1190: "Time"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
spamjam
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:06 pm UTC
Location: greenlake seawash

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby spamjam » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:03 am UTC

KINDADARKONG
Image

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:04 am UTC

lgw wrote:
Kieryn wrote:Quick post-- looking to me with the latest frame and no moon still that either 2013 or west africa are ruled out.
If it is 2013, then it must be at least as far west as the caribean... probably even further west.

Still wish you'd explain how moon position gives you UTC time (and thereby longitude). Lunar distance method? And if we don't actually know the date, we don't know local sunset time, do we (and thereby longitude)?

The moon's position changes by about 12° a day, or about the moon's own width every hour. So you can get a very good reading of the time by precise measurement of the moon's position against the star background. Then by setting the known time against the altitude of a known star (or the moon itself) above the horizon, you can calculate how far around the earth you must be for the star to appear at that altitude at that time.

Zorin_75 wrote:I'd already posted this earlier, but it would be great if one of the astro buffs could explain what this means...
Spoiler:
Image

It pretty much means that Astrometry was able to identify Scorpius and Sagittarius by computer, which Kieryn had already done by hand. But since I suggested Astrometry, I'm glad to see it proved out.

It also means that Astrometry uses much too large a text size in their results image. But hey! Isn't that Opiboble near the center?

(Note to self: Never again put spoiler tags inside URL tags.)
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

lgw
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:52 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby lgw » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:10 am UTC

jjjdavidson wrote:
lgw wrote:
Kieryn wrote:Quick post-- looking to me with the latest frame and no moon still that either 2013 or west africa are ruled out.
If it is 2013, then it must be at least as far west as the caribean... probably even further west.

Still wish you'd explain how moon position gives you UTC time (and thereby longitude). Lunar distance method? And if we don't actually know the date, we don't know local sunset time, do we (and thereby longitude)?

The moon's position changes by about 12° a day, or about the moon's own width every hour. So you can get a very good reading of the time by precise measurement of the moon's position against the star background. Then by setting the known time against the altitude of a known star (or the moon itself) above the horizon, you can calculate how far around the earth you must be for the star to appear at that altitude at that time.


Ah, so that would be a "yes" to Lunar distance method. :D Don't you have to have some vague idea of what the date is to make that work? I guess if the OTC was set thousands of years away, the astronomy buffs here would have already figured that out.
"In no set of physics laws do you get two cats." - doogly

MattTheTubaGuy
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby MattTheTubaGuy » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:13 am UTC

Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:15 am UTC

lgw wrote:[snippety snippety]
Ah, so that would be a "yes" to Lunar distance method. :D Don't you have to have some vague idea of what the date is to make that work? I guess if the OTC was set thousands of years away, the astronomy buffs here would have already figured that out.

As far as I know, you have to have a derned good idea of the date to make that work, which is why navigation tables are so involved.
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

User avatar
HereBeUnmappedBits
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:35 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby HereBeUnmappedBits » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:18 am UTC

Out of curiosity, has anyone used the movements of the stars to determine the amount of time passing between each frame?

User avatar
taixzo
Posts: 1606
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:54 am UTC
Location: The Present

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby taixzo » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:30 am UTC

jjjdavidson wrote:
lgw wrote:[snippety snippety]
Ah, so that would be a "yes" to Lunar distance method. :D Don't you have to have some vague idea of what the date is to make that work? I guess if the OTC was set thousands of years away, the astronomy buffs here would have already figured that out.

As far as I know, you have to have a derned good idea of the date to make that work, which is why navigation tables are so involved.


But we do have a derned good idea of the date, because we know where Venus is!
BlitzGirl the Next
BlitzGirl the Fast
Knight Temporal
Bringer of the Light

Useless utilities: Newpix clock for Mac OS X, Newpix clock for Ubuntu

Sandgarden - a relaxing experience for Time Waiters

Best wishes to GnomeAnne, ColletArrow and january1may! One day you will all join me in the Present!

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:34 am UTC

Are we all at least agreed that Kieryn (and Zorin_75 later) correctly identified Sagittarius and Scorpio? With that, can we find the celestial equator, and figure out which way is dead west? (This is one of those rare occasions when my refusal to install Java handicaps me, since every decent interactive star chart I can find requires it.)

