Shallow Thoughts
Akkana's Musings on Open Source, Science, and Nature.
Sun, 16 Nov 2008
![[moonroot]](http://shallowsky.com/software/moonroot/moonroot-s.png)
I wrote
moonroot
more to figure out how to do it than to run it myself.
But on the new monitor I have so much screen real estate
that I've started using it -- but the quality of the images was
such an embarrassment that I couldn't stand it. So I took a few
minutes and cleaned up the images and made a moonroot 0.6 release.
Turned out there was a trick I'd missed when I originally made the
images, years ago. XPM apparently only allows 1-bit transparency.
When I was editing the RGB image and removing the outside edge of the circle,
some of the pixels ended up semi-transparent, and when I saved the
file as .xpm, they ended up looking very different (much darker)
from what I had edited.
Here are two ways to solve that in GIMP:
- Use the "Hard edge" option on the eraser tool (and a hard-edged
brush, of course, not a fuzzy one).
- Convert the image to indexed, in which case GIMP will only allow
one bit's worth of transparency. (That doesn't help for full-color
images, but for a greyscale image like the moon, there's no loss
of color since even RGB images can only have 8 bits per channel.)
Either way, the way to edit a transparent image where you're trying
to make the edges look clean is to add a solid-color background
layer (I usually use white, but of course it depends on how you're going
to use the image) underneath the layer you're trying to edit.
(In the layers dialog, click the New button, chose White for the
new layer, click the down-arrow button to move it below the original
layer, then click on the original layer so your editing will all
happen there.)
Once you're editing a circle with sharp edges, you'll probably need
to adjust the colors for some of the edge pixels too. Unfortunately
the Smudge tool doesn't seem to work on indexed images, so you'll
probably spend a lot of time alternating between the Color Picker
and the Pencil tool, picking pixel colors then dabbing them onto
other pixels. Key bindings are the best way to do that: o activates
the Color Picker, N the Pencil, P the Paintbrush. Even if you don't
normally use those shortcuts it's worth learning them for the
duration of this sort of operation.
Or use the Clone tool, where the only keyboard shortcut you have to
remember is Ctrl to pick a new source pixel. (I didn't think of that
until I was already finished, but it works fine.)
Tags: programming, astronomy, gimp
[
14:48 Nov 16, 2008
More gimp |
permalink to this entry
]
Mon, 20 Oct 2008
Someone on #openbox this morning wanted help in bringing up a window
without decorations -- no titlebar or window borders.
Afterward, Mikael commented that the app should really be coded
not to have borders in the first place.
Me: You can do that?
Turns out it's not a standard ICCCM request, but one that mwm
introduced, MWM_HINTS_DECORATIONS.
Mikael pointed me to the urxvt source as an example of an app that uses it.
My own need was more modest: my little
moonroot
Xlib program that draws the moon at approximately its current phase.
Since the code is a lot simpler than urxvt, perhaps the new version,
moonroot 0.4, will be useful as an example for someone (it's also
an example of how to use the X Shape extension for making
non-rectangular windows).
Tags: programming, xlib, astronomy, window managers
[
11:06 Oct 20, 2008
More programming |
permalink to this entry
]
Mon, 22 Sep 2008
Part
III in the Linux Astronomy series on Linux Planet covers two 3-D apps,
Stellarium and Celestia.
Writing this one was somewhat tricky because
the current Ubuntu, "Hardy", has a bug in its Radeon handling
and both these apps lock my machine up pretty quickly, so I went
through a lot of reboot cycles getting the screenshots.
(I found lots of bug reports and comments on the web, so I know
it's not just me.)
Fortunately I was able to test both apps and grab a few screenshots
on Fedora 8 and Ubuntu "Feisty" without encountering crashes.
(Ubuntu sure has been having a lot of
trouble with their X support lately! I'm going to start keeping
current Fedora and Suse installs around for times like this.)
Tags: writing, astronomy, linux, ubuntu, bugs
[
21:10 Sep 22, 2008
More writing |
permalink to this entry
]
Fri, 12 Sep 2008
I have a new article on XEphem on Linux Planet,
following up to the KStars article two weeks ago:
Viewing
the Night Sky with Linux, Part II: Visit the Planets With XEphem.
