toomanypancakes@crazypeople.online to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-22 days agoWhat's your entirely unimportant and inconsequential hot take?message-squaremessage-square650fedilinkarrow-up1239arrow-down12file-text
arrow-up1237arrow-down1message-squareWhat's your entirely unimportant and inconsequential hot take?toomanypancakes@crazypeople.online to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish · edit-22 days agomessage-square650fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareagent_nycto@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·21 hours agoWhich 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.
minus-squareNo1@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·11 hours agoHave 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.
minus-squareagent_nycto@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·7 hours agoMaybe where they are in the sky but I’m pretty sure the shape hasn’t changed much. I’m not an expert though.
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.
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.
Maybe where they are in the sky but I’m pretty sure the shape hasn’t changed much. I’m not an expert though.