We can tell this because it is either nonrotating or maintaining the same apparent shape while rotating. All flat disks which rotate follow the same pattern, while a sphere that rotates will be observed to narrow and widen periodically.
Looks like NASA used their mind reading beam on Scott and Skye to figure out exactly where and at what time you were planning to look up at the sky, and dispatched two ISS-shaped planes to fly two well calculated tracks to maintain an illusion that there is an ISS and that it has the orbital parameters that they claim.
Awesome, Reds Rhetoric and I did this experiment using a lunar transit with his p900 and my telescope a few months ago. Sure enough the station was at the expected altitude, speed, and it measured as being about 109 meters across as expected.
that's the first thing that came to my mind :) . although there's a tiny bit of parallax when photographing the moon from 2 locations on earth, the results are almost the same as using the sun. i hope Reds see this
Well I plan to track a really high pass of the space station in broad daylight early on Sunday morning if the weather cooperates, using my new automatic satellite tracking software. It should be a beautiful sight and I plan to try to film it with a 2x barlow to get as close as possible to sampling the scope's maximum angular resolution.
Astronomy Live so you're planning on replicating the experiment with one camera ? :) (knowing the angular width/height of the frame ) and what is " 2x barlow"
No, I'm not really tracking it on Sunday for the purposes of explicitly measuring its distance or altitude per se, though if I have time I may including a logging function so that I can solve for the orbit using the coordinates my software detected it to be at over the course of the path. A 2x barlow lens doubles the effective focal length of the scope, so it gives you basically twice the magnification.
I still remember the time I pointed a pair of binoculars at the ISS passing overhead and saw it wasn't just a pinpoint dot. I also think one time I was lucky enough to briefly see two dots and the Shuttle chasing the ISS.
I'm almost 50 and this is the first time I've seen anyone use actual math for fun outside a teaching or engineering environment. (actual math is something beyond the basic addition, subtraction, multiplication and division)
It just hit me! I figured out why I love watching your stuff so much! Your accent is tricking some part of my mind that Scotty (Star Trek) is explaining this all to me. It must be right! Honestly though, you do a great job of explaining. Even though all this stuff is way above my pay scale, I'm actually "getting it" for the most part. I thoroughly enjoy watching your channel. Keep up the great work. It's cool that you've got your daughter involved as well, it's sure to pay off for her one day.
Scott, it would be good to add that picturing the sun is a dangerous thing, and that you should always use a filter and check it for any defects before using it.
This was so well done. Seriously Scott, thank you! There needs to be more videos done like this. With this level of detail towards honest measurements.
I cant get my dad to agree on a place were gonna meet up 2 weeks away. That you got ok data is a great victory for family planning. Not having the sodding things, *or* getting your kids to get their shit in a pile. Id say thats as big of a win as anything. Awesome vids, with math explanations, thats just great. N some cool pics to boot. N excellent captures they are. Nice work Scott.
Mister Itchy I was 3rd person and the first to hit the like button. But!! There was already one dislike. Definitely some flat earther troll who as soon as they get the nomination - they automatically give Scott a thumbs down. There is absolutely no way in hell this person could have even watched 1-2 seconds. The disease is stupidly is difficult to cure.
No is a "mathPowaa" guy disaprouve the fact wher Scott is not recalculate to introduce the sun angle and the fact of the pressetion orbit of the earth around the sun.... need new video with thrue calcul
i doubt there are truly many flat earth believers i think most are : i)trolls or jokesters ii)smartasses that like to see nerds rage since that makes them feel accomplished.(like that Friends episode) iii)people that want to see others reasearch and figure out stuff on their own before they believe common stuff (i think this whole "flat earth" thing started like that) its almost like a social experiment....
I have an exam in Computational Photography in a few days, this counts as studying, right? I mean, you're doing camera to real world calculations, soo... same thing :D
This is really photogrammetry rather than computational photography. Nice work, Scott. The 20 degree correction needed a bit more explaining. But that's the problem with actual photogrammetry... there's a fair number of things to account for. It gets boring for most folks. Did you intend to set up your baseline orthogonal to the ISS track?
I think he means what would the altitude be if that was a tie fighter that looked the same size as the space station as you saw it. How far away would it be accounting for the size difference
Coolinee Kerman, if it were a smaller object that was closer, then it would have a different parallax angle as measured by the two cameras. That's why Scott said the size doesn't matter.
