I think this really tells us something about 1) perception: we don't really look to see how things 'really' look, we get a general impression of them and 2) art: if we express these perceptions in art, we tend to try and evoke the feeling the perception evokes in us rather than depict the thing as it literally appears to the eye.
The part at 0:16 is infinitely funny to me because it suggests that minutephysics GENUINELY believes that these are actual mistakes and not stylization
Another less common mistake is to make the dark portion of the moon darker than the surrounding space, e.g. dark blue sky, yellow stars, white moon with black shadowed half. The moon will never be darker than how the sky appears in it's vicinity, and any effects one can see coloring the sky will color that dark side just the same.
The thing about knowing all this about the moon, is that it allows you to get accurate answers to all sorts of important questions like, what time is it, which direction is South, what tide is it, what is the local lattitude.
I can overlook most of the others as "general artistic license." I mean, draw a fun looking moon for drama, and if you just need a moon, I don't expect an artist to spend a few hours investigating appropriate orientations, etc, when they just need an image of the moon for effect. But serious, stars inside the dark part of a solid body? That's a pretty easy one to respect.
The super curved crescent moons are 100% about aesthetic appeal more than accuracy. Interestingly one of the reasons they are so common is from air brushing. If one cuts out both ends of a can, and places and offset smaller lid under it, and then uses that as the moon stencil, then one ends up with those types of moons. They are particularly effective for other worldly stylized space art.
I remember the moon being "upside down" when I went to Australia. Something was off but I couldn't work it out until I looked properly and all of the Mare and craters where flipped 180
This video blew my mind TWICE in about as many seconds. First, you tell me the moon looks different in different parts of the world (I never really thought about it). Second, you tell me I can just hold up a ball to check what phase the moon is in. Logic, on display at orbital-mechanical levels and stuff any four year old can understand. Brilliant.
My first (pre-coffee) thought was "no, you can totally see the nearly full moon in the daytime." But then I woke up enough to realise that living on 54 degrees north, I get something like 17 or 18 hours of daylight in high summer, and I've only ever seen full-ish moons in the daytime in the summer. When, clearly, there's enough daytime for the sun and moon to both be visible but still be on opposite sides of the sky.
I got lost in a corn maze one time & I used all these moon tricks to find my way out! I knew the entrance faced west, and since it was evening, I could just follow the sun (cutting through the corn stalks if necessary). The sun had already set, but I could figure out its position based on the phase of the moon. I saw the moon's 2D shape & reverse engineered its 3D configuration. Then I could pinpoint where the sun was supposed to be & I was out of the maze in minutes. I felt like such a genius, and seeing it all confirmed by minute physics just makes my day :)
I also like how different latitudes on earth produced different cultural lore about the moon: in Europe, where you see the moon tilted at roughly 45° people talk about the "man in the moon", based on the moon's topographic features. But when you live more towards the equator, people talk about the "bunny in the moon" - and at those angles ~0° you can clearly see the bunny.
I love how you mention crescent moons being visible in the morning, one of my formative memories as a kid was seeing the crescent moon frequently in the morning to the point I associate moons more with the day. I highly recommend looking for the moon in the morning because seeing the white crescent blend with with the baby blue sky is simply gorgeous.
I will add to that:
In fictional worlds with multiple moons next to each other, the moons will have similar phases and will point in the same direction. You won't see a crescent moon next to a full one.
One interesting "wrong transparency" "moon" is the Montressor Spaceport in Treasure Planet, where the first viewing one may think 'wait, the moon is solid, why can we see through it', only to realize 'Oh! It's a spaceport'
3:35 - you made it look like Rafiki is shaking his head in disappointment at all the inaccuracies 😂
We use cookies, device fingerprinting and cross-device tracking to personalise content, serve targeted advertising, and analyse how you use our site across your devices. By clicking Accept all you consent to the use of these tracking technologies. Your data may be used to build a profile of your interests and show you personalised ads on other sites.
Privacy policy
Comments (20)
Daily Junction discussion mixed with clearly attributed comments from the original video provider.
Join in — free. Comments on Daily Junction are for members, so real names stay rare and bots stay out.
One field. We email you a 6-digit code — no password needed. Your comment is kept while you do it.
Under 13? You’ll need a parent’s OK first — it takes them one click.
I can overlook most of the others as "general artistic license." I mean, draw a fun looking moon for drama, and if you just need a moon, I don't expect an artist to spend a few hours investigating appropriate orientations, etc, when they just need an image of the moon for effect. But serious, stars inside the dark part of a solid body? That's a pretty easy one to respect.
Still, a bit of extra pedantry for the video.
In fictional worlds with multiple moons next to each other, the moons will have similar phases and will point in the same direction. You won't see a crescent moon next to a full one.