Does anyone really care about the supermoon?

[Stonius]

It'll look the same as before, just 14% bigger.

Are there really any very tiny features that are made resolvable by this modest increase in size?

Personally I think the biggest effect will be the increase in the probability of earthquakes.

Markus

[ralph1]

One of the big problems with it is that it's full, so you can't see as many details anyway. The moon often looks better around first and last quarters, when the shadows show objects more dramatically.

Ralph

[barx1963]

I think we should see this as an opportunity to explain something about the night sky to people who only know bout what is reported in the paper. My only concern is that media reports make it sound like an amazing sight whereas it is interesting, rather than spectacular.
I have had people ask me about it and I explain to them what it is all about, most would have no idea that the moon will vary in size from month to month. I have also taken the opportunity to make a basic explanation of how the view of the night changes through the year.

Malcolm

[dannat]

i agree with malcolm -there was a sic article on FB last month, had thousands of likes & 2k comments -i prob told too many truths, gave people some factual numbers, saying super moon prob isn't the right term as people were getting carried away [lambasted the sic webiste/publication in the course of it]
-i ended up getting slammed by many for being debby downer - no fun at parties etc, i just didn't want people to not have some perspective

[Stonius]

Most people are suprised to find out that the moon spends 50% of its time in the daylit hours.

[bojan]

Super Moon = Super light pollution = Super bad for deep sky objects :mad2:

[glend]

Agree 100%. The Moon is a pain in the ***. I'd be happy without it at all. Yes I know there would be some pretty major consequences and we can't just cut it loose.:question:

[AussieTrooper]

This.

Astronomically it's pretty useless. At first and last quarter, the moon isn't at it's closest 'supermoon' distance, so I doubt you'll see any extra detail.

[AussieTrooper]

I actually had a bet with someone about this once. It's amazing the number of people who refuse to believe that you can see the moon during the day.

[deanm]

"Most people are suprised to find out that the moon spends 50% of its time in the daylit hours."

Surely the moon (like the earth) spends 100% of its time in daylight (i.e. the sun is always shining [except during eclipses]).
Both bodies are revolving (24 hrs us, 28 days lunans), so only spend 50% of any local time in daylight.
Dean
(Pedant selector to "OFF"!)

[JA]

I like it :thumbsup:

Best
JA

[barx1963]

I was surprised when my intelligent step son objected to me stating that you can see the moon during the day. Refused to believe it until I explained it to him.

Malcolm

[Stonius]

Okay, yes, you got me. 100% of it's time in daylight. Locally visible 50% during the day, 50% during the night. :-)

[AussieTrooper]

Go outside 5 days after/before the new moon and point it out to him.

[bojan]

you can't see info on Moon visibility on FB or Twitter or Instagram or Whatever...
Movie "Idiocracy" is constantly coming to my mind.

[erick]

Errrrr, no. But it does give me the opportunity to discuss matters astronomical with those who read it somewhere and want to tell me all about it :thumbsup:

[Sol-Skysailor]

Hello, Yes, I care a great deal.

It is a celestial object with it’s own undiminished wonders, of varying phases and proximity just like of some planets, but with features we can see and some did touch.

Friends and I watched a supermoon rising from behind the waters off the Qld coast and it was large, extra orange gold, and a beautiful sight to us. To observers who see them quite rightly as somewhat special, let us not diminish their impression and appreciation which would be like saying to people back from a holiday: oh that’s nothing, I’ve been there, I’ve seen bigger and better, I‘m cleverer…

This illustration http://earthsky.org/?p=190918 is interesting, I think. If ‘only’ 14% bigger (in what?? diameter? 30% in area? compared to when? -apparently to when it’s furthest; even these are points for discussion), it is not necessarily insignificant. Even if something is or is not, what each sees, or is interested to see, is in the eye of the beholder to be respected. I think people’s *interest* in the universe is significant.

Interested enquirer: Supermoon! Can we view it here? Is there a viewing session?
Experienced persons: There’s nothing to see… It’s… it’s only… What people don’t realise…

Have we not killed that interest and enthusiasm? Some enquirers already know the facts too but are keen to observe, and to experience things for themselves.

