Talk:Solar eclipse/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article mentions the moon at one point was too close to the earth to create an eclipse. I haven't been able to find where that information comes from. Can someone explain? 74.203.58.130 (talk) 17:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering if anyone knows of any veracity to this statement, I recall hearing of a Mesoamerican society/tribe (don't remember which, I think during the era of the Aztecs) that was locked in battle, and ceased fighting each other when an eclipse occured on grounds that it was a bad omen on the battle from the god. I know that in the Aztec mythology, they believed that during a solar eclips the Tzitzimitl would descend from the sky and devour humans. If anyone can elucidate or offer constributions about the the eclipse in mesoamerican societies I think it would be helpful. --66.253.36.46 (talk) 10:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected} I want to add a URL: SEMMThere is some information about meteorological measurements during solar eclipse} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmachon (talk • contribs) 18:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you think that it would be appropriate to add the following Moon footer to this page?

Lunokhod 10:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks appropriate to me. Nick Mks 18:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Why were the media links removed? I eventually found them, but why create another page? Mythology is the reason man looked to the skys in the first place. Without the mythology there would be no modern day astronomy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.85.144 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 14 December, 2006 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I have no idea what you are referring to. If you mean Solar eclipses in fiction, that was done because the section and the article were getting too large... Nick Mks 17:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

? ==

ihave been hearing about men being on the moon during asolar eclipse. is this possible? i need someone to answer my question asap! —The preceding

There were only people on the Moon during the Apollo missions - you can check the dates at

Project Apollo#Manned_missions. You can check the Moon phases at http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/MoonPhase.html . Solar eclipses only take place at new moon, when the side of the Moon facing the Earth is in darkness. I expect the Apollo management to have used their senses and only had men on the Moon during daylight, i.e. around full moon. You can check whether there was a lunar eclipse instead during the Apollo missions from the 10-year tables at http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/lunar.html . Tom Peters

11:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, TP, it was preferred to have the landings in the lunar morning; some were before the 1st quarter. The surface would be hotter later. I think another factor would have been the longer shadows would be better for seeing objects in landings Saros136 11:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

the article says that the moon is slowly moving away from the earth so where then is the energy coming from to achieve that? it does not say

It is the rotational energy of the earth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.169.242.191 (talk • contribs)

also, is a partial eclipse possible which is not visible from the mediteranean latitudes? and is a total eclipse possible which is not visible from the mediteranean latitudes? --83.105.33.91 13:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, both are possible and occur very often. Nick Mks 12:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

What was really measured in 1919 ? Is the light light bend by 0.87“ or 1.74“ and how was the displacement measured ? I heard at least three versions.

1. The relative position of two stars were measured with and without the sun between them probable measured with the same instrument some hours or days between the measurements.
2. The position of about 12 stars were measured during the 1919 solar eclipse and several months later.
3. The position of about 12 stars were measured during the 1919 solar eclipse and several months before.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.169.242.191 (talk • contribs)

An extensive description can be found at [1]. Nick Mks 12:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

this device predicted solar eclipses. did it predict ones which were not visible from the mediteranean lattitudes?
--83.105.33.91 12:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have issue with the spiritual "However, the spiritual attribution of solar eclipses is now largely disregarded." Although I think what this is basically saying is that few people believe solar eclipses are completely spiritually based, I think it also hints that any beliefs about the spiritual significance of such an eclipse (regardless of causation) is nonsense, which certainly undercuts some people's, specifically Animist and what some people call "primative", beliefs. Corbmobile 16:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be great if this article included information on eclipses in mythology and spirituality. Wikipedia is not just about facts, it's also about human beliefs. There is no reason why an article cannot contain both physical and mythological/spiritual elements. e.g. http://www.earthview.com/ages/myths.htm --192.48.8.5 02:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

