<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ring of fire eclipse on May 20</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:12:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Haggath</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331415</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Haggath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 11:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331415</guid>
		<description>#36 Nigel:
You are correct; partial eclipses are indeed the commonest kind. But my comment was referring specifically to &quot;central&quot; eclipses, i.e. I said that annular ones are slightly more common than total, not that they are the commonest kind of all.
Sorry for the ambiguity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#36 Nigel:<br />
You are correct; partial eclipses are indeed the commonest kind. But my comment was referring specifically to &#8220;central&#8221; eclipses, i.e. I said that annular ones are slightly more common than total, not that they are the commonest kind of all.<br />
Sorry for the ambiguity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331414</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 09:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331414</guid>
		<description>Katwagner (39) siad:
&lt;blockquote&gt;Nigel @34. No it doesn’t overexpose. I shoot with a wide angle mostly, and if it’s not cloudy, I’ll do that Sunday.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Eh?  You mean the sun&#039;s disc itself is not over-exposed?  Does that mean you see actual sunspots on it and everything?  But does it not also mean that the rest of your shot is a bit dark?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Katwagner (39) siad:</p>
<blockquote><p>Nigel @34. No it doesn’t overexpose. I shoot with a wide angle mostly, and if it’s not cloudy, I’ll do that Sunday.</p></blockquote>
<p>Eh?  You mean the sun&#8217;s disc itself is not over-exposed?  Does that mean you see actual sunspots on it and everything?  But does it not also mean that the rest of your shot is a bit dark?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Miles</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331413</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Miles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 16:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331413</guid>
		<description>Phil, looking forward to solar eclipse. On a different subject was wondering if you had any commnet on recent NASA Report: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2012-138&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;NASA Survey Counts Potentially Hazardous Asteroids&lt;/a&gt; from JPL?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phil, looking forward to solar eclipse. On a different subject was wondering if you had any commnet on recent NASA Report: <a href="http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2012-138" rel="nofollow">NASA Survey Counts Potentially Hazardous Asteroids</a> from JPL?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T-Sun</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331412</link>
		<dc:creator>T-Sun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 08:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331412</guid>
		<description>The start time according to NASA&#039;s table for Albuquerque, NM eclipse starts at 00:28 UTC
Link:
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/OHtables/OH2012-Tab03.pdf

According to your timing in the main article, the eclipse will last for 5 hours 53 minutes (20:56 to 02:49).

Did I miss something?

May be it is a good thing to be prepared early, rather than late. Four hours waiting may be too long a wait for my young grandkids...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The start time according to NASA&#8217;s table for Albuquerque, NM eclipse starts at 00:28 UTC<br />
Link:<br />
<a href="http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/OHtables/OH2012-Tab03.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/OHtables/OH2012-Tab03.pdf</a></p>
<p>According to your timing in the main article, the eclipse will last for 5 hours 53 minutes (20:56 to 02:49).</p>
<p>Did I miss something?</p>
<p>May be it is a good thing to be prepared early, rather than late. Four hours waiting may be too long a wait for my young grandkids&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Android Astronomy &#187; Annular Solar Eclipse &#8211; May 20, 2012</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331411</link>
		<dc:creator>Android Astronomy &#187; Annular Solar Eclipse &#8211; May 20, 2012</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 22:20:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331411</guid>
		<description>[...] May 20, 2012. For a REAL astronomer&#8217;s take on it, I recommend going to Dr. Plait&#8217;s blog HERE and HERE. And, of course, the most thorough rundown can be found at the NASA Eclipse [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] May 20, 2012. For a REAL astronomer&#8217;s take on it, I recommend going to Dr. Plait&#8217;s blog HERE and HERE. And, of course, the most thorough rundown can be found at the NASA Eclipse [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bramblyspam</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331410</link>
		<dc:creator>Bramblyspam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 14:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331410</guid>
		<description>Just got hotel reservations! The wife and I will be driving from Portland (which will get an 81% eclipse but we want the full thing) to Shasta Lake in California. Driving down today (Saturday), staying by Shasta Lake two nights. We checked weather reports, of course - the California coast is due to be cloudy while Redding area is sunny, so we planned accordingly.

This will be my first solar eclipse, my wife saw a partial one as a kid in the late 60&#039;s - probably the same one others recall seeing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just got hotel reservations! The wife and I will be driving from Portland (which will get an 81% eclipse but we want the full thing) to Shasta Lake in California. Driving down today (Saturday), staying by Shasta Lake two nights. We checked weather reports, of course &#8211; the California coast is due to be cloudy while Redding area is sunny, so we planned accordingly.</p>
<p>This will be my first solar eclipse, my wife saw a partial one as a kid in the late 60&#8242;s &#8211; probably the same one others recall seeing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kat wagner</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331409</link>
		<dc:creator>kat wagner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 07:02:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331409</guid>
		<description>Nigel @34. No it doesn&#039;t overexpose. I shoot with a wide angle mostly, and if it&#039;s not cloudy, I&#039;ll do that Sunday. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nigel @34. No it doesn&#8217;t overexpose. I shoot with a wide angle mostly, and if it&#8217;s not cloudy, I&#8217;ll do that Sunday. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arek W.</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331408</link>
		<dc:creator>Arek W.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 18:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331408</guid>
		<description>Just for record.
I just realized that I totally missed Joeshmoe&#039;s comment (#1) ! :/
Forget my earlier comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just for record.<br />
I just realized that I totally missed Joeshmoe&#8217;s comment (#1) ! :/<br />
Forget my earlier comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Friday Links</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331407</link>
		<dc:creator>Friday Links</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 13:33:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331407</guid>
		<description>[...] Don&#8217;t forget to look for the annular solar eclipse on Sunday! [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Don&#8217;t forget to look for the annular solar eclipse on Sunday! [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Depledge</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/17/ring-of-fire-eclipse-on-may-20/#comment-331406</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Depledge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/?p=48476#comment-331406</guid>
		<description>@ Neil Haggath (20) and Tometheus (2) -
Surely there are more than just the two types of eclipse?

I thought we most commonly got partial eclipses, where the geometry means that Earth, moon and sun do not fall on a straight line, so no viewer on Earth&#039;s surface gets to see either a total or an annular.

Is it, or not really?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Neil Haggath (20) and Tometheus (2) -<br />
Surely there are more than just the two types of eclipse?</p>
<p>I thought we most commonly got partial eclipses, where the geometry means that Earth, moon and sun do not fall on a straight line, so no viewer on Earth&#8217;s surface gets to see either a total or an annular.</p>
<p>Is it, or not really?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: basic

Served from: blogs.discovermagazine.com @ 2013-05-18 09:24:51 -->