Talk:Halley's Comet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Halley's Comet is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] | |
|
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Solar System WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Solar System. |
|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
Halley's Comet or Comet Halley discussions
Contents |
[edit] Pronunciation
Quote "Note. The most standard pronunciation of "Halley" is /hæli/, to rhyme with "valley." The pronunciation /hejli/ (to rhyme with "Bailey") is thought to have originated by relation with the rock group Bill Haley & His Comets."
The "rhymes with valley" pronunciation is very common. However, it is thought that the way Mr Halley said his own name was that the Hall part rhymed with Paul, tall and call, then the ey as the ey in valley.
Patrick Moore once famously said on television that the pronunciation should probably be {first part rhymes with tall} but that {rhymes with valley} was so widley used it could probably not be changed.
Songwriter 23:38 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Photograph
"The 1910 approach was notable for ... being the first approach of which photographs exist"
There's a photo of that on Royal Astronomy Society, which claims to be "copyright 2003" (how can that be so if the photo was taken in 1910?) Are there any photos of this encounter that we could use? Ojw 5 July 2005 12:03 (UTC)
- Anything before 1922 is public domain in the US, so any photo at all should be usable. Ken Arromdee 21:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dear NASA
Dear NASA,
Would you plant a telescope in orbit around Halley's Comet when it returns in 2061? We have plenty of time to plan for it! oneismany 10:45, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Not a complete sentence
The first sentence is not a complete sentence. If I am incorrect, please tell me.Sidious1701 22:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Location-specific descriptions
The first paragraph, prior to 14/9/2006, read, "Halley's comet last appeared in the inner Solar System in 1986, and will next appear in the summer of 2061."
Please try to avoid such location-specific descriptions as "in the summer", as this is a global wiki, and the same time is the winter for the southern hemisphere.
[edit] References
Would anyone object to me switching the article to use the footnotes reference style? Mike Peel 19:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] internal contradiction
The article says that people noticed that the comet showed up evey 70 years in 66 CE, yet it also says that no one noticed that it was the same reoccuring object until the 17th century. --Arctic Gnome 09:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- The link in the text did not specify that the object described in 66 CE was definitely Halley's Comet. This may or may not be original research. I have added a citation needed tag. (How nice to no longer deal with complaints about the article's name.) Dr. Submillimeter 18:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pronunciation Question
It says that the "most standard pronunciation of 'Halley' is /hæli/, to rhyme with 'valley'." Does the æ make that sound? The reason I ask is because I always thought it made a long a sound, as in the end of "Astronomiæ Cometicæ" (which is part of a title cited at the bottom of the page). Could someone clear that up for me?
Lollipop09 04:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Four times the size of Venus?
The article says that on its 1066 appearance it was "four times the size of Venus, and ... shone with a light equal to a quarter of that of the Moon." Has there been vandalism? Is that the wrong way around? Venus has no visible disc to the naked eye, so "four times the size of Venus" is sort of meaningless. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's been that way since the article was created in 13:40, 26 March 2002! Dpbsmith (talk) 20:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Apparently this is indeed what the 1911 Britannica says:[1]. I'm sure it's an error. Wouldn't it be neat to have found an error in Wikipedia and the Encyclopaedia Britannica on the same day... in fact, the same error? Dpbsmith (talk) 20:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Halley's comet - a comi ttht takes 76 years to journey from beyond Neptune to around the sun and back; last seen in 1986
- Although Venus is not resolvable as a disc to the average eye (some have claimed to see the crescent phase, however) - you can definitely tell that is has a reasonably large angular diameter - i.e. you can tell that it is not a point source of light like the stars appear to be. At closest approach to Earth, Venus' diameter is of the order of 1 arcminute - around 1/30th of that of the Moon. So "4 times the size of Venus" doesn't mean nothing - you can percieve that Venus does have a "size". I suspect, however, that in this instance, size might mean brightness - from what I have seen in some older texts, brightness and size can be almost interchangable. Richard B 13:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Future of the comet
but of a stupid question, but is the comet shrinking? becuase the tail of the comet is due to parts of the comet breaking off and dust, ice and parts of the comet being thrown into space. therefore does that mean that eventually the comet will be destroyed? or does it 're-build' itself in space, maby by impacting with other objetcs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.224.1.14 (talk) 07:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
- Eventually, yes. When I don't know. Halley looks a bit like a peanut, and some have speculated that it is in the process of breaking into two separate objects. Serendipodous 07:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