HereBeUnmappedBits wrote:Out of curiosity, has anyone used the movements of the stars to determine the amount of time passing between each frame?

It sounded like edo was going to work on that, from the Astrometry data. If you can find the angle between two stars, then you can use that to calculate the angle any particular star moves through. But since this is rotational movement, we'd still need to identify the celestial equator to measure angular movement directly, or calculate it based on an identified star's known declination from the equator. (I don't have the background for that, unfortunately.)

Can somebody GIMPier than I am say if the stars are moving at about the same rate as the sun was earlier? Because mscha and I agreed that based on the sun's apparent size the lapse between frames was about a minute. (Of course, I just realized, that calculation made no allowance for the sun's current latitude.)
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:40 am UTC

HereBeUnmappedBits wrote:Out of curiosity, has anyone used the movements of the stars to determine the amount of time passing between each frame?


I didn't calculate precisely yet, but playing aroung in Stellarium I ballparked it at around 5 minutes.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
nerdsniped
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 6:06 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby nerdsniped » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:51 am UTC

Blindposting to say:

1. I am looking forward to seeing the fervent analysis of every visible star (or airborne antisemencoffeebabies or whatever we've decided it is) which is no doubt taking place.

2. I am totally expecting the Great Pumpkin to pop out at any moment. Or alternately, to see a sleep-deprived Cueball suddenly leap up, Linus-style, emit a huge moan, and faint dead away -- believing that the beaglemolpy across the field is in fact the Great Pumpkin.
New to the Time thread? Click here!

"we are dangerously close to answers. Let's hope they lead to more questions..." -- HES

"Expect friskiness." -- keithl

User avatar
Latent22
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:57 pm UTC
Location: NZ

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Latent22 » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:53 am UTC

jjjdavidson wrote:Can somebody GIMPier than I am say if the stars are moving at about the same rate as the sun was earlier? Because mscha and I agreed that based on the sun's apparent size the lapse between frames was about a minute. (Of course, I just realized, that calculation made no allowance for the sun's current latitude.)

A quick comparison of sun and star movements in photoshop shows almost identical movement.

In one frame the brightest star moved 7 pixels sideways and 10 pixels down.

The sun i measured at 8 pixels sideways and 10 down but it is harder to get this exact due to its size.

User avatar
ggh
Posts: 1950
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:45 am UTC
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby ggh » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:54 am UTC

So November 7th... what do we think that is IRL? the due date? the party? the end of the comic?

And is Nov 7th necessarily the significant date? I mean, okay, so it's the 7th now in the OTC, but that means it was the 2nd or so when it started, right? And unless they get killed tonight, it will be a later date in the OTC when it ends.

Or is it enough that GLR gave us this date this one time and we put it in our calendars?


BTW, really stellar job finding the date!
Requested a magnet? I'm sorry I'm so super-slow, but you will get it
Agatha the Awesomeful

In a Comically Tragic Turn of Events Addams Didn't Die. Please help. (Wait, does that sound like I want you to kill addams?)

User avatar
yappobiscuits
Posts: 2839
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:41 am UTC
Location: The Sea
Contact:

Molpy up!

Postby yappobiscuits » Fri Jun 28, 2013 12:55 am UTC

Whoa, 10 NPs of ketchup… mainly just lots of discussion of astronomy, all very interesting, but I have nothing to add myself so no big ketchup post.

And stars! Pretty. And neat. Time for a suitable song...

"Stars"
Ottification of the song of the same name from Les Misérables.

Spoiler:
There, out in the darkness
Cuegan are resting
Near a neat tree
On a mountainside
On their great journey
They never shall yield
Till they get to the top
Till they get to the top

They know their way in the dark
To learn and discover some more
And those who follow the path to the summit
Shall have their reward
And if a raptorcat should attack
The stick,
The claws!