Tags: writing, astronomy, linux
[
10:50 Sep 12, 2008
More writing |
permalink to this entry
]
Thu, 28 Aug 2008
I have an article on Linux Planet! The first of many, I hope.
At least the first of a short series on Linux astronomy programs,
starting with the one that's easiest to use: KStars.
It's oriented toward binocular observing, with suggestions
for good targets for beginners.
Viewing
the Night Sky with Linux, Part I: KStars
Tags: writing, astronomy, linux
[
21:46 Aug 28, 2008
More writing |
permalink to this entry
]
Tue, 18 Mar 2008
I was looking at Dave's little phase-of-the-moon Mac application,
and got the urge to play with moonroot, the little xlib ditty I
wrote several years ago to put a moon (showing the right phase)
on the desktop.
I fired it up, and got the nice moon-shaped window ... but with a
titlebar. I didn't want that! Figuring out how to get rid of the
titlebar in openbox was easy, just
<application name="moonroot">
<decor>no</decor>
<desktop>all</desktop>
</application>
... but it didn't work! A poke with
xwininfo showed the likely
cause: instead of "moonroot", the window was listed as "Unnamed window".
Whoops!
A little poking around revealed three different ways to set "name"
for a window: XStoreName, XSetClassHint (which sets both class
name and app name), and XSetWMName. Available online documentation
on these functions was not very helpful in explaining the differences;
fortunately someone hanging out on the openbox channel knew the
difference (thanks, Crazy_Hopper). Thus:
- XSetWMName sets a property called XA_NAME which is
primarily used to update the window's titlebar.
Note that this may be more than the app name (for instance,
Firefox puts the title of the current page in the titlebar).
To use XSetWMName, you have to set up and populate an
XTextProperty structure, which first requires that you set up
a string list then run XStringListToTextProperty
-- not difficult but it's several annoying steps.
- XStoreName is a shortcut to XSetWMName, a way to set
the XA_NAME (titlebar name) in one step.
- XSetClassHint sets two properties at once: a name hint
and a class hint. This is the name and class that the window
manager uses for directives like suppressing the titlebar.
I didn't see much in the way of example code for what an app ought to
do with these, so I'll post mine here:
char* appname;
XClassHint* classHint;
[ ... ]
if (argv && argc > 1)
appname = basename(argv[0]);
else
appname = "moonroot";
/* set the titlebar name */
XStoreName(dpy, win, appname);
/* set the name and class hints for the window manager to use */
classHint = XAllocClassHint();
if (classHint) {
classHint->res_name = appname;
classHint->res_class = "MoonRoot";
}
XSetClassHint(dpy, win, classHint);
XFree(classHint);
And if anyone is interested in my silly moon program, it's at
moonroot-0.3.tar.gz.
moonroot gives you a large moon,
moonroot -s gives a smaller one.
I'm not terribly happy with its accuracy and wasted too much time
today fiddling with it and verifying that it's doing the right time
conversions. All I can figure is that the approximation in Meeus'
Astronomical Algorithms is way too approximate (it's
sometimes off by more than a day) and I should just rewrite all my
moon programs to calculate moon phase the hard (and slow) way.
Tags: programming, xlib, astronomy
[
20:15 Mar 18, 2008
More programming |
permalink to this entry
]
Sun, 28 Oct 2007
I finally got a chance to take a look at Comet 17/P Holmes.
I'd been hearing about this bright comet for a couple of days, since
it unexpectedly broke up and flared from about 17th magnitude (fainter
than most amateur telescopes can pick up even in dark skies) to 2nd
magnitude (easily visible to the naked eye from light-polluted
cities). It's in Perseus, so only visible from the northern
hemisphere, pretty much any time after dark (but it's higher
a little later in the evening).
And it's just as bright as advertised. I grabbed my binoculars, used a
finder chart
posted by one of our local SJAA members,
and there it was, bright and obviously fuzzy. Without the binoculars
it was still easy to see, and still noticably fuzzy.