Scott Manley I honestly didn’t even watch the video before posting that lol, just got around to it now and I shouldn’t be surprised you brought up the tie fighter pretty much right away!
I understood some of the things explained here, like the words "the" and "pictures" . :) Even though I would have to watch this video a couple of times more to fully understand everything, it's funny to see how Scott is being "I made a video of the ISS passing in front of the sun... I wonder if I can calculate its speed!"
my mind is melted, but wow scott, You own a voicebox that would herd cattle, collide the Higgs Boson and enlighten Dr.Octavius to not making dem crazy arms in the hunt for fusion...A legend !!! and a legend that has done more for me and by proxy my kids than moderrn schooling has managed. forever grateful x
The funniest one I have heard in the last week was the Soyuz failure was due to it hitting the "Firmament" along with this being clear proof for all to see that we cannot escape the planet. I was caught between laughing my ass off and shaking my head at these people. Seriously they would say the sky is green just to do the exact opposite of a rational human.
I wonder how the flat earthers would explain this... :) Nice work Scott. Thank you for all your dedication on sharing knowledge. Please keep up on inspiring people.
Flat Earthers aren't this smart. They'd get lost the minute you start pulling out mathematical operations beyond addition and subtraction. _"That's too much math, its a lot easier to say it's fake!"_ they say instead.
Trigonometry FTW! My Math teacher always said that the only thing advanced math was good for was teaching others advanced math(Jokingly, of course). I'm just glad I can mostly keep up with your explanations to be honest.
With a good enough thermal camera you can definitely find and track planes from the ISS. Ships are even easier because of the wakes they throw off. I'm not sure how they tracked submarines though, unless the subs were close to the surface.
I just realized why you didn't need a time sync: the transit is so short that it is on itself a date. And you can't get the wrong transit, they are 90min appart.
Hi Scott, thank you very much for this awesome, awesome video! I really enjoy this kind of experiments where you take kind of 'everyday things' and perform real science with it and I really want to see more stuff like this happen on your channel if you're up for it! I liked - as always - your explanation but also the visualization of the underlying thought process. And how cool is it to do stuff like this with your daughter... Keep up the good work!
Excellent! One slight quibble: your calculation at 4:32 assumes a flat Earth. The actual estimated altitude of the ISS should be about 15 km higher than your value, due to Earth curvature. :-)
I did watch the video, but I wasn't paying close enough attention, I thought the later stuff was ALL on speed, but you did adjust for altitude. My bad! :-) Fly safe, you rock!
lol I love watching the ISS fly over head. Whenever I get an email alert from NASA about it I tell all my friends and sometimes we throw impromptu "ISS Parties" where everyone comes out drinks beer, eats barbecue and cheers as the ISS flies overhead. If you have good eyesight there are times when it is close enough that you can make out the "TIE fighter" shape with your naked eye.
Nice one! I actually did something similar to this two months ago - I calculated the distance between Earth and Moon using two photos taken at the same time during the Lunar eclipse - one taken by me, and the other by a Redditor named Nicnac13. My final result was an overestimation of a real distance by around 1% so I'd say it was pretty close. I have compiled all the photos and calculations into an Imgur post, here's the link if anyone's interested: imgur.com/gallery/BlZAOJ2
@Alexagrigorieff No, sadly I couldn't watch that as I don't live in the USA. I mean the Lunar Eclipse as evidenced by the photos of the Moon in the Imgur post.
3:00 wait, so you just left her there alone? "here honey, just point this camera to the sun and wait for the space station to pass, i'll be right back"
a question: in the last picture of the space station passing the sun (at 8:05 for example, where all pictures are overlapped), you can see differences in the shape of the hull of the station. Some are more round, others are more vague. . It seems like there's a rhytm to it: every second one is more round, with a more straith one in between. Why would that be? Probably has something to do with the way the camera or the vid software catches/renders it all, but maybe there's a strange physics phenomenon involved? Just wandering.
There's probably a whole pleathera of ways to constrain altitude from observation data. But pretty cool. Getting out there, doing some observation yourself, math, etc. and most of all thinking.
The “TH-cam Space” Collaboration I would LOVE to see a collaboration between a bunch of TH-camrs such as Scott Manley, Amy Shira Teitel, Isaac Arthur and Joe Scott. The purpose of this multi year multi TH-camr collaboration channel would be to design, fund, build, and launch a rocket capable of putting a crew of TH-camrs into space. All of this would be done on TH-cam as a reality show.