This is not my turf, but as long as you remain factual, feel free to add this kind of stuff. Nick Mks 17:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I came to this article looking for the ill effects to the eyes or vision of looking at a solar eclipse. it does mention it's important near the end, but no further discussion. i only skimmed the section titles mostly, but that tells enough. i heard back in the day "don't look up" at it, to it's harmless. i'd have loved to read some discussion on that. is there *at least* an appropriate article elsewhere within wikipedia that should be linked to? but rather, I think the concern is that something should be written on it here. Nastajus 06:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The first link under eye safety in the external links is a very good source. I don't know whether there are other articles inside Wikipedia on this, but I think the mention in this one is sufficient. Nick Mks 07:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Get a mirror, set it up to reflect sunlight, which will be a circular image, on to a large bed sheet. I have done this and, not only did I watch a few of these, so did a whole town. In my case, I projected the solar image on a old building, not at people. It is like making a device for personal use, only that multiple people can see it. Did you play with mirrors as a kid ? Seen that circle of light ? That is the image of the sun. Now imagine that being seen as the sun is being eclipsed. I rigged one up at school, and the whole school saw the eclipse as it was happening, w/o even looking towards the sun at all, much less being blinded by directly looking at the sun itself. 65.163.112.128 (talk) 03:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

One guy, who was a amateur astronomer said, when he saw my projector, "Son-of-a-bitch! Why the fucking hell didn't I think of that ?!" 65.163.112.128 (talk) 03:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

The "historical eclipses" section of the article currently includes the following:

It has also been attempted to establish the exact date of Good Friday by means of solar eclipses, but this research has not yielded conclusive results. [C. J. Humphreys and W. G. Waddington (22 December 1983). Dating the Crucifixion. Nature, Vol. 306, No. 5945, 743–746.]

AFAIK, this is a mischaracterization of Humphreys and Waddington's work. They proposed that the lunar eclipse of AD 33 was associated with the crucifixion of Jesus; box hill senior state footy 2007 see

The article also says the following in the same section:

Research has manifested the inability of total solar eclipses to serve as explanations for the recorded Good Friday features of the crucifixion eclipse. [M. Kidger (1999). The Star of Bethlehem: An Astronomer’s View. Princeton, N. J: Princeton University Press, 68–72.]

Since the crucifixion occurred at Passover time (which is always at full moon), a solar eclipse could not possibly have been associated with that date, and the above sentence is a serious understatement.

I would suggest that the entire paragraph with the above two sentences should be replaced with a new paragraph, briefly explaining that while some have suggested the events of the crucifixion of Jesus might have involved a solar eclipse, this is in fact not possible (and include a reference/link to the

Richwales 23:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

every ________ years the solar eclipse happens —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.115.103 (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Total solar eclipses are very rare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.176.201 (talk) 00:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Whatcha mean "very rare" they happen every couple of years in some part of the world. See here [2] (P.S. Since that map seems to be NASA, can we put it in the article?) They're only rare if you stay put and don't want to go to some inhospitable places like Siberia or the middle of the ocean. --71.236.26.74 (talk) 13:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

The statement in the Wikipedia article "At least two and up to five solar eclipses occur each year on Earth, though no more than one of them will be total" is incorrect. The correct phrasing is that "no more than two of them will be total". Proof of this is found at the Catalog of Solar Eclipses kept by NASA at http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE2001-2100.html Check out the year 2057 when a total eclipse will occur on January 5, 2057 at 09:47:52 and another separate total eclipse will occur on December 26, 2057 at 01:14:35.

Maps of the total eclipses paths in 2057 are found here: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSEmap/2001-2100/2057-01-05.gif http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSEmap/2001-2100/2057-12-26.gif

You may also find that the last time that two separate total eclipses happened in the same year was in 1889, when they occurred on January 1, 1889 at 21:16:50 and on December 22, 1889 at 12:54:15 (Source: http://eclipses.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE1801-1900.html). Maps of these total eclipses are found here:

http://eclipses.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSEmap/1801-1900/1889-01-01.gif http://eclipses.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSEmap/1801-1900/1889-12-22.gif

Please fix this as soon as possible because of the total solar eclipse that will soon occur and the fact that this glaring inaccuracy may be inaccurately reported in the news media. Zagrossadjadi (talk) 00:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to people's attention. That sentence was added recently to the lead section, and I have just removed it. This site, for example, agrees with you: "It's possible to get 2 total solar eclipses in a year, but again this is rare; only every 170 years or so" — BillC ^talk 06:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this up in the talk and citing those years. The same website (Espenak) says the following on another page: "Although it is theoretically possible to have 2 total eclipses in 1 year, this isn't a single instance in the 5000 year period above" referring to 2000 BC to 3000 AD. This is clearly wrong, so thank you. http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/SEprimer.html --CapeCanaveral321 (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I have problems understanding the following description: [Section Final totality] >>...the Moon was too close to the Earth to precisely occult the Sun<< Assuming that the Moon was never stuck in the earth deeper than 50% it always gave a total shadow (bordered with a partial one) whenever it occured between Sun and Earth. (The following sentence seems correct.)

