February 2003 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

To Mr. Hards
by Carolyn Jolly 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

If I remember correctly you recently had problems with you computer monitor, if wrong please correct me. We are preparing to put our house on the market and have a monitor (17"), used only as a second screen for our laptops and would like to find a good home for it. It is yours if you want it. We can arrange pickup or even delivery. My email is intherockies(a)msn.com, Carolyn Jolly, silent member for two years.

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] NASA phone call
by Chuck Hards 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

That's a great story, Jim. The man has gone to hell and back lately, this personal vignette is much appreciated. I sincerely hope that you're image can help find the answers. C. --- Jim Gibson <xajax99(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > To all: > > To meet my wife is to meet a gum shoe. She doesnt > do it by profession but by nature. True to her super > sleuth propensity she got a hold of Ron Dittemores > (NASA shuttle program manager) home phone number and > called it. She expected to get an answering machine > but to her surprise he answered the phone. He > doesnt usually answer the phone these days because > of people like us that have the audacity to bother > him at home. He just happened to see the 801 prefix > on the caller ID and thought it may have something > to do with his son or daughter who are attending > BYU. Because of my wifes loyalty to me, she thinks > that the photo I happened to capture of the Columbia > passing over is the key piece of evidence. > > Mr. Dittemore was very polite and after hearing of > the photo asked us to email it to him right away. I > quickly went out to gather previous post that I have > made to this listing and tried to put together a > coherent description of the possible event the > photograph may have captured. I included the timing > of the photograph, the location in both Lat & Lon as > well as UTM coordinates as garnered from > topozone.com. I included all four pictures as are > posted on Patrick Wiggins web site and the URL to > Joe Baumans, Deseret News article and sent them > off. > > No more than ten minutes had passed when we received > a call for Mr. Dittemore. He was very professional > and wanted me to explain exactly what he was looking > at. I mentioned that the camera was pointing > straight up and gave him the orientation of the > orbiter and a similar explanation of the event as > has been posted here previously. > > The question of the event possibly portraying the > door to the wheel well came up and he commented that > the sensor data he had, indicated that the wheel > well door remained latched. Then I suggested that > because of the size of the signature that possibly > part of the wing may have come off. I also > mentioned that it is possible that the object may > have been smaller than portrayed in the photo. If > the object were bright enough and had excited only > part of a pixel the whole pixel would have turned on > thereby making the object appear larger that it > really was. To me the signature looks almost as > large as the orbiter signature. > > Preliminarily the photo supplied at least two good > pieces of information. The timing was important and > the fact that the signature of the object appeared > to waffle indicating some aerodynamics. A team of > experts had already begun to analyze a video taken > in Flag Staff, Arizona to try and determine where > the object captured in the video may have landed. > Mr. Dittemore thinks that the video and the Leeds > photo are the same event. The team could not tell > from the video whether the object was a blob or > whether the object had some aerodynamics which > information they need to try and determine a fan of > possible landing locations. The Leeds photo shows > that aerodynamics are involved and will make the > search that much broader. > > I mentioned that there are good people both in Utah > and in Arizona that would volunteer to search for > the object given possible sites to search. He took > that information into consideration. > > My wife briefly mentioned that our daughter lives > about a block away from his daughter just off BYU > campus. All of a sudden he was much more exuberant. > I felt like he would much rather talk about his > children than anything else. Under the > circumstances it would be nice if that were all we > had to talk about. > > Jim > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Eyepice siminar
by Chuck Hards 10 Feb '03

10 Feb '03

You're exactly right. The higher the refractive index, the greater the angle of dispersion. Now, here's the catch: The traditional eyepiece designs, like Plossls, Erfles, orthos, Kellners, etc., were all designed using "regular" glass of medium dispersions. Those are the designs we'll address at the eypiece seminar. New designs, such as the Nagler, utilize high-index glass in their designs. Once you enter this territory, "second-order" and higher math takes over, and frankly some of it is beyond me. A whole new world of refractive behavior takes over once you get into high-index glass. C. --- Jim Gibson <xajax99(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Chuck > > I, like many others, am very interested in you > eyepiece seminar. I have been doing some reading > about eyepieces and I came across this interesting > technical term. The hype I read said that the > eyepiece was made of high-index glass. I have > heard that term before in reference to a fly rod I > bought. The hype said that they used high-index > graphite. So I am curious if I can carry my > fly-fishing knowledge over into astronomy. Let me > take a SWAG at it. SWAG - that stands for Scientific > Wild Ass-tronomical Guess. > > When a fly rod casts a fly line or unloads, in a > high-index graphite rod the tip quickly dampens so > as not to induce a sinusoidal wave into the fly > line. OK heres the SWAG. High-index glass will bend > the light more quickly thereby requiring less glass. > > Am I in the ball park or should I just stick to fly > fishing? > > Jim > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Picture in the DN
by Brent Watson 09 Feb '03