Since they were only 1 KM apart, the curvature component is not significant. If they were 100 KM apart, then yes, the curvature would have to be factored in.
Very entertaining Scott! A great demonstration of an interesting way to show the practicality of mathematics in everyday life! I am so lazy I just ask Google speaker. Thank you for having such a great channel.
Well, we used the known angular size of the sun (a function of its size and distance) and we assumed that there's negligible parallax between the sun and the background stars (implying that the sun is several orders of magnitude farther away than the ISS).
DIY science is the best kind. :-) I've measured my longitude by timing local noon then applying the equation of time. My time reference was a portable shortwave radio tuned to WWV.
7.4Km/s is 16,553.33 MPH, 7.9KM/s is 17,671.8 MPH but what NASA said the ISS is moving at is 17,158 MPH (27,612 Km/h) at the moment as of 15:48 PDT 10/16/2018. its altitude is 253.31 miles or 407.02 Km.
You don't have to convert your angle to radians, you can multiply your baseline by 3438 (360*60/2pi) and divide by your parallax in arcminutes. edit: wrong inversion of small angle formula
Hi Scott I am realy confused a your result for the altitude seams to precis. Wouldn't you expect to be of by at least a couple percents du to atmospheric refraction?
Hi Scott - I don't understand the last point about the sun azimuth leading to an overestimate of the speed. If the Sun direction had been exactly at a right angle to the orbit, what would change? I thought the ISS trace would just appear to be horizontal instead of almost vertical. Instead, you multiplied the speed by the cosine of 20º in your "shower calculation" to get 7,4 km/s from 7,9... that implies that with an angle of 90º you would not have seen motion at all? Doesn't sound right to me.
Super interesting as always! Maybe it’s just me but one thing about the audio that I find a little distracting is the sharp S:es. It would be awesome if you could apply a filter, de-esser, to dampen the hiss (sibilance it’s called, I just learned:)
Thanks for all the uploads. Can you do something about why solar systems and galaxies seem to be flat. I pretty much know why, but it would be nice to hear it from you.
That's a good assumption for any sort of altitude measurement. In this case the cameras were practically at sea level (within a meter or so anyway) so any measurements gained from those photos would also be taken from sea level.
The Blue Angels are the U.S. Navy's flight demonstration squadron. The exterior photography for this video was done on 10-7-18 during fleet week. The camera positions were the Berkeley Marina and a small peninsula in San Francisco Bay called the Albany Bulb. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Angels blueangelsassociation.org/schedule/
Scott I was watching your video about Kerbal spinning too fast so that objects ‘defy gravity’. 1. Could it be possible to to achieve this in real life 2. Could you create a stable orbit around a planet spinning that fast?
Why is it that the ISS seems to be orbiting a little crab-wise compared to its direction? Isn't the Harmony module supposed to be in the direction of the orbit? (I'm trying to visualize the geometry, and I can't figure it out.)
Interesting question. I think since we are standing on a rotating Earth, the apparent direction of motion of the ISS is guaranteed to be different from the actual direction of motion. If you drop a pencil straight down, and then start running, it will look crabby in your reference frame. However, that may be a small effect compared to this: The ISS is a microgravity environment, and doesn't rotate. It is "always" pointing in the same direction, so if it is tangent to its path, after 1/4 orbit it will be perpendicular to it.
Thomas Wijgerse Yes, I thought of that. That might be the reason. However, the motion of the observer is very small compared to the orbital speed. I’m not sure if that would account for it. Another effect is that the observer isn’t looking direct up at the ISS. That angle might be enough to give the illusion that it is crabbing. I don’t know. I was hoping that Scott did since he is much more aware of the geometry. (And he is smarter than I am.)
Hi Scott- new subscriber here. I looked through your videos but couldn't find anything on Thor's Hammer type kinetic energy weapons. Have you posted anything on these things? Thanks!
Field exercises like these should be part of the regular school curriculum. Great demonstration, thank you very much!
My daughter Wheelybin thinks it's cool that both your daughter and her are named after major aspects of their respective fathers professions.
Credit where credit due, you made me laugh.
My son, Hydraulic-Actuator, was also impressed. Aileron-Damper, not so much. Poor girl.
