See the moon cross the Pleiades for the last time this year on July 20
If you live anywhere in the contiguous U.S. or Canada, and clear skies are forecast for early Sunday morning, July 20, then be sure to step outside after midnight and before the first light of dawn. Look low in the east-northeast sky for a slender crescent moon just four days before new phase and 23% illuminated, gracefully approaching the Pleiades star cluster. This will mark the third and final lunar occultation of the Pleiades in 2025, promising a very beautiful scene in steadily held binoculars or a small telescope.
Earlier this year, there were two other moon-Pleiades encounters. On the evening of January 9th, an 82%waxing gibbous moon temporarily hid the Pleiades for parts of the U.S., Canada and Central America and then during the overnight hours of February 5-6, a 61% waxing gibbous moon passed in front of the cluster. If you caught one, or both of the first two events (or if you didn't), make a note on your calendar to watch this final moon-Pleiades rendezvous of the year.
In this upcoming case, you will either have to stay up through the night (to await moonrise, which will occur around 1:00 a.m. local daylight time) or set your alarm for the predawn morning hours.
In addition, since the moon will be a lovely waning crescent, as opposed to a waxing gibbous in January and February, stars will disappear first along the bright lunar crescent. You'll need at least a small telescope, for binoculars probably won't be enough for following stars in the final minutes or seconds as the moon's glare, sunlit edge creeps up to them. But practically any telescope will magnify enough to do the trick. Use 50x magnification, perhaps more if your scope has a solid mount that allows easy tracking.
Stars will reappear about an hour later from behind the moon's dark limb in dramatic fashion: appearing to suddenly "pop-on" as if someone threw a switch. Here, binoculars should do fine, especially if you mount them on a tripod, provided you're watching at exactly the right moment.
In Canada's Maritime Provinces and the northeastern U.S., advancing morning twilight will be an issue, since the eastern sky will be brightening as the moon approaches the Pleiades. As a result, the disappearance of some stars will not be visible because the sky will be too bright. Nonetheless, the view in binoculars of the crescent moon sitting to the upper right of the star cluster will still make for a very pretty sight.
Farther west, the sky will be darker, but the moon and the Pleiades will be lower. This will be especially true for the far-western states and the Canadian province of British Columbia; therefore, a clear and unobstructed view toward the east-northeast is recommended.
Below are two timetables giving local circumstances for the disappearance and reappearance of the four brightest members of the Pleiades that will be occulted. The information is based in part on data generated by the International Occultation Timers Association (IOTA) and is valid for fourteen U.S., two Canadian and one Mexican city. Keep in mind, however, that many other stars not listed here will also be occulted.
If the disappearance or reappearance of a star takes place during dawn twilight, the time is provided in italic font. Also, take note that if the disappearance or reappearance of a star occurs near or soon after the start of civil twilight (roughly 40 minutes before sunrise), it is assumed that the sky would probably be too bright to easily see it. In addition, the moon might miss the star entirely. In both such cases, the time is omitted. All times are in local civil time.
Location
Electra
Alcyone
Atlas
Maia
Los Angeles
——
2:21 a.m.
——
——
Seattle
2:03 am.
2:39 a.m.
3:16 a.m.
——
Tucson
——
2:18 a.m.
——
2:07 a.m.
Denver
2:35 a.m.
3:27 a.m.
——
——
Helena
2:52 a.m.
3:36 a.m.
4:19 a.m.
——
Monterrey
2:13 a.m.
3:28 a.m.
——
2:44 a.m.
Austin
3:17 a.m.
4:26 a.m.
——
3:51 a.m.
Kansas City
3:30 a.m.
4:31 a.m.
——
4:10 a.m.
Winnipeg
3:50 a.m.
4:43 a.m.
——
—-
N. Orleans
3:16 a.m.
——
——
3:48 a.m.
Chicago
3:33 a.m.
4:41 a.m.
——
4:12 a.m.
Atlanta
4:21 a.m.
——
——
4:54 a.m.
Miami
4:15 a.m.
——
——
4:42 a.m.
Washington
4:30 a.m.
——
——
5:05 a.m.
New York
4:35 a.m.
——
——
——
Boston
4:39 a.m.
——
——
——
Montreal
4:42 a.m.
——
——
——
Location
Electra
Alcyone
Atlas
Maia
Los Angeles
2:15 a.m.
3:10 a.m.
——
——
Seattle
2:22 a.m.
3:31 a.m.
4:01 a.m.
——
Tucson
2:13 a.m.
3:04 a.m.
——
2:27 a.m.
