Top 5 Most Recent Articles
Top 5 Most Popular Articles
HOMEPAGE NEWS by Kelly Beatty
Titanic's Celestial Connections
Astronomy played supporting roles in the ill-fated ship's maiden voyage and in the blockbuster movie that followed.
To the best of my knowledge, there was no staff astronomer aboard the RMS Titanic when it set out from Southampton, England, in 1912 on its first and only voyage. If there had been, I wonder if the course of its tragic history would have been any different?
I can only imagine the beauty of the night sky on April 14th as the ship steamed westward toward New York. The seas were dead calm and the sky alive with stars that night. As passenger Lawrence Beesley would later recount in The Loss of the SS Titanic, "The night was one of the most beautiful I have ever seen: the sky without a single cloud to mar the perfect brilliance of the stars..."
Notably, there was no Moon in the sky that night. The absence of its light, together with the calm sea, apparently made it impossible for the ship's lookouts to spot the approaching white hulk of an iceberg before Titanic sideswiped it at 11:40 p.m. Within three hours, the battered ship had cleaved in two and sunk, claiming the lives of some 1,500 passengers and crew.
We will never know the source of that particular berg, but in the spring of 1912 mariners were aware that a great many of them had worked their way into the North Atlantic's shipping lanes. In trying to reconstruct the accident's sequence of events, some experts later argued that a hot arctic summer in 1911, followed by an especially mild winter, had triggered higher rates of glacial creep and the calving of icebergs where they meet the sea in Greenland.
Another astronomical wrinkle is explored by Donald Olson and Russell Doescher of Texas State University, together with S&T senior contributing editor Roger Sinnott, in the magazine's April issue. They followed an astronomical lead first tossed out in 1995 by oceanographer Fergus Wood.
As Wood envisioned it, the iceberg formed a few months earlier on the west coast of Greenland, in or near Diskø Bay, due to extremely high tides. Those super-swells resulted from a rare convergence of astronomical factors: within a single 27-hour span on January 4th, Earth came its nearest to the Sun, the Moon was its nearest Earth, and the Moon was full.
But it's unlikely that the iceberg could have crossed more than 1,600 nautical miles (3,000 km) of ocean to the impact point in just three months. Olson, Doescher, and Sinnott solve that timetable by postulating that the iceberg had formed earlier and become grounded along the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland, only to be freed by the extreme (perigean) tides of early January. It's well worth reading their entire article, "Did the Moon Sink the Titanic?"
There's more!
When director James Cameron set out to capture the ship's voyage and dramatic sinking in his 1997 blockbuster film Titanic, he put a premium on getting all the details exactly right. So it came as a complete surprise to astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson that Cameron botched the scenes showing the night sky.
The movie shows its heroine, Rose (played by Kate Winslet), staring up at the sky as she floats on wood scraps after the ship's sinking. "There is only one sky she should have been looking at," Tyson snorts, "and it was the wrong sky!" Worse, he adds, the left half was a mirror reflection of the right half.
After seeing this astro-gaffe, Tyson (who's director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City) wrote a letter to Cameron, politely pointing out the error. Cameron never responded. Undeterred, Tyson raised the issued again when the two met at a NASA gathering five years later — and a third time over dinner in 2005. As Tyson tells it, Cameron finally retorted, "Well, last time I checked, Titanic has grossed $1.3 billion worldwide. Imagine how much more it would have grossed, had I gotten the sky correct."
Yet just two months after getting his planisphere handed to him on a platter, Tyson got a call from the post-production team working on a special 10th-anniversary "director's cut" of the movie. Cameron wanted to fix the stars after all! So Tyson cranked out a plot of the sky as it would have appeared that night, using Starry Night software. Then, he adds, "I reached deep into my amateur astronomer roots" to adjust the scene as it truly would have appeared.
"I was a chihuahua nipping at his ankles for 10 years," Tyson tells me, but that persistence paid off. When the 3-D version of Titanic made its debut this week, viewers could see that Cameron had changed virtually nothing of the original — except the sky full of stars over Rose's head.
"Iceberg, right ahead!" British maritime artist Simon Fisher portrays the night of April 14, 1912, moments before Titanic struck an iceberg on its maiden voyage.
