But somebody is wrong on the internet! And its funny as hell…
again, look at the definition of “cause” - for x to “cause” y, there needs to be a change in x that results in y. I don’t know how else to describe your argument other than autistic - you’re saying that a change in x results in y therefore it is caused by z. If there’s one thing that NASA has proven with this game, it’s that our children are sorely lacking in education.
Solar flux. At a right angle (like noon), more sunlight hits the ground than it does later in the day. Like wind hitting a sideways piece of paper.
I understand how you got this notion, with the poor state of our education system, and I don’t blame you because it does make some sense. But the tilt IS the overwhelming cause, like how a paper’s tilt affects how quickly it falls.
Distance would have an effect, but it’s such a tiny contribution on the planet. For perspective, it takes 8 minutes for sunlight to reach us. And at the same speed, light can circle the planet’s surface 7 and 1/2 times in a single second. All of this with a logarithmic magnitude falloff…
Space is big. Distance doesn’t matter unless it’s a vast distance. If distance caused the seasons, we’d be fucked by the earth’s elliptical not-quite-circular orbit… which surely varies by at least our minuscule radius.
If you’re still not convinced, congratulations on your trolling. Because on our sphere, nowhere can face the sun directly without in fact being closer than the rest of the planet’s surface. So you’ve found the perfect misconception to rouse other people’s tempers as they try to circumvent your tautologous ‘‘evidence’’.
Seasonal changes are governed by many things. The present season, yes, is one of the biggest contributors. But if we somehow got some ventilation pumping air in from Antarctica, and replacing it with air from Sudan, we’d be able to regulate global temperature despite how perpendicular parts are.
This is the dream I aspire to. The great North-South AtmoSwap. Birds will appreciate not needing to fly continents away every year. Maybe they’ll be able to settle down and start a culture.
Ok so pardon me for asking this stupid question, but my husband made me.
Not too long ago, we had a full moon here in Colorado. About 3 days prior, we had an almost full moon. At the time of this almost full moon, (husband says it was a sliver of a portion that was missing) he was watching the world cup and noticed the moon in the background. He claimed it was no where near as full as the moon we saw.
Now, the world cup is being played in Australia right? (Don’t laugh, I can barely spell Austrailia right without Google Chrome correcting me, so to know exactly where a sport that I don’t care for is being held is a bit out of my realm.)
So how is it that he saw an almost full moon here in colorado, when that same night he saw a slightly more than half moon on tv during the world cup.
Or is he crazy. Cuz I personally did not witness this phenomenon.
I’m no scientist, but I’d say it was because you guys are viewing the moon from a different angle to us.
it’s caused by the direction of the moon
Probably an optical illusion. The moon phase should look nearly the same from all places of the earth. Slide differences may occur due to different view angles, but I don’t think it could make a difference of “allmost full” and “slightly more than half”.
However, keep in mind that moon phases in South Afrika (where the World Cup is taking place) appear to be reversed. Waxing moon on the northern half is observed with the right site of the moon lighting up, whereas the left site is lit on the southern half. This is caused by the southern half people standing “upside down”.
Unless you have photografic evidence of your claims, I’d talk to your husband. Calmly. Don’t shock him. He may be wrong.
No one seems to understand what I mean here. I’m not talking about the orbital distance. To simplify things let’s take a rod and a light source. If you put the rod parallel to a the light the whole surface facing it is evenly lit. However if you tip the top of the rod slightly closer to the light source it’s going to experience more illumination than the lower section, even if it’s kept the same relative distance from the light source because the lower section will be further away from where it originally was. Maybe distance was a poor word choice when explaining the matter, I don’t know.
Actually, what Catz described makes complete sense. Since the moon being “full” or “half” or whatever between the two is defined by what angle we can observe it. The sun almost always illuminates half of the moon, (no atmosphere, low gravitational and magnetic force to make any noticeable light bending), but depending from what point on Earth you observe it, you can view part of the illuminated and part of the night area.
Don’t care for sports either, regardless if it’s in Australia or south Africa, it’s a long-ass distance from north America, on the opposite hemisphere. So it is very probable your husband saw it correctly (tough the proportions seem a bit weird, but still possible).
@ all the sun distance and stuff discussion
The thing you are trying to explain is that the angle the sun rays hit the surface change depending on the axial tilt. The closer this angle is to 90°, the more energy the surface absorbs during summer, otherwise some of the light rays just bounce off, not heating the earth up sufficiently. But as stated many times here, this is just 1 of the defining act of seasons.
Im too stupid for this game… i just walk around and watch as others repair the station
A piece of paper would have worked too. I don’t see why you so quickly jump to phallic examples. 
So let me get this straight:
You may not be talking about the orbital distance, but that’s why i mentioned it. Orbital variance spans ± 2,500,000 km to-and-from the Sun. The Earth’s radius is only 6,300 km. The way axial tilt affects the distance between sun-and-surface is [COLOR=‘PaleGreen’]negligible.
Note: I use the term Flux for how much of the Sun’s rays impact the surface, referencing magnetism. Astronomers like to use the term inclination. It’s never true noon at the poles, which explains their wintery predisposition.
Dicks everywhere.
Alright, I retract everything since I appear to have been using incorrect vocabulary.
What baconeggs means, I think, is that axial tilt causes sunlight to hit the surface at a different angle, and that causes seasonal changes.
So it’s x causes y causes z, not x causes z.
I believe that’s what he would need to have meant to be correct; not what he meant.
To make this game interesting to the eyes of the public we need something that relates to them. How about the average blue collared american?
This is all the result of some jokes about turning the moon in a space station :hmph:
A joke?! I was hoping you’re dead serious about your spaceship plans. :’(
Keep it quiet. I dopn’t have a patent for it yet. Maybe they believe it.
Yes, but what do you think happen to the axial tilt if you remove the moon?
Fuck all?
If you weren’t trolling before, you are now.
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.