Search the FAQ Archives

3 - A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M
N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z
faqs.org - Internet FAQ Archives

[sci.astro] General (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (2/9)
Section - B.11 Why does the Moon look so big when it's near the horizion?

( Part0 - Part1 - Part2 - Part3 - Part4 - Part5 - Part6 - Part7 - Part8 - Single Page )
[ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index | Zip codes ]


Top Document: [sci.astro] General (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (2/9)
Previous Document: B.10 Are the planets associated with days of the week?
Next Document: B.12 Is it O.K. to look at the Sun or solar eclipses using exposed film? CDs?
See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge
	Steve Willner <swillner@cfa.harvard.edu>

The effect is an optical illusion.  You can verify this for yourself
by comparing the size of the Moon when it's on the horizon to that of
a coin held at arm's length.  Repeat the measurement when the Moon is
overhead.  You will find the angular size unchanged within the
accuracy of the measurement.

In fact two effects contribute to making the Moon slightly *smaller*
on the horizon than overhead.  Atmospheric refraction compresses the
apparent vertical diameter of the Moon slightly.  A really precise
measurement will reveal that the horizontal diameter is about 1.7%
smaller when the Moon is on the horizon because you are farther from
it by approximately one Earth radius.

The Sun, incidentally, shows the much same effects as the Moon, though
it's a *really* BAD idea to look directly at the Sun without proper
eye protection (NOT ordinary sunglasses).  The change in apparent
angular diameter is, of course, less than 0.01% instead of 1.7%
because the Sun is farther away.  (See the next entry.)

The probable explanation for this illusion is that the "background"
influences our perception of "foreground" objects.  If you've seen the
"Railroad Track Illusion"---in which two blocks of the same size
placed between parallel lines will appear to be different
sizes---you're familiar with the effect.  The Moon illusion is simply
the railroad track illusion upside-down. For some reason, the sky
nearer the horizon appears much more distant than the point directly
overhead.  The explanation for this apparent difference in distance is
not known, but an informal survey by one of the authors (CJW)
indicates that all people see this distance difference.  The
explanation for the Moon illusion is then that when we see the moon
"against" a more "distant" horizon it appears larger than when we see
it "against" a much "closer" one.

Additional evidence in support of this idea is the behavior of
"afterimages."  An afterimage of a constant size can be impressed upon
the human eye by staring at a light bulb for a few minutes.  By
projecting the afterimage on a sheet of white paper, the size of the
afterimage can be varied by changing the eye-to-paper distance.  A
similar effect is seen with the night sky---an afterimage projected
toward the horizon appears larger than one projected toward the
zenith.

 Much more extensive discussions are available in 

 * The Planetarian, Vol. 14, #4, December 1985, also available
   at <URL:http://www.griffithobs.org/IPSMoonIllus.html>; and
 * Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 27,
   p. 205, 1986.

User Contributions:

1
Keith Phemister
Sep 13, 2024 @ 11:23 pm
Copied from above: If the Universe were infinitely old, infinite in extent, and filled
with stars, then every direction you looked would eventually end on
the surface of a star, and the whole sky would be as bright as the
surface of the Sun.
Why would anyone assume this? Certainly, we have directions where we look that are dark because something that does not emit light (is not a star) is between us and the light. A close example is in our own solar system. When we look at the Sun (a star) during a solar eclipse the Moon blocks the light. When we look at the inner planets of our solar system (Mercury and Venus) as they pass between us and the Sun, do we not get the same effect, i.e. in the direction of the planet we see no light from the Sun? Those planets simply look like dark spots on the Sun.
Olbers' paradox seems to assume that only stars exist in the universe, but what about the planets? Aren't there more planets than stars, thus more obstructions to light than sources of light?
What may be more interesting is why can we see certain stars seemingly continuously. Are there no planets or other obstructions between them and us? Or is the twinkle in stars just caused by the movement of obstructions across the path of light between the stars and us? I was always told the twinkle defines a star while the steady light reflected by our planets defines a planet. Is that because the planets of our solar system don't have the obstructions between Earth and them to cause a twinkle effect?
9-14-2024 KP

Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: