Why do stars twinkle?

Svetti Arss

Why?

MrStuffins

Because the angels sprinkle them with fairy dust!

Fart

They're winking at you.

tommyhaas

Its the light from the star refracting in the atmosphere

FreudianSlippers

Look up stellar scintillation.

It's to do with the turbulence of the winds in the atmosphere.

Red Hand

For the same reason that kittens have whiskers, the wind whispers and Santa has gonorrhea

Svetti Arss

tommyhaas wrote: »

Its the light from the star refracting in the atmosphere

If that's the case then why doesn't the Moon twinkle?

af_thefragile

They don't twinkle if you view them out in space...

starlit

They are like diamonds that shine and sparkle. Its just light reflecting them.

af_thefragile

Svetti Arss wrote: »

If that's the case then why doesn't the Moon twinkle?

Its too bloody big to twinkle!

Here's a wiki answer:

Why do stars twinkle but not planets?

Both objects in the sky are bright, circular discs. The light from a star enters the pupil of our eye and comes to a focus as a point at the back of the eye. If that light is followed backwards to the star, it forms a cylindrical bundle the size of the pupil but gradually widening as it nears the star. But so gradual is this widening that even at the edge of the atmosphere, 100 km up, the bundle is still about the same as the pupil say half a cm across. This is so narrow that wind currents of different temperature and refractive index can disturb the light and cause the star to twinkle. A planet is so much nearer that at the edge of the atmosphere the bundle is a disc metres across. The light from the planet that forms our image of it comes from hundreds of different pathways in this bundle and it is unlikely that many will be disrupted at the same time. The amount of disturbance is therefore much less and the planet appears as a steady point.

biko

Because we have nominated the word "twinkle" for the apparent change in light intensity caused by atmospheric changes to stars.

Cookie_Monster

because you touch yourself at night

Canis Lupus

tommyhaas wrote: »

Its the light from the star refracting in the atmosphere

What ^^ said.

Want a semi interesting fact? Stars are so far away, the light you're looking at set out years ago and a star that you see in the sky may already have gone bang but the light of the explosion just hasn't reached us yet.

karlog

There are no stars. It's a government conspiracy, what you see at night is one big hologram covering up whats really out there, which is the truth..............out there..........the truth............THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!

admiralofthefleet

why does my bollox stick to the inside of my leg on a warm day?

xoxyx

Hey - stars have to blink too y'know.

af_thefragile

Canis Lupus wrote: »

What ^^ said.

Want a semi interesting fact? Stars are so far away, the light you're looking at set out years ago and a star that you see in the sky may already have gone bang but the light of the explosion just hasn't reached us yet.

That's from the watchmen!!

jackiebaron

Because they are actually burning and hence give off different and varying degrees of light....like the sun.
Planets and satellites (like the moon) are not burning. They are just chunks of rock that don't twinkle because all they are doing is reflecting light shone upon them by a sun/star.

A candle twinkles but a football illuminated by a flashlight doesn't.

Monty Burnz

Canis Lupus wrote: »

What ^^ said.

Want a semi interesting fact? Stars are so far away, the light you're looking at set out years ago and a star that you see in the sky may already have gone bang but the light of the explosion just hasn't reached us yet.

That's not semi-interesting, it's fascinating. The fact that you can actually pop outside today and look through a telescope at what a distant galaxy looked like a billion years ago....:eek:

TeddyTedson

jackiebaron wrote: »

Because they are actually burning and hence give off different and varying degrees of light....like the sun.
Planets and satellites (like the moon) are not burning. They are just chunks of rock that don't twinkle because all they are doing is reflecting light shone upon them by a sun/star.

A candle twinkles but a football illuminated by a flashlight doesn't.

But the SUN doesn't twinkle, or does it. Maybe it's just so bright it doesn't appear to.
Is it as simple as this?

Canis Lupus

af_thefragile wrote: »

That's from the watchmen!!

Bill Bryson A short History of Everything actually. :P

Monty Burnz

jackiebaron wrote: »

Because they are actually burning and hence give off different and varying degrees of light....like the sun.
Planets and satellites (like the moon) are not burning. They are just chunks of rock that don't twinkle because all they are doing is reflecting light shone upon them by a sun/star.

