Not sure, but I think the last line is a suitable commonality to be called a template name.
I post pictures with my other account @Deme@lemmy.world
Not sure, but I think the last line is a suitable commonality to be called a template name.
Achchchually no I’m not in the Andromeda galaxy 2.5 million light-years from Earth.
Not an arcus, but what looks to be a series of Stratocumulus volutus. Nice find nonetheless!
Arcus is a supplementary feature attached to a strong convective cloud (Cumulonimbus or possibly a strong Cumulus). This isn’t the case here.
A per capita map would also be nice.
They’re right on this one. This picture here is pretty illuminating about the sizes of the views that Hubble captures:
Image source with additional reading. Zooming into an object a couple of meters in size on the surface of the Moon is in a completely different ballpark.
I’m no astronomer or astrophotographer, but this picture of the moon clocks in at around 320 meter angular resolution. That being said, a lot of post-processing goes into a shot like that, so some detail may be lost due to that. The atmosphere of the Earth is pretty difficult to deal with as its disturbances cause fuzziness and shimmering. Stacking multiple frames can help, but it’s still never perfect. Earth based telescopes sometimes shoot a laser up along their line of sight to get an idea of how the atmosphere is messing with them.
For comparison, The Hubble space telescope gets around 90 m angular resolution for objects at the distance of the Moon.
To build on this: The technology to fake it didn’t exist back then.
You’d need either the biggest space telescope ever that doesn’t yet exist, or a lunar orbiter. The latter is how other space agencies have taken pictures of the landing sites.
I did a two minute internet search and every result says that the Hubble doesn’t have the angular resolution for this. It could resolve a football field on the moon, but not anything smaller.
It was made to look at nebulae and galaxies, and those are a lot bigger, even in apparent size.
Focal distance doesn’t matter when the aperture is so infinitesimally small compared to the distances. All space telescopes are focused to infinity no matter what they’re observing up there.
I’d say the correlation is pretty good even when accounting for population densities.
That is a good point.
Except that that might explain the slightly different alias on that line. Maybe it’s a message just like the rest, sent for the sake of the meme, and the alias just happened to get typed incorrectly…
The twitter user is an actual commercial pilot, and ACARS messages do look like that. Not sure what’s up with SKW2438/SKY2438 but otherwise it seems legit. I think faking it would be harder than actually doing this.
Edit: Here’s a picture of a much longer message in a more professional, non furry rp context:
Close, but this is in fact the circumhorizontal arc. It’s very similar to the cza, but the refractions happen in the opposite order. The cha occurs below the sun when the sun is high, the cza occurs high above the sun (near the zenith) when the sun is low.
Nice pictures!
How’s he being an ally here? He’s just talking about some people who supposedly pulled themselves up by the bootstraps. Most likely in an attempt to prove that others in similar situations have only themselves to blame for not doing the same.
Yes, but was this the bullet that hit him (so picture taken after he was hit), or a previous shot that missed?
Spectacular crepuscular rays!
Ok sure, but hindus still don’t let that bother them.
I know you’re being sarcastic, but I just absolutely despise that mentality. People seriously think that it’s best to just roll over to the side and surrender every symbol the nazis want for themselves?
So the lack of proof is the proof? Bro you have schizophrenia.