From the Bruce Willis, Walt Disney film "The Kid": …
"The moon sometimes looks orange when it rises because the light has to travel through more of the atmosphere than when the moon is high in the sky. The blue light waves scatter but the red light waves make it through."
What is wrong with this explanation that appears just before the credits at the end of the film?
"The moon sometimes looks orange when it rises2 The moon often appears orange when high in the sky. The moon does not always appear orange when low in the sky. In fact the term "often" used above actually means "less often" -as in:
The light from the moon appears orange less often than it appears uncoloured after passing through the atmosphere, regardless of the declination or parallax.
The reason the moon appears orange is that the atmosphere has less light to diffract and refract than the sun has, when it is passing through water or ice the refraction and diffraction is the same as with sunlight passing through water.
When sunlight passes through water, the majority of the blue light is returned to the surface or fails to penetrate it.
The next most refracted and diffracted is green, then yellow, then orange then red. Red light penetrates to absorption at depths as great as 200 or 300 feet.
It is the same with red sunsets. Overhead the sunlight also refracts and diffracts but it recurves to the ground if it can. All light is able to pass through the air. It's just at the horizon that the red sunset/rise phenomenon is most noticeable, as the recurve takes place both under the horizon and behind the observer.
With the the first, the line of sight is obstructed and with the second the observer is not looking behind him.
If you face east, north or south east during a red sunset, the sky is only very lightly tinged with pink.
The blue light does scatter more easily but then it also returns a lot faster. Which is why during the day whatever the weather, the light tends to even itself out.
Moreover, light is red-shifted when it passes through matter, thus there is more red light when it passes through a clear medium such as gas, liquids and liquids. (More noticeably for glass than for air.)
In fact the greenhouse effect is that light passing into a greenhouse from outside is unable to pass back out through the glass; having red-shifted to a frequency that is unable to pass through glass….
I would like to take this opportunity to dispute the Hubble Effect of so called red-shift in stars.
It has been mooted by others before Edwin Hubble, that the reason that stellar light appears to be red-shifted is that the stars so optically affected are moving (I am not sure in which direction; towards us or away from us.) This supposition is the reason that some idiots consider the age of the universe is calculable.
It is just as likely that the shifting is due to the light passing through water. This would allow the biblical account to explain the depth of "the watery deep" (Genesis chapter 1 KJ version) as heavenly as well as allowing a more plausible explanation for Novas.
Novas would then fit in to the biblical concept of stars lasting forever.
Take away my religious predilections and I still have a more viable alternative to cosmogony than contemporary science. Do I not?
Consider the unlikelihood of the solar atmosphere being magnetic. Magnetism falls off with temperature. Every one knows that -except astronomers.
Another thing the dick-heads don't realise is that there is no gravity in the middle of the sun.
You don't have to believe me. Just go and look up "solar atmosphere" and "magnetism"
"The Sun is the star at the center of the Solar System. It is almost perfectly spherical and consists of hot plasma interwoven with magnetic fields.
….ts surface temperature of approximately 5778 K (5505 °C)"
And this is from another site:
"This tells you how the magnetic flux changes with respect to temperature. -0.20 means that if the temperature increases by 100 degrees Centigrade, its magnetic flux will decrease by 20%.
Tcurie is the Curie temperature at which the magnet will become demagnetized. After the temperature drops below this value, it will not behave as it did before it reached that temperature. If the magnet is heated between Tmax and Tcurie, it will recover somewhat, but not fully (it is not recoverable)."