A candle twinkles but a football illuminated by a flashlight doesn't.

Um...how can I put this politely...the correct answer is earlier in the thread

Canis Lupus

Monty Burnz wrote: »

That's not semi-interesting, it's fascinating. The fact that you can actually pop outside today and look through a telescope at what a distant galaxy looked like a billion years ago....:eek:

It's mind blowing really just didn't know if people feel the same kinda of awe I feel when I'm lucky enough to be out in the country on a clear moonless night and just look up.

tommyhaas

Svetti Arss wrote: »

If that's the case then why doesn't the Moon twinkle?

Its down to the size, same reason planets dont twinkle. If a planet is close enough to the horizon it can twinkle as your line of sight cuts the atmosphere at quiet a small angle, hence more refraction. Its for this reason that stars/planets close to the horizon cant be relied upon for celestial navigation

ascanbe

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

why does my bollox stick to the inside of my leg on a warm day?

Because the angels sprinkle them with fairy dust.

Cookie_Monster

Canis Lupus wrote: »

It's mind blowing really just didn't know if people feel the same kinda of awe I feel when I'm lucky enough to be out in the country on a clear moonless night and just look up.

It'd be mind blowing if you could see stars as they are now, not x thousand + years ago

Someone go and invent warp drive already

Lando Griffin

TeddyTedson wrote: »

But the SUN doesn't twinkle, or does it. Maybe it's just so bright it doesn't appear to.
Is it as simple as this?

I dont know,
I will have a look in the morning.

knird evol

This optical illusion is caused by the chemical reaction of oxygen and californium
in the atmosphere of the Star as these molecules combine thus giving off super strings causing the Twinkle.
The degree of twinkle is measured in 'edels' on a scale of 1 to 14

Svetti Arss

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Bill Bryson A short History of Everything actually. :P

A short history of nearly everything actually..

Brilliant book highly recommended.

Red Hand

knird evol wrote: »

This optical illusion is caused by the chemical reaction of oxygen and californium
in the atmosphere of the Star as these molecules combine thus giving off super strings causing the Twinkle.
The degree of twinkle is measured in 'edels' on a scale of 1 to 14

Dr Edel was the first person to discover this and has done extensive research on Twinkle Theory.

Canis Lupus

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Bill Bryson A short History of Everything actually. :P

He stole it off Watchmen! :pac:

jackiebaron

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Um...how can I put this politely...the correct answer is earlier in the thread

Venus doesn't twinkle at sunset. Why would the distance that the light travels have a bearing upon how the atmosphere interferes with that light?

af_thefragile

Monty Burnz wrote: »

That's not semi-interesting, it's fascinating. The fact that you can actually pop outside today and look through a telescope at what a distant galaxy looked like a billion years ago....:eek:

A photograph of the universe looking back approx 13 billion years into our universe's past.
http://walkaboutblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/hubble_ultra_deep_field1.jpg

Every spec of light you see is an entire galaxy containing more than a billion stars.

FreudianSlippers

jackiebaron wrote: »

Venus doesn't twinkle at sunset. Why would the distance that the light travels have a bearing upon how the atmosphere interferes with that light?

It's not just distance, it's light source.

A star is a single light source, whereas light from a planet is already a reflection there are multiple sources of light from the same "dot"

Monty Burnz

af_thefragile wrote: »

A photograph of the universe looking back approx 13 billion years into our universe's past.
http://walkaboutblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/hubble_ultra_deep_field1.jpg

Every spec of light you see is an entire galaxy containing more than a billion stars.

If you could get every fundamenalist religious person, and every power-hungry materialist to look at that picture and understand its implications, you'd have world peace at a stroke.

fontanalis

Svetti Arss wrote: »

If that's the case then why doesn't the Moon twinkle?

Somethign to do with it reflecting the suns light.

Monty Burnz

fontanalis wrote: »

Somethign to do with it reflecting the suns light.

It actually does 'twinkle' - if you look at it through a powerful telescope, you will see the surface details shimmer and wiggle around now and then due to the same atmospheric effects that cause stars to twinkle. It's just a lot easier to see in stars because they are a point light source.

fontanalis

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It actually does 'twinkle' - if you look at it through a powerful telescope, you will see the surface details shimmer and wiggle around now and then due to the same atmospheric effects that cause stars to twinkle. It's just a lot easier to see in stars because they are a point light source.

