Help To Map Light Pollution 152
jcgam69 writes "October 1 marked the first day of the Great Worldwide Star Count, a half-month citizen science project that will harness thousands of observers across the globe to help map light pollution."
Here ya go: (Score:5, Funny)
Done.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Can I use the flash on my camera? It's pretty dark out here.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Now I do my part: I live in Hong Kong and the only star I could see all these years is that red dot behind the moon, probably Mars.
Now you can check Hong Kong as the complete star-seeing blind spot in your map. Thanks.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:5, Funny)
You can see behind the moon from Hong Kong?
Re:Here ya go: (Score:5, Funny)
Geez, the level of basic science knowledge here at /. is downright scary...
This can mean only one thing: (Score:2)
We've been infiltrated by Muslim jihadists! [slashdot.org]
Re:Here ya go: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2, Funny)
If you cannot see the night sky clearly, then you'll miss that meteor headed strait for your Linux box.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your eyes see better in the dark when they've adjusted and when you move from really bright to dark places.. or vice versa, it takes your eyes a while to adjust. At night, you shouldn't have to do this. This is a safety issue.
It's a waste of energy.
It effects animal migrations.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:4, Interesting)
As a kid I could watch the stars just by laying on the beach by our house. I remember when we moved to england I wondered why the sky didn't have as many stars, and that was in the seventies. I just wasn't fun to look at. Now I know of only one spot near where I live that I can get even a slightly better view, and to get there is a two hour walk across the countryside, then the view is, well, not great.
I don't even live in a city.
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Re:Here ya go: (Score:4, Informative)
-New observatories will be put on planes. (like NASA's SOFIA project) [1]
So, all it really means is amateur astronomers can't collect the best data. Which is bad, I agree, but
-in terms of scientific progress, is about as bad as not putting the latest scientific journal publications in high schools
-affects my life less than "noise pollution".
Yeah, mod me down, but someone had to say it.
[1] Before anyone else can do it: "Enough is enough! I have *had it* with these m/f'ing observatories having to go on m/f planes!"
Re:Here ya go: (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if the facilities here aren't cutting edge, what if the next Galileo would have been born here but never gets into Astronomy because the facility was made useless just by people pointlessly sending light into the sky?
Re:Here ya go: (Score:2)
Who is going to man those planes and observatories in the middle of nowhere if kids today cannot look up at the night sky in wonder?
Noise pollution is bad too, but the light pollution is a double insult since much of it comes from streetlights being powered by MY tax dollars.
It's just sad in general how many people have no real idea what the sky should look like at night and have no idea why our galaxy would be called the Milky Way. The vast night sky isn't JUST a pretty sight, it's sight has a way of imparting a much better sense of perspective. It has in the past inspired everyone from ancient philosophers to Van Gogh to Douglas Adams. I doubt that a uniform dingy pink glow will ever do as much.
Check out IDA (Score:3, Informative)
Goals
1. Stop the adverse effects of light pollution on dark skies, including
* Energy waste and the air and water pollution caused by energy waste
* Harm to human health
* Harm to nocturnal wildlife and ecosystems
* Reduced safety and security
* Reduced visibility at night
* Poor nighttime ambience
2. Raise awareness about light pollution, its adverse effects, and its solutions
3. Educate everyone, everywhere, about the values of quality outdoor lighting
4. Help stop other threats to our view of the universe, such as radio frequency interference (RFI) and space debris.
There are a bunch of very interesting articles on how less exterior lighting gives better visibility, roughly speaking because floodlights don't really light up everything and end up blinding you more than general darkness with point illumination.
Troll? (Score:2)
But really. I grew up at the tip of the Baja peninsula, and I now live in St Petersburg, FL. Darkness is good for your brain, man. It's difficult to describe the pain of not being able to be outside in the dark and see the stars. It's very abstract, and unless you've been out away from cities for a significant period of time--I think a month, at least--it's difficult to appreciate.