Denver
3:21 a.m.
4:19 a.m.
——
——
Helena
3:26 a.m.
4:31 a.m.
4:56 a.m.
——
Monterrey
3:05 a.m.
3:35 a.m.
——
3:33 a.m.
Austin
4:11 a.m.
4:51 a.m.
——
4:38 a.m.
Kansas City
4:24 a.m.
5:16 a.m.
——
4:46 a.m.
Winnipeg
4:37 a.m.
——
——
——
N. Orleans
4:11 a.m.
——
——
4:43 a.m.
Chicago
4:31 a.m.
——
——
4:57 a.m.
Atlanta
5:18 a.m.
——
——
5:52 a.m.
Miami
5:03 a.m.
——
——
5:44 a.m.
Washington
—-
——
——
——
New York
——
——
——
——
Boston
——
——
——
——
Montreal
——
——
——
——
Specific times and zones of visibility
Courtesy of IOTA, detailed prediction pages are available for each of the four brightest stars — Alcyone, Atlas, Electra, and Maia. These include Universal Time (UT) disappearance and reappearance data, as well as Mercator maps showing where each occultation will be visible.
For example, from St. Louis, Missouri (in Central Daylight Time, UTC–5), Maia will disappear at 4:06 a.m. CDT and reappear at 4:51 a.m. CDT. At the moment of reappearance, the sun will be about 11 degrees below the horizon, meaning Maia should reappear in a twilight sky.
TOP TELESCOPE PICK
Want to see the moon and Pleiades together? The Celestron NexStar 8SE is ideal for beginners wanting quality, reliable and quick views of celestial objects. For a more in-depth look at our Celestron NexStar 8SE review.
In addition to the timetable, a world map (Mercator projection) is provided, showing the region where the occultation will be visible. The boundaries are in different colors. The Cyan boundaries show the curves of the occultation disappearance or reappearance at moonrise or moonset. A continuous white line marks the nighttime northern and southern limits of the occultation. A continuous blue line denotes the occultation limits occurring during twilight, while a dotted red line depicts the occultation limits occurring in daylight.
For Alcyone, the occultation takes place over much of the western U.S. For Atlas, visibility occurs over the northwest U.S., western Canada and Alaska. For Electra, visibility will be over much of the U.S. and Canada, while the occultation of Maia will be visible primarily over the central and southern U.S. and Mexico.
Joe Rao serves as an instructor and guest lecturer at New York's Hayden Planetarium. He writes about astronomy for Natural History magazine, Sky and Telescope and other publications.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
16 minutes ago
- Forbes
Audacious Idea That America Is Going To Have An Unnerving Sputnik Moment When It Comes To Attaining AGI And AI Superintelligence
Will the United States attain AGI and ASI first, before any other country, and does it really matter ... More which country is first? In today's column, I examine the provocative chatter that the United States might experience a said-to-be Sputnik moment when it comes to attaining artificial general intelligence (AGI) and artificial superintelligence (ASI). How so? The audacious idea postulates that rather than America being the first to achieve AGI and ASI, some other country manages to beat us to the punch. It is a seemingly unimaginable proposition. You see, the United States is indisputably a world leader in AI and known for the development of leading-edge advances in AI. It is nearly inconceivable that the U.S. won't arrive at AGI and ASI first. But is that wishful thinking rather than real-world thinking? Let's talk about it. This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI, including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here). Heading Toward AGI And ASI First, some fundamentals are required to set the stage for this weighty discussion. There is a great deal of research going on to further advance AI. The general goal is to either reach artificial general intelligence (AGI) or maybe even the outstretched possibility of achieving artificial superintelligence (ASI). AGI is AI that is considered on par with human intellect and can seemingly match our intelligence. ASI is AI that has gone beyond human intellect and would be superior in many, if not all, feasible ways. The idea is that ASI would be able to run circles around humans by outthinking us at every turn. For more details on the nature of conventional AI versus AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here. We have not yet attained AGI. In fact, it is unknown whether we will reach AGI, or that maybe AGI will be achievable in decades or perhaps centuries from now. The AGI attainment dates that are floating around are wildly varying and wildly unsubstantiated by any credible evidence or ironclad logic. ASI is even more beyond the pale when it comes to where we are currently with conventional AI. The Saga Of Sputnik 1 There is immense speculation going on about AGI and ASI regarding which country will be the first to achieve the vaunted pinnacle of AI. One fiery comment that's floating around is that this could turn out to be another semblance of the infamous Sputnik crisis. You might be somewhat familiar with the unnerving exploits of Sputnik that occurred in the 1950s and 1960s, and beyond. I'll provide a quick recap for ease of recollection and then tie the historical reference to our modern times. In October 1957, the Soviet Union launched a small spacecraft known as Sputnik 1 that traveled in a low Earth orbit. A radio signal was then beamed from this orbiting spacecraft. People across the globe could hear the beeping sounds on their radios as retransmitted by amateur radio operators. This made enormous history as it was the first-ever artificial Earth satellite. At the time, this frightening action