cubinator Posted Monday at 05:54 AM Author Share Posted Monday at 05:54 AM Took some more images and the brightness does not appear to have changed over these last few hours. All clear as far as I can tell! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spikemaster Posted Monday at 09:58 AM Share Posted Monday at 09:58 AM Interesting The eastern side is usually clear so I might be able to see it every evening when Corona borealis rises Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted Monday at 06:24 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:24 PM (edited) has the thing happened already? so far my track record for observing astronomical phenomena this year has not been great as everything looks like rain clouds. im told that there is a big glowing ball in the sky but i cant find it. much less the little glowing ball. Edited Monday at 06:28 PM by Nuke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted Monday at 06:49 PM Author Share Posted Monday at 06:49 PM 23 minutes ago, Nuke said: has the thing happened already? so far my track record for observing astronomical phenomena this year has not been great as everything looks like rain clouds. im told that there is a big glowing ball in the sky but i cant find it. much less the little glowing ball. As of about 14 hours ago, I think not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted Monday at 07:40 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:40 PM 51 minutes ago, cubinator said: As of about 14 hours ago, I think not. i mean id go out and look but the sky is very grey and has been since the aurora. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piscator Posted Tuesday at 07:01 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 07:01 AM It will be interesting to see how accurate the predictions will turn out to be. Apparently we only have good observational data for the last two events, which is surprisingly little to go on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K^2 Posted Tuesday at 04:32 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 04:32 PM 9 hours ago, Piscator said: Apparently we only have good observational data for the last two events, which is surprisingly little to go on. I have no idea what you're talking about. It's the perfect amount of data. Draws a straight line on graph paper through points labeled (1866, 2) and (1946, 3) with intensity normally reserved for cutting red or blue wires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted Tuesday at 04:55 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 04:55 PM 17 minutes ago, K^2 said: I have no idea what you're talking about. It's the perfect amount of data. Draws a straight line on graph paper through points labeled (1866, 2) and (1946, 3) with intensity normally reserved for cutting red or blue wires. For some reason drawing an line between two points always give an straight line if using an ruler I would expect it to be couple of % variation because of weather on the large star. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted Tuesday at 06:08 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:08 PM so we will have 3 data points instead of 2. 3 is 50% better than 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFUN Posted Tuesday at 06:10 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:10 PM It's almost certain that the fit will be made worse by adding a third data point. Not worth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted Tuesday at 06:12 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:12 PM (edited) i cant help but think that science is not about making lines look pretty. this is also why sound engineers keep destroying perfectly good music by flattening out all the bumps. squiggly lines are good. Edited Tuesday at 06:14 PM by Nuke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFUN Posted Tuesday at 07:32 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 07:32 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted Tuesday at 07:36 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 07:36 PM you just wiped out all the data though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFUN Posted Tuesday at 08:01 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:01 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted Tuesday at 08:24 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:24 PM 3 hours ago, magnemoe said: straight line if using an ruler Fine, make things complicated - why don't you?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeSchmuckatelli Posted Tuesday at 08:39 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:39 PM 2 hours ago, NFUN said: It's almost certain that the fit will be made worse by adding a third data point. Not worth 2 hours ago, Nuke said: i cant help but think that science is not about making lines look pretty. this is also why sound engineers keep destroying perfectly good music by flattening out all the bumps. squiggly lines are good. Nuke, I'll solve NFUN's riddle for you using math's and logic. Marines get this stuff, watch: There is exactly one way that adding a third point of data won't totally mess up @K^2's two-point prediction. Literally every other possible point would make his ' two points and a ruler' derived prediction some degree less accurate. Since there is an infinite number of other possibilities for where to place the third point - and we cannot split infinity, we will use the SWAG principle and insert a sufficiently large number for infinity and do the math. I'm going with a gagillion. If you add a gagillion, plus the one possible point that makes K^2s big brain prediction possible, you get a gagillion and one. Divide that by 2 and you get the average - half a gagillion (give or take). Thus, the average deviation from the preceeding two points when placing the third point should be half a gagillion off the line of the other two. Since that's the case, logic tells you that if the third point lines up with the first two it can only mean one thing: @K^2 is clearly manipulating the data and cannot be trusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted yesterday at 03:07 AM Author Share Posted yesterday at 03:07 AM I just did my nightly check to see if it's exploded. It has not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted yesterday at 06:02 AM Share Posted yesterday at 06:02 AM the sky is still gray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted yesterday at 06:37 AM Share Posted yesterday at 06:37 AM 34 minutes ago, Nuke said: the sky is still gray. So it's brighter than it was! HYPE 14 hours ago, K^2 said: I have no idea what you're talking about. It's the perfect amount of data. Draws a straight line on graph paper through points labeled (1866, 2) and (1946, 3) with intensity normally reserved for cutting red or blue wires. (yes I know why this is different) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnemoe Posted yesterday at 07:03 AM Share Posted yesterday at 07:03 AM 21 minutes ago, Superfluous J said: So it's brighter than it was! HYPE (yes I know why this is different) I was thinking about that comic then writing the above Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K^2 Posted yesterday at 07:22 AM Share Posted yesterday at 07:22 AM 43 minutes ago, Superfluous J said: yes I know why this is different Naturally, you are referring to the fact that in most jurisdictions, spouses are subject to Fermi-Dirac statistics by law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.f41d27ddfefbbcda354ea9269edbd28a.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.