🙂 Yup - I have a Takahashi FSQ106 refractor and Meade LX200 12" SCT wide field version on a computer controlled mount.... 🙂 Nice dark skies here!
In 3 weeks I'm buying the house inset in my 23 acre summer property, in part to extinguish the yellow yard lights of the night blind neighbors. The people across the road are Amish, who have disconnected from electrical service. First task, take the Menzel Field Guide to the Stars and Planets and learn some constellations besides Big & Little Dippers. The month after I bought the book, in 1980, the veterinarian installed yard lights for his two Appaloosa horses behind my house in Herington KS. I was at the edge of the town out there, too. 25 miles to the next house to the south. **** Europeans, we native Ams can read the black & white print of maps by starlight.
Other reason to buy, 180 deaths by gunshot in Louisville metro Jan to June 2023. 2 old guys mowing their lawns were executed.
That's the 12" version of this family of telescopes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meade_LX200
A serious piece of kit!
And the Takahashi FSQ106 refractor is described as an astrograph - a telescope designed for the sole purpose of astrophotography.
Go on - show us a photograph of your observatory!
Attachments
Haven't done this stuff in years, but I don't think I was blowing smoke when I likened the squared Sinc function to an Airy disk:
You can do fourier transforms on electrical things confined to frequency apertures, or spatial things like light in telescopes or radar dishes confined to physical apertures, and the maths is pretty much the same.
I doubt if amateurs with smallish telescopes or widefield cameras can do much useful these days. The 4x 8.2m VLT in Chile (pictured) and the 2x 10m Keck in Hawaii with adaptive optics are where it is at!
Which brings us back on-topic.
Andrea Ghez (Keck) and Reinhard Genzel (VLT) won a half share of the 2020 Nobel prize for showing that you could infer a Black Hole at the centre of our Milky Way by plotting the stars revolving around it over some years.
Roger Penrose got the other half for the theory.
Pretty enchanting video here about what Keck is up to in Hawaii:
https://www.keckobservatory.org/
Awful place, the top of that mountain. Freezing cold, 150mph winds sometimes. Cars just don't work very well. You can hardly breathe. One for the enthusiasts!
You can do fourier transforms on electrical things confined to frequency apertures, or spatial things like light in telescopes or radar dishes confined to physical apertures, and the maths is pretty much the same.
I doubt if amateurs with smallish telescopes or widefield cameras can do much useful these days. The 4x 8.2m VLT in Chile (pictured) and the 2x 10m Keck in Hawaii with adaptive optics are where it is at!
Which brings us back on-topic.
Andrea Ghez (Keck) and Reinhard Genzel (VLT) won a half share of the 2020 Nobel prize for showing that you could infer a Black Hole at the centre of our Milky Way by plotting the stars revolving around it over some years.
Roger Penrose got the other half for the theory.
Pretty enchanting video here about what Keck is up to in Hawaii:
https://www.keckobservatory.org/
Awful place, the top of that mountain. Freezing cold, 150mph winds sometimes. Cars just don't work very well. You can hardly breathe. One for the enthusiasts!
Last edited:
i was going to set one up just large enough for a telescope rather than me but they changed the local street lights from sodium to led. Sodium just needs an interferance filter to remove it. Very narrow spectrum. LED - there are filters available now but very wide rejection spectrum not leaving much at all. So wide a spectrum I suspect they may be a bit of a con like many earlier light pollution filters.
The night sky is a pretty big place hence
https://blog.scistarter.org/2021/05...teur-astronomers-to-help-study-the-night-sky/
Amateurs may spot nova before any professionals do and other things as well. They have an advantage. The field of view of large telescopes is rather restricted. Generally the bigger they are the smaller it is. The pro's did use a type of telescope designed by some one called Schmidt for surveys but as they need a large diameter of high quality optical glass max size was generally restricted to ~1m but they could cover a 6 degree field onto a hemispherical photographic plate. Still needs a lot of photo's to cover the entire sky. They could also have very low F numbers which helped with exposure times. Photographic plates from these are still used -eg Huble's guide star catalogue. They were digitised yonks ago,
Yes, research isn't just the realm of professional astronomers. Amateur astronomers can do cutting-edge science too. Lots of pro-am collaboration going on as well.
Amateurs are spotting supernovae, tracking asteroids and even using spectroscopy to study the composition of stars - and doing it when they choose - no need to book observational time on a big telescope.
Amateurs are spotting supernovae, tracking asteroids and even using spectroscopy to study the composition of stars - and doing it when they choose - no need to book observational time on a big telescope.
CCD's have had an enormous effect on what they can produce as well. An interesting example
I’m thinking of hanging my audio gloves up and doing a bit of reading and astronomy. I’ll be 70 in 3 yrs. I see you can get a decent starter scope for a few grand. Might be what I do. Move to Skye - the only place I’ve seen night skies like that was as a young man in the bush in South Africa.
You're just a boy, Bonsai! 😀
Skye has no less than nine Milky Way Class Dark Sky Discovery Sites!
