The final planet parade of 2025 starts this weekend: Here's how you can view it
A planetary alignment, casually called a 'planet parade,' occurs when several planets gather closely on one side of the sun at the same time.
Mercury, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn will be bright enough to be seen without a telescope in the hour before sunrise, but stargazers will need a telescope or binoculars to see Uranus and Neptune.
Find out more about viewing the event, and the science behind planetary alignments:
Alongside the planets will be a nearly-full 'sturgeon moon' that will reach peak illumination on August 9. The planet parade will also be followed by the Perseid meteor shower, which will peak on the evenings of August 12 and 13.
Where to look for the planetary alignment
The planets will be visible on the eastern horizon, and Mercury will rise shortly before sunrise near the Cancer constellation, so it's best to start looking about an hour before the sun comes up.
Jupiter and Venus will be a bit higher to the right of Mercury and will be right next to each other. They form their closest approach of the year, known as a conjunction, on August 12.
Uranus will be the highest in the sky to the right of Mercury, Jupiter and Venus, but is best viewed with binoculars or a telescope. Then Neptune and Saturn will be a bit below and to the right of Uranus. They might be more difficult to see due to the brightness of the full moon.
How does the alignment happen?
The planets orbit the sun continuously in the solar system, so at times, they slowly catch up to one another. Because they travel along the same path, or ecliptic, as they pass Earth, it appears they are aligned, according to NASA. The alignment formation, however, will be short-lived because each planet moves at different speeds.
When will the next planetary alignment occur?
According to Starwalk, the next alignment will occur on February 28, 2026 when Mercury, Venus, Neptune, Saturn, Uranus and Jupiter align in the sky.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
NASA Curiosity rover discovers coral-like flower-shaped rocks on Mars
NASA's Curiosity Rover has taken images of coral-like and flower-shaped rocks on Mars, which have been estimated to be billions of years old. On July 24, the rover sent images of a wind-eroded rock about one inch wide, resembling a piece of a coral reef. NASA has said that the rover has taken many images of rocks of this type. The space agency noted that when liquid water still existed on the planet, it carried dissolved minerals into the cracks of rocks. When the liquid dried, it deposited hardened minerals. 'This common process, seen extensively on Earth, has produced fantastic shapes on Mars, including a flower-shaped rock,' the agency said in a statement. NASA noted that the 'unique shapes' seen today came to be after billions of years of sandblasting. A uniquely shaped rock nicknamed 'Paposo' was also found on July 24. Similarly, another rock shaped like a flower was discovered in 2022. According to NASA, the flower rock is believed to have formed as mineralizing liquids went through conduits in the rock. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory built the rover, which is leading its Mars mission. After travelling for eight months and 352 million miles, the rover landed on Mars in 2012. NASA noted that it was the largest and most capable rover ever sent to Mars at the time. The rover has explored as much as 22 miles of the planet and previously found chemical and mineral evidence of previous habitable environments. According to NASA, the rover is continuing to gather samples and data from a time when Mars may have hosted microbial life. The one-inch rock was found in the Gale Crater, an impact basin. In June, Curiosity took images of a geological structure called 'spiderwebs' because of its pattern of ridges, also indicating that Mars previously had water that has since hardened. 'The images and data being collected are already raising new questions about how the Martian surface was changing billions of years ago,' NASA said in a June statement. 'The Red Planet once had rivers, lakes, and possibly an ocean. Although scientists aren't sure why, its water eventually dried up and the planet transformed into the chilly desert it is today,' the agency added. 'Remarkably, the boxwork patterns show that even in the midst of this drying, water was still present underground, creating changes seen today.' 'Eons of sandblasting by Martian wind wore away the rock but not the minerals, revealing networks of resistant ridges within,' said the agency. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
US wants to put a nuclear reactor on the moon in next ten years, NASA chief says
The United States wants to put a nuclear reactor on the moon in the next ten years, according to a NASA directive obtained by The Independent. President Donald Trump's NASA chief Sean Duffy has expedited the timeline to build the reactor, and wants it to have at least 100 kilowatts of power - enough to run about 80 homes - and be ready to launch by 2030. The directive, first reported by Politico, mentions China and Russia's joint effort to place a reactor on the moon by the mid-2030s. The two U.S. adversaries first announced their plans in March 2024. 'The first country to do so could potentially declare a keep-out zone which would significantly inhibit the United States from establishing a planned Artemis presence if not there first,' Duffy warned in the directive. NASA is working with the Energy Department and the broader space industry to design a fission power system that would provide at least 40 kilowatts of power. The space agency has already mentioned the benefits of developing fission surface power (FSP) on the moon and Mars. 'Relatively small and lightweight, fission systems are powerful and could enable robust operations on the Moon and Mars,' NASA states on its website. NASA's Artemis campaign aims to establish the first long-term presence on the moon. During Trump's inaugural address, he said the U.S. would launch astronauts 'to plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars.' 'It is about winning the second space race,' a NASA senior official also told Politico. In Duffy's new timeline, a Fission Surface Power Program Executive will be designated within 30 days of the directive. The executive 'is empowered to provide reporting and updates with maximum transparency directly to the Administrator,' the NASA chief wrote. Within 60 days, NASA will ask for industry proposals for the nuclear reactor, according to the directive. The directive mentioned Trump's budget request for the 2026 fiscal year, which includes $350 million for a new program 'that will accelerate the development of high priority technologies for Mars, (i.e. FSP).' The funding would increase up to $500 million starting in 2027. Trump's budget request also proposes a huge cut to NASA, with The Planetary Society, a global non-profit space organization, reporting it's the smallest budget proposed for the agency since 1961. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Experts sound off after Trump and NASA fast-track a nuclear reactor on the moon: ‘The whole proposal is cock-eyed'
