Yö on saalistajan, päivät perhosten

Remember when Lil Nas X beautifully explored his sexuality, seduced and killed the devil to the banger of all time, and instead of cheering on this openly gay and proud Black artist for his artistry and fighting back against respectability politics, suddenly said respectability politics was all the Queerest Place on the Internet cared about? Hm. Wonder what happened there.

the city of los angeles

the city of new york

sex

how drinking alcohol works

how getting high works

how a child of any age speaks

how nuclear physics work

how [my job] works

how debilitating being shot in the shoulder is

how hypothermia works

things I have never before seen someone fake their way through writing about, until today:

SHRIMP COCKTAIL:

banahbanah: #flashback to that one fic where Peter Parker frets about drinking shrimp cocktail because of the alcohol

generaldeliciousness: adding: what a prawn/shrimp cocktail is

#why is your character turning it down because they're under 21 #do you think prawn cocktail is a cocktail #this lives in my brain rent-free constantly #the rest of the fic was so normal #and good enough that i'll still re-read it #but bro

And then many, MANY, people wondering if this was actually authour mistake, since Peter really would do this!

POMEGRANATES:

zhajhassa: #haha where's that post that was like someone describing someone eating a pomegranate but they ate it like an apple

thornhands: #once someone wrote persephone biting into a whole Pomegranate #had to stop and stare at a wall for a minute

sungsingsanguine: I once saw someone very confidently write about a character eating slices of pomegranate.

FRUIT TREES:

zagreuses-toast: #given a very endearing glimpse into a writers blindspots by seeing them describe someone sitting under a ''pineapple tree''

salatrash: I remember something about picking watermelons... OF A FUCKING TREE

baander: #cranberry trees

DOUGH/BATTER:

maycelium: #I'm a chef so I'm really used to people not accurately describing how to cook food #But I was surprisingly flabbergasted when someone was writing making a cake and was kneading it. Which uh #Not necessary for cake. It was interesting for sure but just bizarre

livebloggingmydescentintomadness: #the one that drove me nuts was when a character set aside a batch of PASTA DOUGH 'to rise' #pasta doesn't have yeast!! #it does need to REST but it will never RISE #you do not want an airy crumb on your noodles

lovesodeepandwideandwell: #THE ONE WHERE THEY MADE COOKIES BY LADLING BATTER INTO A TRAY

Some other topics:

People are roasting this person for asking a dumb question. But I think this is a valid query and the answer is actually pretty cool.

Unfortunately, you usually get a response like this.

This is accurate. But not very explanatory. "It's how light works" just feels a bit condescending.

We need to Bill Nye this shit.

The first thing you need to know is that light competes with light. And the brightest light is always the victor.

And this phenomenon is not specific to cameras. Our eyeballs also play in the light vs light competition.

Every person with a mobile phone has already seen this effect. What happens when you look at your phone on a really sunny day?

You can't see shit.

The sun is so overwhelmingly bright that it is reflecting light off the screen that is much brighter than the light being emitted from the phone.

However, newer phones are starting to have screens that are extremely bright. Up to 3000 nits in some cases. They are able to emit light brighter than the sun's reflection.

What happens to our eyes when we go outside on a sunny day?

Our pupils get as small as they possibly can. Smaller pupils let in a lot less light. And when they are that contracted, we can only register really really bright things.

But if we are in the dark, our pupils get super big. They allow in a bunch more light. And after we adjust to the dark, we can see really really dim things.

If our pupils stayed contracted and we looked at a starry sky, it would be as blank as the phone screen on a sunny day. You can even test this with an eye patch. Go into a very bright room and keep one eye covered for about 20 minutes. Then go outside and look at the sky with each eye. One eye will see stars and the other will not.

And this should give you a clue as to how light pollution works. Light bounces off stuff in the atmosphere. And when a city shoots a bunch of light upward, that light reflects back down and is much brighter than the stars.

The brightest light always wins.

