idwthis ยท 104 points ยท Posted at 14:55:10 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
It bugged me so much as a kid that the constellations didn't actually look like what they said they were. The only ones that do are the Big and Little Dippers and the Southern Cross. And just the belt in Orion, not the rest of him.
Khalexus ยท 21 points ยท Posted at 21:11:06 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Y'know, when I dabbled a bit in stargazing last year, I found
Orion and used my imagination to picture him as an Archer. It was pretty great, I could see how he had his bow drawn, elbow up past his head, legs set firm, with a sword hanging from his belt and everything.
Then I discovered that I was looking at the "actual" constellation upside down because I was in the southern hemisphere.
The actual Orion constellation sucks shit. It works so much better upside down.
Goes to show how much individual imagination affects these things.
My whole life I've seen Orion as an archer too, and I was majorly disappointed when I found out about the actual constellation. He'll always be a bitchin' archer in my mind!
slrqm ยท 59 points ยท Posted at 15:17:11 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
That's terrible!
[deleted] ยท -30 points ยท Posted at 16:51:22 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
[deleted] ยท -26 points ยท Posted at 17:55:37 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
[deleted]
zodberg ยท 13 points ยท Posted at 19:46:47 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Close, but actually in ancient times when the stars were being mapped, life on Earth was just less detailed, we don't have photographs from the era but most animals were only a handful of lines. It was only a few thousand years ago that floral and fauna grew curves and details.
I've think you've misunderstood something, it's the constellations that move not the individual stars in relation to each other. This can of course affect how we see the constellations and how clear they are, for instance because the "higher" a constellation is on the night sky the more other stars around the constellation becomes visible and might make a previously very clear pattern hard to discern. While a constellation near the horizon will consist of bright visible stars while the others around them aren't visible to the naked eye due to being to "weak" (i.e. far away).
Is this it? Massive TIL, so since stars are at different distance from us their relative position to each other from our perspective gets skewd when we move through our galaxy. Quite cool and something I didn't know! I wonder which famous constellations have a significant difference in proper motion?
Ordies ยท 5 points ยท Posted at 01:50:59 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
"YAYYYYYYYY"
[deleted] ยท 18 points ยท Posted at 15:37:08 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
The constellations fill in more in true dark sky like there was back when we were naming them. They really do feel more real in pristine and remote darkness
You're right, but the majority of stars (ie, stars in all the constellations) do not move that much in a ~thousand year timeframe. So that really has nothing to do with this.
idwthis ยท 104 points ยท Posted at 14:55:10 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
It bugged me so much as a kid that the constellations didn't actually look like what they said they were. The only ones that do are the Big and Little Dippers and the Southern Cross. And just the belt in Orion, not the rest of him.
Khalexus ยท 21 points ยท Posted at 21:11:06 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Y'know, when I dabbled a bit in stargazing last year, I found Orion and used my imagination to picture him as an Archer. It was pretty great, I could see how he had his bow drawn, elbow up past his head, legs set firm, with a sword hanging from his belt and everything.
Then I discovered that I was looking at the "actual" constellation upside down because I was in the southern hemisphere.
The actual Orion constellation sucks shit. It works so much better upside down.
Goes to show how much individual imagination affects these things.
Bragi-GodOfBullshit ยท 7 points ยท Posted at 22:21:08 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
My whole life I've seen Orion as an archer too, and I was majorly disappointed when I found out about the actual constellation. He'll always be a bitchin' archer in my mind!
slrqm ยท 59 points ยท Posted at 15:17:11 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
That's terrible!
[deleted] ยท -30 points ยท Posted at 16:51:22 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
[deleted]
DemJellyBones ยท 17 points ยท Posted at 17:40:30 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
What? Hahaha!
[deleted] ยท -26 points ยท Posted at 17:55:37 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
[deleted]
zodberg ยท 13 points ยท Posted at 19:46:47 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Close, but actually in ancient times when the stars were being mapped, life on Earth was just less detailed, we don't have photographs from the era but most animals were only a handful of lines. It was only a few thousand years ago that floral and fauna grew curves and details.
