Determine the least value of declination of stars so that stars can be seen?

AI Thread Summary
To observe stars, they must be above the horizon, with their declination determining visibility based on the observer's latitude. At the equator, all stars with declinations from +90º to -90º are visible at some point in the year. Moving 20º northward limits visibility to stars with declinations no lower than -70º, as the South celestial pole dips below the horizon. Continuing north to the North Pole results in all stars with negative declination being permanently obscured. The declination and right ascension of a star remain constant over short periods, though they can change over long timescales due to proper motion and precession.
nicolauslamsiu
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
For stars to be observed in a certain place, the stars must be at a position above the horizon. Yet, how to determine the least value of declination of stars so that stars can be seen?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Imagine that you are observing from a point on the equator. All stars are visible at some time of the year, having any declination from +90º to -90º. Now, imagine you move your observatory 20º to the North. The South celestial pole will also dip by 20º below your horizon, and with it, all the stars having a declination more negative than -70º... If you continue moving your observatory to the North, you will reach the North pole, from which any star with a negative declination is permanently below the horizon, and can't be observed.

I believe that this description is better than a formula...
 
ok...get it...one more question:
the declination and R.A. of a star on a certain day is given.
is it possible to find the declination and right ascension of a star some days after?
 
Both declination and right ascension are fixed celestial coordinates, and they don't change in days... In the long term, they do, because of proper motions and the precession of the equinoxes, but -for normal use- they can be considered as fixed.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
How does light maintain enough energy in the visible part of the spectrum for the naked eye to see in the night sky. Also, how did it start of in the visible frequency part of the spectrum. Was it, for example, photons being ejected at that frequency after high energy particle interaction. Or does the light become visible (spectrum) after hitting our atmosphere or space dust or something? EDIT: Actually I just thought. Maybe the EM starts off as very high energy (outside the visible...
Back
Top