Fast-tracking a NASA plan to build a nuclear reactor on the moon may sound dubious. Experts say that's because it is. 'The whole proposal is cock-eyed and runs against the sound management of a space program that is now being starved of money,' national security analyst, nuclear expert and author Joseph Cirincione told The Independent. Nuclear has been used in space since the 1960s. That's nothing new. The U.S. launched its first test reactor into orbit in 1965, and the former Soviet Union has sent up dozens more. NASA says that a new 100-kilowatt reactor could be used to power a future base at the lunar South Pole, and fuel prospective missions to Mars and beyond. Nuclear would help to fill gaps in solar energy that occur when that side of the moon is in darkness for two weeks. The majority of space experts have said that placing a reactor on the moon is possible, so, why is NASA's current plan 'cock-eyed?' The problem is the proposed timeline. Interim NASA Administrator Sean Duffy, who also serves as President Donald Trump's Secretary of Transportation, pushed to expedite the project, detailed in a memo this week. Duffy said the administration wanted to have a nuclear reactor ready to launch by 2030. Earlier this year, China and Russia announced a plan to build a nuclear reactor for a lunar base by 2035. 'The first country to do so could potentially declare a 'keep-out' zone which would significantly inhibit the United States from establishing a planned Artemis presence if not there first,' Duffy said. NASA first announced in 2021 that it would put a reactor on the moon 'within a decade.' In 2024, NASA then said that their target date for delivery a reactor to the Earth-based launchpad was the early 2030s. But, Cirincione says essentially no progress has been made. 'It was in the last Trump administration that NASA had put out a press release, they had a YouTube video, they had these announcements about how they're going to develop these small, modular nuclear reactors for use on the moon, and it was going to be ready by 2026,' said Cirincione, who is vice-chair of the Center for International Policy, a non-profit that advocates for a peaceful approach to foreign policy. 'Oh, really? So, where is it?' Ultimately, the expert believes a nuclear reactor on the moon could take up to 20 years to become a reality. NASA would need a working launch vehicle, a small and adaptable reactor, and the ability to land on the moon. Right now, the SpaceX Starship is the only vehicle option – but it has exploded during several of its test flights. NASA has been working with Boeing on a Space Launch System - the main competitor to Space X's Starship - but that program would be canceled under the Trump administration's proposed cuts which slash 24 percent from NASA's overall budget. Landing on the moon is no picnic, and attempts by Japanese space companies in 2023 and 2025 ended in crashes. There are also the scientific and technological advances needed for the nuclear reactors. The reactors must be able to withstand harsh conditions on the moon, including temperatures swings from 250 degrees Fahrenheit during the day to minus 400 degrees at night. 'Small modular nuclear reactors, it turns out, are always just around the corner – a corner you never get to turn,' Cirincione said. Many scientists and nuclear energy experts have shared in Cirincione's skepticism. Dr. Kathryn Huff, a former nuclear energy official at the U.S. Department of Energy, and professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, wrote in a Bluesky social media post that she's not 'bullish' on 'unrealistic timelines.' 'The 2030 target does not align well with recent budgetary trends…' she explained in a statement, shared by the university. 'Accelerating the FSP program could come at the expense of other critical priorities, including earth science, climate observation and space-based weather forecasting – all core elements of NASA's public-serving mission.' Dr. Alfredo Carpineti, an Italian astrophysicist, wrote in IFLScience this week that the proposal is 'unfeasible.' 'Even if we allow landing the nuclear reactor on December 31, 2030, the timing is really too short for something that must not have any faults if you want to operate it safely,' Carpineti wrote. Others were more optimistic about NASA's accelerated timeline. Sebastian Corbisiero, a senior program manager at Idaho National Laboratory who leads the Energy Department's space reactor program, told The Independent that a nuclear reactor on the moon is 'doable' by 2030. 'Nuclear reactor technology has been around for decades, so its well known,' he said. 'Some key differences with a space reactor is that it needs to fit on a rocket, so there are mass and volume requirements; and that the system needs to operate in vacuum – so components will need to be built to survive that environment.' Dr. Bhavya Lal, a former associate administrator for technology, policy, and strategy at NASA, and former aerospace executive Roger Myers, recently argued that it would be possible to have nuclear reactor on the moon by 2030, and it would take $3 billion to do so. 'It's possible, but it will require serious commitment,' Lal told The Independent. But even if plans are speeded up, Lal says there's no need to worry about the prospect of the moon blowing up. It's 'simply not grounded in science,' she said. Solve the daily Crossword