WhatTheFhtagn ยท 5 points ยท Posted at 08:04:04 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Relevant Calvin and Hobbes.
[deleted] ยท 3 points ยท Posted at 20:43:04 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Yeah, everybody, this guy's comment is right. Cave paintings are evidence of this phenomena.
zodberg ยท 4 points ยท Posted at 21:07:56 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Cave paintings were just put down a few thousand years ago, don't buy into the propaganda from Big Cave
DemJellyBones ยท 26 points ยท Posted at 18:02:48 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
What you say is true but the rate at which they move is way too slow to have any impact on the night sky.
[deleted] ยท -23 points ยท Posted at 18:12:41 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
[deleted]
DemJellyBones ยท 15 points ยท Posted at 18:18:05 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
A few thousand years is still nog enough to make an impact.
[deleted] ยท -18 points ยท Posted at 18:22:51 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
[deleted]
NinjaN-SWE ยท 13 points ยท Posted at 18:50:51 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
I've think you've misunderstood something, it's the constellations that move not the individual stars in relation to each other. This can of course affect how we see the constellations and how clear they are, for instance because the "higher" a constellation is on the night sky the more other stars around the constellation becomes visible and might make a previously very clear pattern hard to discern. While a constellation near the horizon will consist of bright visible stars while the others around them aren't visible to the naked eye due to being to "weak" (i.e. far away).
https://books.google.se/books?id=LVp_gkwyvC8C&lpg=PA245&ots=NQnYLNxJDO&dq=how%20did%20orion%20look%202000%20years%20ago&pg=PA246#v=onepage&q&f=false
[deleted] ยท 1 points ยท Posted at 19:31:24 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
[deleted]
NinjaN-SWE ยท 1 points ยท Posted at 19:45:46 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_motion
Is this it? Massive TIL, so since stars are at different distance from us their relative position to each other from our perspective gets skewd when we move through our galaxy. Quite cool and something I didn't know! I wonder which famous constellations have a significant difference in proper motion?
michael1026 ยท 2 points ยท Posted at 09:03:10 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Orion looks pretty good if you have dark skies. You can see the head and shield. I really like it.
[deleted] ยท 1 points ยท Posted at 23:15:48 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
In Romanian we call them Chariots, not Dippers.
[deleted] ยท 1 points ยท Posted at 11:54:41 on August 29, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
We call it the Plough in Britain.
[deleted] ยท 58 points ยท Posted at 12:49:54 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
[deleted]
jannne ยท 47 points ยท Posted at 13:49:26 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Fixed once more.
zodberg ยท 17 points ยท Posted at 19:47:28 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
City life, huh?
Born2hybrid ยท 7 points ยท Posted at 17:00:02 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Fixed twice more.
Ordies ยท 5 points ยท Posted at 01:50:59 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
"YAYYYYYYYY"
[deleted] ยท 18 points ยท Posted at 15:37:08 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
The constellations fill in more in true dark sky like there was back when we were naming them. They really do feel more real in pristine and remote darkness
CombustionJellyfish ยท 15 points ยท Posted at 05:43:05 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
The Crusades!
ghosthost999 ยท 13 points ยท Posted at 16:03:09 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Highly relevant
CalmBeneathCastles ยท 3 points ยท Posted at 04:32:16 on April 20, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Shoulda been called "East Side".
[deleted] ยท -14 points ยท Posted at 16:57:51 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)*
[deleted]
Crislips ยท 24 points ยท Posted at 18:18:34 on April 17, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
You should post this a third time and see if people start agreeing with you.
AllisGreat ยท 3 points ยท Posted at 00:02:32 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
You're right, but the majority of stars (ie, stars in all the constellations) do not move that much in a ~thousand year timeframe. So that really has nothing to do with this.
UnimpressedIndividua ยท 2 points ยท Posted at 06:33:44 on April 18, 2015 ยท (Permalink)
Are you a million years old mate. Nothing has really changed even in a thousand when it comes to star positions in the sky.