While joining in with others’ appreciation, as Malcolm and Eric and maybe others said and I agree it presents an opportunity to converse, two-ways, with any interested persons about some noteworthy information and ideas. To me, no such natural light is ever a light pollution (unless it fries us). It’s up to us to think up how best to treasure it. And if we carry some name of ‘- - astronomer’ or related, in my opinion we also carry the duty of care, for others we influence, support and occasionally inspire.


Cheers and to Supermoon :)
Sol

[75BC]

I totally agree Sol. :thumbsup:

It’s an astronomical event that anyone who can look outside with at least one working eye can enjoy. No fancy (expensive) equipment required.

An event like this can be the start of someone’s lifelong love of astronomy.

And let’s not forget that a lot to do with astronomy is about the numbers as opposed to what you can and can’t see. You know, so many millions of light years away and such. This will be the closest the moon has been since 1948. I don’t find that insignificant.

I find the moon beautiful regardless of phase and a supermoon rising above the horizon especially so.

[Rob_K]

That's another thing with the "Supermoon", what casual observers report is overwhelmingly the Moon-illusion. The Moon can appear huge as it rises and the illusion can be visible at any Full Moon (or even outside Full Moon if it comes to that). Try explaining that to true Supermoon believers though.... :rolleyes:

Cheers -

[astro_nutt]

I'm hoping to capture some images of the Moonrise as it creeps above the horizon. Especially if the Eastern sky has a hint of colour from the Earths shadow.

[mental4astro]

I too have been guilty of dismissing the Full Moon as a just a pain in the bum.

Not any more!

Not since testing out a newly acquired eyepiece last summer and the Moon was the only target to be seen through some whispy cloud.

There is one aspect of the Moon that really gets bugger all attention, and is just cannon fodder for when it is full - the limb!

The only time that there really are no shadows on the Moon is when there is a lunar eclipse. Yes it is behind Earth's shadow, but it is also the only time that for us on Earth that sunlight falling on the Moon is exactly square to us, so shadows wouldn't be seen.

Every other time, with the Moon's orbit ranging north and south of Earth's rotation plane, shadows are ALWAYS visible, and only on its limb during the full phase.

Why get excited about this? MOUNTAINS, VALLEYS, CRATERS, RILES, all seen in profile, not from above.

Huge mountains, with craggy slopes, valleys and ridges, plunging down into the abyss and soaring up into the dark night sky, and shadows thrown back far, far away.

I had seen the work of a very good Korean astronomer who loves sketching the limb's details with his large refractors. To my shame I thought these were fanciful, :ashamed::scared3: Oh, how wrong I was...

Then throw libration into the equation, and the Full Moon becomes a brilliant opportunity to nail some of the Moon's more exotic features that are visible for only a handful of days during the whole year!

I've attached a couple of photos of sketches I've done around the limb of the Moon while a day or two off its full phase. One of these (the second image) is of the crater Drygalski which is completely libration dependent. Getting a sketch done while full all depends on getting all the ducks to line up - work, family, clouds, seeing, etc...

Markus, whether the Moon is 'normal' or a 'supermoon', seeing any details on it totally depends on the prevailing seeing conditions. The smallest details I've been able to pull have been at 400X, and these on the Moon measure 500m across (big features in size, but flaming tiny through a scope being pumped as far as it and my eyes will go). And a 14% "larger" appearance won't make a real improvement to this.

What the Supermoon really does is give us astro nutters the opportunity to engage with novices with a target that they've seen all their lives and most likely never gave it much thought. That's the BIG deal about the Supermoon.

I hope this helps you, and gives you a new outlook on what the Full Moon actually has to offer.

Alex.

[bojan]

Alex, those are very nice drawings.

[xelasnave]

Alex may I also say ...very nice.
You have the passion of an artist and the reason of a scientist.
Great post.
Alex

[mental4astro]

Thank you Bojan and Alex.

Alex, you are a master of flattery, :D

[xelasnave]

Flattery as you call it isno more than observing the good qualities of another human which often they do not see in themselves but others do.
And then pointing those good qualities without going overboard or causing embarrassment.
In you case I could have made a list but I confined myself to your artistry.
Alex

[Baza]

Great drawings.