Donald W. Olson
I can only imagine the beauty of the night sky on April 14th as the ship steamed westward toward New York. The seas were dead calm and the sky alive with stars that night. As passenger Lawrence Beesley would later recount in The Loss of the SS Titanic, "The night was one of the most beautiful I have ever seen: the sky without a single cloud to mar the perfect brilliance of the stars..."
Notably, there was no Moon in the sky that night. The absence of its light, together with the calm sea, apparently made it impossible for the ship's lookouts to spot the approaching white hulk of an iceberg before Titanic sideswiped it at 11:40 p.m. Within three hours, the battered ship had cleaved in two and sunk, claiming the lives of some 1,500 passengers and crew.
The Moon was full on January 4, 1912, which coincided with the Moon’s perigee and Earth’s perihelion. These combined effects boosted tides, which may have helped the Titanic iceberg drift into shipping lanes.
S&T: Leah Tiscione
Another astronomical wrinkle is explored by Donald Olson and Russell Doescher of Texas State University, together with S&T senior contributing editor Roger Sinnott, in the magazine's April issue. They followed an astronomical lead first tossed out in 1995 by oceanographer Fergus Wood.
As Wood envisioned it, the iceberg formed a few months earlier on the west coast of Greenland, in or near Diskø Bay, due to extremely high tides. Those super-swells resulted from a rare convergence of astronomical factors: within a single 27-hour span on January 4th, Earth came its nearest to the Sun, the Moon was its nearest Earth, and the Moon was full.
But it's unlikely that the iceberg could have crossed more than 1,600 nautical miles (3,000 km) of ocean to the impact point in just three months. Olson, Doescher, and Sinnott solve that timetable by postulating that the iceberg had formed earlier and become grounded along the coast of Labrador or Newfoundland, only to be freed by the extreme (perigean) tides of early January. It's well worth reading their entire article, "Did the Moon Sink the Titanic?"
There's more!
When director James Cameron set out to capture the ship's voyage and dramatic sinking in his 1997 blockbuster film Titanic, he put a premium on getting all the details exactly right. So it came as a complete surprise to astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson that Cameron botched the scenes showing the night sky.
The movie shows its heroine, Rose (played by Kate Winslet), staring up at the sky as she floats on wood scraps after the ship's sinking. "There is only one sky she should have been looking at," Tyson snorts, "and it was the wrong sky!" Worse, he adds, the left half was a mirror reflection of the right half.
After seeing this astro-gaffe, Tyson (who's director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City) wrote a letter to Cameron, politely pointing out the error. Cameron never responded. Undeterred, Tyson raised the issued again when the two met at a NASA gathering five years later — and a third time over dinner in 2005. As Tyson tells it, Cameron finally retorted, "Well, last time I checked, Titanic has grossed $1.3 billion worldwide. Imagine how much more it would have grossed, had I gotten the sky correct."
Yet just two months after getting his planisphere handed to him on a platter, Tyson got a call from the post-production team working on a special 10th-anniversary "director's cut" of the movie. Cameron wanted to fix the stars after all! So Tyson cranked out a plot of the sky as it would have appeared that night, using Starry Night software. Then, he adds, "I reached deep into my amateur astronomer roots" to adjust the scene as it truly would have appeared.
"I was a chihuahua nipping at his ankles for 10 years," Tyson tells me, but that persistence paid off. When the 3-D version of Titanic made its debut this week, viewers could see that Cameron had changed virtually nothing of the original — except the sky full of stars over Rose's head.
Posted by Kelly Beatty, April 13, 2012
The following comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sky Publishing.
By posting a comment, you agree to our Rules of Conduct and Terms of Use.
By posting a comment, you agree to our Rules of Conduct and Terms of Use.
First comments (from 14)
This is amusing. . .
Posted by G Boardman
April 13, 2012 At 12:23 PM PDT
"Iceberg, right ahead!" British maritime artist Simon Fisher portrays the night of April 14, 2012, moments before Titanic struck an iceberg on its maiden voyage.
Donald W. Olson
Oh really, April 14, 2012? Ahem, did anybody proof read this?
Hilarious!
Amused by minor typos??
