[Tontogary]

It’s a pity people do not actually read the commentary on the links that rate provided.

Rabinoz did. He provided a quote that one of the images was from fish-eye lens.

As does your link state "which look like ellipses on this distorting fish eye image." You should probably read your own links before accusing others of that.

Please read the captions on the website in the link before accusing me of hypocracy.

In fact let me quote the caption above the picture;

“Equirectangular projection of the all sky view. Southern celestial hemisphere is on the left and Northern celestial hemisphere on the right.
If you want to see the movie of the true sky rotation explained above (and showed in all these pictures) by moving the camera yourself, you MUST have a look at this "Virtual night Time Lapse Movie".”

Not sure where the words  “fish eye lens” appear in the above caption?

this is the link.
http://sguisard.astrosurf.com/Pagim/From_pole_to_pole.html#Picture3

The caption referring to “fish eye lens” was attributed to the equatorilm time lapse picture, and not the picture showing the 2 poles and the rectangular view.

So let me get this right,

You agree that there is lens distortion of the images?

Yet use this distortion as an argument that the constellations change relative positions?

Yet completely reject any pictures of the earth that are taken using a fish eye lens as being misrepresentative ? (Many times in other threads)

If the constellations change relative shape during the night, why are none of the lines crossing? In the you tube videos i linked earlier the representations show the stars converge and cross, which does not happen in the pics you show.

As for the pictures you have posted Did you take those pictures yourself? What camera and lense did you use, and the location of the pics will be needed to verify they are genuine.

[Tontogary]

I have a free, easy way of checking if there is any change of the shape of constellations or event if there is a change between the relative distances of different constellations.

Measure the arc angle between the stars in the evening and morning.

Simple.

You can use a sextant, although anyone who knows how to use one will likely be a navigator, and therefore by definition a REer, OR;

Construct your own device for measuring angles. A cross Staff, there are many references to it on google, and it is easy to make at no cost to most people.

Take a long ruler or straight stick, broom handle, etc, and tape/tie/secure a smaller stick/piece of cardboard, etc at right angles to the longer stick. If this piece can move under a bit of pressure, thats OK.

Now place the longer stick end on your cheek, with the smaller piece at the far end, and sight along the stick to 2 stars in the eastern sky an hour or 2 after sunset, (best to use 2 stars that are about the same altitude, so are separated along the horizontal) and either choose 2 stars that are already at the correct angular distance apart or move the cross piece so that each one is at the end of the smaller stick.

You can later take the same observations as the stars get higher in the sky, and as they pass the zenith, then as they lower to the western horizon.

The angular distance apart will NOT VARY during the course of the night or any other night, or season.

Very low on the horizon the stars may be subject to refraction in the vertical, Which is why it is best to use stars with a horizontal displacement

This will be a perfect example to show that there is no divergence or change of shape of constellations.
Do it as many times as you like with different stars and seasons.

I challenge any FEer who wishes to be Zetetic, and actually do an experiment for free, to do this and say that there is divergence in REAL LIFE. Not camera shots, or CGI, or graphically enhanced shots. You can prove it to yourself......

[rabinoz]

You would then find that your claim that the "angular distance between stars varies" is not supported by the extreme fish-eye lens photo you presented.

You do realize that the warping necessary would need to be opposite of a fish-eye/wide-angle lens.

Of course I do. That's why I posted this explanation from Stéphane Guisard.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I do wish you read the explanation that went with the star-trails photograph.
You would then find that your claim that the "angular distance between stars varies" is not supported by the extreme fish-eye lens photo you presented.

Here is the note that went with that photograph:

Star Trail from the Equator (Ecuador), "From Southern Pole to Northern Pole"
The following image is an unprecedented star trail image taken from the Equator (this imaginary line that splits the Earth into the two hemispheres) in Ecuador (the country). If you stand on the Equator line you can see the Southern Pole at the horizon to the South (left of the image) and the Northern pole at the horizon on the opposite direction. The Earth rotation will make all the sky and stars look like they rotate around these two points, making them appear as concentric circles (which look like ellipses on this distorting fish eye image). Note that on this image, that cumulates 10 hours of exposure starting 1 hour after sunset and finishing 1 hour before sunrise (nights and days always last 12 hours on the Equator, it is a permanent equinox), more than 90% of the sky is 'visible', this is another particularity of being on the ecuator line : you can observe the largest part of the sky during any night. An extremely bright meteor appeared during that night and seems to be pointing at the Southern Pole (extreme left of the image). Image processing done with Prism software.

If you want to see the movie of the true sky rotation explained above (and showed in all these pictures) by moving the camera yourself, you MUST have a look at this "Virtual night Time Lapse Movie", the first one ever made.

From: Star Trail from the Equator (Ecuador), "From Southern Pole to Northern Pole"

Please note the explicit statement "The Earth rotation will make all the sky and stars look like they rotate around these two points, making them appear as concentric circles (which look like ellipses on this distorting fish eye image)".

Diverging stars images:

Sure, they are "Diverging stars images" not images of diverging stars.
The apparent diverging is simply from imaging a wide angle of circular motion onto a flat surface. Looking north or south shows this circular motion.
Looking up at the stars is the equivalent of looking out at the inside of a huge sphere, as the old astronomers recognised with there "celestial spheres".

This link shows a horizon to horizon (extreme fish-eye lens) photo looking straight up from the South Pole: Astronomy Picture of the Day, South Pole Star Trails, Image Credit: Robert Schwarz (South Pole Station

Star trails Northern Hemisphere, Polaris in thd centre:

Star trails Souther Hemisphere, no visible star in the centre:

Both from: Stuff that interests Mr Reid, Optical phenomena