Same goes for noise pollution. And pollution pollution. When I came to the US, I spent a couple weeks in Riverside, CA. I went into Vernon, an industrial district of LA, with my friend Jon for one day. As we entered the city, I could feel the air entering my lungs, it was so thick. After 8 hours in Vernon, we left, went to dinner, and got to the place we were crashing. Some of the people in the group went out, but I didn't feel well, so I laid down. That night, I slipped into a hallucinatory high fever. Way way way better than TV. Anyway, the fever lasted a week in a half, and the rattling cough lasted 3 months.
Now, light pollution is less serious than that, but I'm sure it accounts for at least part of my depression living in St Pete. Which is why I'm moving.
Um. (Score:3, Informative)
Am i missing exactly why the stars light pollution keeps us from seeing would be a more useful measure than simply the brightness of light emitted?
Re:Um. (Score:2)
Luke SkyGazer: No I won't. Try harder.
Re:Um. (Score:2)
That said however I'm sure they could calculate how many stars aren't visible due to light pollution using some math/science type thing but perhaps again it's because by making a big deal out of it it's easier to bring people's attention to the issue.
Re:Um. (Score:2)
In the 30 seconds that I used the program Starry Night, I remember that it already had a feature where you could show what the night sky looks like with different levels of light pollution, which I'm guessing is a simple mathematical calculation, and you could feed it as input data that we already have from satellites.
So yeah, I don't see the point of the project.
That'd help (Score:2)
It's not just that simple, but I think light pollution could be better calculated using that and some algorithms. One thing to take into account is elevation, at higher elevations the same amount of light visible from space wouldn't equal the light pollution. With less atmosphere to go through, more light will pass into space so the satellite will record a higher value than the same lights at a lower elevation, while less will actually be reflected back to the ground by the atmosphere so there will be less light pollution. Also let's say you are looking at a normal street lamp. Without a special hood, a lot of the light goes up into the atmosphere at various angles, but not straight up. If the satellite was directly overhead, it would not count all the light pollution produced by these lights.
Re:That'd help (Score:2)
Word though.
Seems Like a Cool Idea (Score:3, Interesting)
A few 1000 observers will offer very little resolution, considering the fact that light pollution is very localized. I live in the middle of an urban area, but can drive a few miles to see 10x as many stars.
Re:Seems Like a Cool Idea (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Seems Like a Cool Idea (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Seems Like a Cool Idea (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Seems Like a Cool Idea (Score:2)
Pfffft! That's not a map, THIS [nasa.gov] is a map!
Notable sights to observe:
The first and foremost site to see is the Nile river (solid white line in the dark desert of top-right Africa)
Trans-Siberian railway (connecting Eastern Europe to the Pacific)
The ~4000 year old Silk Road trade route (arch from the Mediterranean to China, below Trans-Siberian railway and above India)
North Korea (black hole above) South Korea (white box left of Japan)
The all-roads-lead-to-rome effect web centered on Moscow (Moscow being the bright central white dot east of Europe)
The (in my opinion amusing) almost perfect square grid tiny dots of apparently pre-planned development in the very center of America
And of course the game counting how many blobs you can pin down as specific named cities.
-
Inaccurate... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Inaccurate... (Score:2)
To be a little more clear, if you can only find one or two stars of the constellation, you give it a 1; if you can find the main stars, a 2, and so on, up to the highest rating, which represents "too many stars to count." This might not sound accurate, but it's enough for what they're trying to do, which is get a good idea of how dark the night sky is in various parts of the world.
Re:Inaccurate... (Score:2)
1. If it's "rural areas where no one lives", then where will the light pollution come from? Last I checked, deer and squirrels weren't lining up to buy Halo 3.
2. You're not asked to count all the stars, you're asked to count a constellation and compare your numbers to a magnitude chart. And if someone misses a star they should have seen, that's what we call "experimental error".
3. If it's cloudy, DO IT TOMORROW.
Oh, and if there's a link, RTFA. It'll save your fingers in the long run.
Can someone clue me in? (Score:2)
Tm
;)
Re:Can someone clue me in? (Score:2)
Gets out extremely heavy duty cluestick.... (Score:2)
Do you feel more enlightened now?