So I dragged out the trusty 6" dobsonian, and although it has no
visible tail, it has lots of structure. It looked like this:
It has a stellar nucleus, a bright inner area (the coma?) and a
much larger, fainter outer halo. There's also a faint star just
outside the coma, so it'll be fun (if we continue to get holes in
the clouds) to see how fast it moves relative to that star.
(Not much motion in the past hour.)
It's nice to have a bright comet in the sky again! Anyone interested
in astronomy should check this one out in the next few days -- since
it may be in the process of breaking up, there's no telling how long
it'll last or what will happen next. Grab some binoculars, or a 'scope
if you have one, and take a look.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
21:51 Oct 28, 2007
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Wed, 08 Nov 2006
Mercury transited the sun today. The weather forecast predicted
rain, and indeed, I awoke this morning to a thick overcast which
soon turned to drizzle. But miraculously, ten minutes before the
start of the transit the sky cleared, and we were able to see
the whole thing, all five hours of it (well, we weren't watching
for the whole five hours -- the most interesting parts are the
beginning and end).
I had plenty of practice with solar observing yesterday,
showing the sun to a group of middle school girls as part of
an astronomy workshop.
This is organized by the AAUW, the same group that runs the annual
Tech Trek
summer science girls' camps. (The Stanford Tech Trek has a star
party, which is how I got involved with this group.)
It's the second year I've done the astronomy workshop for
them; this year went pretty smoothly and everybody seemed to
have a good time observing the sun, simulating moon phases,
learning about the Doppler effect and plotting relative distances
of the planets on a road map.
But what I really wanted to write about was the amazing video
shown by last weekend's SJAA speaker, Dr. Ivan Linscott of Stanford.
As one of the team members on the New Horizons mission to Pluto,
he was telling us about Pluto's tenuous atmosphere. There isn't a
lot of information on Pluto's atmosphere yet, but one of the goals of
New Horizons is to take readings as Pluto occults the sun to
see how sunlight is refracted through Pluto's atmosphere.
But that's no problem: it turns out we've already
done more challenging occultation studies than that.
Back in December 2001, Titan occulted a binary star, and
researchers using Palomar's Adaptive Optics setup got a
spectacular video of the stars being refracted through Titan's
atmosphere as the occultation progresses.
This is old news, of course, but most of us hadn't seen it before
and everyone was blown away. Remember, this is a video from Earth,
of the atmosphere of a moon of Saturn, something most Earth-based
telescopes would have trouble even resolving as a disk.
Watch
the Titan occultation video here.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
22:38 Nov 08, 2006
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Fri, 25 Aug 2006
The BBC had a
good
article today about the International Astronomical Union
vote that demoted Pluto from planet status.
It was fairly obvious that the previous proposal, last week,
that defined "planet" as anything big enough that its gravity made
it round, was obviously a red herring that nobody was going to take
very serious. Fercryinoutloud, it made the asteroid Ceres a planet,
as well as Earth's moon (in a few billion years when it gets a bit
farther away from us and ceases to be considered a moon).
But apparently there were several other dirty tricks played by the
anti-Pluto faction, and IAU members who weren't able to be in the
room at the time of the vote are not happy and are spoiling for
a rematch. The new definition doesn't make much more sense than
the previous one, anyway: it's based on gravitationally sweeping
out objects from an orbit, but that also rules out Earth, Mars,
Jupiter and Neptune, all of which have non-satellite objects along
their orbits.
And of course the public is pretty upset about it for sentimental,
non-scientific reasons. Try searching for Pluto or "Save Pluto" on Cafe Press to see the amazing
selection of pro-Pluto merchandise you can buy barely a day after
the IAU decision. (Personally, I want a Honk
if Pluto is still a planet bumper sticker.)
It'll be interesting to see if the decision sticks.
So do I have a viable definition of "planet" which includes Pluto
but not Ceres or the various other Kuiper belt objects which are
continually being discovered?
Why, no, I don't. But the discussion is purely semantic anyway.
Whether we call Pluto a planet doesn't make any difference to
planetary science. But it does make a difference to an enormous
collection of textbooks, museum exhibits, and other
science-for-the-public displays.
