Talk:Pisces (constellation)

Astrology

The astrological information should be on another page called Pisces (astrology) since it has no bearing on the astronomical constelation. The sun is not even in the constelation during the dates of the Pisces sign. Lumos3 07:54, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In line with the above, I have moved an astrological discussion to Pisces (astrology) as "Moved." B00P (talk) 11:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sidney Hall - Urania's Mirror - Pisces.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Sidney Hall - Urania's Mirror - Pisces.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on May 1, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-05-01. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:07, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

Pisces is a constellation of the zodiac. Its name is the Latin plural for fish. It lies between Aquarius to the west and Aries to the east. The ecliptic and the celestial equator intersect within this constellation and in Virgo. In Greek mythology, Pisces was associated with Aphrodite and Eros, who escaped from the monster Typhon by leaping into the sea and transforming themselves into fish.Illustration: Sidney Hall; restoration: Adam Cuerden

Archive – More featured pictures...

65 Piscium (Maxwell Hall's "central sun of the universe")

On page 343 in Richard Hinckley Allen's book STAR NAMES - their lore and meaning, there is something which seems to be a mystery. A certain Maxwell Hall regarded the 6-th magnitude double star 65 Piscium as the central sun of the universe. Why the star 65 Piscium? And who was Maxwell Hall? All of this could be interesting information for the article, but I want to know if there are more sources than only page 343 of R. H. Allen's STAR NAMES. DannyCaes (talk) 13:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An obituary of Maxwell Hall (1845-1920) and a summary of his astronomical and meteorological work can be found here. AstroLynx (talk) 14:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting! The 65 Piscium question is answered! Thanks AstroLynx! DannyCaes (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm... I try to comprehend Maxwell Hall's way of thinking, but... (???). It is an interesting obituary and summary, although I can't figure out why he thought 65 Piscium should be the central sun of the universe. The mentioned coordinates give a location in the head-part of Ursa Major! By the way, on page 346 of R.H.Allen's STAR NAMES, Boguslawski thought the star Alpha Piscis Austrini (Fomalhaut) could be the central sun of the universe. I guess many astronomers had their own special star as so-called central sun of the universe. DannyCaes (talk) 12:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See his 1877 publication. Note that N.P.D. is not the same as declination but angular distance from the celestial north pole. AstroLynx (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting text to read! Thanks AstroLynx! And... aha... N.P.D. (North Pole Distance). DannyCaes (talk) 18:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are only two stars brighter than magnitude 4 in Pisces

According to your own list, clearly there is only one ... and the English is dire also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.253.184 (talk) 08:42, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m one of them 2600:6C63:6E7F:4AB4:10DC:7711:D467:4398 (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]