h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: The History of the Transit of Venus - A9043959
Author: Annie - Motown fans - please visit Peer Review! - U128652

Hi
This is my 2nd Flea Market rescue.
Original article here: A2662247 - The Transit Of Venus - 1769 & 2004 - Gilbert White of Selborne by U739171 icicle_halo_

Looking forward to comments.

Annie
(submitted 14 Feb)

Nice save

I've read it through and there's nothing that horrendous that jumps out at me on first scan. However -

>Hawaii, Australia, the Pacific Ocean and eastern Asia, so better start saving now.<

Why? I'm sure there's many Hawaiians, Australians and other Australiasians who won't have to save a penny...(or a cent as the case may be...)

Educational and not dull though. Lubberly jubbly

MJ

Well I'm saving...

Thank you very much for the review, MJ

I think this is a great entry!

"Looking at the sun through the magnifying lens of a telescope or pair of binoculars will fry your retina and cause instant, permanent blindness"

I think this would have more impact if you can find a link to a news story, or medical report where this has happened - wasn't there a child who looked at the sun in the last exclipse at school and damaged his eyes? I don't think he was looking through binoculars though.

I've seen people dispute this, so it would be good to have something to back up the statement, or use 'may' instead of 'will'.

"between the Earth and the sun" I think that gramatically that should be 'between Earth and Sun' as they are names. You might need to check some of the other solar system entries to see what has been used before.

"they found themselves in the middle of an epidemic." epidemic of what? It seems there should be the name of a disease there somewhere.

"This map shows the world visibility of the transit" It's house style to use the name of the site, rather than linking a word in a sentence like this if the sentence depends on the link, if you see what I mean. It's considered good practise for writing for the web.

And as I've just mentioned on another of your threads, I think the list can lose its P tags as it's not proper sentences.

Good rescue! You're about the only person on h2g2 I think could do it justice with your interests.

Thank you Naim!

"Looking at the sun through the magnifying lens of a telescope or pair of binoculars will fry your retina and cause instant, permanent blindness"

I think this would have more impact if you can find a link to a news story, or medical report where this has happened - wasn't there a child who looked at the sun in the last exclipse at school and damaged his eyes? I don't think he was looking through binoculars though.

I've seen people dispute this, so it would be good to have something to back up the statement, or use 'may' instead of 'will'

I have changed the paragraph to:

You should never look at the Sun directly, or through a telescope or binoculars. Looking at the Sun directly can cause permanent damage to your eyes. Looking at the Sun through the magnifying lens of a telescope or pair of binoculars will fry your retina and **might** cause instant, permanent blindness. Please teach young children to take care of their eyes to avoid any tragedies.

I remember that news story where the mother was going to sue the school because her son looked at the Sun during the transit of Venus. I searched for it while writing this entry but couldn't find it even on the BBC news website.

I watch "The Sky At Night" every month - and when Patrick talks about the Sun he always tells us how dangerous it is to look at it with naked eye and never to look at it through telescopes or binoculars.
So, as I consider him the world's greatest expert, I'll leave in the warning, as I'm only really quoting him, but I've added the please warn children bit for myself and that news item you mentioned as well.
I don't know why people would risk their eyesight if they know the danger and have been warned, I don't know how people don't know how dangerous it is to look at the Sun.



Changed all the "sun" to "Sun"



Removed the tags (twice in one night)



<>
Sorry - it was the plague. That's been added now and I also added some more information I found on poor Pauly.



<> changed to "NASA" (twice)



I hope it's improved somewhat, I must say I'm very pleased with it, I love the quotes of the witnesses but there were some really cursed poor blighters weren't there.

And all we astronomers have to moan about is clouds!

Thanks a lot for the review!

OK while searching I found 2 excellent sites warning of the dangers, and linked to both.