My son named maleHooker agrees with you
My job is boring so nothing cool to name my kid after.. but little whathisface is okay with that. ;)
And I thought lensflares could come up with better names...
The space station is obviously flat.
We can tell this because it is either nonrotating or maintaining the same apparent shape while rotating. All flat disks which rotate follow the same pattern, while a sphere that rotates will be observed to narrow and widen periodically.
Earth is flatter than a pancake (look up Vsauce's video on that)
@Joshuanight332
If it's flat, it can't be hot.
The Sun is curvy!!!
The sun is clearly a paid actor.
Pls, no more flat earth, flat sun bullshit. Im getting sick of this societys
Thanks Scott and Scott's offspring , that was Awesome
Skye is a pretty smart cookie.
Looks like NASA used their mind reading beam on Scott and Skye to figure out exactly where and at what time you were planning to look up at the sky, and dispatched two ISS-shaped planes to fly two well calculated tracks to maintain an illusion that there is an ISS and that it has the orbital parameters that they claim.
That is impossible. Plus the speed would be a lot slower.
@@thatgaming1940 He is being sarcastic.
Awesome, Reds Rhetoric and I did this experiment using a lunar transit with his p900 and my telescope a few months ago. Sure enough the station was at the expected altitude, speed, and it measured as being about 109 meters across as expected.
that's the first thing that came to my mind :) . although there's a tiny bit of parallax when photographing the moon from 2 locations on earth, the results are almost the same as using the sun. i hope Reds see this
When is the next flattard anal wrecking? @Astronomy Live
Well I plan to track a really high pass of the space station in broad daylight early on Sunday morning if the weather cooperates, using my new automatic satellite tracking software. It should be a beautiful sight and I plan to try to film it with a 2x barlow to get as close as possible to sampling the scope's maximum angular resolution.
Astronomy Live
so you're planning on replicating the experiment with one camera ? :) (knowing the angular width/height of the frame )
and what is " 2x barlow"
No, I'm not really tracking it on Sunday for the purposes of explicitly measuring its distance or altitude per se, though if I have time I may including a logging function so that I can solve for the orbit using the coordinates my software detected it to be at over the course of the path. A 2x barlow lens doubles the effective focal length of the scope, so it gives you basically twice the magnification.
I still remember the time I pointed a pair of binoculars at the ISS passing overhead and saw it wasn't just a pinpoint dot. I also think one time I was lucky enough to briefly see two dots and the Shuttle chasing the ISS.
I'm almost 50 and this is the first time I've seen anyone use actual math for fun outside a teaching or engineering environment. (actual math is something beyond the basic addition, subtraction, multiplication and division)
It just hit me! I figured out why I love watching your stuff so much! Your accent is tricking some part of my mind that Scotty (Star Trek) is explaining this all to me. It must be right! Honestly though, you do a great job of explaining. Even though all this stuff is way above my pay scale, I'm actually "getting it" for the most part. I thoroughly enjoy watching your channel. Keep up the great work. It's cool that you've got your daughter involved as well, it's sure to pay off for her one day.
Scott, it would be good to add that picturing the sun is a dangerous thing, and that you should always use a filter and check it for any defects before using it.
@alans73 Going blind isn't evolution, it's just unfortunate.
@alans73 natural selection, me thinks. lol
This was so well done. Seriously Scott, thank you! There needs to be more videos done like this. With this level of detail towards honest measurements.
the website heavens-above calculates the altitude of the ISS as 416 km during the month of October 2019. good job!
I cant get my dad to agree on a place were gonna meet up 2 weeks away. That you got ok data is a great victory for family planning. Not having the sodding things, *or* getting your kids to get their shit in a pile. Id say thats as big of a win as anything.
Awesome vids, with math explanations, thats just great. N some cool pics to boot. N excellent captures they are. Nice work Scott.
This is one of the many reasons why I subscribed to your channel years ago. :D
Science is awesome, not even Sky is the limit! ;)
Mars is not the limit either!
@@confusedaardvark7662 just beyond the edge of the Observable Universe is tho :(
Scott, I've seen you so often, I assumed I was subscribed. I've now fixed that "BUT QUICK" . So pleased to be "Part of the Family", Thanks
Best youtuber ever
You are great Scott
I concur!
So, doctor Brown has a TH-cam account, alright, he's a time traveller, after all.
Oh, I see what you did there
If there'd be a wiki page about "Subtle jokes", this one would be their prime example
Whoever hit the thumbs down should just accept the fact that they are too lazy to do the measurements and math themselves.
Mister Itchy I was 3rd person and the first to hit the like button. But!! There was already one dislike. Definitely some flat earther troll who as soon as they get the nomination - they automatically give Scott a thumbs down. There is absolutely no way in hell this person could have even watched 1-2 seconds. The disease is stupidly is difficult to cure.
No, should accept they have paranoid schizophrenia. But they won't.
Maybe Scott himself disliked the video... Just for the trolls???
Or someone who thinks that Scott should focus on other stuff than math. The world isn’t black and white you know
No is a "mathPowaa" guy disaprouve the fact wher Scott is not recalculate to introduce the sun angle and the fact of the pressetion orbit of the earth around the sun.... need new video with thrue calcul
where are the flatbrains? haven't spotted them in the comments yet.
guess I'm too early
It's not the first time you came too early
Green Screen, that's what she said too. gotta work on my timing!
Yoo are not..look at the dislikes...they sneaked in already ;)
they cant really debunk anything what are they going to say sin is wrong because they dont understand it
i doubt there are truly many flat earth believers i think most are :
i)trolls or jokesters
ii)smartasses that like to see nerds rage since that makes them feel accomplished.(like that Friends episode)
iii)people that want to see others reasearch and figure out stuff on their own before they believe common stuff
(i think this whole "flat earth" thing started like that)
its almost like a social experiment....
I have an exam in Computational Photography in a few days, this counts as studying, right? I mean, you're doing camera to real world calculations, soo... same thing :D
Who knew that was a thing...
This is really photogrammetry rather than computational photography.
Nice work, Scott. The 20 degree correction needed a bit more explaining. But that's the problem with actual photogrammetry... there's a fair number of things to account for. It gets boring for most folks.
Did you intend to set up your baseline orthogonal to the ISS track?
I loved your character, FPS Doug.
Scott is the perpetrator, Skye is the accomplice.
What if we assume the obvious? That it’s not a space station but an imperial Tie fighter?
What altitude would that be?
The altitude estimate is unrelated to the size
I think he means what would the altitude be if that was a tie fighter that looked the same size as the space station as you saw it. How far away would it be accounting for the size difference
While we're doing that, we can look at the Sun and say, "That's no moon!".
Coolinee Kerman, if it were a smaller object that was closer, then it would have a different parallax angle as measured by the two cameras. That's why Scott said the size doesn't matter.
Scott Manley I honestly didn’t even watch the video before posting that lol, just got around to it now and I shouldn’t be surprised you brought up the tie fighter pretty much right away!
I understood some of the things explained here, like the words "the" and "pictures" . :)
Even though I would have to watch this video a couple of times more to fully understand everything, it's funny to see how Scott is being "I made a video of the ISS passing in front of the sun... I wonder if I can calculate its speed!"
my mind is melted, but wow scott, You own a voicebox that would herd cattle, collide the Higgs Boson and enlighten Dr.Octavius to not making dem crazy arms in the hunt for fusion...A legend !!! and a legend that has done more for me and by proxy my kids than moderrn schooling has managed. forever grateful x
THERE, the earth is round
Do you want "LOL NASA CGI ur so dumb" comments? Because this is how you get them... on other channels, at least.
No sh*t Sherlock
xD
The math the fake
The real problem is that flat earth conspiracy believers have brains that are fake :)
+Eliasdbr Not "round", but "spherical". Flat Earthers think the Earth is round (as in a circle) but flat.
I was impressed you used the NA word "math" and not the British word "maths". Nicely done measurement sir.
If you'd taken flerspective into account, you'd see the masonic balloons that hold the ISS under the dome,
or some such flattarded rubbish.
oWo eArTh iS flAt wAkE uP
The funniest one I have heard in the last week was the Soyuz failure was due to it hitting the "Firmament" along with this being clear proof for all to see that we cannot escape the planet. I was caught between laughing my ass off and shaking my head at these people. Seriously they would say the sky is green just to do the exact opposite of a rational human.
Anarchy Antz at that flight the Soyuz found to hit the firmament?...
This is one of the things which drove me to this channel. Wonderful explanation. You made it look so easy. I'd love to see a video on the ISRO.
