Area 51 » Science

The Astronomy site didn't have enough activity during the beta. It has been closed, and its content has been merged into Physics. You can download the data dump of all questions here.

133

followers

Announcements

The proposed description of this site is quite weak and doesn't provide any real direction. Personally, I think amateurs (and their equipment) have to be explicitly included, because astronomy, perhaps more than any other science, relies on amateurs for observational data and other input. A great example is the list of observatories, many amateur, maintained by the IAU Minor Planet Center at cfa.harvard.edu/iau/lists/ObsCodesF.html - mine is code J58. While amateur astronomers represent a wide spectrum of interests, the top end certainly overlaps the professional arena. – Tim Long May 27 '10 at 15:36

I think the question of whether spaceflight and space exploration are on- or off-topic needs to be explicitly incorporated into the charter. The overlap between "people interested in astronomy" and "people interested in spaceflight" is very large, but not necessarily 100%. – Larry OBrien May 29 '10 at 18:37

There may be three populations of questions here, Professional Astronomy and Astrophysics, Practical Amateur Astronomy and Space Flight and Exploration. – Chris Rowland May 31 '10 at 7:37

show 49 more announcements

188 Example Questions (10 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 0 down vote

added by Tim Long May 27 '10 at 17:40

Real question from AstroAnswers SE site concerning the ASCOM telescope driver for the Gemini drive system. – Tim Long May 27 '10 at 17:41

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 27 '10 at 17:51

(ILOC: International Lunar Occultation Centre.) – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 29 '10 at 14:17

up vote 0 down vote

added by therefromhere May 27 '10 at 18:49

up vote 0 down vote

added by juanformoso, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 3 '10 at 8:59

Why is this not a good example? – juanformoso Jun 8 '10 at 15:36

up vote 0 down vote

added by Tobias Kienzler May 28 '10 at 6:58

up vote 0 down vote

added by Tobias Kienzler May 28 '10 at 7:13

Btw. what "colour" is dark? Black? That would be wrong since dark matter is absolutely transparent... – Tobias Kienzler May 28 '10 at 7:14

@Tobias: dark matter is just a name. The first thing physisists do when they don't understand something is give to it a name. – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 7:28

We certainly do. Sounds better than "that thing we don't understand. no, the other one". At least we make up names in plain english most of the time... – Tobias Kienzler May 28 '10 at 8:04

It is dark as in a dark room. In other words, it don't exist, or at least can't be seen. – Arlen Beiler May 28 '10 at 14:43

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 7:24

(I made "UZ Boötes type peculiar variable stars" up.) – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 7:25

It really is a variable! aavso.org/publications/newsflash/sp12.shtml – Chris Rowland May 28 '10 at 8:55

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 9:47

	(NLC: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noctilucent_cloud. Borderline because they are at the edge of space, are observed at night and may or may not be associated with meterorite dust) – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 9:50
	Another question about NLCs (but not a duplicate): area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/51/astronomy/… – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 1 '10 at 13:20
	The question is wether something that happens high in our planet's atmosphere (like sprites, meteors and northern/southern lights) should be included or not. It could also depend on the origin. NLCs (most likely) and sprites do not have origin in space whereas meteors and northern/southern lights do. – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 3 '10 at 13:10

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 10:03

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 10:41

	(Sprite: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_%28lightning%29) – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 10:42
	This would be better for weather or meteorology. – Arlen Beiler May 28 '10 at 14:38

up vote 0 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 28 '10 at 10:53

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 28 '10 at 16:06

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 28 '10 at 16:15

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 28 '10 at 16:18

up vote 0 down vote

added by Larry OBrien May 29 '10 at 0:40

up vote 0 down vote

added by Larry OBrien May 29 '10 at 0:43

closed as off topic by delete, Bryan Anderson, Blorgbeard, sysadmin1138, TGnat Jun 22 '10 at 21:21