Stars
In your multitudes
Scarce to be counted
Filling the newpix
With order and light
You are the sentinels
Silent and sure
Keeping watch in the night
Keeping watch in the night

You know your place in the sky
You hold your course and your aim
And each in your season
Returns and returns
And is always the same
And if a raptorcat should attack
They'll fight back again

And so it must be, for Randall has written
That their journey must carry on
And we will see what comes if we wait
For the next ONG

Randall please guide them
That we may see them
Safe to the top
I will wait for it
Till then
This I swear
This I swear by the stars


And finally, keeping up the mature tone...
mscha wrote:I think we missed Kieryn's 600th, in all the excitement. (We might have missed a few more...)

Happy 600th, Kieryn!
Spoiler:
Image

You won't see anything by looking through your telescope with THAT body part...
OTTscars results Pt. 2 coming... eventually, but not from me. Seeking writer.
English Instrumentalist Waterottermolpy
Mighty Troubadour of the OTT
Image

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6883
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:01 am UTC

Cueball drinkONG...
Image
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 1948
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby cellocgw » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:04 am UTC

thirds wrote:
jovialbard wrote:Interesting how Nov 7 is over a month shy of 9 months from the start of the comic :wink: :wink:

wow, good catch.



Well, except that 9 months is not the average, or median, time for human gestation. Can't speak for stick people, tho'.
And given that it's pretty much impossible to verify pregnancy status on the day of egg-sperm-fusion, one might expect the "Wait For It" day to be more like 8 months after the OTC started.
https://app.box.com/witthoftresume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
BytEfLUSh
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:15 am UTC
Location: Sombor, Serbia, Pizza
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby BytEfLUSh » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:05 am UTC

spamjam wrote:DINGDONGDINGDONG
Image

Blindreply... I like that frame so SO VERY much, I want it as a poster. GLR, you're the only Lord I ever humored with that entire "talking-to-myself-stuff"... So, could you please sell this to us? :)
Image

Image

-- Professor Dan, The Man from Earth (paraphrased)

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:08 am UTC

mscha wrote:Cueball drinkONG...
Image

Still no moon. Seems like even California is being pushed out of range. Hawaii is becoming the last hope for 2013.

By the time the moon window moves as far as indonsia again and the date changes to the 8th of November Venus will have moved out of position.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
BytEfLUSh
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:15 am UTC
Location: Sombor, Serbia, Pizza
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby BytEfLUSh » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:11 am UTC

I'm not anywhere near to being an astronomy expert, but isn't Milky Way visible that way only when viewed from the southern hemisphere (also, in absence of light)? If that's a lie, there goes my very good reason for visiting Peruvian jungle. :(
Image

Image

-- Professor Dan, The Man from Earth (paraphrased)

User avatar
Marsh'n
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:55 pm UTC
Location: Blitzing: 609-918, then 1000-2247 +/- schizms

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Marsh'n » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:15 am UTC

Blindpost from NP 953:
Eutychus wrote: (Requesting OTTification...) Or possibly Israel Kamakawiwoʻole's mashup of it with Somewhere over the rainbow?


If no one has ninja'd me to it I would be very happy to take this on dixmorrow. I love this song.

User avatar
eta oin shrdlu
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:25 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby eta oin shrdlu » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:16 am UTC

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.
I had the same thought. With Stellarium I get a better match to the shapes (in particular, looking at the shape of Corona Australis and the angle between the bow stars Kaus Borealis/Media/Australis) at about 20000 +- 5000 AD. I'm going to try a better fit later.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5551
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Niclep wanted to chase the squirpy.

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:18 am UTC

cellocgw wrote:
thirds wrote:
jovialbard wrote:Interesting how Nov 7 is over a month shy of 9 months from the start of the comic :wink: :wink:

wow, good catch.



Well, except that 9 months is not the average, or median, time for human gestation. Can't speak for stick people, tho'.
And given that it's pretty much impossible to verify pregnancy status on the day of egg-sperm-fusion, one might expect the "Wait For It" day to be more like 8 months after the OTC started.
And over a month shy of 9 months from the start of the comic is "more like 8 months after the OTC started", right?
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
ggh
Posts: 1950
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:45 am UTC
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby ggh » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:21 am UTC

cellocgw wrote:
thirds wrote:
jovialbard wrote:Interesting how Nov 7 is over a month shy of 9 months from the start of the comic :wink: :wink:

wow, good catch.