But bear in mind that astronomical twilight never ends there between April 30th and August 13th, because the sun does not dip far enough below the sea, and so the stars fade for a few months. The best time for observing the heavens is outside of these dates.
Pictured, is the midnight Sun on the Isle of Skye.
Here's a list of the best places to stargaze in Scotland: https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/best-places-stargaze-scotland/
@gpauk is apparently located in the far north of Scotland, so he is best placed to give you the low down on the limitations of latitude.
You may remember, Bonsai, that I posted elsewhere about the nearby Galloway Forest Park, the first Dark Sky Park in the UK.
https://forestryandland.gov.scot/visit/forest-parks/galloway-forest-park/dark-skies
Very few people live in the 300 square miles of forest and hills in the park, so skies really are dark.
Here's a photo (not taken by me) which gives you an idea of the thousands of stars you can see there.
https://forestryandland.gov.scot/visit/forest-parks/galloway-forest-park/dark-skies
Very few people live in the 300 square miles of forest and hills in the park, so skies really are dark.
Here's a photo (not taken by me) which gives you an idea of the thousands of stars you can see there.
I must have been bored, and to save you the effort, but I watched cumbb's "interesting" video presentation "Indeed our Sun is Electric!" by Donald. E. Scott, who is described as a Professor in various places on the skeptic Thunderbolts and Natural Philosophers websites.
Reeked of Hooey to me. But I concede that electricity and magnetism and plasma must play a part in our Universe. I am not an expert on the Solar Corona.
I thought I would explore something by the Natural Philosophers that I know a bit about.
https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/...able_will_be_Rewritten_-_Photons_of_an_H-atom
The 1913 Bohr Atom! I worked that one out myself when I was 16 as a sort of summer holidays project. Early glimmers of the Quantum in action, and now considered semi-classical or schoolboy physics. It works up to a point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model
Enter Francis Viren Fernandes.
https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Francis_Viren_Fernandes
Uh, oh! Red flags! Not a Physicist! In fact a Pharmacist specialising in aqueous handcreams and other gooey things! Believes in the Aether! Has proposed a genetically modified solution to World Hunger called the SOYOTO, which is half Soya Bean and Half Potato!
Here we go. Fasten your seatbelts, girls!
As a statement of some physics constants, particularly Bohr Atom ones, that is OK so far. We notice he thinks Bohr got it wrong. I wouldn't disagree with him, because it was an early theory.
Rather than develop a full quantum explanation he moves on:
Whoah! That's not the De Broglie Equation! (Lambda = h/mv or Lambda = h/p depending how you want to do it), that's the Compton Wavelength Lambda = h/mc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength
Without going into it too much, it is well known that the Compton Wavelength ( A relationship for scattering of X-rays by atoms) relates to various Bohr constants. So this is all a bit circular reasoning, IMO.
I don't want to put the man down too much. Toroids are an interesting transformation of spherical problems, If static electricity is a spherical problem, then magnetism is a toroidal one when things start to move. And we can convert between them with Relativity.
Sort of thing I enjoy as mathematics.
But I draw a line at the debunked Ether! Hope that was interesting fact-checking anyway. 🙂
Reeked of Hooey to me. But I concede that electricity and magnetism and plasma must play a part in our Universe. I am not an expert on the Solar Corona.
I thought I would explore something by the Natural Philosophers that I know a bit about.
https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/...able_will_be_Rewritten_-_Photons_of_an_H-atom
The 1913 Bohr Atom! I worked that one out myself when I was 16 as a sort of summer holidays project. Early glimmers of the Quantum in action, and now considered semi-classical or schoolboy physics. It works up to a point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model
Enter Francis Viren Fernandes.
https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Francis_Viren_Fernandes
Uh, oh! Red flags! Not a Physicist! In fact a Pharmacist specialising in aqueous handcreams and other gooey things! Believes in the Aether! Has proposed a genetically modified solution to World Hunger called the SOYOTO, which is half Soya Bean and Half Potato!
Here we go. Fasten your seatbelts, girls!
As a statement of some physics constants, particularly Bohr Atom ones, that is OK so far. We notice he thinks Bohr got it wrong. I wouldn't disagree with him, because it was an early theory.
Rather than develop a full quantum explanation he moves on:
Whoah! That's not the De Broglie Equation! (Lambda = h/mv or Lambda = h/p depending how you want to do it), that's the Compton Wavelength Lambda = h/mc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength
Without going into it too much, it is well known that the Compton Wavelength ( A relationship for scattering of X-rays by atoms) relates to various Bohr constants. So this is all a bit circular reasoning, IMO.
I don't want to put the man down too much. Toroids are an interesting transformation of spherical problems, If static electricity is a spherical problem, then magnetism is a toroidal one when things start to move. And we can convert between them with Relativity.
Sort of thing I enjoy as mathematics.