Most stars are just incredibly dim. You need to be in a very dark environment in order to see them shine. You need them bigass pupils fully activated. And cameras need either a very large aperture (lens pupils), or a very long time interval to see them.

The sun is so so soooo bright. Many thousands of times brighter than distant stars. And the moon is also very bright. Especially if you are on or near the surface. The properties of moon dust, the regolith, are a near perfect diffuse reflector. Which is why astronauts struggled to see and photograph stars during their moon excursions.

If they opened up their camera apertures and did a long exposure, they'd just get a blank white frame.

There are dozens of photos in which that exact thing happened.

This is exactly what happens if you accidentally shine a flashlight directly into your eyes.

But it is a really cool ancient myth from one of Aristotle's essays written 2400 years ago.

And I think it is kind of neat that intellectuals from back then were trying to understand and figure out how light works. And it is impressive that a myth has lasted this long.

The problem is that the sky is a giant light source. A pretty bright one, in fact. People often forget that the sky is a giant hemisphere of scattered light because the sun is so overwhelming in comparison. It's just so much dimmer than the sun, it gets outshone on sunny days.

But you can see the sky being a light source on snowy days. If you look at photos of snow, you'll notice all the shadows are tinted blue.

That's the sky getting into the nooks and crannies where the sun don't shine.

So if you were deep in a well, you'd just see the blue sky.

HOWEVER, if you were to create a deep hole on the moon during lunar daytime, you could totally see stars. You'd be in a dark environment, your pupils would open up, there is no atmosphere to scatter light from the sun, and the glare of the surface wouldn't compete with the starlight.

Naomi is an anti-vaxx dipshit and not a great person.

But I think this question was asked in good faith and is also a perfectly valid query.

Moon nomenclature can be a bit confusing. People will reference the far side of the Moon and the dark side of the Moon and conflate the two.

From our perspective, there is a near side and a far side. The "near side" is always facing Earth. And people sometimes think the side facing away from us is also the "dark" side of the Moon.

But the far side is not always in darkness. Only when we see a full moon is it dark.

Astronomers have tried to update the terminology to lunar day and lunar night, but that hasn't really caught on as popular vernacular. It's hard to undo Pink Floyd's influence.

All of this is to say, it is easy for people to get confused about the far side of the Moon being illuminated by the Sun. It's quite common to imagine it as in perpetual darkness.

But lunar night is not completely in a void of darkness. The light from the universe does very dimly illuminate the lunar backside. And while traditional optics aren't easily able to see the Moon's butt, NASA does have a special UV camera that surveys the lunar night.

It's called the "Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project."

They love their clever acronyms.

I've seen people also confused about the lighting in this photo.

The Sun is directly behind the Moon, yet the left side seems to have light wrapping around to the lunar night side.

And the reason for this makes my light-loving heart full. Because light is light and it works the same way in space as it does in my studio.

This phenomenon is called "Da Vinci glow" or earthshine. The Sun is bouncing light off the Earth, and it is reflecting onto the side of the Moon. And even though it is usually too dim to see without a very long exposure, this eclipse was able to reveal it.

Here is what earthshine looks like to human eyes adjusted for darkness.

And here is a brightened, long exposure example.

It's literally just this on a cosmic scale...

There is also moonshine, which is more than just a legally dubious beverage.

You may have already seen an example.

The left is exposed as our eyeballs would see it. And the right is brightened with long exposure and a high gain setting.

The Sun is behind the Earth, but it is shining light off the Moon and giving very dim illumination to the night side.

The Moon is a big retroreflector. You have seen a different form of retroreflection when you are driving at night and the highway signs light up as you pass. Your headlights are shining directly back at you.

The special properties of Moon dust give it a near-perfect diffuse matte reflection. And when the Sun is in the right position, it acts similarly to our car headlights and the light shines back in our direction.

A studio reflector needs to be angled just right to shine the light exactly where you want it. The angle of the light is like a bumper shot in billiards.