Posted by Frank Reed
April 13, 2012 At 12:46 PM PDT
G Boardman wrote: "Oh really, April 14, 2012? Ahem, did anybody proof read this? Hilarious!". Wow, you're easily amused! It's a TRIVIAL typo which did not detract from the content of the article in any way. Happens to the best of us.
re: This is amusing. . .
Posted by Kelly Beatty
April 13, 2012 At 01:32 PM PDT
actually, it *is* amusing — as is the story of how that typo came to exist (a story for another time, perhaps). anyway, it's also now fixed.
Iceberg right ahead.
Posted by Larry Toolwy
April 14, 2012 At 12:35 AM PDT
Seeing the night watchman in the tower yelling into the phone "Oce bug. royt de4ad ahead," gives me the comic relief of thinking if he had said, "There's an iceberg in front of us." they would have understood. Speak American!
I read the ship's rudder was too small to turn it in time, and changing the engins to full astern ruduced the rudder effect even more.
Titanic's Celestial Connections
Posted by Hussain Almousawi
April 14, 2012 At 03:20 AM PDT
I am still puzzled on the connections of Titanic sink to the celestial. Ok never mind what if there was full knowledge of the celestial at 9112 and there where astronomers on board Titanic, What difference that would made. When you question::''did the moon sink Titanic?''..My question is on what bases this question was put? and where is the answer? Or is it just a question for further research?
BUT MY MAIN QUESTION: have we finished from all human errors that have been committed before and through the Titanic sailing, and the shortage for its sailing preparations. Wouldn't this first historical sailing of its kind with huge amount of people necessitate escorting? Where the safety measures on board and the sailors training and ship's trial time sufficient? And the weather was it, taken into consideration?
Titanic accident
Posted by Dileep V. Sathe
April 14, 2012 At 08:43 AM PDT
As per Prof. Don Olson, the supermoon on 4th January 1912 triggered the movement of iceberg which led to the Titanic accident on 14th April 1912. As per the story on TheDailyBite's Blog, dated: 6th March 2012, the approach of Moon was closest since 0796 A.D. Can any one tell when the next approach of this nature will be? In other words, are we likely to observe an accident of the Titanic magnitude in the next 200 years or so?
Titanic & starry sky appearance
Posted by Susan Hutchings
April 14, 2012 At 07:06 PM PDT
Finally, someone else notices weird sky things in movies & books. It's like when the actors or book characters are sitting outside in the early evening in the summer looking up at the sky where Orion is shining. Not only is Orion NOT UP THERE in the summer night sky, but it would probably not even be dark yet.
But I still think Pluto is a planet.
Oce bug. royt de4ad ahead
Posted by Bruce
April 15, 2012 At 06:14 AM PDT
Larry, thanks for the biggest laugh I've had all year. I almost hurt myself! "Speak American!" indeed. Should've been part of the terms of surrender in 1812.
What really sunk the Titanic
Posted by Bill R. Smith
April 15, 2012 At 06:37 AM PDT
While celestial events may wellhave played a part in the Titanic tragedy - all be it small - in my opinion, the real cause was arrogance. Captain Smith folded under pressure to break the Atlantic crossing record. Bruce Ismay of White Star Lines kept urging Smith to proceed at near flank speed, even after the Titanic had received warnings of icebergs in the shipping lanes of the North Atlantic. In addition, as we know, there were not enough life boats. After all, this ship was "unsinkable". Poor quality of the rivets for the seams in the hull also played a part.
Yes, lack of Moonlight was a factor. The bergs could not be seen easily and the mirror like calm seas did not allow for waves to break against the berg, which would have created a white line of foam.
In my view, the main reasons for the loss of the Titanic was excessive pride, greed, and the fact that at that time in history, it was believed that humans could do anything and throw caution to the wind. This attitude has caused other disasters in the past, and will likely do so in the future.
Keen observations
Posted by Bruce
April 15, 2012 At 06:51 AM PDT
Susan, being keenly observant shows you have a sharp mind. And Pluto IS a planet! Down with astronomical dwarfism! Dedwarf the Sun!
|
|
|
||
|
|
Date:
|



Other links: + digg | + reddit | + del.icio.us | + rss
comments (14)