Night Sky Tracker (Horvitz)

 My husband bought this for me years ago when I was interested in astronomy. I put it on the shelf, under other books (never a good thing). Recently I rearranged all my shelves and decided to go through the book. Half of it is a logbook but the first half is quite informative. Those pages are what I will be narrating from. My goal is half a chapter. We shall see. I have only a short amount of time this morning for reading. So, let's get to it!

A Brief History of Astronomy

From the dawn of time, people have believed that the sky, movement of the planets and stars were of major importance to their livelihood. Astronomy is the oldest science and yet it is still evolving. 

Ancient Astronomy

In the beginning there was no distinction between astrology and astronomy- the belief that the stars and planets impacted lives directly and the scientific study of stars and planets. Comets and such phenomena were taken to mean there would be negative occurrences on the earth (earthquakes, plague, etc.). Even into the Middle Ages, astrologers were also astronomers. 

Astronomy developed independently on various continents, taking on various forms, mythological to scientific. Archaeology backs this by physical findings just about everywhere that people tracked the stars and planets. In China, during the Shang Dynasty, there was a calendar of 360 days that tracked the solar and lunar phases. The Egyptians went one further and devised a 365-day calendar. 

Later in history, observation met philosophy and Aristotle declared the universe was a finite (limited) sphere with Earth at the center. This was a geocentric universe theory. The Greek-Egyptian Ptolemy stated that the Earth was the center of universe, and as such, the Sun and planets revolved around it. He made a list of 48 constellations that are still used today, with some revision.

The Copernican Revolution

In the 15th century Nicolas Copernicus wrote a book titled On the Revolution of Heavenly Bodies. In this work, he refuted the geocentric universe theory and instead advanced a heliocentric theory; that the Sun is the center of the universe and all revolve around it. This meant that the Earth was "just another planet" (third rock from the Sun) and that the stars and other planets appeared to revolve around it because the Earth itself was in motion. In addition, he put forth the idea that the stars and planets seemed to be brighter at different times in direct relation to the distance it was from the Earth. 

Copernicus did not answer all questions, such as if the Earth was in motion, how did objects on the Earth stay put and not fly off? He also understood that his ideas were in contradiction to the Catholic Church, so he was careful to state them as theories, not fact. At first, his theories made little difference but in the late 16th century the observations of others finally overthrew the geocentric theory.

There is an illustration of the Copernican model with the planets orbiting the Sun. 

Tycho Brahe and the Supernova

In the 16th century Tycho Brahe was a mathematician studying to become a diplomat. But he was in a duel (over a mathematical argument) in which he lost part of his nose. His major notable accomplishment was his observations of the constellation of Cassiopeia in 1572, in which there was an explosive birth of a new star. His well documented observations have helped many astronomers searching for evidence of other supernovas. He did however still believe in the geocentric universe theory. 

The Secret World of Weather (Gooley)

 Last time I ended with Gooley saying that it used to be that a forecast more than 2 days was crazy to believe (quite unreliable, and that upsets people) but more recently we have 10-day forecasts that aren't too bad (not 100% accurate but way better). I will pick up at the bottom of page 5 today. 

This development of accurate forecasts (with the help of advanced technology) has caused two problems (a disconnect) for us. It has led us to believe the weather itself cannot be its own forecaster and that the weather is detached from the land.

One noticeable thing is that tv and internet forecasts give us an unrealistic image of weather. On tv and the internet we often see large swirls of "weather" covering entire regions, when in reality it could take one many hours to even travel the region. We experience weather on a smaller scale.

When in conversation with a meteorologist, if they speak of showers, Gooley asks pointedly if it will rain in his backyard. The meteorologist will laugh of course because he knows that even with all the technology they have today, they still struggle to pinpoint where a predicted shower will fall. If they don't know the landscape personally or well, they will just kind of give up on that attempt altogether because they understand that even with all the computers put together they still cannot accurately determine exactly where. So, a 48-hour forecast was deemed impossible in the 1800s and yet with our extended forecasts today, the weather man still cannot give precise localized weather forecasts (small scale).

But we don't have this problem. With the use of our senses we are able to determine where rain will fall later, locally. First, the weatherman is trying to cater to thousands of people, in many counties. We only are concerned with our local area, which doesn't generally cover huge tracts of land. Second, the weatherman is looking at the atmosphere whereas we are looking at it as a person on the ground. So by being sensitive to the land a person can definitely learn the secrets of the weather that machines cannot.

The Secret World

The landscape shapes the weather. Machines can detect the factors that will affect the weather over large land masses but not when there is a change in landscape. All aspects of "weather" fluctuates as one walks even a short distance, up or down a hill, from one side of a tree to the other. If you mention this to a meteorologist they may get pedantic and say, no that's microclimate. But whatever they may call it, it is the weather we actually experience. 

