Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 9:11:17 GMT -5
yeah, the traffic is going to suck in the totality zone.
i'm planning way ahead for 2024 -- I can stay with my family, so that's taken care of, but I'll get plane tickets well in advance and plan on taking vacation then so I don't have to drive anywhere that day or the days before and after.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 21, 2017 10:39:03 GMT -5
I'm in a place that is supposed to see 99.7% coverage.
That's not good enough for me, so I'm making the ultimate sacrifice to drive an entire 20 minutes away to get to 100%.
It'll be a long, likely dangerous journey. But, it's a risk I'm willing to take for history.
Wish me luck, friends.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 12:21:05 GMT -5
May the force be with you. The museum was INSANELY crowded. They didn't limit ticket sales, so by the time I got there with my advance ticket, the line to the viewing terrace was so long I might not get in before the thousand person cut off. (Yes, they did limit that.) So, I'm in the park.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 21, 2017 16:29:01 GMT -5
It was really freaking cool. Glad I made the short drive. My friends who stayed in town didn't get to see the 100% total eclipse, therefore couldn't look at the spectacle without their glasses. That's a shame, because it was really neat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 16:37:08 GMT -5
It was cool to see the moon cover most of the sun, but it didn't get dark or anything at 75%, so I missed that experience. (The sun is so bright that even with most of it covered, you have full daylight. A partial eclipse, even 75% is really not at all the same thing. Still, cool to see. I'm glad I got the glasses, because I never would have known it was happening otherwise!
But assuming I'm alive in 2024, I'll have a free backyard seat with my family in 100% totality zone! I can wait. Neither my brother or my mother lives in an area with tall buildings, so I should have a nice unobstructed view, complete with convenient bathroom and snack facilities, and no driving!
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Aug 21, 2017 17:14:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Don on Aug 21, 2017 18:33:51 GMT -5
We were traveling into Yellowstone on the 98% line, so we picked a pullout on the Shoshone River, had a snack, and watched a tiny crescent creeping around the edge of the moon. We were gifted with a couple pairs of eclipse glasses by the guy who filled our propane at the campground, a big improvement over the pinhole camera I made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2017 19:54:13 GMT -5
Yeah. My six year old nephew knew not to peek at the sun. We were traveling into Yellowstone on the 98% line, so we picked a pullout on the Shoshone River, had a snack, and watched a tiny crescent creeping around the edge of the moon. We were gifted with a couple pairs of eclipse glasses by the guy who filled our propane at the campground, a big improvement over the pinhole camera I made. I lent my glasses to a very sweaty biker for a few seconds so he could get a look near the peak time. He'd thought he'd be able to snag a pair in the last day or so, and it was pretty impossible. So he'd given up. But lucky him, he struck up a conversation with me.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 22, 2017 7:30:56 GMT -5
Yeah, lucky him...
*rolls eyes*
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 7:53:59 GMT -5
One is always lucky to meet me.
But in all seriousness, not everyone in New York would chat with a stranger, much less a sweaty one, much less when it's a woman meeting a strange man, much less would they take off their eclipse glasses during peak totality and hand them to the stranger so the stranger could check it out.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 22, 2017 12:36:06 GMT -5
You don't need the glasses during peak totality, silly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 12:52:33 GMT -5
You don't need the glasses during peak totality, silly. You do if peak in your area is 75%, as it was in NYC. I know you don't need it at 100%, but anything less, and it will blind you. The sky was just as bright at 75% as it was with no eclipse, so you'd notice no difference at all -- you saw no difference at all without eclipse glasses, and if you tried, you'd be blind. With eclipse glasses, you could see that the sun was only a tiny crescent. ETA: To tell you the truth, I was a wee bit disappointed that it didn't get just a smidge darker. I knew it wouldn't get dark as it does in the 100% zone, but I thought it would get just a wee bit darker, like maybe a cloud moving over the sun. But no. It was just as bright 75% covered as it was normally. ETA: There is probably another science-y term that applies when you are in an area where you are not in the 100% zone to describe the point at which the maximum amount of sun is covered by the moon. But I don't know what that term is. I figured I'd already said I wasn't in the 100% zone, so y'all would know what I meant and I didn't need to type out the whole cumbersome sentence. If you want to tell me the term I should use, I shall be delighted to use it.
|
|
|
Post by Angie on Aug 22, 2017 14:43:16 GMT -5
Apparently, looking directly at the sun during an eclipse is "perhaps the most impressive thing any president has ever done."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2017 15:31:48 GMT -5
You know what would be even more impressive? Standing in front of a speeding train. Or leaping off a cliff. Don't be intimidated by those elitist science types telling you you'll die if you do that. Show them who's boss!
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Aug 22, 2017 17:01:55 GMT -5
You don't need the glasses during peak totality, silly. You do if peak in your area is 75%, as it was in NYC. If you're in an area of 75% coverage (magnitude), then by definition you are not in an area that achieves "totality" because you are only viewing a partial solar eclipse rather than a total eclipse. I'm not sure either. Maybe it's the zenith? My only point was that there is no "totality" in a partial solar eclipse.
|
|