triggered the American Sputnik crisis. Worries were that the Soviet Union could end up controlling outer space. The Russians could potentially launch military weapons that orbited the planet and would readily threaten the United States and other countries of the world. The action also suggested that the scientific prowess showcased by the Soviet Union was superior to that of America. How much farther behind might the U.S. really be? The sky was the limit, or maybe not, and extended to the heavens far above. This served as a mighty impetus to spur the Space Race. Indeed, a few years later, President John F. Kennedy made his famous speech in 1962 that called for the United States to land on the Moon before the end of the decade. The oft quoted line was this: 'We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win, and the others, too.' Will AI Be The Sputnik 2 Let's tie the Sputnik saga with the ongoing efforts to attain pinnacle AI. There is heated debate in dark backrooms that maybe the United States won't be the first to arrive at AGI and ASI. Some other country might get there first. Lots of big-name countries are vying for that prized position. Smaller countries are doing so too. An eclectic race is avidly underway. Suppose the U.S. isn't first? It would be reminiscent of the Sputnik 1 circumstance. Perhaps such an instance would cheekily be labeled as a kind of Sputnik 2 phenomenon (as an aside, there really was a Sputnik 2 in terms of a second spacecraft launched in November 1957 by the Soviet Union and was the first to put an animal in space, the dog named Laika). America could end up as a second fiddle in the AI race. The idea seems absurd at face value. The United States undeniably has many of the top AI makers, along with amazing academic institutions that are globally recognized as AI leaders, and gobs of first-class AI researchers. Billions upon billions of dollars are flowing into the AI race by American companies and via U.S. federal, state, and local governmental agencies. Any notion of the United States not landing on AGI and ASI before any other country would seem utterly ludicrous and summarily rejected. The Logical Suppositions Whoa, comes the retort, you can't blindly assume that the United States will necessarily be the first to attain AGI and ASI. That is a haughty assumption. It belies the intense efforts taking place beyond the United States. This begs the question as to why America would not be the first to reach that desired goal. I will go ahead and give you a rundown on some of the most compelling reasons that have been expressed on this dicey matter. They consist of these five primary contentions: Let's briefly unpack each of those. Unknown Path To AGI And ASI First, no one anywhere can say for sure how AGI and ASI can be achieved. The whole endeavor is pretty much a shot in the dark. There isn't a pristine map that lays out the steps involved. Furthermore, it is conceivable that AGI and ASI will not be attained at all, i.e., no one will achieve the pinnacle AI. The United States is in the same boat as everyone else, namely, trying all sorts of clever ways to move toward AGI and ASI. No guarantees are to be had. All countries might come up blank on the AGI and ASI pursuit. Thus, no matter how much money or brainpower is employed, the end result might consist nicely of more advanced AI, but not the total package of true pinnacle AI. Marching To The Same Tune A second point is that perhaps a birds of a feather mindset could undermine the United States. Here's what that entails. Some have criticized that, by-and-large, we are using the same methods and similar AI internal structures across the board to reach AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here and the link here. If that's the case, our all-alike AI approach could be akin to putting all our eggs into one basket. The true path to pinnacle AI might be something outside of that presumed avenue. Unwilling To Take Risky Chances Another somewhat related consideration is that with the vast investments going into AI efforts, this might be making us more risk-averse. The logic is this. You would find it difficult to take in bucko bucks and not be pursuing AGI and ASI like others are. The investors won't be happy that you are trying some oddball angle. If you don't succeed but have followed the same approach as others, you can hold your head high and proclaim that everyone was caught off guard. On the other hand, if you opt for a risky path that no one else chooses to pursue, you'll have little headspace cover when it comes to explaining why your zany method didn't arrive at AGI and ASI. You will be fully exposed and readily vulnerable to reputational attack. Stealing AI To Reach The Pinnacle Here's a twist for you. Theft might come into play. It is suggested that maybe another country will steal our budding AI and manage to undertake the final steps to AGI and ASI before we do. In other words, suppose we have gotten down to the 90% mark and are struggling to get the final 10% done. Some other country that isn't anywhere near AGI and ASI decides to take a shortcut by stealing the AI that we have. Next, they manage to get the remaining 10% undertaken under their own auspices. Of course, they tout to the world that they did the pinnacle AI by themselves, entirely from A to Z. For more details on the chances of stealing AI, see my coverage at the link here. Discovery By Luck Or Chance One of the most intriguing reasons for the U.S. not being the first to achieve pinnacle AI is that perhaps there is some out-of-the-blue discovery that needs to be made. The ardent belief is that there is a missing piece that nobody has identified yet. No one knows what that piece is. There isn't any definition of it. It is the classical dilemma of not knowing what we don't know. The kicker is this. Suppose that discovering the missing piece is going to be based mainly on luck rather than skill. Assume that there is no inherent advantage in having the biggest AI labs and the biggest AI budgets. AGI and ASI might hinge on a completely left-field discovery that could happen anywhere and at any time. I've pointed out that this particular theory or conjecture has given rise to the credence that AGI and ASI might be achieved on a solo basis, see my discussion at the link here. Yes, instead of vast teams arriving at pinnacle AI, some enterprising individual in their pajamas and in their basement arrives there first. If you believe in this fanciful missing piece concept, it seems plausible that a solo developer with incredible luck might discover it. The solo developer might be in the tiniest of countries, and ergo, bring AGI and ASI to that country before any other country figures it out. Presumably, unbelievable fame and fortune await that solo developer. Being First Does Matter Those above-described handful of mainstay reasons are on the minds of many. Please know that additional reasons are being bandied around. It's a hot topic and raises the heat when emphatically discussed. A smarmy viewpoint about this dire handwringing conundrum is that being first is perhaps overrated. If the U.S. doesn't get to AGI and ASI before some other country, maybe it's not such a big deal, and we are making an undue fuss. A preoccupation with being first can be a bad thing. Go with the flow. However things perchance go, they go. The counterargument to this offhandness is that we all pretty much acknowledge that AGI and ASI have supremely dual-use consequences, doing grand good for the world but also potentially grand bad for the world. The first to get to pinnacle AI might unleash quite a vicious storm upon the globe and muscle themselves into a geo-economic position of a disconcerting nature (see my analysis at the link here, along with why the United Nations also is trying to have a role in the AGI/ASI arrival, see the link here). The planetary and humankind existential stakes underlying AGI and ASI are huge. Whichever country gets there first is, in fact, an important consideration. Humanity And The Future A final thought to ruminate on. Some have likened the attainment of AGI and ASI to the likes of achieving atomic energy and the atomic bomb. Historically, the case can be made that getting there first did make a difference. We now know that being first was significant, and we also know that what happens after the first attainment is an ongoing struggle and vitally crucial too. Thinking further ahead in terms of pinnacle AI, the question arises whether some or all other countries of the world will eventually possess and/or control AGI and ASI. That's another substantive topic worthy of keen chatter. Per the wise words of Albert Einstein, we earnestly need to keep this pointed remark in mind: 'The solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Everyone's talking about the Perseid meteor shower – but don't bother trying to see it in Australia or NZ
In recent days, you may have seen articles claiming the 'best meteor shower of the year' is about to start. Unfortunately, the hype is overblown – particularly for observers in Australia and New Zealand. The shower in question is the Perseids, one of the 'big three' – the strongest annual meteor showers. Peaking in the middle of the northern summer, the Perseids are an annual highlight for observers in the northern hemisphere. As a result, every year social media around the world runs rife with stories about how we can enjoy the show. For an astronomer in Australia, this is endlessly frustrating – the Perseids are impossible to see for the great majority of Australians and Kiwis. Fortunately, there are a few other meteor showers to fill the void, including a pair that will reach their peak in the next seven days. What are the Perseids? Every year, Earth runs into a stream of debris laid down over thousands of years by comet 109P/Swift–Tuttle. The comet swings around the Sun every 133 years or so, shedding dust and debris each time. Over the millenia, that material has spread to create a vast stream. Earth starts to run into debris from Swift–Tuttle in mid-July, and takes six weeks to pass through the stream. When the dust and debris hit Earth's atmosphere, the resulting meteors create bright streaks in the sky – a meteor shower. For most of that time, the dust we encounter is very widely spread, and so few meteors are seen. Around August 12, Earth reaches the densest part of the Perseid stream and the shower reaches its peak. The Perseids aren't even the 'best' meteor shower Comet Swift–Tuttle last passed through the inner Solar System in 1992. With the comet nearby, Earth encountered more dust and debris, making the Perseids the best meteor shower of the year. In the decades since, the comet has receded to the icy depths of the Solar System, and the peak rates for the Perseids have fallen off. The 'best' (most abundant) meteor shower of the year is now the Geminids. However, for people in the northern hemisphere, the Perseids are still well worth looking out for. The curse of the spherical Earth All meteor showers have a 'radiant"– the