Talk:Light echo

message: With the current illustration, that is not true.  Could somebody correct the illustration so that paths B and C are truly co-linear? 71.219.229.17 (talk) 17:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "light following paths B and C appear to come from the same point in the sky to the observer" 

message: Are you sure that V838 Mon was the only observed light echo since 1936? Here are some links that analyse light echoes around other supernovae: Multiple Light Echoes from Supernova 1993J, Sugerman & Crotts, ApJ 2002; A New View of the Circumstellar Environment of SN 1987A, Sugerman, Crotts, Kunkel, Heathcote & Lawrence, ApJ, 2005. Searching citebase for some of the authors mentioned also reveals similar papers. SamGeen(talk)
*I was going off the information provided by the ESA on that one.  Certainly if there are other examples that can be dug up then by all means they should be added to the article! Arkyan • (talk) 14:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I don't know what the ESA site meant. Possibly it was referring to direct observations; the methods used in the papers appear to be difference methods, where the flux in the two images is subtracted to remove bright, constant light sources like stars. I don't know whether the ESA site meant direct observations without using difference methods. In any case, it's only something I've come across for project work - I don't know a huge amount about it. SamGeen(talk) 18:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only example? 

message: :"Because this light has only traveled forward as well as away from the star [...]"
Is there a word missing here? "Only" implies exclusivity, "as well as" implies inclusivity. Both cannot be correct.
:"Since the speed of light is a constant, all light that originates from the same flash must have traveled the same distance."
Uh, no - only those arriving at the same time. If this statement is a locical continuation of the previous paragraph, they should not be separated. Geira (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, please! This is still incomprehensible. And  is understandable but seems to be nonsense. If the echo arrives later than the original signal, how can it be thought to have traveled faster? Maybe an observer thinks the echo is the direct signal and the direct is an echo, but then the article should say so explicitly rather than leave the reader in confusion. --Thnidu (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomprehensible logic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Light echo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061125003637/http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/light_echo_030326.html to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/light_echo_030326.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Light echo. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516174941/http://www.ctio.noao.edu/supermacho/lightechos/ to http://www.ctio.noao.edu/supermacho/lightechos/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:57, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified