Talk:Solar eclipse of October 14, 2023

Can I see it from Kentucky

??? 71.31.1.88 (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Max eclipse in Kentucky is 12:00 Central/1 Eastern near Cairo, Illinois and 1:15 Eastern near the Cumberland Gap. But looking at partial phases or uneclipsed Sun without a (non-fraudulent) filter or with one with a pinhole in it can cause permanent or temporary vision loss. (Sun filters designed for cameras are only dark enough for cameras, eyes must use one designed for eyes). Total phase can't harm eyes. The view from the middle of the 2024 total eclipse band will be so good it'd be worth driving to from anywhere in Kentucky. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some people view total solar eclipses from a certain distance inside the band that maximizes time where the red line just outside the Sun is visible. This decreases the few minutes of totality though so probably not the best idea if never seen totality before. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:48, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you put in a pinhole in a paper you can see the edge of the Moon on the Sun without looking toward it. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the shadow of trees on the ground will often show moonbitten Suns of various quality. Same principle as the pinholed paper. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Person with No Name 0 (talk) 20:11, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The description of the first image is Partial from Lima, Peru

The description of the second image is Same image, but cropped

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

annulus or annularity

User 129.15.65.229 mentions a preference for the hydrogen-alpha image of the eclipse, but this image is not a true or geometric annulus. My opinion is that the infobox image of an annular Solar eclipse should be as close as possible to maximum eclipse in both time and space (as close as possible to the eclipse centerline location and as close as possible to the time of maximum eclipse) which should display a centered annulus or as close as physically possible to a true or geometric annulus, and not a displaced or off-center image of annularity. Nicole Sharp (talk) 11:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think having a photo at maximum eclipse in both time and space is desirable but it is not the only criteria we should use. I also think it should be recognizable as the sun, and it should show what distinguishes it from other annular eclipses.

For the first criteria, clearly you went to the effort to calculate maximum annularity and I trust you chose the photo that reflects that.

For the second criteria, I understand that the sun doesn’t come out like it looks in person and getting a natural color is certainly beyond my capabilities, but I think you photo is very dim and would benefit from being brightened. The alternate photo also suffers from odd color, from my limited understanding of H-alpha, I think it would be redder.

For the third criteria, does the photo show features that distinguish it from other eclipses. Take a look at the lead image in Solar eclipse of September 1, 2016 Is there anything that distinguishes the sun between this eclipse and that one? You could randomly swap the pictures around and there would be no way to tell. On the other hand, the H-alpha images shows Solar prominences which do change from year to year.

Neither photo is optimal, but between the two photos I prefer the H-alpha one.

Lorax (talk) 00:25, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox photo from 2016-09-01 is also visibly off-centered and does not display as a true or geometric annulus. This is very difficult to photograph because you must be as close as possible to the centerline which means that even for an eclipse path stretching across the USA, there are only a handful of accessible locations throughout the entire country where you can actually see an annulus instead of just annularity. From all eclipses throughout all of human history with photos available on Wikimedia Commons, I could only find one other eclipse that looks as close in annularity as 2023-10-14, from 2020-06-21 in China. For the photos of the 2023-10-14 eclipse, I went through every single photo (from the USA), and the one I selected is from the closest possible location to the eclipse centerline. The second-closest is from Hondo (Texas) but that is nearly ten times further away from the centerline. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since a photograph of an actual Solar annulus (when Sol appears as close as physically possible to a geometric annulus) is much much rarer than a photograph of Solar annularity, my suggestion is to try to exemplify this phenomenon through the infobox since for the majority of annular Solar eclipses it is too difficult to find locations with good weather where you can visibly see an annulus instead of just annularity. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Technically these should be considered two different visual phenomena: photographs of Solar annuli versus photographs of Solar annularity. The vast majority of photographs at maximum annularity do not display an annulus. The difference can be quantified as defining for example an image that appears visibly as an annulus to have the Moon's apparent position to be within 0.01 Solar radii of the Sun's apparent position. From the photographs on Wikimedia Commons of all eclipses over all of human history, there are only a handful of photographs that might meet such a criterion. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just read also that 2013-10-14 was the very first Annular Solar Eclipse in human history to be photographed with a radiotelescope. If we can get the radio image uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, that will be historically significant to include on the article page. I can't find a freely licensed version of the photo but should be mentioned on the article probably and the image will likely meet fair-use guidelines to be added to Wikipedia directly since it is the only radio image in existence of an annular Solar eclipse. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lorax: the Sun is properly exposed in the photograph I selected from Hobbs, New Mexico. If you look closely, you can see a Solar facula on the edge of the Solar disc at maximum eclipse. This is one of those unique identifying features for this particular eclipse that you mentioned, except that faculae can be seen in white light as well as in hydrogen-alpha light. Brightening the annulus using a photo editing application will lose small low-contrast details on the Solar surface such as granules and faculae but these are only visible at full resolution and not in the infobox. Nicole Sharp (talk) 23:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

add a projections section to the gallery?

I was thinking that we could add a projections section to the gallery just like the 2024 eclipse page Tigerclone (talk) 03:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]