sensors I was familiar with.

[George]

OK, I asked a question that was outside your areas of interest, or was perhaps too difficult.
I'm going to have very limited internet access of the next Nine days, so I'm handing it off to George to ask a question, and get us started again.
BTW, the answer to the above was MKIDs (Microwave Kinetic Inductance Detectors). Pretty amazing tool compared to the sensors I was familiar with.

Google failed me, but I did try and I do think these babies are pretty amazing.

Given that the Great Eclipse is just ahead, here is an extravaganza set of timely questions that you may not already know and I don't think Google will help. Simple iterations will likely solve it but I think you will like the answer regardless. It's a 2 part question, but 20 tries should be more than enough...maybe.

A) Tell me the most combined number of total and near total eclipses that took place for any given region (~ 250 mile radius) on Earth in a span of 15 years within the last 2000 years.
B) Where is this region?

Bonus questions:
a) What is the average number of years any one spot will see a total eclipse for the northern hemisphere? [400 is too crude]
b) Southern hemisphere?
c) Approx. number of solar eclipses in last 4,000 years.
d) Approx. number of lunar eclipses in last 4,000 years.

Knowing y'all, the "why" to these will just ooze out without me asking.

[George]

The number for A is very small, of course, but the goal is to show you the social impact of them.

[Added: Hint, < 7 and a prime number]

[Solfe]

Google failed me, but I did try and I do think these babies are pretty amazing.

Given that the Great Eclipse is just ahead, here is an extravaganza set of timely questions that you may not already know and I don't think Google will help. Simple iterations will likely solve it but I think you will like the answer regardless. It's a 2 part question, but 20 tries should be more than enough...maybe.

A) Tell me the most combined number of total and near total eclipses that took place for any given region (~ 250 mile radius) on Earth in a span of 15 years within the last 2000 years.
B) Where is this region?

Bonus questions:
a) What is the average number of years any one spot will see a total eclipse for the northern hemisphere? [400 is too crude]
b) Southern hemisphere?
c) Approx. number of solar eclipses in last 4,000 years.
d) Approx. number of lunar eclipses in last 4,000 years.

Knowing y'all, the "why" to these will just ooze out without me asking.

A - 3
B - Luzhou, China.

A - 54 years, one month.
B - Same as above.
C - ~777
D - ~4333

[antoniseb]

The Database has been getting slow because of the size of the original thread, so I've created a second one to continue this quiz game.

[George]

A) Tell me the most combined number of total and near total eclipses that took place for any given region (~ 250 mile radius) on Earth in a span of 15 years within the last 2000 years.
B) Where is this region?

Bonus questions:
a) What is the average number of years any one spot will see a total eclipse for the northern hemisphere? [400 is too crude]
b) Southern hemisphere?
c) Approx. number of solar eclipses in last 4,000 years.
d) Approx. number of lunar eclipses in last 4,000 years.

1) Not 3, though even that number is unusually high.
2) No. The region is not in China, though China is a logical guess given their eclipse history. (subliminal hint in there. Well, not subliminal now. )

a - Not 54 years. Is there an interesting reason for this number? The 400 years I mentioned is pretty close. Getting within 20 years would be fine.
b - No they are not the same number. There is a slight difference and for a logical reason.
c - No, not 777 (or even 666). Partial eclipses are part of the total. I don't have a total eclipse count.
d - Nope, not 4333. Comparing this number with C will likely surprise you, as it did me, which is why I added them.

[George]

The Database has been getting slow because of the size of the original thread, so I've created a second one to continue this quiz game.

Good idea.

[Solfe]

1) Not 3, though even that number is unusually high.
2) No. The region is not in China, though China is a logical guess given their eclipse history. (subliminal hint in there. Well, not subliminal now. )

a - Not 54 years. Is there an interesting reason for this number? The 400 years I mentioned is pretty close. Getting within 20 years would be fine.
b - No they are not the same number. There is a slight difference and for a logical reason.
c - No, not 777 (or even 666). Partial eclipses are part of the total. I don't have a total eclipse count.
d - Nope, not 4333. Comparing this number with C will likely surprise you, as it did me, which is why I added them.

A and B - Three because there were three eclipses noted in Luzhou, China. I do not know the time dates. It was an off-handed remark by a professor that lived there for a while.
a - saros number. For all four of these bonus questions, I wasn't sure if you meant all eclipses or just some of them.

[George]

A and B - Three because there were three eclipses noted in Luzhou, China. I do not know the time dates. It was an off-handed remark by a professor that lived there for a while.

