Nothing too serious, i want to hear your petty, your eccentric, your off beat takes.

  • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Have you seen them outside of light pollution? I’m not saying they’re draw-by-the-numbers, but there’s a ton of relevant stars that aren’t visible to 75% of the global population from home. You can count the stars of the little dipper to gauge your light pollution. It has 7 stars. If you can’t see at least 6, you’re missing most of the bears

    • Octavio@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I’ve literally seen my own shadow from the starlight (new moon, clear sky, remote Utah desert), and I agree with that guy. I don’t see how they get all those shapes.

    • agent_nycto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Which would make sense if I also didn’t see pictures of the constellations and some of these formations still don’t look like the thing they say they are.

      • No1@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Have they altered shapes since they were first named?

        I know precession has a 26000 year cycle, but no idea if the stars that make up those signs are moving relative to one another.

        • agent_nycto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Maybe where they are in the sky but I’m pretty sure the shape hasn’t changed much. I’m not an expert though.