I'm certainly going to look & tell people, it is an event that I probably will not see again and if still around I may not have the capacity to view. Can't change it, so might as well enjoy whats there.

I see the moon's value & nuisance. On open nights there are lots who ask to view the moon, lots of photos taken & questions. It's the detail. People don't seem to be impressed with Mars and unfortunately lots of good stuff is obscured by trees or local light.

Look at the tides on that day.

Barry

[julianh72]

I'm as thrilled as anybody that all the media hype meant that lots of people got out last night to look at the Moon, something that perhaps they rarely do.

All the breathless excitement on the evening news reports was great to see - but I'm sure that half of the people were simply seeing the "Full Moon Illusion" and not realising that they can basically see the same thing EVERY month. I suspect the other half were left thinking "Hmmmm - it doesn't look all that "super" to me?!"

Without wanting to rain on anyone's parade - I prepared the attached diagram to show my family and work colleagues, showing all of the Full Moons of 2016 drawn true scale. Can YOU "Spot the Supermoon"? :shrug:

[PCH]

Alexander, I'd be interested to hear how long one of your amazing drawings takes to complete. They're so detailed, it looks they they must surely take forever, but I'm guessing you have it down to a fine art by now.

Cheers :)

[Satchmo]

The tragedy was that sky was clear at midnight in Sydney the night before - the moon was 98.4 illuminated and the `supermoon ' was as super as it was going to get , and it was completely ignored as the public and media were lead to believe it was something only going to happen last night ... For that matter , the Moon will be 98.4% tonight and we have fair weather cumulus around so no excuses tonight .

Personally , I stepped out , saw the sky was clear , noted everything strongly lit by moonlight , but I didn't bother to even look . Being dazzled by the full moon was something I gave up about 30 years ago , though I don't mind seeing a deep orange full moon when it is rising .

[Stonius]

Exactly

I feel wary of promoting a 'supermoon' to the general public that won't be able to see much difference. Sure a lot of people went out and looked up, but if the expectations are too high, the response is 'meh, it doesn't look much different to *me!' with the associated disappointment or frustration. This could ultimately drive people away from astronomy, rather than bring them to it as it feels like astronomy is 'hard' because they're 'doing it wrong'.

-Markus

[MortonH]

I was completely ignoring it until my daughter suddenly said (just before bed) "Dad, it's supermoon tonight!". Apparently her teacher mentioned it at school yesterday. So I ended up with my 4" and 66mm refractors on the balcony.

I told her she'd be able to tell her classmates that she'd looked at the moon through two telescopes, but she corrected me and said she'd looked through THREE as she was also counting the finderscope on the 4"!

[mental4astro]

Thanks Paul. A lunar sketch usually takes me about 2 hours.

I agree about not promoting the term "supermoon". It does nothing more than create misunderstanding, and even promotes ignorance and superstition. Instead I try to direct the conversation to something more factually based. Even if its just to make people aware of the full Moon not being the best phase to view the Moon, or the tidal locking of the Moon showing us the same face, anything. The public's imagination and attention has been gained, WE then have the opportunity to undo the crap promoted by the mass media.

Change the world! That's what I'm gonna do!!
:lol::D:P:rolleyes::clap::evil::ato m::rover1::drink::nerd::2thumbs::po ke:

[Giritboy]

Too bad it was very cloudy in wollongong.

[Stonius]

Case in point. This just popped up in my newsfeed

[multiweb]

Actually it was only 80cm.

[mental4astro]

Blooming brilliant Markus! :lol:

Yep, we'll all be rooned by this Supermoon, said Hanrahan...

Julian, your post and pic are brilliant too.

I do have to admit to thinking a similar sentiment when I saw the Moon peek through the clouds. But it did get the Moon the most attention its had since 1969...

Then again, I've also had people think that I was somehow trying to trick them into looking at the Sun and destroy their vision even though I was using a solar scope and was just looking through the damned thing too. Go figure, :shrug: Maybe it was the hollows burned through my head where my eyes were that made them suspicious...