Re:Can someone clue me in? (Score:2)
Support the idea but ..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Support the idea but ..... (Score:2)
Assuming the intended area of illumination is actually well illuminated. It can easily be the case that the light in question isn't actually of much use. Even to the point where not having it at all is actually an improvement.
How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
You're ahead of your time.
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
I might also suggest hopping on a boat and going out a few miles from the coast. A few years ago, I kayaked out about 2 miles to a small island off the coast of Maine with a couple friends. We were the only people on the island that night (occupancy limited to 6 I think due to size) and we could see an unbelievable number of stars, satellites, planets, you name it.
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
North of Monument Valley (Score:5, Informative)
Bring a good car, several maps, one map which shows BLM Land. camping supplies, plenty of gas, food and water. You'll be in the middle of nowhere, so always make sure you have enough gas.
Head North on Highway 261, go through Monument Valley, head towards Natural Bridges National Monument [google.com]. Monument Valley is one of the most famous places in the world, yet you can stand on the side of the road without seeing anyone for 30 minutes.
Drive 4000-feet up the side of a cliff on a crazy curvy old Uranium Road [google.com]. This area is called the 'Gooseneck State Park [utah.com]. When you get to the top, stop and look back south over the valley--- you can see quite far.
Head north until you leave Gooseneck. This is BLM land. You can drive on any road, find a nice spot and camp. Wait until the nighttime, and check out the stars.
This is one of the most remote places in the US-- millions of stars. I remember it being so dark, and the stars were so bright that I could see faint shadows from the starlight.
This has got to be ... (Score:2)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
Of course there's also no guarantee that the most silent place on Earth I've been is going to be the least lit but I'd say there's a fair chance.
In all honesty the clearest skies I've seen have always been in Canada and not even necessarily terribly far from Ottawa which isn't the biggest of cities but small enough not to particularly pollute the night sky badly it would seem, or perhaps my perception of what a perfect night sky is like is blurred by the fact I've never or rarely seen it but either way it was a million times better than anywhere here in England!
Re:How Timely -- Some Advice Please (Score:2)
The Navajo Nation has it's own Parks and Recreation department, with some special rules. Check in with the Visitors Center. The local tour companies in Kayenta may also provide information also:
http://www.navajonationparks.org/htm/monumentvalley.htm [navajonationparks.org]
http://www.kayentatownship.com/ktctourist2003.html [kayentatownship.com]
Hey, don't ask me (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hey, don't ask me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hey, don't ask me (Score:3, Funny)
(sorry, just could not resist)
here in Flagstaff . . . (Score:2)
Definitely lots of stars here! And still NINE planets! :-)
Re:here in Flagstaff . . . (Score:2)
Re:here in Flagstaff . . . (Score:2)
You mean eight planets, and a binary dwarf planet, [wikipedia.org] right?
Editors... (Score:2)
Worse... or Better? (Score:2)
The original title makes it sound like the task is pretty much done by the time you've read it; much like "Thousands Rally in DC."
The new title seems more like a plea for us to chip in on the project. I think it's an improvement.
Science is too tough (Score:3, Funny)
Anthropogenic light pollution a media creation (Score:3, Funny)
Laugh. It was funny.
In My Area... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's either that or armed guards, and electric is cheaper.
motion sensors? (Score:3, Insightful)
- light when you need it (i.e. somebody is in the vicinity. Heck, the light suddenly popping on has more effect than the light being on continuously)
- no light when you don't need it (makes the light-pollution people happy)
- lower electricity bill
down sides..
- initial cost (couple bucks)
- initial installation (screwdriver and some healty common sense when it comes to dealing with electrical wiring)
Re:In My Area... (Score:3, Insightful)
The idea that more light = safer is false. In some ways, it actually allows criminals to plan how they're going to break into something. Not to mention, if a light is always on, most people just ignore it whereas if a light is triggered by motion it will attract a lot more attention.