point at which meteors seem to originate in the sky. This is because, for a given shower, all the debris hitting Earth comes from the same direction in space. The debris from comet Swift–Tuttle crashes towards Earth from above the north pole, and at an angle. As a result, for people at a latitude of 58 degrees north, the Perseid radiant would be directly overhead in the early hours of the morning. If a meteor shower's radiant is below the horizon, you won't see any meteors – Earth is in the way, and all the dust and debris is hitting the other side of the planet. It's exactly the same reason you can't see the Sun at nighttime. Given the location of the Perseid radiant, it will never rise for observers south of 32 degrees. This means anyone below that line will never see any Perseids. In theory, anyone north of 32 degrees south latitude can see the Perseids – but there are other complications. The higher a shower's radiant is in the sky, the more meteors you will see. This is why the Perseids can't put on a great show for people in Australia. Even in the far north of Australia, the Perseid radiant remains low in the sky at its highest. For most Australians, the Perseids will be a spectacular disappointment. Look for these meteor showers instead If you're keen to see a meteor shower from Australia or New Zealand, it's best to cross the Perseids off your list. Fortunately, there are other options. Every May, Earth passes through debris left behind by comet 1P/Halley, creating the Eta Aquariid meteor shower – only visible in the hours before dawn. For Australian observers, that's the second best shower of the year. At the end of July each year, two minor meteor showers reach their peaks: the Southern Delta Aquariids and Alpha Capricornids. This year, they peak on 29 and 30 July, with the best views coming in the hours around midnight. It's a perfect time to head out to a dark sky site and relax under the stars – the centre of the Milky Way is high overhead in the evening sky, and these two showers provide some added fireworks to make the sky extra special. Then, in December, comes the true "best shower of the year' – the Geminids. Reaching a peak on 14 and 15 December, the Geminids always put on a spectacular show. Unlike the Perseids, it can be seen from all across our island continent and in Aotearoa. If you really want to see a great meteor shower, skip the Perseids and plan to head somewhere dark this summer, to spend a couple of nights relaxing under the stars. This article is republished from The Conversation. It was written by: Jonti Horner, University of Southern Queensland Read more: Astronomers have spied an interstellar object zooming through the Solar System Astronomers have discovered another puzzling interstellar object − this third one is big, bright and fast After 50 successful years, the European Space Agency has some big challenges ahead Jonti Horner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
When did our solar system's planets form? Discovery of tiny meteorite may challenge the timeline
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. A tiny meteorite is rewriting what scientists thought they knew about the origins of our solar system. New evidence found in shavings from a meteorite known as Northwest Africa 12264 — a 50-gram (1.8 ounces) piece of space rock that is believed to have formed in the outer solar system — suggests that rocky planets like Earth and distant icy bodies may have formed at the same time. This challenges the long-standing belief that planets closer to the sun formed before those in the outer solar system, the ones that lie beyond the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Planets form within the rotating disks of gas and dust that surround young stars, where particles collide and stick together through a process known as accretion. As developing rocky planets heat up, they begin to differentiate, forming separate internal layers known as the core, mantle and crust. Scientists have thought that our solar system's inner rocky planets — Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars —formed first (around 4.566 billion years ago), while gas giants and icy bodies in the outer solar system came together slightly later (4.563 billion years ago), due to the colder temperatures at a greater distance from the sun. Rocky planets farther out were also thought to form more slowly because their higher water and ice content would have delayed internal heating and core development. Analyzing the composition of the meteorite (which was purchased from a dealer in Morocco in 2018) revealed a ratio of chromium and oxygen that indicates it came from the outer part of the solar system. Using precise isotopic dating methods, the researchers found that the rock formed 4.564 billion years ago — just two to three million years after the solar system's earliest solid materials. Until now, such early formation was thought to be limited to bodies from the inner solar system, according to a statement announcing the new study. RELATED STORIES — How did the solar system form? — Solar system guide: Discover the order of planets and other amazing facts — What are meteorites? Evidence that rocky planets beyond Jupiter formed as rapidly, and at the same time, as the inner planets could transform our understanding of how planets take shape — not only in our solar system, but in planetary systems throughout the universe, the researchers said. Their findings were published on July 4 in the journal Communications Earth & Environment.