The landscape we live in is actively shaped by the weather and the weather in turn is shaped by the landscape. Example: a wooded area is generally known for more rainfall. It allows the trees to grow, which in turn leads to more rain. He even says the rain we feel changes from one tree to another. 

A small flat island has different weather from a larger hilly one. From the air, you can even see the difference in color from one side to the other. One any day you may see sunbathers on the dry coasts of the Canary Islands and then rain-soaked plants on the opposite side. 

He talks next about Swiss Jura where on the two sides of a 2600 foot high ridge the climate is so drastically different it is like what we normally find traveling 625 miles across and/or 3000 feet in altitude in one single step. This proves that weather is and can be very different over very small spaces.

Another example of the extreme differences that can be detected in small areas is the juniper bush of the temperate zones of both the US and Europe. On the north side it can be as different from the south side as if we traveled 3000 miles, but it's just a few yards difference really. 

These are not theoretical or merely academic facts and figures. We can figure the average and probable weather conditions from the microclimate, but it also dictates the weather. These are our clues and with them we can learn to recognize and predict changes in weather. 

On a walk in early December, Gooley stepped into heathland from under some pines, expecting a chill in the air. He experienced just what he expected and saw some iced puddles, whereas in the wooded areas and grasslands it was not as cold. This is because heathland loses heat quickly at night resulting in cooler temperatures than surrounding land. He says we'll learn more about why it loses heat in the next chapter. 

Meteorologists are aware of these vast fluctuations and position their 'meters' at heights that will avoid them. It is ironic that those who forecast the weather go to such measures to avoid the very things that we actually experience when it comes to weather. They have perfected (well, made great strides toward this) predicting and understanding "big weather" and it has definitely proven its worth but they have also shortchanged us into thinking of weather as much bigger than it is where we actually are. 

In this book we will look at our local landscapes, towns and cities, in the hills and trees. Much will overlap with the big weather of the meteorologists but most are nestling in our small, local landscapes. It is the secret world of weather.

I have stopped before the next subheading of The Blocking High on page 9. 

The Secret World of Weather (Gooley)

This narration is over pages 3-5 of The Secret World of Weather by Tristan Gooley.

 

It was Thursday in September in South Downs. There was a breeze and sunshine and the sea was a dark dull band in the distance. Looking at the oak tree, it was clear the weather would hold. How could he tell? There were "several clues and two signs" that told and we can know their secrets. 

Weather forecasts have a bad name and it started with FitzRoy. He was a "weather pioneer" in the Royal navy and coined the term "forecast" but his reward was criticism every time he was wrong. Unfortunately, FitzRoy didn't take that too well; he took his life in 1865.

It is unfortunate and even at the time, no one believed there was enough evidence to suggest someone could predict what the weather would be like for the next 48 hours. But 100 years later we had weather 'forecasts' all the time, even while there were still many doubters. Someone else said that there was very little accuracy for a forecast beyond 24 hours. 

And today? It takes mere seconds to find forecasts worldwide for days on end. How is this? We didn't actually get any better at reading the signs. We do have four advantages however in our time: more accurate and plentiful data, better machines, a better understanding of weather, and faster communication. 

Communication is actually quite important to this. It is of no use to anyone if an accurate forecast be made  for today or tomorrow but it takes two weeks to get to anyone! There had been the practice of hoisting cones up to let people know of gales but it would take entirely too much hoisting to send a message across a vast expanse. 

An example is given of a gale that rose off the coast of Ireland and forty-four sailors died as a result. The storm had been predicted but sadly the news hadn't reached so far as the islands off the mainland. 

Even today with our ten-day forecasts, it is a struggle. They are more reliable at about five or six days but begin to be doubtful after that. Just a couple of decades ago a forecast beyond a couple days would have been unbelievable whereas today, we can fairly trust a five-day forecast. There are improvements! But we still have more to make. 

A Note on the Teaching of School Science (1928)

 Another from the Parents' Review Articles 'archive' - still working on the subject of science. 

Over at the AmblesideOnline Forum we are reading through some of the Parents' Review Articles. 

The article that we are planning to read/discuss is "A Note on the Teaching of School Science" from 1928. Come over and participate in the conversation!

The article is fairly short, only taking a few minutes to read. I've recorded it as well. You can find it here. 

Cultural Value of Science (1920)

Over at the AmblesideOnline Forum we are reading through some of the Parents' Review Articles. 

The first article that we are planning to read/discuss (2023) is Cultural Value of Science from 1920. Come over and participate in the conversation!

I have recorded this in sections for those who would like to hear, perhaps while you read. (I am very much an amateur at recording.) 

Section 1 recording 

Section 2 recording 

Section 3 recording