Unraveling the Mystery: Why Stars Blink but Planets Don't

AI Thread Summary
Stars appear to blink due to their status as point sources of light, which means that atmospheric disturbances affect all the light from them uniformly, causing twinkling. In contrast, planets are extended sources, so small atmospheric disturbances impact different parts of their light differently, resulting in a more stable appearance. When viewed through a telescope, planets can show variations due to atmospheric conditions, but they generally appear steady to the naked eye. The analogy of looking through water illustrates this concept: a single point moves with the water, while a larger object remains relatively stable. Understanding these differences clarifies why stars twinkle while planets do not.
DanicaK
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Why do the stars blink, but the planets do not?
I need good explanation, please!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Stars are point-sources because they are so far away. All the light coming from them passes through one path, and any atmospheric ripples cause all the light from them to be affected similarly, so we see twinkling. Planets are small from our vantage point, but they are still extended sources, so small disturbances in the atmosphere do not affect all of the light reflected off them in exactly the same way. If you look at them through a telescope, you will see the effects of "seeing" (observational astronomy term for atmospheric steadiness), but naked-eye, they appear pretty stable.
 
Imagine looking through the water of a swimming pool to a point in the bottom.
As the water moves the single point will move around - like a star
But for a body on the bottom - individual points of the image of the body will move but the average position of the whole body (if it is larger than the size of the waves) will stay in the same place.
 
Tnx!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top