But I draw a line at the debunked Ether! Hope that was interesting fact-checking anyway. 🙂
Last edited:
;-)
"Gravitation" does not explain e.g. rotation nor highly ordered motion. And also the present "gravitation"-"mathematics" does not explain these. Both a physicist and a mathematician would notice this;-)
"Gravitation" does not explain e.g. rotation nor highly ordered motion. And also the present "gravitation"-"mathematics" does not explain these. Both a physicist and a mathematician would notice this;-)
Street lighting may not rule out having an astroscope in the garden. An easy check for reasonable but not ideal conditions is to check if any of the milky way is visible. To give you an idea of what ideal is when there is no lighting problems best viewing is when there is no moon. That always applies. Also winter tends to be best. When the skies are clear you will be amazed by how cold your scope gets as it's radiating heat into outer space. Dew will form on it so a dew heater is a good idea.
https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/celestron-cpc-800-xlt-telescope.html
However you may want to buy a wedge for it at some point which would add ~£500. The Meade version is more expensive.
Newtonians. Probably the cheapest option and can be pretty good. An obvious source for consistent performance is this company
https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/product/ideal-8-8l/
Buy that with the cheapest mount they show on that page - I wouldn't.
For visual use size matters. 8" is a good size for a number of reasons. Seeing conditions matter even heat of buildings can effect that. It might be worth going for Orion's 1/10 wave optics at that size.
Refractors. An old statement was that a 4" refractor matches a 6" newtonian. I own an early 5" apo on an extremely hefty mount. Moving it around is no fun. I'd say it outperforms an 8" sct I owned 😉 at a cost.
A bit of a mine field, many cowboys around. They have a habit of skimping on the mount. A set up that works pretty well due to being fully fork mounted and at this size not too much weight. A SCT.
https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/celestron-cpc-800-xlt-telescope.html
However you may want to buy a wedge for it at some point which would add ~£500. The Meade version is more expensive.
Newtonians. Probably the cheapest option and can be pretty good. An obvious source for consistent performance is this company
https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/product/ideal-8-8l/
Buy that with the cheapest mount they show on that page - I wouldn't.
For visual use size matters. 8" is a good size for a number of reasons. Seeing conditions matter even heat of buildings can effect that. It might be worth going for Orion's 1/10 wave optics at that size.
Refractors. An old statement was that a 4" refractor matches a 6" newtonian. I own an early 5" apo on an extremely hefty mount. Moving it around is no fun. I'd say it outperforms an 8" sct I owned 😉 at a cost.
Really, boys, this is not a discussion of your preferences in laptop computers! It's about Gravity!
Cheering news from Space. The Euclid telescope is doing OK out at (Lagrange Point 2) L2. It hopes to more target Physicists on the Dark Energy/Dark Matter problem, and eliminate more crackpot theories (LQG and String Theory, I am looking at YOU!).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66365074
Naturally I noticed the streak on the right. Meteorites in a vacuum? NO, it's a cosmic ray!
Euclid has run into a technical problem of anomalous images, apparently caused by an incomprehensible blunder of leaking sunlight into the barrel of the telescope. But this has been fixed by orientating the telescope crack away from the Sun.
But I fear that someone is going to get the TicTac (Sack) from the project.
The life of a Physicist is extremely intense. Not only have I been brushing up on particle physics today, following the Cricket Test Match, but am watching Professor Andre Koch Torres Assis on Weber's Electrodynamics on the recommendation of @cumbb.
So far, so good, though I am not "Le Dernier Cri" (The last shout) on Maxwell's electromagnetism, a subject I always detested. If any injustice has been done to Weber, at least he got a Physical Unit named after him, which will be more than Maxwell can claim.
I was struck by mine own resemblance to the Prof who actually really (and this is unusual for Electric Universe people) is a Prof of Physics. I wonder if we are related?
Cheering news from Space. The Euclid telescope is doing OK out at (Lagrange Point 2) L2. It hopes to more target Physicists on the Dark Energy/Dark Matter problem, and eliminate more crackpot theories (LQG and String Theory, I am looking at YOU!).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66365074
Naturally I noticed the streak on the right. Meteorites in a vacuum? NO, it's a cosmic ray!
Euclid has run into a technical problem of anomalous images, apparently caused by an incomprehensible blunder of leaking sunlight into the barrel of the telescope. But this has been fixed by orientating the telescope crack away from the Sun.
But I fear that someone is going to get the TicTac (Sack) from the project.
The life of a Physicist is extremely intense. Not only have I been brushing up on particle physics today, following the Cricket Test Match, but am watching Professor Andre Koch Torres Assis on Weber's Electrodynamics on the recommendation of @cumbb.
So far, so good, though I am not "Le Dernier Cri" (The last shout) on Maxwell's electromagnetism, a subject I always detested. If any injustice has been done to Weber, at least he got a Physical Unit named after him, which will be more than Maxwell can claim.
I was struck by mine own resemblance to the Prof who actually really (and this is unusual for Electric Universe people) is a Prof of Physics. I wonder if we are related?