Thread: Attiyah's Light of the Eclipsed Moon

Attiyah's Light of the Eclipsed Moon

1- At the time of the full Moon a set of complex interactions occur between the localized "mini-magnetospheres" of its earthward face and the geomagnetic tail forming transitory systems of electric currents.

2- At the time of the full Moon the plasma sheet of the geomagnetic tail interacts with its surface and its very tenuous atmosphere leading to the formation of electric potentials.

3- During the time of the lunar eclipse the earthward face of the Moon becomes exposed to be impacted by the plasmoids. This impact leads to the formation of electric currents and electric potentials.

4- The light of the eclipsed Moon which is often coppery red is primarily a glow of electric discharges on its surface, in its very tenuous atmosphere and in its localized "mini-magnetospheres".

5- Only a very small ratio of the light of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of sunlight by the Earth's atmosphere.

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

1- At the time of the full Moon a set of complex interactions occur between the localized "mini-magnetospheres" of its earthward face and the geomagnetic tail forming transitory systems of electric currents.

2- At the time of the full Moon the plasma sheet of the geomagnetic tail interacts with its surface and its very tenuous atmosphere leading to the formation of electric potentials.

3- During the time of the lunar eclipse the earthward face of the Moon becomes exposed to be impacted by the plasmoids. This impact leads to the formation of electric currents and electric potentials.

4- The light of the eclipsed Moon which is often coppery red is primarily a glow of electric discharges on its surface, in its very tenuous atmosphere and in its localized "mini-magnetospheres".

5- Only a very small ratio of the light of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of sunlight by the Earth's atmosphere.

Oh no, not again! :?

If this was really the case, the astronauts that were on the moon, must have had a really unpleasant experience. All these discharges affecting with the electronics on board the landing modules, their space suits and the communication with earth. Poor bastards. But wait, I have never seen anything like this on the pictures showing the astronauts walking or driving around. Ah, maybe NASA forgot to put it in when they faked the landings. (Sarcasm!)

Once and for all! Before you discredit a perfectly sufficient explanation for a phenomenon, you first have to show, why you think it is not. It has always been like that in the history of science: If you bring up something new, convince me with evidence that the old views are wrong and the new ideas are correct.

Originally Posted by Dishmaster

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

1- At the time of the full Moon a set of complex interactions occur between the localized "mini-magnetospheres" of its earthward face and the geomagnetic tail forming transitory systems of electric currents.

2- At the time of the full Moon the plasma sheet of the geomagnetic tail interacts with its surface and its very tenuous atmosphere leading to the formation of electric potentials.

3- During the time of the lunar eclipse the earthward face of the Moon becomes exposed to be impacted by the plasmoids. This impact leads to the formation of electric currents and electric potentials.

4- The light of the eclipsed Moon which is often coppery red is primarily a glow of electric discharges on its surface, in its very tenuous atmosphere and in its localized "mini-magnetospheres".

5- Only a very small ratio of the light of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of sunlight by the Earth's atmosphere.

Oh no, not again! :?

If this was really the case, the astronauts that were on the moon, must have had a really unpleasant experience. All these discharges affecting with the electronics on board the landing modules, their space suits and the communication with earth. Poor bastards. But wait, I have never seen anything like this on the pictures showing the astronauts walking or driving around. Ah, maybe NASA forgot to put it in when they faked the landings. (Sarcasm!)

Once and for all! Before you discredit a perfectly sufficient explanation for a phenomenon, you first have to show, why you think it is not. It has always been like that in the history of science: If you bring up something new, convince me with evidence that the old views are wrong and the new ideas are correct.

What are your mathematical proofs that the glow of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of the sunlight through the Earth's atmosphere?

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

What are your mathematical proofs that the glow of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of the sunlight through the Earth's atmosphere?