I think I have seen this as well, including where I read the other account that exceeds 3. Getting the correct number will be very easy since you're so close already. The other half of the contest may take some guessing as well unless the impact of these eclipses upon culture are taken into consideration. This is the juice that will come from the squeeze.

a - saros number. For all four of these bonus questions, I wasn't sure if you meant all eclipses or just some of them.

Ah, I'm still trying to get my head around these things. The 18.6 year lunar orbital inclination cycle, however, seems to get me close.

[Uranium Sidus]

Perhaps 5 would be the number of total or near total eclipse events in one region within the short period of 15 years.

[Solfe]

Ok, back at it. A - 4 or 5, I can't tell without cranking some math which is really bad for me. July 1944, May 1948, June 1955, Dec 1955, April 1958. The 48 eclipse has a very narrow path, so I don't know if you could see it.
B - Someplace near Vientiane, Laos.

Bonus question C. The total number of solar eclipses from 1999 BC to 2100 AD by type (I know, that's 4100 years):

Total # of eclipses: 9734
Partial: 3430
Annular: 3140
Annular, Non central: 54
Total: 2567
Total, Non central: 24
Hybrid: 519

[Solfe]

North and south are sort of relative terms. If you are over 80 degrees, you see total eclipse about every 254 years and annular every 166 years. In the south the numbers are 513 and 122. At the equator, they are 388 and 275. The difference between the two types has to do with the geometry of the orbit of the earth around the sun. The southern hemisphere sees more frequent annular eclipses because we are closer to the sun. If I think too hard about this generality, the whole thing will get away from me.

There an average 2.44 lunar eclipses a year. Compared to 2.38 solar. Lunar eclipses are more visible, so by staying in the same place you can see more lunar than solar eclipses. Trivially, the moon is around in the sky more regularly, so you get to see twice as many lunar eclipses.

[grapes]

Trivially, the moon is around in the sky more regularly, so you get to see twice as many lunar eclipses.

More regularly than the sun?

[Solfe]

More regularly than the sun?

Amusingly, yes. Everyday the moon rise is about 50 minutes later. But the time it sets doesn't change all that much. There can be a 6 hour overlap where the moon is in the sky with the sun. That isn't surprising, because the moon roughly follows the same path as the sun. On its own, that creates the perception that the moon is around more simply because people sleep and then don't notice the moon has left the sky until they notice it again.

On the other hand, for Aug 13, the moon rose at 11:44 PM eastern time. On the 14th, it will set at 1:35 PM (13 hours, 51 minutes) and rise again just after midnight. The next setting will be at 2:44 PM. That is 14 hours and 23 minutes. The sun is only up for 13 hours and 50(ish) minutes this time of year. On the 13th, the sun was up more, but on the 14th, the moon is up for longer.

Daylight hours vary more than Moonlight hours. It's a feature, not a bug.

[Solfe]

In looking at my history notes, I stand corrected. Luzhou, China will have 3 eclipses this century. It hasn't happened yet. This was a history class, you I hope you can understand how that statement would be confusing to me.

[George]

Perhaps 5 would be the number of total or near total eclipse events in one region within the short period of 15 years.

1) Not 3, though even that number is unusually high.
2) No. The region is not in China, though China is a logical guess given their eclipse history. (subliminal hint in there. Well, not subliminal now. )
3) Yes. It is 5.

[George]

A) Number of Total/Near Total eclipses (1 region) within 15 yrs.:
1) Not 3, though even that number is unusually high.
2) No. The region is not in China, though China is a logical guess given their
3) Yes. 5 [Ur. Sidus wishes Solfe to have it.]

B) Ok, I need to reward for the Laos answer. There were 4 annular eclipses there and one total eclipse.
Jean Meeus, of celestial mechanics fame, came up with 5 found in the Yucatan around 335 AD that occurred within 13 years. [I knew I should have used 13. ]

So, can you guess why I chose this as an interesting question? [This is what I found interesting.]

It goes to you Solfe.


a) What is the average number of years any one spot will see a total eclipse for the northern hemisphere? [400 is too crude]
a1) No, not 54.
a2) Yes, your post #12 goes into great detail. I trust your answer. The wait time that I read -- I distinctly remember the number but not the source, though I thought it was from a reference to Meeus -- for the northern hemisphere is 335 years, which might be a reasonable average.

b) Southern hemisphere?
b1) No, not 54.
b2) Yes, no doubt, per your post #12. You are pointing out that there are more annular eclipses down under, which goes to the same reason more partial eclipses would take place due to the aphelion aspect. So the wait time, IIRC, is about 20 years greater for total eclipses.

c) Approx. number of solar eclipses in last 4,000 years.
c1) Not 777
c2) Yes, approx.. 10,000 years. How did find the full account? That’s amazing.

d) Approx. number of lunar eclipses in last 4,000 years.
Appros
Hmmm. Meeus shows only about 4000 lunar eclipses vs. 6,000 solar eclipses for the 4000 year period. Interesting you differ with Meeus, but I am too rushed to think why at the moment.