Re:In My Area... (Score:2)
I agree with alien88 and so does the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ, FBI and other U.S. and British government agencies. This page [att.net] has a nice summary of the studies including:
Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising -- A Report to the U.S. Congress http://www.ncjrs.org/works/index.htm [ncjrs.org] This lengthy report has several references to lighting and crime which indicate that lighting's effect on crime is inconclusive. See chapter seven. These statements are contained in its conclusions: "We can have very little confidence that improved lighting prevents crime, particularly since we do not know if offenders use lighting to their advantage. In the absence of better theories about when and where lighting can be effective, and rigorous evaluations of plausible lighting interventions, we cannot make any scientific assertions regarding the effectiveness of lighting. In short, the effectiveness of lighting is unknown."
Having been the victim of a couple of car break-ins because we didn't have the outside lights on While I'm on the topic of Post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning, could it be also that less light pollution would lead to more people out at night enjoying the milky way (and other wonders) and therefore less crime? I force criminals in my back garden to either use a flashlight or risk tripping over all the junk I have back there. Why give them a convenience light? [wikipedia.org]
Re:In My Area... (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering a lot of light pollution is mostly a matter of inefficiency... Since you think it's a choice between light pollution and crime, I have to assume that you think that shooting vast amount of light into the sky somehow feeds the moon god, who in turn stops crime out of gratitude.
Seriously, a big part of the problem is with street lights that don't point all of there light toward the ground. Sure, a really well lit ground will bounce some light back up, but some lights literally just shine right up into the sky.
Also, in many cases excessively bright lights are used, which results in pools of blinding brilliance with pools of pitch black between them. In that case, the solution to make people feel safer is not to make the light brighter, but more even (and possibly dimmer) so that you can't hide in the harsh shadows.
'Glare bombs' make it easier for criminals (Score:2)
i.e. if a passerby's pupils have shrunk to the size of pinholes because of a glaring light, their ability to see their feet, let alone a criminal, will have disappeared for several minutes. The same if they're driving by: they're less likely to see criminals by a house or moving creatures (deer, dogs, running children) by the road. [And then there's how the deer will also be blinded (more than humans for a given glare bomb).]
Re:In My Area... (Score:2)
Poorly though out lighting can actually encourage crime. Since it enables the criminals to see what they are doing, be their intention theft or vandalism.
It's either that or armed guards, and electric is cheaper.
Another alternative would be a car alarm. One which flashes the internal and external lights on the vehicle will draw people's attention to it without very well illuminating anything valuable which might be inside.
Re:In My Area... (Score:3, Interesting)
-It's too dark to find our neighborhood. Unless you know it's here, the blazingly bright apartment complexes a mile down the road look like way better targets.
-It's too dark to see what you're doing. Are you breaking in to a pinto, or a lexus? If there's no moon, it's tough to tell.
Seriously though, just *having* a light on doesn't do anything more than give a thief a well lit work environment. I took this picture http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1400894628&size=l [flickr.com] on the way home from a trip to New Jersey. You're looking at SE Michigan, in the metro Detroit area. There are hundreds of thousands of lights in that picture that are shining straight up, wasting energy and brightening the night sky.
I'll start. (Score:2)
Do I win something? What's my motivation for pointing this out?
Also, does anybody want to buy a Celestron Nextar SLT 130 telescope? I've seen as much of the moon as I care to view.
Re:I'll start. (Score:2)
Re:I'll start. (Score:2)
Re:I'll start. (Score:2)
Count from Beijing, China (Score:3, Interesting)
The solution: burn coal (Score:4, Funny)
This demands immediate action! (Score:3, Funny)
/removes tongue from cheek
Pffftt.... (Score:2)
Personally, I stopped using map-lights years ago - is there a way I can claim retro-carbon credits for that...?
There's a whole lotta stars around here (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe it has something to do with the Navy base to the South, or the other Navy base to the East, or the Air National Guard base to the East, or the regional airport to the North...