I wonder how the flat earthers would explain this... :) Nice work Scott. Thank you for all your dedication on sharing knowledge. Please keep up on inspiring people.
Flat Earthers aren't this smart. They'd get lost the minute you start pulling out mathematical operations beyond addition and subtraction. _"That's too much math, its a lot easier to say it's fake!"_ they say instead.
Trigonometry FTW! My Math teacher always said that the only thing advanced math was good for was teaching others advanced math(Jokingly, of course). I'm just glad I can mostly keep up with your explanations to be honest.
I wonder if they will watch this on the ISS?
I wonder if they can see big planes from the ISS...
I'd guess they can see reflections from airlines flying just on the dark side of the terminator or something similar.
@@michielstikkel Supposedly, they can spot submarines from the ISS (and did do that on a regular basis from Mir).
With a good enough thermal camera you can definitely find and track planes from the ISS. Ships are even easier because of the wakes they throw off. I'm not sure how they tracked submarines though, unless the subs were close to the surface.
@@michielstikkel they can. But they look like dots
I just realized why you didn't need a time sync: the transit is so short that it is on itself a date. And you can't get the wrong transit, they are 90min appart.
But with the sun in the background happens fever so even more time😀
I wish we did stuff like this in school!!
Math is better when you do it, Scott....
Wicked cool & thanks for helping, Sky! Fly safe!
Hi Scott, thank you very much for this awesome, awesome video! I really enjoy this kind of experiments where you take kind of 'everyday things' and perform real science with it and I really want to see more stuff like this happen on your channel if you're up for it! I liked - as always - your explanation but also the visualization of the underlying thought process. And how cool is it to do stuff like this with your daughter... Keep up the good work!
Excellent! One slight quibble: your calculation at 4:32 assumes a flat Earth. The actual estimated altitude of the ISS should be about 15 km higher than your value, due to Earth curvature. :-)
You never watched the whole video before posting did you?
I did watch the video, but I wasn't paying close enough attention, I thought the later stuff was ALL on speed, but you did adjust for altitude. My bad! :-) Fly safe, you rock!
lol I love watching the ISS fly over head. Whenever I get an email alert from NASA about it I tell all my friends and sometimes we throw impromptu "ISS Parties" where everyone comes out drinks beer, eats barbecue and cheers as the ISS flies overhead. If you have good eyesight there are times when it is close enough that you can make out the "TIE fighter" shape with your naked eye.
Well done, sir. Well done.
Nice one! I actually did something similar to this two months ago - I calculated the distance between Earth and Moon using two photos taken at the same time during the Lunar eclipse - one taken by me, and the other by a Redditor named Nicnac13.
My final result was an overestimation of a real distance by around 1% so I'd say it was pretty close.
I have compiled all the photos and calculations into an Imgur post, here's the link if anyone's interested: imgur.com/gallery/BlZAOJ2
Cool!
Love it :D
I'm impressed.
Don't you mean during solar eclipse?
@Alexagrigorieff
No, sadly I couldn't watch that as I don't live in the USA.
I mean the Lunar Eclipse as evidenced by the photos of the Moon in the Imgur post.
3:00 wait, so you just left her there alone?
"here honey, just point this camera to the sun and wait for the space station to pass, i'll be right back"
There’s something called a mom
Nice video! Always love your content!
a question: in the last picture of the space station passing the sun (at 8:05 for example, where all pictures are overlapped), you can see differences in the shape of the hull of the station. Some are more round, others are more vague. . It seems like there's a rhytm to it: every second one is more round, with a more straith one in between. Why would that be? Probably has something to do with the way the camera or the vid software catches/renders it all, but maybe there's a strange physics phenomenon involved? Just wandering.
It's turbulence, the filter I use is black and causes the air in front of it to heat up, making heat haze.
There's probably a whole pleathera of ways to constrain altitude from observation data. But pretty cool. Getting out there, doing some observation yourself, math, etc. and most of all thinking.
Thanks for the video! And you've also inspired me to try getting video or images of an ISS transit across the sun tomorrow.
You make Space and rocket science very fun and enjoyable
But how close is the space station to the firmament?
The “TH-cam Space” Collaboration
I would LOVE to see a collaboration between a bunch of TH-camrs such as Scott Manley, Amy Shira Teitel, Isaac Arthur and Joe Scott. The purpose of this multi year multi TH-camr collaboration channel would be to design, fund, build, and launch a rocket capable of putting a crew of TH-camrs into space. All of this would be done on TH-cam as a reality show.