Well, except that 9 months is not the average, or median, time for human gestation. Can't speak for stick people, tho'.
And given that it's pretty much impossible to verify pregnancy status on the day of egg-sperm-fusion, one might expect the "Wait For It" day to be more like 8 months after the OTC started.


It's not atypical though: my daughter was born 9 months and 1 day after conception. And this is a lovely idea:
vvn wrote:My favorite theory (which I am sure is wrong, but I like it anyway) is that Randall found out that his wife is pregnant, and set out to do a comic the length of the pregnancy. A very cool present for mom and kid. The faster period of newpix was to catch up for starting later than the conception.

(Can you tell I'm a romantic?)

Edit: to fix bad memory
Last edited by ggh on Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:29 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Requested a magnet? I'm sorry I'm so super-slow, but you will get it
Agatha the Awesomeful

In a Comically Tragic Turn of Events Addams Didn't Die. Please help. (Wait, does that sound like I want you to kill addams?)

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:23 am UTC

Uh-oh. I'm disturbed by a closer look at the results from Astrometry.

Zorin_75's results say "158 arcsec/pixel" over an image size of 1024 x 682. At 3600" per degree, that's about 23 pixels / degree. If Zorin used the full width of the original frame (553px), that converts to 292 arcsec/pixel, or about 12 pixels / degree. But the sun circles I was drawing yesterday, which I thought were a little undersized, run from 21 to 23 pixels, making the sun about four times its proper size. (If Zorin's submission was an enlargement of only part of the original width, the discrepancy gets even worse.)

Does this mean their sun is too big? Has earth moved closer, or has the sun enlarged? Can somebody with more of a clue than me check the sun's size against Sagittarius? (Or the moon's, since they're the nearly the same?)
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

User avatar
ChronosDragon
Posts: 1852
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:42 am UTC
Location: [~]

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby ChronosDragon » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:31 am UTC

jjjdavidson wrote:Uh-oh. I'm disturbed by a closer look at the results from Astrometry.

Zorin_75's results say "158 arcsec/pixel" over an image size of 1024 x 682. At 3600" per degree, that's about 23 pixels / degree. If Zorin used the full width of the original frame (553px), that converts to 292 arcsec/pixel, or about 12 pixels / degree. But the sun circles I was drawing yesterday, which I thought were a little undersized, run from 21 to 23 pixels, making the sun about four times its proper size. (If Zorin's submission was an enlargement of only part of the original width, the discrepancy gets even worse.)

Does this mean their sun is too big? Has earth moved closer, or has the sun enlarged? Can somebody with more of a clue than me check the sun's size against Sagittarius? (Or the moon's, since they're the nearly the same?)


That might be another explanation for the enormous tide.

Which begs the question, what planet are they on that they have the same constellations?
Image

User avatar
edo
Posts: 427
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:05 pm UTC
Location: ~TrApPeD iN mY PhOnE~

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edo » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:36 am UTC

eta oin shrdlu wrote:
MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.
I had the same thought. With Stellarium I get a better match to the shapes (in particular, looking at the shape of Corona Australis and the angle between the bow stars Kaus Borealis/Media/Australis) at about 20000 +- 5000 AD. I'm going to try a better fit later.



Or the new moon is obscuring it? (where the heck is the limb?) If it is the moon, there is a chance Antares could come out from behind the moon before moonset

Since you guys are looking for me to do more I logged back in. I'm going to need some pixel coordinates for some of the stars. the ones in the path of "Venus" and "Yed Prior" (the bottom star in bow shape on the right (Ophiuchus))
Image

I'll also need some kind of estimate of the distance (pixels is fine) of the sun to Venus, then Venus to Yed Prior
Last edited by edo on Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:41 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Co-proprietor of a Mome and Pope Shope

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:41 am UTC

eta oin shrdlu wrote:
MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.
I had the same thought. With Stellarium I get a better match to the shapes (in particular, looking at the shape of Corona Australis and the angle between the bow stars Kaus Borealis/Media/Australis) at about 20000 +- 5000 AD. I'm going to try a better fit later.