Pluto is big enough to have
been discovered in 1930, back in the days before computerized
robotic telescopes and satellite imaging; it's been considered
a planet for 76 years. There's no scientific benefit to changing
that, and a lot of social and political reason not to -- especially
now with New Horizons
headed there to give us our first up-close look at what Pluto
actually looks like.
There are two possible bright notes to the Pluto decision.
First, Mark Taylor pointed
out that it has become much easier to observe all the planets
in one night, even with a very small telescope or binoculars.
And second, maybe Christine Lavin will make a new
updated version of her song Planet X
and go on tour with it.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
21:56 Aug 25, 2006
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Sun, 10 Jul 2005
Yesterday was the annual Fremont Peak Star-b-q.
This year the weather managed to be fairly perfect for observing
afterward: the fog came in for a while, making for fairly dark
skies, and it wasn't too cold though it was a bit breezy.
It was even reasonably steady.
I had my homebuilt 8" dob, while Dave brought his homebuilt 12.5".
Incredibly, we were all alone in the southwest lot: the most
Star-b-q was fairly lightly attended, and most of the handful
who stayed to observe afterward set up at Coulter row.
The interesting sight of the evening was the supernova in M51 (the
Whirlpool galaxy). It was fairly easy in the 12.5" once we knew
where to look (Mike Koop came over to visit after looking at it
in the 30"), and once we found it there all three of us could see
it in the 8" as well.
We had excellent views of Jupiter in the 8", with detail in the red
spot, the thin equatorial band easily visible, and long splits in
both the northern and southern equatorial bands. I didn't make any
sketches since a family wandered by about then so I let them look
instead.
We also had lovely low-power views of Venus and crescent Mercury,
and we spent some time traversing detail on the dark side of the
slim crescent moon due to the excellent earthshine. All the major
maria were visible, and of course Aristarchus, but we could also
see Plato, Sinus Iridum, Kepler, Copernicus and its ray system,
Tycho (only in the 12" -- the 8" was having glare problems that
close to the lit part of the moon) and one long ray from Tycho
that extended across Mare Nubium and out to near Copernicus.
Pretty good for observing the "dark" side!
Neither of us was able to find Comet Tempel-1 (the Deep Impact
comet), even with the 12.5". But after moonset I picked up the Veil
and North American in the 8" unfiltered (having left my filters at
home), and we got some outstanding views of the nebulae in
Sagittarius, particularly the Trifid, which was showing more
dust-lane detail without a filter than I've ever seen even filtered.
It was a good night for carnivores, too. We saw one little grey fox
cub trotting up the road to the observatory during dinner, and there
was another by the side of the road on the way home. Then, farther
down the road, I had to stop for three baby raccoons playing in the
street. (Very cute!) They eventually got the idea that maybe they
should get off the road and watch from the shoulder. The parents
were nowhere to be seen: probably much more car-wise than their
children (I don't often see raccoon roadkill). I hope the kids
got a scolding afterward about finding safer places to play.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
22:31 Jul 10, 2005
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Fri, 17 Jun 2005
Remember the game of "Telephone" when you were a kid? Everybody gets
in a big circle. One kid whispers a message in the ear of the kid next
to them. That kid repeats the message to the next kid, and so on
around the circle. By the time the message gets back to the
originator, it has usually changed beyond recognition.
Sometimes the Internet is like that.
Background: a year and a half ago, in August 2003, there was an
unusually favorable Mars opposition. Mars has a year roughly double
ours, so Mars "oppositions" happen about every two years (plus a few
months). An opposition is when we and Mars are both on the same side
of the sun (so the sun is opposite Mars in our sky, and Mars is
at its highest at midnight). We're much closer to Mars at opposition
than at other times, and that makes a big difference on a planet as
small as Mars, so for people who like to observe Mars with a
telescope, oppositions are the best time to do it.
The August 2003 opposition was the closest opposition in thousands of
years, because Mars was near its perihelion (the point where
it's closest to earth) at the time of the opposition. Much was made of
this in the press (the press loves events where they can say "best in
10,000 years") to the point where lots of people who aren't
normally interested in astronomy decided they wanted to see Mars and
came to star parties to look through telescopes.