Hullo Scott Manley!
That was genuinely awesome. Epic work!
Nice to see a bit of geometry in use. Good work.
Gotta find your patrean page, this content MUST continue!
Thank you for using metric!
But the distance of the space station to the surface of the earth should also be corrected for the earths curvature, right?
Since they were only 1 KM apart, the curvature component is not significant. If they were 100 KM apart, then yes, the curvature would have to be factored in.
Yeah, thats true, not sure if he did that somewhere or not, could be he forgot.
That's a difference of 8 cm over a km. It's buried way deep in measurement error.
Straightforward logic, quite accurate, fairly easy to follow & think through, & (as usual) very very impressive...! Great!
Very entertaining Scott! A great demonstration of an interesting way to show the practicality of mathematics in everyday life! I am so lazy I just ask Google speaker. Thank you for having such a great channel.
My Check Yo stagin! T-shirt arrived! I'm so happy to have it since I wanted it since 23rd of march 4 days after the last time you could buy it😀
I love that all of this can be worked out without needing to know the distance or size of the Sun, nor the size of the ISS. Gotta love maths.
Well, we used the known angular size of the sun (a function of its size and distance) and we assumed that there's negligible parallax between the sun and the background stars (implying that the sun is several orders of magnitude farther away than the ISS).
The angular size does not need you to know the size or the distance, just how much angle it occupies in the sky.
Scott, what kind of lenses did you use with the camera? Or was it stock lenses that already came with the camera?
The RX10 is an All in one camera. amzn.to/2CMWrcd
Ahhhh good ol' math! I love these videos when you show how we humans on the ground can measure and interact with those things which are in space!!
DIY science is the best kind. :-)
I've measured my longitude by timing local noon then applying the equation of time. My time reference was a portable shortwave radio tuned to WWV.
Is its altitude 420km??
Wow, how did you guess? It clearly gets that high when passing over San Francisco and Oakland.
LoL
Товарищ Ленин - гриб, и, одновременно, радиоволна из космоса. Грибным сверхразумом он всё охватывает и замечает.
inhale oxygen every orbit
Blazing across the sun like that, it really makes you sit down and think for a while.
2:38 How does one calculate parallax from arc minutes? Is there a formula?
7.4Km/s is 16,553.33 MPH, 7.9KM/s is 17,671.8 MPH but what NASA said the ISS is moving at is 17,158 MPH (27,612 Km/h) at the moment as of 15:48 PDT 10/16/2018. its altitude is 253.31 miles or 407.02 Km.
Well within the error bars expected.
Impressive bracketing, actually.
You don't have to convert your angle to radians, you can multiply your baseline by 3438 (360*60/2pi) and divide by your parallax in arcminutes.
edit: wrong inversion of small angle formula
Or arcseconds has the magic number 206265
The arcseconds version is the one burned into my brain from astronomy class a couple decades ago.
Hi Scott
I am realy confused a your result for the altitude seams to precis.
Wouldn't you expect to be of by at least a couple percents du to atmospheric refraction?
Never mind
If we assume n (air)
Hi Scott - I don't understand the last point about the sun azimuth leading to an overestimate of the speed. If the Sun direction had been exactly at a right angle to the orbit, what would change? I thought the ISS trace would just appear to be horizontal instead of almost vertical. Instead, you multiplied the speed by the cosine of 20º in your "shower calculation" to get 7,4 km/s from 7,9... that implies that with an angle of 90º you would not have seen motion at all? Doesn't sound right to me.
Super interesting as always!
Maybe it’s just me but one thing about the audio that I find a little distracting is the sharp S:es. It would be awesome if you could apply a filter, de-esser, to dampen the hiss (sibilance it’s called, I just learned:)
I do, but when I turn it up enough my sibilants start to buzz instead.
Try using a little compression as well. You have a good narration voice and with a little technical wizardry, it could be very smooth.
This experiment should be done by schools! I live in Norway and we can't see ISS much, not at all here in north.
Nothing like some good ol physics 1. Brings me back to a time some moons ago
Can we have a PDF write up of what you did, please? I am still confused.
can you average all the frames of the space station to create a higher-resolution image?
Maybe, but I should to that with my other image.
Good job Sky!
