Close ups 💫
NASA

No title available

No title available
hello vonnie
Jules of Nature
Cosimo Galluzzi
Misplaced Lens Cap
dirt enthusiast
Stranger Things
noise dept.
wallacepolsom

izzy's playlists!
No title available
h
ojovivo
trying on a metaphor

oozey mess
Three Goblin Art
we're not kids anymore.
Today's Document
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from Netherlands

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Brazil

seen from United States

seen from Australia
seen from Slovakia

seen from Italy

seen from Germany

seen from United States

seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
@ginger-snaps014
Close ups 💫
Fun fact. Nothing can stop you from finding the oldest art your friend has ever made on their blog and reblogging it.
@mushr0oms-and-m0ss you shouldn't have reblogged this. Do you know what I'm going to do now? Do you know what you've done?
OH GOD
"Medieval Christians would have gone nuts for protons, neutrons, and electrons for trinity reasons" sounds like a jokey oversimplification historypost but I cannot really articulate how true that is. They would never shut up about it.
RIP St Thomas Aquinas you would have loved atomic physics
actually hate that the bodys response to anything is nausea. ate too much? nauseous. ate too little? nauseous. an imaginary threat got you scared? be nauseous. on your period? you guessed it. sawed into your hand and need to go to the emergency room? perhaps throwing up into your open wound will be of help
being The Horror Friend means sometimes people will ask me what movies ive seen recently, if ive seen that new horror movie that just came out, etc, and lately i just dont have the heart to tell them that outside of work ive been doing basically nothing but doing puzzles and watching columbo. just me and my lovely little grandma style existence.
I feel called out by this.
Just switch in Midsummer Murder for Columbo
SOUND ON.
Just imagine this but from a man who hasn't seen sunlight in centuries.
We would fully accept any Japanese buckaroo
Foreigners will never understand how someone like Rawhide Kobayashi would immediately become a beloved local fixture in whatever small American town he ended up in.
every single time someone pulls the "How would you AMERICANS like it if someone came to AMERICA and" reversal, the answer is always "we'd fucking love it"
@kurtwagnermorelikekurtwagnerd
Your tags summed up the exact feeling I had about this
I just Googled the Swedish-Japanese guy in the OP, and according to this interview, his Japanese name was given to him by the master gardener he was apprenticed under:
“The family name ‘Murasame’ was given to me by my master. The given name ‘Tatsumasa’ is a combination of ‘dragon’ (tatsu), the [zodiac] year when I was born, and one character from my master’s name,” says Murasame."
So I think maybe it's less like naming yourself 'Brandon McFreedom' and more like moving to the states to work under a veteran car mechanic named Bud McLean, and then having him turn to you after a few years on the job, and say "Son, it's time for you to become an American so you can open up your shop. And when that day comes, I think the world should know you by a new name: McLeo GM Corvette."
Named by his superior by conventions one would apply to a super chill stray cat
[ID: A vehicle's Toyota decal that has been modified with legs, claws, and eye stalks to look like a crab. End ID]
Krab
god forbid 5000 year old girls do anything
holy shit bronze age pro sheep bone gamer girl
this is hilarious but also im gonna cry like this teenage gamer died and they buried her with her high score. no one took back the pot or divided it up because no one would play against her again. her family and friends buried her with her wins. im crying
happy dracula crawling down the walls of his castle in the manner of a lizard day to all who celebrate 🦎🎉
People are roasting this person for asking a dumb question. But I think this is a valid query and the answer is actually pretty cool.
Unfortunately, you usually get a response like this.
This is accurate. But not very explanatory. "It's how light works" just feels a bit condescending.
We need to Bill Nye this shit.
The first thing you need to know is that light competes with light. And the brightest light is always the victor.
And this phenomenon is not specific to cameras. Our eyeballs also play in the light vs light competition.
Every person with a mobile phone has already seen this effect. What happens when you look at your phone on a really sunny day?
You can't see shit.
The sun is so overwhelmingly bright that it is reflecting light off the screen that is much brighter than the light being emitted from the phone.
However, newer phones are starting to have screens that are extremely bright. Up to 3000 nits in some cases. They are able to emit light brighter than the sun's reflection.
What happens to our eyes when we go outside on a sunny day?
Our pupils get as small as they possibly can. Smaller pupils let in a lot less light. And when they are that contracted, we can only register really really bright things.
But if we are in the dark, our pupils get super big. They allow in a bunch more light. And after we adjust to the dark, we can see really really dim things.
If our pupils stayed contracted and we looked at a starry sky, it would be as blank as the phone screen on a sunny day. You can even test this with an eye patch. Go into a very bright room and keep one eye covered for about 20 minutes. Then go outside and look at the sky with each eye. One eye will see stars and the other will not.
And this should give you a clue as to how light pollution works. Light bounces off stuff in the atmosphere. And when a city shoots a bunch of light upward, that light reflects back down and is much brighter than the stars.
The brightest light always wins.
Most stars are just incredibly dim. You need to be in a very dark environment in order to see them shine. You need them bigass pupils fully activated. And cameras need either a very large aperture (lens pupils), or a very long time interval to see them.
The sun is so so soooo bright. Many thousands of times brighter than distant stars. And the moon is also very bright. Especially if you are on or near the surface. The properties of moon dust, the regolith, are a near perfect diffuse reflector. Which is why astronauts struggled to see and photograph stars during their moon excursions.
If they opened up their camera apertures and did a long exposure, they'd just get a blank white frame.
There are dozens of photos in which that exact thing happened.
This is exactly what happens if you accidentally shine a flashlight directly into your eyes.