The Moon scatters light in all directions like a typical matte surface.

However, a non-retroreflective matte reflection on a sphere typically has a bright center and then graduates into darkness around the edges. But the Moon's super matte retroreflection maintains brightness across almost the entire surface area.

So even though the Moon is quite small compared to the Earth, its regolith creates a powerful reflection of the Sun's light. You'd think a full moon would be twice as bright as a half moon, but this retroreflective surge makes the Moon roughly 10 times brighter.

In special cases when both astronomical bodies in a system are close to the same mass, both of them can become locked to each other, but in our case, the Earth is much more massive than the Moon. So the Moon is tidally locked to Earth, but Earth is not tidally locked to the Moon. If we were both locked to each other, like Pluto and Charon are, the Moon would only ever be visible from half of the Earth because one side of Earth would always be facing the Moon. And if anyone lived on the Moon and liked Pink Floyd, they might call one side of Earth the 'dark side' even though our day/night cycle would be the same as it is now.

iirc, all of our solar system's satellites that are large enough to be round—as opposed to asymmetrical lumps—are tidally locked to their planets. This happens more quickly when satellites are close to a higher mass planet, or when a planet is close to a star, which of course has a LOT more mass than the planet. It occurs more slowly with more distant objects, but eventually, in all systems with Large Thing A and Small Thing B, B will become tidally locked to A. And of course, in complex systems with many satellites and planets or even multiple stars, all of this becomes massively complicated.

Now, let's get to why this process is called 'tidal' locking, because it's pretty cool. We all know what tides are on Earth, but if you don't know what causes them, let me briefly explain:

The Earth, of course, exerts a gravitational pull on the Moon, which is what keeps it from flying off into space away from us. But the Moon also exerts a pull on the Earth, and this pull tugs on our oceans, causing a water bulge on the side of the Earth closest to the Moon:

[source]

The Sun also impacts ocean tides, as do a number of other things, so this is extremely simplified, but let's just go with it. As you can see, when the Moon pulls on one part of the oceans, the areas to either side get more shallow, and a corresponding increase in ocean depth occurs on the opposite side of the Earth from the Moon. Tides vary wildly depending on a million factors, including geography, but for reference, the highest tidal range—the difference between high and low tides—is in the Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia, where the mean (not most extreme) range is 11.7 meters, or 38.4 feet.

And of course, because the Earth is rotating through day/night cycles while the Moon orbits us, the bulges of high tide effectively travel around the Earth, trying to 'follow' the Moon. There is a slight lag, because nudging all that water isn't going to happen instantly:

[source]

Okay, so we've got ocean tides, but the Moon doesn't have any oceans, so why the term 'tidal locking?'

If the Moon exerts a pull on the Earth's oceans that's strong enough to deform them like this, then what kind of pull must the Earth exert on the Moon? Turns out, the pull of massive objects on smaller objects can be so strong that Large Thing A will deform the very substance of Small Thing B, just as the Moon deforms our oceans (the smaller objects also deform the larger ones, but the effect is much smaller).

So, back before the Moon was tidally locked to Earth, the Moon's surface would have bulged and stretched in a way that's similar to our ocean tides (incidentally, stretching and squishing a giant ass rock creates a lot of friction—a process called tidal heating, which is responsible for geologic activity on astronomical bodies like Jupiter's moon, Io). As the Moon rotated (spun on its axis), it was also orbiting (rotating around) the Earth, and through insanely complex math that I don't understand, the constant deformation of the Moon effected its rotation until it got to where we are now, with one rotation, or day/night cycle, for every orbital period.

And like I said, the same process has happened—and will happen—to stars and planets and satellites all over the universe.

So yeah, that's why we only see one side of the Moon from Earth.

@thatlittleegyptologist

Closest match: Mya arenaria isolate MELC-2E11 chromosome 1 Common name: Soft-Shell Clam