That's always nice, and we tried to show them Mars, though Mars is
very small, even during an opposition. The 2003 opposition wasn't
actually all that favorable for those of us in northern hemisphere.
because Mars was near the southernmost part of its orbit. That means
it was very low in the sky, which is never good for seeing detail
through a telescope. Down near the horizon you're looking through a
lot more of Earth's atmosphere, and you're down near all the heat
waves coming off houses and streets and even rocks. That disturbs the
view quite a bit, like trying to see detail on a penny at the bottom
of a swimming pool.
This year's opposition, around Halloween, will not be as
close as the 2003 opposition, but it's still fairly close as
oppositions go. Plus, this year, Mars will be much farther north.
So we're expecting a good opposition -- weather permitting, both on
Earth, which is sometimes cloudy in November, and on Mars, where you
never know when a freak dust storm might appear.
Which brings me back to the game of Telephone.
A few weeks ago I got the first of them. An email from someone
quoting a message someone had forwarded, asking whether it was
true. The message began:
The Red Planet is about to be spectacular! This month and next, Earth is
catching up with Mars in an encounter that will culminate in the closest
approach between the two planets in recorded history.
and it ended:
Share this with your children and grandchildren. NO ONE ALIVE TODAY WILL
EVER SEE THIS AGAIN
(sic on the caps and the lack of a period at the end).
I sent a reply saying the email was two years out of date, and giving
information on this year's Mars opposition and the fact that it may
actually be better for observing Mars than 2003 was. But the next day
I got a similar inquiry from someone else. So I updated my
Mars FAQ to mention the
misleading internet message, and the inquiries slowed down.
But today, I got a new variant.
Subject: IS MARS GOING TO BE AS BIG AS THE MOON IN AUGUST?
As big as the moon! That would be a very close opposition!
(Dave, always succinct, said I should reply and say simply, "Bigger."
Mars is, of course, always bigger than the moon, even if its apparent
size as viewed from earth is small.)
It looks like the story is growing in the telling, in a way it
somehow didn't two years ago.
I can't wait to see what the story will have become by August.
Mars is going to hit us?
Tags: science, astronomy
[
10:48 Jun 17, 2005
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Mon, 17 Jan 2005
Anthony
Liekens has a wonderful page on open-source Cassini-Huygens
image analysis.
A group of people from a space IRC channel took the raw images
from the descent of the Huygens probe onto Titan's surface, and
applied image processing: they stitched panoramas, created animations,
created stereograms, added sharpening and color. The results are
very impressive!
I hope NASA takes notice of this. There's a lot of interest, energy
and talent in the community, which could be very helpful in analysis
of astronomical data. Astronomy has a long history of amateur
involvement in scientific research, perhaps more so than any other
science; extending that to space-based research seems only a small step.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
18:30 Jan 17, 2005
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]
Sun, 18 Jul 2004
Hiking up to the top of Fremont Peak before the
FPOA Star-b-q started,
we saw the Ghost and the Darkness, squirrel style.
A couple of ground squirrels hidden in the tall grass
startled as we walked by, and whisked off through the
grass, occasionally twitching a tail-tip up above the tops
of the grasses but otherwise mostly invisible.
Down in the parking lots, there were some interesting ant or
wasp-like insects: furry scarlet head, black thorax, furry scarlet
abdomen. The wings were black, too, and they could fly at least
a little. No idea what they were.
Learned a new word reading scoops on the way down: Anecdotage,
that advanced age where all one does is relate stories about "the
good, old days."
Turned out Jeff Moore was the speaker at FPOA. He always gives
good talks, but this one was especially good: interpretation of
the Mars Rover geologic results so far. Some of his slides showed
terrestrial scenes (mostly Death Valley) for comparison with the
Martian geologic features, and he mentioned that the terrestrial
slides were easy to tell because they were the ones with the
pocketknife showing (for scale). So the following morning,
I got inspired to whip up a
few counterexamples.
Tags: science, astronomy
[
09:00 Jul 18, 2004
More science/astro |
permalink to this entry
]