I haven't got time to read the entry again, so don't know if this is one of the links that you found, but I'll post it anyway and hope to find some time to check the entry again soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/4586048.stm

Did you know that the church where Horrocks was Rector in Much Hoole has his transit shown in the stain glass windows of the church?
Also while you must not look through a scope or binoculars to see a transit (or sun-spots) If it is securely mounted on a tripod you may use it to project the image onto a flat surface. I did this and witnessed the last transit in a shopping center in Lansing MI projecting it onto a store wall at 6:30 AM. I could not use my own house because I needed a lower horizon and my house is surrounded by trees.

Oh thank you Naim
I had searched and searched for that story - I must have been using the wrong keywords!

The safety links I mentioned above were the NASA and transitofvenus.org ones, so I've added yours and will be crediting you
That story makes my case of how dangerous it is to look at the sun



shagbark - I did know about the window, I've seen a picture of it but I'd love to visit the church. Have you seen the picture of him (artists impression) I have linked to? It shows his method of viewing the transit was the same as yours
Did you know I wrote the edited entry on Jeremiah Horrocks?
I have added your additional information (about the tripod) and will also be crediting you.

That's a fascinating story of your viewing - I got my car out the garage, (used the roof to lean on), caught the Sun in a mirror and projected the image onto a piece of card at an angle that I could see.

I don't need a credit for a link Annie... it's what I'm here in PR for.

Well it's already a community effort, so might as well
If you would rather just have a credit for additional research just let me know and I'll switch things round, but I'm happy to give you co-authorship.
As I said, that link made my case for eye-safety, thanks again.

Right now I am having problems to read through this Entry, somehow I had the feeling that the individual parts are not connected well. I'll give it a once over and come back with some constructive suggestions later on!

HELL

If that's what you want, that's fine, thank you!

I've added a lot more information, and some quotes, also crediting the contributors.

Dr Hell, have you come up with your suggestions yet?

How do you do it? This is about the 4th Peer Review article of yours I've seen this week and they're all of the highest standard.

Just noticed a teensy problem; in footnote 11 you quote "another h2g2 researcher" but the footnote comes before the quote of the first researcher.

Goes without saying I really enjoyed it, you'll have your 50 easily

Oops, that'll be because I moved some chunks around...I'll sort it now.

Thanks, lago, I really appreciate you saying that

This entry is a Flea Market rescue so won't count towards my solo total

Actually I've put that excellent quote from Metal Chicken to the top to introduce the entry, it captures the magic of the event perfectly

I'm happy with this entry as it is, unless there are any more suggestions?

Hi Annie. I've had a read through this, and it is interesting. It should certainly be part of the Edited Guide.

It still needs a bit of work.


The structure of your entry is a bit confused. You should always devise the structure first and write the content later. If you decide to change the structure, you should ruthlessly rewrite to match it, cutting out stuff if necessary.

The description of the 1761 and 1769 transits are confused. You've got a header for the 1769 Transit. Later you have a header for Guillame de Gentil, who observed it. Then you have a header for Jean Chappe d'Autoroche, but you jump back to 1761 and then on to 1769. It would be better if you dealt with the 1761 transit first, starting it with a Header. Then have a header for 1769, and put all the different people with their own subheaders. You shouldn't need to say "Pity poor Guillaume le Gentil (see below)" .

The other major thing that jumps out at me is this:

"In order for a transit to occur, Venus and Earth have to be in the same plane on the same side of the Solar System."

This isn't right. Venus and Earth are always "in the same plane" because any two points are always in a plane. To be strickly true, it should be:

In order for a transit to occur, Venus and Earth must both be on the same side of the Sun, and must both lie along the line of intersection of the two planets' planes of orbit.

That's rather confusing, though. Perhaps you can think of a simpler or more obvious way of saying this.

Are you sure you can calculate the mass of Venus by observing its motion? I thought it was the mass of the Sun that you measured by observing Venus.

Some minor things:

which is where Horrocks lived and made the first recording of a Venus transit-->
which is where Horrocks had lived and had made the first recording of a Venus transit

Links:

Crete A362161
Greece A133066

Disinterested Parties --> Uninterested Parties
(disinterested means unbiased)

G