MelchiorG (talk) 01:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I just wrote to Fred Espenak this morning with a nice outcome!

My message:

While browsing through Wikipedia's article on "Solar eclipse" I noticed a fact that invalidates a statement made at your http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/SEprimer.html web site. The easiest way to describe it is to reproduce the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Solar_eclipse page that mentions the point. (This "Errors in Article" discussion follows.)

His response was nearly immediate:

===================================================================================

From: Fred Espenak <[email protected]> To: [Glenn L] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:08:07 AM Subject: Re: Error in your Solar Eclipse Primer page

Glenn -

Thanks for catching this. I have just made the correction.

Regards,

Fred Espenak

===================================================================================

Here's the corrected text from his http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/SEprimer.html site:

Actually, the number of solar eclipses in a single year can range from 2 to 5. Nearly 3/4 of the time there are 2 eclipses in a year. On the other hand, it is quite rare to have 5 solar eclipses in a single year. The last time it happened was in 1935 and the next time is 2206. Typically there is 1 total eclipse every 1 to 2 years. Although it is possible to have 2 total eclipses in a single year, it is quite rare. Examples of years containing 2 total eclipses are 1712, 1889, 2057 and 2252.

Glenn L (talk) 18:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

This article isn't up to featured standards. Is anyone watching it regularly, is anyone prepared to clean it up, or should it go to

I haven't been watching this page, but I agree that it needs some improvement to maintain FA status. There are some unnecessary red links, section headers with no text and weak citation in places. Still the article looks pretty good overall. We might consider moving the "Historical eclipses" section to the main Eclipse article, as the subject is relevant to both lunar and solar eclipses. (A section on Eclipses in culture, on the Eclipse article, would be another nice addition.)—RJH (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Resurrecting this discussion, there appear to be at least four featured article criteria at issue:

• 1a (prose): Take for example the repetition in the very first sentence: "As seen from the Earth, a solar eclipse occurs when the Moon ... blocks the Sun as viewed from a location on Earth."
• 1b (comprehensiveness): The history section leaps from 1095 to 1879 completely ignoring the entire Renaissance and Enlightenment periods.
• 1c (verifiability): An example claim requiring attribution (and possibly balance) is "The last total solar eclipse on Earth will occur in slightly less than 600 million years."
• 2b (structure): The final section is a collection of links.

In addition, the lead should summarise the article, and citations should be consistently formatted. If no-one here is able to improve the article, a FAR might lead to improvements by drawing in other editors.

I don't know much about solar eclipses. I followed a link to this page from the Heroes (TV series) article. Should a Popular Culture section be added? If I add one, the only reference in popular culture I can think of is Heroes and how it's involved with eclipses. What does anyone else think? Or should I take that to the general eclipse page? Whatever you think, just say the word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.153.159.139 (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

....How long is totality? This kinda gives off the impression that it lasts longer than you think....I'm gonna say...1 minute? I don't know, it just gives off the impression that its ok for someone to unaid their eyes for a while....which is dangerous. 75.72.221.172 (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I am moving the following block of text here from the article:

The term solar eclipse itself is strictly speaking a misnomer. The phenomenon of the Moon passing in front of the Sun is not an eclipse, but an occultation (similarly, the phenomenon where the moon is too small as seen from Earth to completely occult the Sun would be an astronomical transit). Properly speaking, an eclipse occurs when one object passes into the shadow cast by another object. For example, when the Moon disappears at full moon by passing into Earth's shadow, the event is properly called a lunar eclipse. Therefore, technically, a solar eclipse actually amounts to an eclipse of the Earth.

I do this for a few reasons:

1. The information features no citation.

2. The information contradicts information in Occultation ("Every time an occultation occurs, an eclipse also occurs.").

3. The information contradicts information in Eclipse ("When an eclipse occurs within a stellar system, such as the Solar System, it forms a type of syzygy—the alignment of three or more celestial bodies in the same gravitational system along a straight line.").