Do you need a mathematical explanation for the sunrise and sunset having red colours? I have no time at the moment to show you, but since you also refuse to accept scattering as the dominant process that turns the sky blue and the sunset and sunrise red, I think it is difficult to convince you that the colour of the simultaneous sunrises and sunsets seen from the moon are the reason. You might know that during a normal sunset atmospheric refraction pulls the image of the sun above the horizon while in fact the physical sun has already set. The effect is of the same order as the diameter of the sun. This is the reason why you can see the sunrises and sunsets producing a reddish ring around the earth when viewed from the moon. Unfortunately, the websites I have found do not give a mathematical explanation. But there is a nice and simple experiment that you can try explained in one of those.

http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/LEprimer.html
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...nareclipse.htm
http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Resources...e99/lunar.html
http://www.physics.brown.edu/physics...emo/6f4010.htm

Why do you think that you are so wise knowing it better than everybody else?

Originally Posted by Dishmaster

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

What are your mathematical proofs that the glow of the eclipsed Moon is owing to the refraction of the sunlight through the Earth's atmosphere?

Do you need a mathematical explanation for the sunrise and sunset having red colours? I have no time at the moment to show you, but since you also refuse to accept scattering as the dominant process that turns the sky blue and the sunset and sunrise red, I think it is difficult to convince you that the colour of the simultaneous sunrises and sunsets seen from the moon are the reason. You might know that during a normal sunset atmospheric refraction pulls the image of the sun above the horizon while in fact the physical sun has already set. The effect is of the same order as the diameter of the sun. This is the reason why you can see the sunrises and sunsets producing a reddish ring around the earth when viewed from the moon. Unfortunately, the websites I have found do not give a mathematical explanation. But there is a nice and simple experiment that you can try explained in one of those.

http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/LEprimer.html
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...nareclipse.htm
http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Resources...e99/lunar.html
http://www.physics.brown.edu/physics...emo/6f4010.htm

Why do you think that you are so wise knowing it better than everybody else?

Do you feel that I must be prohibited from thinking?

No, rather the opposite. Would you please care to consider my arguments instead of bullying around?

Here is a link to an image showing what I mean. This is a sketch of the moon running into the earth's shadow and the view from the moon during that passage.

Originally Posted by Dishmaster

No, rather the opposite. Would you please care to consider my arguments instead of bullying around?

Here is a link to an image showing what I mean. This is a sketch of the moon running into the earth's shadow and the view from the moon during that passage.

Please bring a photo of the eclipsed Moon such that its surface is showing two somewhat parallel series of colored strips or bands so that their colors are in the arrangement of those of the iris.

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

Please bring a photo of the eclipsed Moon such that its surface is showing two somewhat parallel series of colored strips or bands so that their colors are in the arrangement of those of the iris.

The Earth is not a cylinder. :?


Lovely image BTW Dishmaster.

Originally Posted by Pong

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

Please bring a photo of the eclipsed Moon such that its surface is showing two somewhat parallel series of colored strips or bands so that their colors are in the arrangement of those of the iris.

The Earth is not a cylinder. :?


Lovely image BTW Dishmaster.

Show mathematically by the laws of the refraction why the red light is bent such that it fills the Earth's shadow, and such that the rest of the bent colors do not enter this same shadow.

Originally Posted by Attiyah Zahdeh

Show mathematically by the laws of the refraction why the red light is bent such that it fills the Earth's shadow, and such that the rest of the bent colors do not enter this same shadow.

If you look carefully on my previous image, you see that the red light does not fill the shadow. Since the red light is scattered less (it is not bent) than the blue light, it is closest to the direct geometric light path:



You cannot see the other colours during the eclipse, because the bright sunlight that is coming directly from the sun outshines them. Additionally, the light is not focused on the moon, so the image is rather fuzzy. The only reason why you then see the red light, is that the earth blocks the direct illumination.

But the apparent location of the setting (and rising) sun is modified by refraction. This is what refraction means. It is only slightly dependent on the wavelength. It is not the main reason for the red colour. It is scattering. But the wavelength dependence of the refraction causes the interesting phenomena of the green and blue flash.

http://www.eso.org/public/outreach/p.../pr-12-08.html