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	The problem with this is that it shades into religion almost instantly. – Larry OBrien May 29 '10 at 18:28
	It is possible to discuss this without going into religion but I take your point. – Chris Rowland May 30 '10 at 6:29
	This is a discussion subject and doesn't fit into the SE paradigm. – Chris Rowland May 30 '10 at 6:29
	this is impossible to answer until the chances for the existence of extra-universal a live can be determined – Tobias Kienzler May 30 '10 at 9:11
	First of all, the universe does not support life, in other words, something can't just live in the universe (duh!), secondly, it obviously supports life because we live in it. Sounds contradictory, I know, but think of it as a blast furnace for iron, or a underwater home for scientists. Is a blast furnace fine-tuned to support life? The question is ridiculously naive. The universe is most definitely not "fine-tuned to support life", although the earth itself is. If it were, astronauts wouldn't need space suits (for starters). – Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 1:53

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote 0 down vote

added by juanformoso May 29 '10 at 0:59

up vote 0 down vote

added by juanformoso May 29 '10 at 1:00

up vote 0 down vote

added by Good Person May 29 '10 at 12:03

This is a discussion subject and doesn't fit into the SE paradigm. – Chris Rowland May 30 '10 at 6:27

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 30 '10 at 5:46

up vote 0 down vote

added by Tim Long May 30 '10 at 11:06

up vote 0 down vote

added by Tim Long May 30 '10 at 12:33

Real question (slightly edited) from astroanswers.org – Tim Long May 30 '10 at 12:33

up vote 0 down vote

added by therefromhere May 30 '10 at 14:41

I was going to ask this one but saw you beat me to it. Good question! – dagorym May 31 '10 at 18:34

up vote 0 down vote

added by juanformoso, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 31 '10 at 18:55

closed as off topic by Jason Punyon♦, Peter K., gnovice, dagorym, Charles Stewart Jun 7 '10 at 12:30

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

off-topic - atrology – juanformoso May 30 '10 at 17:52

*astrology (copy/paste) – juanformoso May 31 '10 at 14:11

up vote 0 down vote

added by ChrisF May 30 '10 at 21:39

	As a counter to area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/51/astronomy/… – ChrisF May 30 '10 at 21:40
	This is refering to the actual constellations, not astrology (zodiacal signs), therefore on-topic. – Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 1:06

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 31 '10 at 17:21

up vote 0 down vote

added by dagorym May 31 '10 at 17:25

up vote 0 down vote

added by Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 19:06

closed as off topic by Scott Wales, gnovice, Robert Harvey, Tobias Kienzler, Bryan Anderson Jun 6 '10 at 17:13

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	As opposed to *who is the greatest living* astronomer?** (area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/51/astronomy/…) – Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 19:07
	This is not really argumentative, because whichever answer gets the most votes is probably the most correct. – Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 19:10
	But it definitely is subjective. Different people will definitely have different opinions. – dagorym May 31 '10 at 19:59
	Right. And the subjective answer with the most votes is probably the best. – Arlen Beiler May 31 '10 at 20:10
	This is a great question - for Cloudy Nights :-) – Chris Rowland May 31 '10 at 20:30

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote 0 down vote

added by Nick Berardi, edited by Tobias Kienzler Jun 2 '10 at 14:16

Near duplicate: area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/51/astronomy/… – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 1 '10 at 13:24

up vote 0 down vote

added by delete Jun 1 '10 at 10:51

	Another question about NLCs (but not a duplicate): area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/51/astronomy/… – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 1 '10 at 13:19
	NLC's are a very discussed topic on the astro lists I've been on, I'm still not convinced I've had a positive ID of one myself yet! – delete Jun 1 '10 at 19:13
	The question is wether something that happens high in our planet's atmosphere (like sprites, meteors and northern/southern lights) should be included or not. It could also depend on the origin. NLCs (most likely) and sprites do not have origin in space whereas meteors and northern/southern lights do. – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 3 '10 at 13:11
	@dswan: yes, the first time is the most difficult. You can use binoculars to see if there is very fine structure (on the order of arcminutes) and high contrast in the clouds. – WikiSpeedia hang-around Jun 3 '10 at 13:14