I think you are right. The current exact position of Venus and us seeing no moon yet I think has now totally ruled out 2013. I also notice many of the stars are in not-quite-right positions. I think it's safe to say that this is likely to be thousands of years distant from the present. Not sure about past or future - I don't know where stars are heading. Oh Custard!

So what was with the mustard sparkle then??? Why correct something if it is intended to be nowhere near the present???

Randall is totally messing with us and I love it.

EDIT: I am scrolling through the years like crazy... the moon path never crosses Antares
Last edited by Kieryn on Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:47 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5551
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

But he knew he didn't have time.

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:43 am UTC

Kieryn wrote:
Spoiler:
eta oin shrdlu wrote:
MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.
I had the same thought. With Stellarium I get a better match to the shapes (in particular, looking at the shape of Corona Australis and the angle between the bow stars Kaus Borealis/Media/Australis) at about 20000 +- 5000 AD. I'm going to try a better fit later.


I think you are right. The current exact position of Venus and us seeing no moon yet I think has now totally ruled out 2013. I also notice many of the stars are in not-quite-right positions. I think it's safe to say that this is likely to be thousands of years distant from the present. Not sure about past or future - I don't know where stars are heading. Oh Custard!

So what was with the mustard sparkle then??? Why correct something if it is intended to be nowhere near the present???


Randall is totally messing with us and I love him.
Pronoun fix!
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: But he knew he didn't have time.

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:48 am UTC

Eternal Density wrote:
Kieryn wrote:
Spoiler:
eta oin shrdlu wrote:
MattTheTubaGuy wrote:Just a random thought, if Randall drew the star super accurate, then I am thinking this may be some time in the future.
My reasoning: where the hell is Antares?!
Image
Eta Scorpii is another star that seems to have disappeared.
also, several other stars seem to be placed in slightly different places.
I had the same thought. With Stellarium I get a better match to the shapes (in particular, looking at the shape of Corona Australis and the angle between the bow stars Kaus Borealis/Media/Australis) at about 20000 +- 5000 AD. I'm going to try a better fit later.


I think you are right. The current exact position of Venus and us seeing no moon yet I think has now totally ruled out 2013. I also notice many of the stars are in not-quite-right positions. I think it's safe to say that this is likely to be thousands of years distant from the present. Not sure about past or future - I don't know where stars are heading. Oh Custard!

So what was with the mustard sparkle then??? Why correct something if it is intended to be nowhere near the present???


Randall is totally messing with us and I love him.
Pronoun fix!


Well, that too :)
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6883
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:57 am UTC

About this moon thing...
It it were covering Antares or any other missing star in our view, wouldn't it be too far away from the sun to be a proper new moon? There'd be at least a sliver of light, and if you can see the Milky Way, you can see even the tiniest sliver of moon as well.
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:59 am UTC

mscha wrote:About this moon thing...
It it were covering Antares or any other missing star in our view, wouldn't it be too far away from the sun to be a proper new moon? There'd be at least a sliver of light, and if you can see the Milky Way, you can see even the tiniest sliver of moon as well.


Yes there would... you'd just be able to see it by now.
Last edited by Kieryn on Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:05 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
edo
Posts: 427
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:05 pm UTC
Location: ~TrApPeD iN mY PhOnE~

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edo » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:01 am UTC

mscha wrote:About this moon thing...
It it were covering Antares or any other missing star in our view, wouldn't it be too far away from the sun to be a proper new moon? There'd be at least a sliver of light, and if you can see the Milky Way, you can see even the tiniest sliver of moon as well.


Yeah I don't like it that I can't see the limb.

That said, the Moon obscured Antares at:
180°W, azimuth 230°Fri 2005 Nov 4 6:00 UTC
Co-proprietor of a Mome and Pope Shope

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:05 am UTC

BrightONG?