But if we ever have a moon mission during lunar night, those astronauts are in for a starry treat. They won't have any atmosphere to absorb starlight. So they'll be able to see the Milky Way, in all its glory, with just their naked eyes.
also, apparently, when you are at the bottom of a deep well during daytime, and the sun is NOT directly in line-of-sight over it, you CAN see the Stars.
I really hope this doesn't come off as embarrassing, but this is actually a myth.
But it is a really cool ancient myth from one of Aristotle's essays written 2400 years ago.
And I think it is kind of neat that intellectuals from back then were trying to understand and figure out how light works. And it is impressive that a myth has lasted this long.
The problem is that the sky is a giant light source. A pretty bright one, in fact. People often forget that the sky is a giant hemisphere of scattered light because the sun is so overwhelming in comparison. It's just so much dimmer than the sun, it gets outshone on sunny days.
But you can see the sky being a light source on snowy days. If you look at photos of snow, you'll notice all the shadows are tinted blue.
That's the sky getting into the nooks and crannies where the sun don't shine.
So if you were deep in a well, you'd just see the blue sky.
HOWEVER, if you were to create a deep hole on the moon during lunar daytime, you could totally see stars. You'd be in a dark environment, your pupils would open up, there is no atmosphere to scatter light from the sun, and the glare of the surface wouldn't compete with the starlight.
Aristotle was on to something, he just chose the wrong celestial body.
Naomi is an anti-vaxx dipshit and not a great person.
But I think this question was asked in good faith and is also a perfectly valid query.
Moon nomenclature can be a bit confusing. People will reference the far side of the Moon and the dark side of the Moon and conflate the two.
From our perspective, there is a near side and a far side. The "near side" is always facing Earth. And people sometimes think the side facing away from us is also the "dark" side of the Moon.
But the far side is not always in darkness. Only when we see a full moon is it dark.
Astronomers have tried to update the terminology to lunar day and lunar night, but that hasn't really caught on as popular vernacular. It's hard to undo Pink Floyd's influence.
All of this is to say, it is easy for people to get confused about the far side of the Moon being illuminated by the Sun. It's quite common to imagine it as in perpetual darkness.
But lunar night is not completely in a void of darkness. The light from the universe does very dimly illuminate the lunar backside. And while traditional optics aren't easily able to see the Moon's butt, NASA does have a special UV camera that surveys the lunar night.
It's called the "Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project."
They love their clever acronyms.
I've seen people also confused about the lighting in this photo.
The Sun is directly behind the Moon, yet the left side seems to have light wrapping around to the lunar night side.
And the reason for this makes my light-loving heart full. Because light is light and it works the same way in space as it does in my studio.
This phenomenon is called "Da Vinci glow" or earthshine. The Sun is bouncing light off the Earth, and it is reflecting onto the side of the Moon. And even though it is usually too dim to see without a very long exposure, this eclipse was able to reveal it.
Here is what earthshine looks like to human eyes adjusted for darkness.
And here is a brightened, long exposure example.
It's literally just this on a cosmic scale...
There is also moonshine, which is more than just a legally dubious beverage.
You may have already seen an example.
The left is exposed as our eyeballs would see it. And the right is brightened with long exposure and a high gain setting.
The Sun is behind the Earth, but it is shining light off the Moon and giving very dim illumination to the night side.
The Moon is a big retroreflector. You have seen a different form of retroreflection when you are driving at night and the highway signs light up as you pass. Your headlights are shining directly back at you.
The special properties of Moon dust give it a near-perfect diffuse matte reflection. And when the Sun is in the right position, it acts similarly to our car headlights and the light shines back in our direction.
A studio reflector needs to be angled just right to shine the light exactly where you want it. The angle of the light is like a bumper shot in billiards.
The Moon scatters light in all directions like a typical matte surface.
However, a non-retroreflective matte reflection on a sphere typically has a bright center and then graduates into darkness around the edges. But the Moon's super matte retroreflection maintains brightness across almost the entire surface area.
So even though the Moon is quite small compared to the Earth, its regolith creates a powerful reflection of the Sun's light. You'd think a full moon would be twice as bright as a half moon, but this retroreflective surge makes the Moon roughly 10 times brighter.
If the Moon weren't such a dusty bitch, moonlight would be dimmer and that nighttime photo of the Earth may not have been possible.
The other night husband and I were watching a documentary about the yeti where they were doing DNA analysis of samples of supposed yeti fur, and every one of them came back as bears.
Anyway, the next night we watched a thing about some pig man who is supposed to live in Vermont. People said it had claws and a pig nose but walked upright like a man. Now, I happen to know that sideshows used to shave bears and present them as pig men. So every piece of evidence they gave of this monster sounds to me like a bear with mange.
So now the running joke in our house is that everything is bears. Aliens? Bears. Loch Ness monster? Bear. Every cryptozoological mystery is just a very crafty bear.
Bears. They’re everywhere. Be wary. Anyone or anything could be a bear.
oh shit
As the OP of this post, I’m going to threaten that if this gets to one million notes by the 10 year anniversary on 1 June 2026, one year from today, I will get a lower back tattoo of the loch ness bear monster.
At time of posting, this is at 711.6k notes
29 Days Remain
......suddenly struck by the idea for a piece of worldbuilding of "fae don't like iron bc it is the most stable element*"
*as in elements higher you can extract energy via fission and lower you can extract energy via fusion but iron itself there is no excess binding energy to extract at all
YOU. YOU SEE MY VISION.
People: exposure to the fae realms makes you weak and sickly. Because of the fae
The fae: wow wow wow i LOVE uranium!!!! We should put it ALLLL over our land!!! This won't cause problems!