Jump to content

Talk:Daylight

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move

[edit]

This page really should be at Daylight. I've fixed the disambiguation and links to make this possible. Admin please move the page.--Srleffler 18:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Done. —Nightstallion (?) 08:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

artificial daylight

[edit]

I assume this is refering to recreating daylight in terms of lux? ...because recreating it's temperature is already possible...

Anyway, if that's the case, maybe that should be clarified in the article.. TerraFrost 00:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)ar[reply]

Daylight intensity in the Solar System

[edit]

Is Daylight the right place to describe sunlight intensity in the Solar System? It just seems a little odd, even if we can speak of daylight on other planets, to have a detailed examination here and a bare mention at sunlight. I think the table etc should be merged there, with a briefer mention and {{seealso}} in its place here, keeping things here more terrestrial. I've merge tagged the section, anyway.--mikaultalk 12:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the author of that section, I agree wholeheartedly. I am now moving the table. --Cyclopia (talk) 20:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated

[edit]

The table of the planets' sunlight intensity is out of date, as it mentions Pluto as being a planet whereas it is now in fact classed as a dwarf-planet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.Help (talk • contribs) 19:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad image from time.gov

[edit]

I deleted the image from time.gov (showing the terminator in Jan), because it is incorrect. It shows light symmetrically divided between the two hemispheres. However, at that time of year (Northern winter), there should be a band at the top (around the north pole) that light does not reach into, and at the bottom (around the south pole) there should be a band in continuous light. Compare to the websites at http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Earth or http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/earthview.php, which generate correct images. Wingedsubmariner (talk) 05:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I undid my edit: I was wrong, graph didn't extend as far as I thought. Wingedsubmariner (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Different luminance for overcast within Wikipedia

[edit]

The Daylight article reads "10,000 - 25,000 lux Typical overcast day, midday", but the LUX article states "1,000 lux Overcast day; typical TV studio lighting". What is correct? The two articles differ by more than a factor 10! http://books.google.at/books?id=tTswvXBDBHkC&pg=SA35-PA37&dq=overcast+lux&hl=de&ei=ZwLJTZeJMcmVOoCLjccH&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=overcast%20lux&f=false gives a table (Table XIX), where the illumination of the overcast sky depends on the latitude. Based on such information I guess the Lux articel should also give a range and not a fixed value. The Daylight article should probably extend the low range for overcast to 5,000 lux instead of 10,000 lux. But these are just assumptions from an unexpierenced person, named Michilans (talk) 09:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Early-June this year, in Seattle, on a very heavily overcast and rainy day, my lux meter showed about 10k. Some less severe overcast days have shown closer to 20-25k. I do believe that the 1-2k estimate currently shown is far too low. Mortrek (talk) 21:51, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

removed night filming paragraph

[edit]

In some filmmaking locations, such as Sweden, there is too much light due to long summer days. As a result, in films like Marianne, night scenes have to be shot during the daylight hours and digitally altered later.

I removed this since it isn't about daylight as much as about movie-making with excess daylight. PErhaps move it to "day for night"? Mang (talk) 20:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC) see also Day for night[reply]

Removed mental health effects under "effects" header

[edit]

It has been 5 years since the unreferenced tag was added and no attempts for adding references to it have been made, I believe it is better if it's removed due to the questionable nature of the paragraph.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Daylight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daylight. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency in moonlight illumination

[edit]

This Wikipedia article : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonlight state that moonlight have at most 0.1lux please discuss with each other and provide the correct version 183.182.111.149 (talk) 18:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion?

[edit]

The article could do more to mention daylight in the context of other bodies. For example, Mercury, where the synodic day lasts for 176 days (compared to the orbital period of 88 days). The surface of Venus only receives indirect sunlight. The poles of Uranus can receive sunlight for 42 straight years. It could also discuss permanently shadowed craters that never receive sunlight. Finally, perhaps it could mention the midnight sun effect of latitude? Daylight reflected from rotating asteroids can be used to produce shape models through light curve inversion. Praemonitus (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Daylight&oldid=1259044534"