Image

Edit: Maybe not brighter... just seemed brighter. My eyes are going wonky

[ONG moved to new post]
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6883
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:07 am UTC

Kieryn wrote:BrightONG?
Spoiler:
Image

Edit: Maybe not brighter... just seemed brighter. My eyes are going wonky

Not brighter, no, but not getting any darker anymore either.
Corner pixels:
Spoiler:
np2352: #ffffff/#fefefe/#000000/#000000
np2353: #ffffff/#fcfcfc/#000000/#000000
np2354: #ffffff/#fbfbfb/#000000/#000000
np2355: #ffffff/#fafafa/#000000/#000000
np2356: #ffffff/#f9f9f9/#000000/#000000
np2357: #ffffff/#f7f7f7/#000000/#000000
np2358: #ffffff/#efefef/#000000/#000000
np2359: #ffffff/#e9e9e9/#000000/#000000
np2360: #fbfbfb/#e3e3e3/#000000/#000000
np2361: #f2f2f2/#dcdcdc/#000000/#000000
np2362: #e9e9e9/#d5d5d5/#000000/#000000
np2363: #dfdfdf/#cecece/#000000/#000000
np2364: #d5d5d5/#c6c6c6/#000000/#000000
np2365: #d0d0d0/#c2c2c2/#000000/#000000
np2366: #cdcdcd/#c0c0c0/#000000/#000000
np2367: #cacaca/#c0c0c0/#000000/#000000
np2368: #c8c8c8/#bfbfbf/#000000/#000000
np2369: #c6c6c6/#bdbdbd/#000000/#000000
np2370: #c0c0c0/#b8b8b8/#000000/#000000
np2371: #b2b2b2/#ababab/#000000/#000000
np2372: #a9a9a9/#a2a2a2/#000000/#000000
np2373: #989898/#919191/#000000/#000000
np2374: #8f8f8f/#8b8b8b/#000000/#000000
np2375: #828282/#7e7e7e/#000000/#000000
np2376: #727272/#707070/#000000/#000000
np2377: #6a6a6a/#696969/#000000/#000000
np2378: #636363/#626262/#000000/#000000
np2379: #5a5a5a/#595959/#000000/#000000
np2380: #505050/#4f4f4f/#000000/#000000
np2381: #4c4c4c/#4c4c4c/#000000/#000000
np2382: #434343/#434343/#000000/#000000
np2383: #333333/#353535/#000000/#000000
np2384: #242424/#262626/#000000/#000000
np2385: #1c1c1c/#1f1f1f/#000000/#000000
np2386: #171717/#191919/#000000/#000000
np2387: #151515/#171717/#000000/#000000
np2388: #141414/#151515/#000000/#000000
np2389: #121212/#141414/#000000/#000000
np2390: #101010/#111111/#000000/#000000
np2391: #0d0d0d/#0f0f0f/#000000/#000000
np2392: #0b0b0b/#0d0d0d/#000000/#000000
np2393: #0a0a0a/#0c0c0c/#000000/#000000
np2394: #070707/#070707/#000000/#000000
np2395: #060606/#060606/#000000/#000000
np2396: #050505/#060606/#000000/#000000
np2397: #050505/#050505/#000000/#000000
np2398: #050505/#050505/#000000/#000000
np2399: #050505/#050505/#000000/#000000
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
nerdsniped
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 6:06 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby nerdsniped » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:07 am UTC

BlitzGirl wrote:
SBN wrote:
susanoodin wrote:Hmm, is anyone else finding it a bit strange that they can sleep outside, without any kind of protection at all.... not even a blanket? Assuming earth climate, what climate zone would that be possible in?

Even weirder than that, they can both be comfortable at the same time.

Perhaps they have identical thicknesses of bark on their sticks.

This made me LOL. In my experience, most married couples will tell you that there is NEVER a circumstance under which both partners can be comfortable (unless they are wearing very different clothing). One person (usually the woman) will prefer it much warmer than the other. If there is a couple out there with identical bark thickness, I haven't met them.
New to the Time thread? Click here!

"we are dangerously close to answers. Let's hope they lead to more questions..." -- HES

"Expect friskiness." -- keithl

User avatar
SkUrRiEr
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:22 am UTC
Location: Stuck in the past: Newpage 961

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby SkUrRiEr » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:10 am UTC

A blindpost from the past:

Neil_Boekend wrote:
SkUrRiEr wrote:
jjjdavidson wrote:Good explanation about the fire, however; I've seen many times how much darker the rest of the world gets at night, when you have a nearby light source. I won't use a flashlight in the country at night unless I absolutely have to.