It's twinkle, twinkle littler star, not twinle, twinkle little moon. Are you disagreeing with a classic nursery rhyme?

tommyhaas

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It actually does 'twinkle' - if you look at it through a powerful telescope,

Is that an iphone app?

lil_lisa

You're all wrong. You see, stars are born and in order for them to be acknowledged as grown up stars, they must learn the ability to twinkle. They spend all their hours and days as baby stars doing good deeds and being happy so that one day they will learn and be able to twinkle. They twinkle because it is their destiny. There are actually a few competitions I believe for the most twinkliest star!

af_thefragile

Monty Burnz wrote: »

If you could get every fundamenalist religious person, and every power-hungry materialist to look at that picture and understand its implications, you'd have world peace at a stroke.

Surprisingly that imagine only increases my awe towards the creator who set it all in motion in the first place. It is almost spiritually enlightening! All of our collective worth and understanding not even an atoms worth compared to the scale and design of the universe. We must be utter and absolute fools when we say we know the secrets of the universe!!

For the materialists, it should give them a perspective of how fragile our planet is when looked along with the constant chaos present everywhere.
http://multimedia4everyone.com/faith_science_commentary/media/photo_earth-from-space.jpg
http://www.creationoutreach.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/earth-from-space-western.jpg

The fuzzy haze that outlines the planet is all we have of our atmosphere. Its that fuzzy haze which sustains all life on the blue marble floating along the empty darkness of space...

I particularly like the first pic. It looks so calm and serene from afar... Yet the close you get to the surface, the serenity crumbles down into a static discord of chaos, violence and destruction...

Red Hand

lil_lisa wrote: »

You're all wrong. You see, stars are born and in order for them to be acknowledged as grown up stars, they must learn the ability to twinkle. They spend all their hours and days as baby stars doing good deeds and being happy so that one day they will learn and be able to twinkle. They twinkle because it is their destiny. There are actually a few competitions I believe for the most twinkliest star!

Here is an annual winner!

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSbKhNRGNAkvFRaigY1Nm5LAphKDS0A381AJSGR9Bk40_TYfqaJ

fontanalis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wupToqz1e2g

jackiebaron

OisinT wrote: »

It's not just distance, it's light source.

A star is a single light source, whereas light from a planet is already a reflection there are multiple sources of light from the same "dot"

That's what I said. Stars provide an undullating light source whereas planet are just relectors.

af_thefragile

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYaJCmJgb9A

ejmaztec

lil_lisa wrote: »

You're all wrong. You see, stars are born and in order for them to be acknowledged as grown up stars, they must learn the ability to twinkle. They spend all their hours and days as baby stars doing good deeds and being happy so that one day they will learn and be able to twinkle. They twinkle because it is their destiny. There are actually a few competitions I believe for the most twinkliest star!

I think that could be a very long-winded way of you telling us that, on the subject of twinkling stars, you were off sick on the day the subject came up.

Monty Burnz

jackiebaron wrote: »

That's what I said. Stars provide an undullating light source whereas planet are just relectors.

Um..they don't. You're wrong on this one. Some stars do fluctuate in their light output, but over the course of decades or centuries or longer, not seconds.

Canis Lupus

af_thefragile wrote: »

Surprisingly that imagine only increases my awe towards the creator who set it all in motion in the first place. It is almost spiritually enlightening!

Which creator are you referring to?

whatsamsn

Monty Burnz wrote: »

That's not semi-interesting, it's fascinating. The fact that you can actually pop outside today and look through a telescope at what a distant galaxy looked like a billion years ago....:eek:

I dont know much about the subject of stars but surely looking at a star with the naked eye .... then with a telescope would give me the same aged view of the star? (Since it would take the same amount of lightyears to reach either right?)

af_thefragile

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Um..they don't. You're wrong on this one. Some stars do fluctuate in their light output, but over the course of decades or centuries or longer, not seconds.

Variable Star's do fluctuate very regularly and some very fast...

Regularly... that's such a funny word to say out loud...!!

Gummy Panda

Only Beth Gaga Shaggy knows the truth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ccN_5HGgeo