[George]

Amusingly, yes. Everyday the moon rise is about 50 minutes later. But the time it sets doesn't change all that much. There can be a 6 hour overlap where the moon is in the sky with the sun. That isn't surprising, because the moon roughly follows the same path as the sun. On its own, that creates the perception that the moon is around more simply because people sleep and then don't notice the moon has left the sky until they notice it again.

But the number of new moons is the same number of full moons in a year, mas e minus due only to where the Moon is on Jan. 1 each year. It's even possible to have three solar or lunar eclipses in one year if one occurs the first few days of January.

[Solfe]

The Nasa Website has a 10000 year catalog of eclipses and 5000 years for lunar.

Let's go with Astronomy History for 100. This one is easier than eclipses. Galileo first observed the four moons of Jupiter. Marius gave them their modern names.

A) Who suggested those names to Marius?
B) Galileo didn't use those names. In his unpublished notes, what did he call them? (Hint, they were being called this into the 20th century.)

[antoniseb]

... B) Galileo didn't use those names. In his unpublished notes, what did he call them? (Hint, they were being called this into the 20th century.)

My copy of Siderius Nuncius uses the designations I, II, III, and IV for the Galilean Satellites.
As to Question A, I don't know, I don't have a copy of Mundus Jovianis, but I think it is a good guess that it was Kepler, and if not him then Bayer.

[Solfe]

My copy of Siderius Nuncius uses the designations I, II, III, and IV for the Galilean Satellites.
As to Question A, I don't know, I don't have a copy of Mundus Jovianis, but I think it is a good guess that it was Kepler, and if not him then Bayer.

Yes to the first and yes to Kepler. That went fast.

[antoniseb]

Yes to the first and yes to Kepler. That went fast.

Sorry, about the speed. Medieval astronomy is one of my strong topics.
I'll come up with a new topic in the next day or so.

[Solfe]

Sorry, about the speed. Medieval astronomy is one of my strong topics.
I'll come up with a new topic in the next day or so.

I love the whole history aspect of Astronomy. I am researching a German astronomer, Wilhelm Albrecht Oeltzen for fun. He disappeared in the 1870's. It was a tumultuous time period and there is a good chance he simply died of natural causes and it was never documented.

[George]

Galileo benefitted financially by naming them the " Medician stars". I'm curious if he called them by anything else once he chose calling them by his benefactor's name?

Also, in our last episode, the Mayans were in their classical period, first part of the 4th century, when they were hit by 5 total or near total eclipses, reportedly. Their works were destroyed when the Spanish arrived, regrettably, which included their great eclipse works. The Dresden Codex was translated revealing the pattern of 177s with an occasional 148 revealing their ability to predict eclipses. They may have been the most advanced in solar predictions, perhaps due to those 5 solar eclipses in a 13 year period.

I see that at the very bottom of the page the link to the older eclipse periods. Thanks, Solfe. I will look at those later when time allows.

[Solfe]

Galileo benefitted financially by naming them the " Medician stars". I'm curious if he called them by anything else once he chose calling them by his benefactor's name?

I am not sure. He called them Medician Stars collectively, but also used the names of four brothers for each moon. As a guess, I'd say I or IV is faster than writing "Fredward and George". Easier on the ink pen.

[George]

I am not sure. He called them Medician Stars collectively, but also used the names of four brothers for each moon. As a guess, I'd say I or IV is faster than writing "Fredward and George". Easier on the ink pen.

"George"? No wonder they were changed. Herschel had no luck with that name, either. [I'm doing okay with it, at best. ]

[antoniseb]

What did Johannes Kepler say paid the rent?

[Solfe]

What did Johannes Kepler say paid the rent?

Casting signs. Astrology.

[antoniseb]

Casting signs. Astrology.

I think the best translation of what he wrote was "Making Calendars" but he certainly meant astrology, so it is now Solfe's turn!

[Solfe]

I think the best translation of what he wrote was "Making Calendars" but he certainly meant astrology, so it is now Solfe's turn!

Ok, this one is little bit easy, and little bit hard.

A) The Hubble Space Telescope was used to resolve the disk of a star. Which was the first?
B) Name one ground based telescope that can also resolve disks. There are a few. No need to be formal, common names, group names, universities, etc. are all good answers.