• Zozano@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ll tell you what’s definitely unsettling;

    The fact that if you kiss a mirror, you’ll only ever kiss yourself on the lips.

  • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    So conditioned that NDT is talking bullshit and people dunking on him that I had to read it a couple of times to understand it.

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    From that picture, it looks like you’d be on mercury and look up, see nothing but sun, But realistically it’s 60% closer than earth

    looks kinda like this from the surface

    • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Im struggling to parse this. The picture of the sun with the tiny dot when compared with the artists impression you posted. It just wont click together. How can the sun appear so big from the telescope compared to mercury but be so small from mercury’s perspective?

      Edit. Actually i think it clicked. Mercury is so far from us and so smalkl that it appears like a small dot through that telescope even when zoomed in enough to see the sun that closley. Its actually still really far from the sun but our perspective and that flat picture makes it seem like its about to be consumed by the sun. If it was off to the side the distance would be more clear.

      So more like this

      S—‐-------------------------------M--------------------------------------V----------------------------------E

      Than

      S—M‐---------------------------------------------------------------------V----------------------------------E

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        If someone is struggling with it still, think about the moon.

        On the surface of the moon, the sun looks basically like from the earth, small disk in the sky.

        From lunar solar eclipses we know that just from 300.000km away (on earth) the moon looks just as big as the sun.

        Now imagine you travel just a couple million km further away, the moon will look smaller and smaller, while the sun stays almost the same (as the distance to the moon will be 10 times bigger and the distance to the sun will increase by like 2%). If you are just 3 million km away from earth the moon will be a small-ish dot in front of the sun (it would cover about 1% of the suns disk, if my math maths out).

        For context, the moon and mercury are quite comparable in size.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yep, zoom and narrow aperture really messes with perspective.

        It’s kind of opposite of the tilt shift photos that make real life things look fake.

  • thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    This reminds me of that part of that space opera I read where there was a nomadic colony on mercury which needed to always be moving at exactly the right speed to stay on the dark side of the terminator.

    • BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wow. I was in middle school and had to do a creative writing assignment, and I wrote a science fiction short story set in a colony on that boundary of Mercury. I thought Mercury was tidal locked. I was praised for my creativity.

      I was today years old when I found that Mercury is not tidal locked.

      • Lyrl@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        The 3:2 resonance Klear references is considered a type of tidal locking.

      • Klear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Same here. I was so going to ackchyually that guy, but I did a quick check before and turns out there is a day/night cycle.

        Apparently one Mercury day takes exactly two Mercury years due to some fuckery involving “3:2 spin-orbit resonance” which is something I’m too drunk to comprehend right now.

        Gonna be an interesting wikipedia binge at work tomorrow tho

    • Weirdfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      That was in the Red / Green / Blue mars trilogy, one of my favorites. Though I think I’ve seen the concept in other works as well.

      Basically the temp difference between day / night caused contraction of the rail tracks, pushing the whole city forward so it was always just ahead of dawn.

      • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        The nomadic colony got expanded on in KSR’s novel 2312. I don’t actually remember much about it in the Mars Trilogy.

        But I’ve seen the concept before in an old EU Star Wars novel, one of the Solo books maybe, where Lando was operating something similar as his new venture.

        And before that maybe mentioned by Sagan. And before that…

          • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Adjacent, probably. Very similar, and seems to purposefully be set a hundred years after Blue Mars ends (2212).

            But it starts and ends on Mercury after a voyage through the solar system, not spending much story time on Mars.

  • Juice@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I guess because of perspective, Mercury being millions of miles closer to the camera than it is to the sun, the actual proportions would have the planet being much smaller by comparison

    • nexguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Mercury’s apparent size in the sky when close to us is about twice the size as when mercury is in the other side of the sun from us. So mercury would appear about 75% the size it is in this photo of it were next to the sun (so about the same distance away as the sun is).

  • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Trying to wrap my head around how incromprehensively large even just our sun is always makes me feel dizzy.

    We are not even a pale blue dot to most of the universe, and when we disappear nothing will know or remember us.

    • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      My fav sun fact is that it burns 400 million tons of hydrogen each second, and will be doing that for billions of years. That’s 400 million tons of the lightest possible element there is. Just absolutely insane how gigantic the mass of the sun is.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        My fav is just that the sun is, all by itself, 99% of the total mass of our solar system. Most of the rest of that 1% is Jupiter.

        • addie@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          You’re understating it a bit there - the sun is 99.86% of the mass of the solar system by itself. To the nearest whole percent, the solar system consists of 100% “the sun”. To the nearest 0.1%, it’s 99.9% the sun and 0.1% Jupiter.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_mass