Talk:Extraterrestrial skies
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article related to meteorology and/or specific weather events is part of WikiProject Meteorology and Weather Events, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to weather or meteorology. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Meteorology. |
 |
This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. |
[edit] Archive -- Start a new discussion
surely it should be called Skies of other planets? Deus Ex
Surely everything on this page is/ought-to-be covered on the individual planets' pages? Also, the Moon is not a planet. Jonel
- I disagree. Paranoid 11:15, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
What colour can be the skies of other planets? Paranoid 11:15, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Time, date and astronomy on Mars#The_color_of_the_sky -- Curps 12:21, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Gas Giants
I think this is an interesting page that deserves more work. Does anyone have any knowledge of what the sky colour would be on the gas planets? The Singing Badger 18:20, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It is hard to say. Because of the Rayleigh scattering, One would expect a blue sky. Add a little methane and one gets a cyan sky. The clouds vary from white to pink or yellow. (chemically stained). -- Ŭalabio 16:36, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)
-
- Since gas giants don't have surfaces, how can one see a "sky" at all from below the cloud tops? 70.168.32.250 06:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Name of article
Over on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates, Alkivar suggests that since we include the perspective from moons, comets, asteroids, et cetera too, we should move the article to a more appropriate name. ¿Does anyone have any suggestions? I have some ideas, but I want to sleep on them.
--
Ŭalabio 11:02, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)
I slept on it and have decided to run with my idea:
If none object, I shall move the article tomorrow. On another note, If you follow the link at the top of the page, you can see what the objections are to this being a featured article and fix it.
--
Ŭalabio 16:36, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)
- I support this name change. The Singing Badger 17:28, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
-
- Well now, it is the next day, and 100% of all respondents approve the move. I shall move the article now.
-
-
- I moved the page, fixed the redirects, fixed the AddSectionCode, fixed moved the section on { { fac } }, et cetera. I probably missed something.
-
[edit] Improving the article
The following is a list of comments made on a discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates by Alkivar (I removed some that are made redundant by changing the name of the article). I would like to work more on this article but (a) I'll be away for a few weeks and (b) I've reached the limits of my scientific knowledge. However I've added some comments to Alkivar's comments to aid futuire editors.
- Lead in WAAAY too brief Yup. Needs a discussion of what a 'sky' actually is, what factors affect its colour, and what kinds of things (moons, rings, stars) one might expect to see in the sky of a planet.
- Information on Mercury reads stilted and broken. I'll see if I can fix this.
- Information on Venus is 2 lines?!?!! Since Venus's sky is basically, erm, orange smog, there's only so much one can say!
- Mars section needs reformatting badly Yes, there are probably too many pictures which should be deleted and/or rearraned so they're not all in a line.
- Jupiter needs serious work as 90% of its content regards its moons. Material could be added on the varying cloud layers on JUpiter, perhaps?
Hope this helps, The Singing Badger 17:46, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I added another paragraph to the introduction. Now it is merely too brief instead of way too brief. ;-) -- Ŭalabio 22:14, 2004 Dec 18 (UTC)
I have an idea about how we can solve the Venusian problem:
As The Singing Badger states, "Since Venus's sky is basically, erm, orange smog, there's only so much one can say!" It appears to me that Venus has three skies:
- Just above the clouddeck -- we can take a screenbrage from Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back and edit out Cloudcity. ;-)
- A point halfway between the bottom of the clouds and the surface showing the bottom of the clouddeck and the surface, as well as the horizon.
- The surface view.
We could treat Titan the same way. Although Jovian planets lack a point 3, we can explain their points 1 and 2. We can explain that the clouds of Venus and the jovian planets might have bacteria in them and, as an historical note, point out that after the idea of bacterial life in the atmosphere of Jupiter arose, some people got carried away, and imagine giant improbable monsters living in the clouds. ¡We have not even begun to get into the skies of extrasolar worlds yet!
[edit] Featured article is ours -- in a few months.
I am very proud of all of you. I stumbled across this article in middecember. I could tell that this article is ready for featured article. Unfortunately, this time of year was just to hectic. We all put in as much time as we could trying to work out the last few snags, but, we just did not have the time.
I suggest that we meditate about how to improve the article such as explain the physics better and go over theoretical skies instead of just the ones in our solar system. After coming up with some ideas, we can get some help from peer review, in February. In March we can resubmit this to featured article candidates, where it will succeed this time.
Understandably, if any of you have any other ideas, I defer to you, because you people built this article into the fine state in which I found it. ¡You people are paragons of the wikiway! --
Ŭalabio 06:50, 2005 Jan 4 (UTC)
[edit] This should be added
Write more about the sky seen from Venus above the clouds, the appearance of Mercury and Venus from Mars, the sky seen from big asteroids as Ceres
Isn't this all somewhat theoretical and/or speculative, and not quite factual, describing findings or hard data, as an encyclopedia should do?
[edit] Sylvia
Why is the Sylvia section notable? I am all for it being here if it is notable enough, but why is it more notable than say planetoids like Ceres, Quouar, Ixion, etc.? It seems "fluffy" and unnecessary.
[edit] size of the moon as it appears to be as seen from the earth
I want to carry out a scientific experiment regarding the cosmic bodies in the space in order to broaden my knowledge on matters regarding the solar system as well as astronomy. Can you please provide me with the really size of the moon, it,s distance from the earth as well as the size it appears to be when seen from the earth in order to enable me to carry out this experiment / investigation.You can send me this data via my e-mail.
[edit] Apollo 15 Lunar Rover Camera attempt to observe eclipse.
Checked with the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and retrieved the information. The eclipse took place on 6 August 1971. Goto [1] for details. Note the capcom - crew discussion at 262:16:48 hours mission elapse time. Panamango 04:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)Gary Fearon
[edit] Pluto
As Pluto is no longer considered a planet, shouldn't that be added to it's section on this article? --KCMODevin 16:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Way, way out... Magellanic clouds
I posted a question on Talk:Magellanic Clouds about where would be appropriate for a description of the sky on a planet in the Magellanic clouds. How would our galaxy appear? GBC 18:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Apparent Magnitudes
How do we know things like the apparent magnitude of Earth from Venus? For that figure, assuming the article means maximum brightness, the magnitude that I calculated differed from the given one by .5. Many other apparent magnitudes from non-Earth skies are also given. My point is, either these magnitudes have been measured, in which case a source should be cited, or they have been calculated, in which case the calculation should be made explicit or cited. If no one answers within a couple of days, I will mark those things as requiring citations. Kier07 18:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure thay've been calculated by someone rather than measured; some footnote from whoever calculated them would be good, I agree. Deuar 10:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