4. The information seems false on its face. A solar eclipse casts the shadow of the moon onto the surface of our planet, producing the characteristic drop in brightness that accompanies the event. In addition, the definition of umbra and penumbra and their specified alignments with Earth during an eclipse also impugns the claims in the challenged block of text.

Whoever posted the above text, please produce a credible source that corroborates these claims. Whoever supports the removed text, the same applies to you. The burden of citation lies with the editor(s) who wish to add the text. Thanks. —

) 03:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Eye Safety

The following was posted on Solar eclipse of July 22, 2009: ==Eye safety== [[NASA]] publishes a recommendation by B. Ralph Chou of the [[University of Waterloo]], which among other things, states the following: "It is never safe to look at a partial or annular eclipse, or the partial phases of a total solar eclipse, without the proper equipment and techniques. Even when 99% of the Sun's surface (the [[photosphere]]) is obscured during the partial phases of a solar eclipse, the remaining crescent Sun is still intense enough to cause a retinal burn, even though illumination levels are comparable to twilight.... Failure to use proper observing methods may result in permanent eye damage or severe visual loss. This can have important adverse effects on career choices and earning potential, since it has been shown that most individuals who sustain eclipse-related eye injuries are children and young adults..." <ref>{{cite web|url=http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/safety2.html|publisher=[[NASA]] and the School of Optometry at the [[University of Waterloo]] ([[Canada]])|title=Eye Safety During Solar Eclipses|date=1997-04|author=B. Ralph Chou}}</ref>

It didn't really seem appropriate there so I've copied it here incase someone wants to work the quote and/or reference into the section on viewing here. --Falcorian ^(talk) 17:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Did Columbus use a Solar Eclipse in his explorations of America?

remeber something (should Wikipedia it I guess!) About Christopher Columbus useing a Solar Eclipse to influence the natiave populations on an isanl in Carribean.Decide/DatedPMTodaySolarEclipseTu.Jul22,200921stCnt.Dr.Edson Andre' Johnson D.D.ULC,PINEAPPLEMAN (talk) 20:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

A predicted total lunar eclipse was used by Columbus to impressive the natives: march_1504_lunar_eclipse. Tom Ruen (talk) 06:32, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Longest eclipse?

Does anyone know what the longest solar (and lunar whilst we're at it) eclipse was? where? when? total/partial. 203.59.45.96 (talk) 14:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Solar Eclipses: -3999 to +6000 (4000 BCE to 6000 CE)

The longest central solar eclipses of this period are:

         Longest  Total  Solar Eclipse:    2186 Jul 16      Duration = 07m29s
         Longest Annular Solar Eclipse:    0150 Dec 07      Duration = 12m24s
         Longest  Hybrid Solar Eclipse:   -0979 Aug 12      Duration = 01m49s

Source: Ten Millennium Catalog of Long Solar Eclipses

Lunar Eclipses: -1999 to +3000 (2000 BCE to 3000 CE)

The longest eclipses of the 5,000 year period are listed below.

         Longest Penumbral Lunar Eclipse:    1322 Nov 24      Duration = 296.5m
           Longest Partial Lunar Eclipse:    2669 Feb 08      Duration = 210.0m
           Longest  Total  Lunar Eclipse:    0318 May 31      Duration = 106.6m

Source: Index to Five Millennium Catalog of Lunar Eclipses --Glenn L (talk) 06:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent and upcoming solar eclipses

I filled out stub articles for all solar eclipses between 2000-2018, covering one

Saros cycle

. Listing 18 years seems a good size to include past and future events, so I added a new section here on recent/upcoming events, grouping them by 5 lunar year cycles (eclipse sets repeating every 177 days). Each section has cropped maps of the eclipse, and a photo if any exist (for past events). I'd like to reduce the table size, but this seems the smallest size that make the maps useful. I'll replace them if I can get better ones. I also uploaded a good number of animated maps, also on the NASA site. They exist on the NASA site for 1991-2049.

I also tried to make the articles a little bit systematic, but much more could be done in structure. Lastly, I'm more of an image person than writer here, so I'm happy if anyone want to research and expand articles and sources.

Perhaps this will help encourage uploads for more event photos!

All of them are linked on: Template:Solar eclipses.

Tom Ruen (talk) 10:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.