lordarka
Offline
Image Upload: On
|
 I shot a 50 minute star trail (15 3-min exp.) but what are these... | |
Art B:
It's an interesting theory, but thinking it through, I see some problems...
(1) You can only see stars discretely in our galaxy. Given that the nearest galaxy to us something like 2,000,000 light years away, you would only see it as a dot, not unlike a star.
(2) Your analogy to the moving train implies that the object viewing the nearby train and the faraway train is stationary relative to both moving trains. But the problem is that a photographer on earth is not stationary with respect to distant celestial objects; in fact, he or she is moving a lot faster relative to any object in the sky than any object is moving relative to the earth, albeit the movement being rotational rather than linear.
What we are seeing in the motion of the stars is the earth's rotational motion, not the movement of celestial bodies toward or away from us. Even though the relative change in position of celestial bodies as we see them here on earth would clearly fall into your "train and distant vehicle" analogy, the motion trails captured here are almost entirely a result of the the earths rotation, and not the motion of objects through the heavens.
Again, I may be out of my element here as well, but the dots seem to me to be either camera artifacts, or perhaps satellites in geosynchronous orbit. Either way, the dots must be synchronized with the earth's orbit, rather than independent of it. A camera artifact or geosynchronous satellite meets that limitation.
Arka C.
|
