NavList:

The thread dates from Jan 2009. The almost final result from Frank:

Hewitt, you wrote:
"It seems to me the thing about watching the sun from the North Pole is its
altitude is the same as its declination. That is, on the say of the summer
solstice the sun's altitude would be 23.45°. It would circle the horizon at
that altitude, gradually declining day by day till the equinox when its
altitude would be 0°. That would be sunset. (Obviously, I'm ignoring
refraction)."

Yes, and so the Moon could never be seen there in that orientation either.
It's intriguing to me that people happily forwarded this to one another
without ever considering WHY they think it shows the North Pole. I suppose
most people are under the impression that the view from exactly at the pole
must be unique, eery, or at least unusual. BTW, where's the workshop? Behind
the photographer?

And:
"The moon being so large and the reflection in the water (ice?) indicate it's
a composite, but it is beautiful."

Not even a composite. It's a pure digital fantasy. But here's an interesting
challenge: the next time the crescent moon is very close to a bright planet,
I propose attempting a real photo that duplicates as nearly as possible the
appearance of this digital image. Then we start a new email forwarding game
and see how many people happily assure us that, "as everybody knows," it's
not a real photo. For starters, what's the range of latitude where the horns
of the crescent moon can be exactly horizontal?

-FER

----------------------------------------------------------------
NavList message boards and member settings: www.fer3.com/NavList
Members may optionally receive posts by email.
To cancel email delivery, send a message to NoMail[at]fer3.com
----------------------------------------------------------------