Why Were Planets Visible to Ancient People but Not Us?

[ebos]

Lucivaldo: Perhaps you think the planets look like, well, like the planets we are shown on photos from telescopes, ie; Jupiter with a red spot, Saturn with rings, etc, etc., but, no, the planets all look basically the same as the stars. There are a few slight differences, however. Mars is noticeably redder, Venus is quite bright and so is Jupiter (depending on their distance from us, of course) and they move very slowly across the sky. You need to watch them and track them for several weeks in order to notice any apparent movement. Also, don't forget, the ancients watched and kept very close track of the stars daily for thousands of years. Their movement was extremely important to their religions and their religions were often passed down to other empires. The stars were first observed by the Sumerians and their charts and observations were later seamlessly adopted by the Akkadians, Egyptians and Babylonians among many others. The movements of the stars, planets, the moon and the sun was so important to these peoples' religions that their kings would be executed according to what phase and position the moon was in for example (until the kings finally smartened up). The rising of the star Sirius usually coincided with the annual flooding of the Nile River and when, because of the precession of the equinoxes (look it up), it failed to rise on time eventually, it caused complete havoc and revolution among the Egyptians because their whole religion needed to be rewritten. So, like the man says, "Keep on looking up."

 

[1oldman2]

Okay then, this is a pretty good example.

 

[1oldman2]

Here is mercury, a good example of a "star" wandering.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Here is mercury, a good example of a "star" wandering.
View attachment 103930

Nice picture but it is not 'as seen'. The clouds would have moved much more than Mercury during the time for the multiple exposures.
I am still having to come to terms with the difference between the astrophotographs that get published and what you actually see. Lots of scope for artistic expression - even if it's just the false colour that's used to accentuate the features of astronomical objects.

 

[1oldman2]

Nice picture but it is not 'as seen'. The clouds would have moved much more than Mercury during the time for the multiple exposures.
I am still having to come to terms with the difference between the astrophotographs that get published and what you actually see. Lots of scope for artistic expression - even if it's just the false colour that's used to accentuate the features of astronomical objects.

Very good point, thanks.

 

[analogue]

Let's be honest...Why were planets visible to the ancient people and not to us humans any longer? Is it because the planets distanced? How can some planets distance themselves while others don't? It's said that light pollution has affected the visibility of planets in the sky, whereas there still reports of people seeing at least one planet in the sky. So how come ancient astrology was on right before the telescopes?

Have you read Newton? Copernicus? Here is a book written actually for entertainment purposes, but is educational as well http://www.gutenberg.org/files/52709/52709-h/52709-h.htm#Page_466 I've posted a link starting with the chapter on Astronomy. Title of book is Popular Scientific Recreations, by Gaston Tissandier, I didn't check the pub. date but it is over a century old at least. Here is another GREAT book: Copernicus, Brahe, all of the greats are in here http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2298/2298-h/2298-h.htm it gives pretty good descriptions of the hows whys wheres and whatnots. You have a curious and inquiring nature, which is a sign of INTELLIGENCE. It asks questions as to how and why. This tells us you are not a dolt and simply toss up your hands and don't care. What concerns me personally is the fact you simply tossed the question out there, but haven't researched for the answers on your own. The answers are not hidden in some obscure and lofty database accessible only by using a special key, or permissions or need a credit card to access via a paywall. The BEST books are free, as the newer ones are so conciliatory and like to dangle the answers using obscure and confusing terminology, just the way Soros likes it, only the elites are supposed to know these things, it seems (don't knock me, my uncle wrote the stuff for SCANs, so I know more about it than your regular person might)
The last link I supplied you even goes into details of Newton's younger days :""In the house where he lodged there were some female inmates, in whose company he appears to have taken much pleasure. One of these, a Miss Storey, sister to Dr. Storey, a physician at Buckminster, near Colsterworth, was two or three years younger than Newton and to great personal attractions she seems to have added more than the usual allotment of female talent. The society of this young lady and her companions was always preferred to that of his own school-fellows, and it was one of his most agreeable occupations to construct for them little tables and cupboards, and other utensils for holding their dolls and their trinkets" Isn't that the cutest thing??

There are TONS of easy to read, yet not dumbed down titles in Gutenberg, MAKE USE OF THEM.

Sign me, Girl Fascinated with Science