Stellarium

Moon in full eclipse is labelled Uranus?

Asked by James Hoffman

When the moon was in total eclipse this week, a gloriously eerie sight, I went back to trace its progress on Stellarium. While the moon was in eclipse it was labelled Uranus. Was this a joke? Uranus could not have tracked through sky with the moon for the hour or so it was in eclipse. What's up?

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
Stellarium Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
gzotti
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
gzotti (georg-zotti) said : 		#1

The Moon was labelled Moon.
Uranus, depending on your diverse settings maybe only barely noticeable on screen, was labelled Uranus.
Uranus was close to the eclipsed Moon.
The moon's label was faded away during eclipse.
You saw the label Uranus close to the eclipsed moon.
You associated Uranus' label with the Moon.

You were wrong.

And I don't understand what you mean with "Uranus could not have tracked through sky with the moon for the hour or so it was in eclipse." Why not?

Revision history for this message
James Hoffman (jimmyh191) said : 		#2

as the eclipsed moon neared the horizon the Uranus label followed it. How could the placement of a distant planet follow the path our moon across the sky. That makes no sense.

Revision history for this message
Best gzotti (georg-zotti) said : 		#3

The sun rises in the eastern part of the sky, transits high in the south (if you live in the northern hemisphere), and sets in the western part.
A star rises in the eastern part of the sky, transits high in the south (if you live in the northern hemisphere), and sets in the western part. (1)
The moon rises in the eastern part of the sky, transits high in the south (if you live in the northern hemisphere), and sets in the western part. (2)
A planet rises in the eastern part of the sky, transits high in the south (if you live in the northern hemisphere), and sets in the western part. (3)

Somehow these motions seem related. Such were the observation-based questions of the Ancients...

Maybe the sky with all contents rotates in its entirety around earth, from east to west?
Or the Earth rotates from west to east, and we see everything rotating?

The visible effect is the same.

So, while Uranus neared the horizon but would still have been visible (and therefore labeled) in simple binoculars because the full moon (whose glare would usually have overwhelmed Uranus' feeble glow) was hidden in Earth's shadow, likely nobody cared to observe Uranus despite its label, because everybody's attention was caught by the eclipsed moon nearby.

==================================

(1) There is a regular 4 minutes drift in relation to the Sun, i.e. stars transit four minutes earlier every day. Not relevant here.
(2) There is an additional relative motion towards the east, so that the moon seems to be slower than the stars by about one apparent lunar diameter per hour. Not relevant here.
(3) In addition, there is a slow motion among the stars, notable over a few days. Not relevant here.

Revision history for this message
James Hoffman (jimmyh191) said : 		#4

Thank you for your time. These things occurred to my amateur mind as I set about re-imagining the whole deal. it seemed odd at first, but quite sensible upon reflection.