And I guess you done ok Scott! :-p
Thanks for all the uploads. Can you do something about why solar systems and galaxies seem to be flat. I pretty much know why, but it would be nice to hear it from you.
I wonder how good an image you could get if you used all the 20'ish frames to produce 1 "noise cancelled" image of the space station. Fun vid!
Great movie Scott! Good job!
scott, when we measure orbital height, are we measuring from sea level?
That's a good assumption for any sort of altitude measurement. In this case the cameras were practically at sea level (within a meter or so anyway) so any measurements gained from those photos would also be taken from sea level.
Fantastic video!
Thanks!
but its fake because trigonometry is flat and not triangular as we were told in high school obviously 😂😂😂
I really wish I understood Trig a little better... I'd love to try this at home. This is safe to try at home, right?
Based on all this is it possible to compute a set of keplerian elements based on just ground observations?
I think I need an entire hr to see if I understand all the math. Fun project. Reminds me of Matt Parker measuring parks and streets in NYC
just a doubt.
why didn't you take earth round while calculating the altitude and simply a right triangle?
You need to know the length of two sides to use Pythagorus.
Sorry, I meant something else.
I edited the question
"but look... I'm just going to use this and..." lmao.... Effin' eh Scott and cheers from Canada!
Now explain in that final frame, why each frame of the ISS has a slightly different shape. My guess is atmospheric disturbance.
CGI. (joking)
What is "blue angel" he mentioned briefly?
The Blue Angels are the U.S. Navy's flight demonstration squadron. The exterior photography for this video was done on 10-7-18 during fleet week. The camera positions were the Berkeley Marina and a small peninsula in San Francisco Bay called the Albany Bulb.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Angels
blueangelsassociation.org/schedule/
US Navy precision flying team.
They are the United States Navy's flight demonstration squadron. They fly F-18 Hornet fighter jets, and perform at air shows around the country.
th-cam.com/video/4G6GLhlez9w/w-d-xo.html
I am waiting for the tie fighter UFO comments :) Great video by the way. I enjoy your channel.
Scott I was watching your video about Kerbal spinning too fast so that objects ‘defy gravity’.
1. Could it be possible to to achieve this in real life
2. Could you create a stable orbit around a planet spinning that fast?
Is any one knows any website for watching the movie first man plzzz
Awesome work Scott!
There is no left side of the sun really.
That's pretty cool! Great work
Wow, my brain hurts. But I love it that SOMEONE can do sums like those.
Hey, that's rather cool. Were you using a Canon P900?
I think you mean the Nikon P900. Nah it has a tiny sensor compared to my Sony.
Im so happy none of the flat earth tolls have found this channel yet (big fan of sci man dan and sir sic)
Dont worry..we are here watching your nonsense
Why is it that the ISS seems to be orbiting a little crab-wise compared to its direction? Isn't the Harmony module supposed to be in the direction of the orbit?
(I'm trying to visualize the geometry, and I can't figure it out.)
Interesting question. I think since we are standing on a rotating Earth, the apparent direction of motion of the ISS is guaranteed to be different from the actual direction of motion. If you drop a pencil straight down, and then start running, it will look crabby in your reference frame.
However, that may be a small effect compared to this:
The ISS is a microgravity environment, and doesn't rotate. It is "always" pointing in the same direction, so if it is tangent to its path, after 1/4 orbit it will be perpendicular to it.
Also, it looks like it is crabby, because the observer is also moving, at an angle go the stations orbit.
Thomas Wijgerse
Yes, I thought of that. That might be the reason. However, the motion of the observer is very small compared to the orbital speed. I’m not sure if that would account for it.
Another effect is that the observer isn’t looking direct up at the ISS. That angle might be enough to give the illusion that it is crabbing.
I don’t know. I was hoping that Scott did since he is much more aware of the geometry. (And he is smarter than I am.)
@@EtzEchad my bet is still because of the observers speed, that is still 340m/s at a 50 degree angle to the iss.
Thomas Wijgerse
You may be right. I don’t know. (That’s why I asked.)
Hi Scott- new subscriber here. I looked through your videos but couldn't find anything on Thor's Hammer type kinetic energy weapons. Have you posted anything on these things? Thanks!
You mean the rods from the gods?
yes
Thanks for doing this it's an excellent video!
The precise apparent diameter of the sun is published per day. Solar ephemerides are available online by many agencies.
This was fun, I learned a lot thanks!
Beautiful work!