Um. Not to put too fine a point on it (Score:2)
Re:Um. Not to put too fine a point on it (Score:2)
Serious question... (Score:2)
Now I'm fairly ignorant on the subject I'll admit and please, please feel free to correct me, but if everything we do somehow injures the environment then wouldn't that insinuate that we're some form of blight on this planet? It just seems sort of unfair that no matter what we do we'll always be the "bad neighbor" in the ecosystem. I suppose it all comes down to how much of the environment we're willing to sacrifice to advance our species technologically.
I'd appreciate opinions on the matter or any corrections to my statements you may have.
Re:Serious question... (Score:2)
However, the view is that as we seem to have become intelligent and aware enough to know what impact we are having on what is - at least as far as we know - an incredibly unique ecosystem, we should act on this in any way we can. If environment was put before profits, bonuses, high paid city bosses, politics and greed, we would probably be a rather clean, low-polluting organism. It just so happens that all those factors slow down our adoption of said technologies.
Having said that, it could be said that without profits, bonuses, high paid city bosses, politics and greed, we would have waited a lot longer for the scientists and technology to have a proper platform to investigate climate change.
Say you had a blank planet, simcity style, and could start again; wouldn't you just put an absolutely giant solar array and/or wind array covering a huge 'reserved' area of land to cater for a lot of people for a long time? Surely that solves an immediate problem of once it's been built, they never pollute again... at least not as much as a coal plant.
Re:Serious question... (Score:2)
Light pollution is a similar case, it's perfectly possible to dramatically reduce it's effects whilst retaining the benefits light bring to us with the bonus that our night time view of the sky is not ruined.
Re:Serious question... (Score:2)
In a way it's sort of a vicious cycle - the more people to support, the more intensive we are to provide that support, which increases both the direct and indirect pollution we cause.
In a balanced world, we would get up with the sun and go to bed with the sun; you wouldn't need intense lighting after dark. Those who live in the extreme north and south should move to a more temperate area. That's great, except that there are too many of us to do that (that overpopulation thing again).
By the way - if someone from US congress or administration is reading...your new DST is an utterly useless waste of time. Thanks to the new DST, I spend an extra hour in the morning with the lights on, and an hour less an night. Good call on saving energy. Not. More like a good waste of time and effort to change the date.
Re:Serious question... (Score:2)
Personally, I think this whole light pollution thing that crops up from time to time is crap. If you want to see stars, get in your car and drive away from cities-- no big deal! Why be an ass and try to force everyone to turn off their lights, that they pay for, because you want to have things your way? This may come as a shock to most of the people who complain about this "issue", but there are large, large swathes of the United States and Canada that are entirely uninhabited! (The vast majority of Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico for instance.) Hell, I live in a pretty populus west-coast state at the cutting edge of industry and technological development, home to Boeing, Microsoft and Amazon, and it's mostly empty. Drive an hour and a half from Seattle in virtually any direction and you're in the clear.
Re:Serious question... (Score:2)
Yes, but the entire point of my post is:
YOU CAN!
Look, I'm sorry that you live in New York and have to drive a long way to see the Milky Way. That's just one of those things you have to cope with when you choose where to live, I guess. But even if you do live in New York, you still have the option to go somewhere and see the Milky Way. Hell, if anything, making it a rare event makes it more meaningful.
I guess I just don't get the big deal. On my list of "problems that we should fix", this one is way towards the bottom.
No need for this really (Score:2)
Re:No need for this really (Score:2)
Light offset credits (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm Vegas alone could pay for NASA's budget every year. I'm liking it.
Re:No light pollution problem here! (Score:2)
Re:No light pollution problem here! (Score:2)
Re:Hawaii Big Island solution (Score:3, Informative)
The stargazing on Hawaii is even more spectacular. However, the best stargazing I've ever done was from a little island on a tiny atoll several hundred miles west of Hawaii. Since there isn't anything resembling civilization nearby, it was about as black as one could imagine, as it was before moonrise. The night sky is completely chock full of dim lights that we have no hope of seeing when there is any ambient light at all. It really is amazing.
Re:insensitive clods (Score:2)
Re:insensitive clods (Score:2)