MHB Sun Circumference - A Picture on 04/18/2010

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vi Nguyen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circumference Sun
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a photograph taken on 04/18/2010, where the user attempts to calculate the sun's circumference based on the image. To achieve accurate calculations, a metric reference is necessary, such as a ruler or an object of known size, but the sun's distance complicates this. Suggestions include using the properties of the camera and its pixel resolution for measurement, provided that relevant details are known. The user acknowledges cropping the picture, which limits visibility of potential reference objects like trees. Accurate calculations require both visual references and camera specifications for verification.
Vi Nguyen
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I took this picture on 04/18/2010, and I thought that I see the sun circumference. I just wonder can I calculate the physics and mathematics equations to figure out what is it that I am seeing in this picture. I stood from Earth standpoint, and I took this picture at noon time of the day.
 

Attachments

  • sun 3.png
    sun 3.png
    43.8 KB · Views: 131
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Vi Nguyen said:
I just wonder can I calculate the physics and mathematics equations to figure out what is it that I am seeing in this picture. I stood from Earth standpoint, and I took this picture at noon time of the day.

For calculations we need some kind of metric reference.

Usually a picture is taken with some kind of ruler in the display at the same distance as the object we're interested in.
Or otherwise an object of known size.
That won't work in this case of course as the sun is a bit too far away for that.
We can compensate if we know the distance of the ruler from the camera.
In this case it would help if those trees at the bottom would actually be inside the picture, and if we know the distances between those trees, and the distance of those trees to the camera.

Alternatively, we can combine the properties of a camera with its pixel resolution into a measurement.
We still need to know these properties then.

Preferably we have both, so can verify we got the correct numbers.
 
You are right, I cropped the picture, that is why you can't see clearly the two trees on each side as a reference. The full picture is as show below:
 

Attachments

  • suncircumference1.png
    suncircumference1.png
    32.7 KB · Views: 109
I have been insisting to my statistics students that for probabilities, the rule is the number of significant figures is the number of digits past the leading zeros or leading nines. For example to give 4 significant figures for a probability: 0.000001234 and 0.99999991234 are the correct number of decimal places. That way the complementary probability can also be given to the same significant figures ( 0.999998766 and 0.00000008766 respectively). More generally if you have a value that...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
16K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K