I've been in exceptionally dark underground spaces where you need to use a flashlight. When you turn it off, it's pitch black, even if there's another light source, say, a gap in the "ceiling".

This is why I'm never far from a good light source :)


If you had the flashlight on then your rod cells were probably already light-bleached. It would take time for it to correct. Of course the underground space could be dark enough that even fully functional rod cells would not pick up anything.
Or you could have a vitamin A deficiency (do you eat carrots?) or some other reason for nightblindness.


I do have problems with night vision - my eyes take a while to adjust, much to the amusement of my partner. In this case, it was a combination of light bleaching from my torch (Even though I'm very careful to keep it pointed away from me) and the fact that there was _literally_ no light down there. One time I stopped for a moment to let my eyes adjust and I couldn't see anything other than the tiny bits of light from "gaps" in the "ceiling".

User avatar
mscha
Posts: 6883
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:21 pm UTC
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby mscha » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:12 am UTC

And a final animation update for todix. (Way past coma time for me...)
Spoiler:
Image
List¹ of all Frames of Time and after Time.
New here? Questions? Check the wiki.
Don't worry, feed molpies⁴.
Image
Holy Croce
Default footnotes; standard OTT-np2166m 1.2:
Spoiler:
Image
Image

User avatar
jjjdavidson
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:40 pm UTC
Location: Outside: The Ozarks, North America ─ OTTside: Lost in the 1400s

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby jjjdavidson » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:13 am UTC

Completely off the current topic: Fellow Waiters, I'm still hoping for responses to my survey. I'm looking for your opinions about which frames of Time were the most significant. Not your favorite frames, but the ones that you think had the biggest impact when they first appeared. Please read details at the link above if you're interested.

It's not a popularity contest, and I'm not going to tally the votes; your lists will be the starting data, not the result. I'll collect suggestions through at least the 10th-12th of July, so there's no rush. ☻
────────────────
Also, I'm not ignoring all the people who are asking for charts of their personal posting history. It's just going to be a few days before I can run the results─especially since I've decided that they would look cooler as polar charts, which will require some recoding (if I can make them work at all).

I'm going to have to go back through about 40NP looking for requests, because I foolishly haven't been taking notes as I read. But I'll do my best to get to all of you soon─even the 4-poster who piped up!
Don't worry. Feed squirpys.
Don't wait for me.
My OTC/OTT graphsMay include spoilers!
Helpful links: Time Wiki FAQrot-13 / Morse decoders
He won! He won! He won!
Knight Temporal. :) Ex-Loopist. :(

MattTheTubaGuy
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:01 am UTC

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby MattTheTubaGuy » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:16 am UTC

more in depth analysis comparison with Stellarium:
Image
Red = blank space where there should be a star
Green = new star (or possibly a planet)
Yellow = stars that have moved
Blue = constellations.

User avatar
edo
Posts: 427
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:05 pm UTC
Location: ~TrApPeD iN mY PhOnE~

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby edo » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:22 am UTC

Ok, I'm going to try on my own. Step one, get an exact date from solar right ascension.

Assumptions:
the two newpices between sunset and the appearance of Venus/Jupiter had the same spacing as those around it.
Co-proprietor of a Mome and Pope Shope

User avatar
Kieryn
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:40 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: 1190: "Time"

Postby Kieryn » Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:24 am UTC

MattTheTubaGuy wrote:more in depth analysis comparison with Stellarium:
Image
Red = blank space where there should be a star
Green = new star (or possibly a planet)
Yellow = stars that have moved
Blue = constellations.



Nice job... hopefully someone can from that work out if it's actually a realistic point in the many thousands of years from now future, or if Randall is just making stuff up to mess with our heads.

Comatime for me now. I've done enough damage for today :)
Image- Kieryn

Director, Time Foundation Data Analysis Department
http://its-all-related.org


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rmsgrey and 42 guests