09 Feb '03

Jim, I would not set the clock in your camera. Rather than reset it, you may want to check the time over several days to see haow far it drifts. That would be a calibration that would get your even closer. Brent --- Jim Gibson <xajax99(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Brent > > I just went and got a camera pass that will allow me > to bring my camera to work tomorrow. We have more > precise clocks here than I have at home. Not that 1 > or 2 seconds will make much of a difference, but I > feel more comfortable with equipment I am familiar > with. I will be able to calculate back to the real > time tomorrow. Thanks. > > Jim > > Brent Watson <brentjwatson(a)yahoo.com> wrote:Jim, > > BTW, your focal length was set to 5.9mm and the > exposure time was 8 sec. The flash did not fire. The > aperture was set at f3.0, with a maximum value of > f2.8. It was taken using a Kodak DC4800 Zom Digital > Camera. It was using a spot light measuring system, > daylight light source, and an EI of 400. It was a > manual program. > > All this information and more is in the header for > the > JPEG format. > > Brent > > --- Jim Gibson wrote: > > > > Patrick > > > > Thank you. You deserve a grate deal of credit for > > the pictures we all got. You got us in the right > > place at the right time oriented in the right > > direction with the right setup. All I did was push > > the button. > > > > The one thing I kick myself for now is that I > didnt > > have my date/time stamp turned on. After working > for > > 17 of the last 27 years in the data collection > > business and in particular being involved in > writing > > programs that bring a number of different data > sets > > together for analysis, I know how important it is > to > > have properly time coordinated data. With out it > the > > significance of each data set is reduced. It would > > be easy to assume that the video shown on TV and > my > > picture are data of the same event. There is a > good > > chance that that is not the case. If anyone hasnt > > seen the video spoken of shown on KSL go to > > > > http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?nid=39&sid=8498 > > > > If we consider that the zipper affect started > over > > Hawaii, pieces were falling off over the pacific, > > California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona etc all the way > to > > the final catastrophic event. There were multiple > > events and without time coloration it makes it > very > > difficult to have confidence in saying these two > > pictures were of the same event. Patrick from some > > of your previous statements I feel that the event > I > > captured was of the 6:56 (local time) event. > Saying > > I feel does not inspire a lot of confidence in > an > > important matter. You were astutely the timekeeper > > besides everything else you were doing. I guess > the > > best we can do is say here is our piece of data. > > > > Just a few thoughts concerning me. > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > > > Patrick Wiggins > wrote: > > I checked the web to see if Jim's picture was in > the > > D News today (Tuesday). > > Did a search on "Gibson" and got "Utah photo may > > show breakup of space shuttle" > > but when I clicked on it it tried to take me to > > > http://deseretnews.com/dn/view2/1,4382,455029547,00.html?textfield=Gibson > > . All > > that got me was "Not Found The requested object > does > > not exist on this server." > > > > Has anyone been able to get to Jim's picture > today? > > > > BTW, kudos to Jim for a fine interview on KSL TV > > this evening. > > > > Patrick > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up > now > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up > now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com

2 3

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Shuttle - our expierence
by RStmarie＠aol.com 08 Feb '03

08 Feb '03

Deb, Do you remember the time when it went overhead at Ivins? I think Brent is right about the the shuttle breaking up even before you folks started watching it. Compare your time to the event times mentioned on the news service websites. Your observations may be valuable. Worth noting on paper. Brent, were you at the old Huricane airfield? Site of the old rocket sled track and ejections seat test facility? On the mesa? What is the field like there? Bob St. Marie

4 5

Columbia
by Patrick Wiggins 08 Feb '03

08 Feb '03

2 Columbia related items: ASTRONAUT SPOUSES & CHILDREN RELEASE STATEMENT The Astronaut Spouses Group released the following statement on Friday, Feb. 7. http://www.nasa.gov/HP_news_03060_bb_030208.html [From February 10, 2003 issue of AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY] Spectral Analysis May Offer Columbia Clues By DAVID A. FULGHUM and FRANK MORRING, JR./WASHINGTON U.S. intelligence agencies operate ships and aircraft designed to analyze the glowing plasma that surrounds foreign spacecraft as they reenter the atmosphere, and this very specialized technology may help provide clues to the destruction of the Columbia space shuttle. Air Force Maj. Gen. (ret.) Michael C. Kostelnik, NASA's deputy associate administrator for international space station and space shuttle, said he expects the mission response team and, in particular, the action investigation team led by Adm. (ret.) Harold W. Gehman, Jr., to avail itself of Defense Dept. spectral analysis expertise to help "get every perspective on this we can" as the investigative effort gears up. Cobra Judy ships and the Air Force 55th Wing's RC-135 Cobra Ball aircraft have tracked the missile tests of other countries for decades from hundreds of miles away by gathering, among other details, the heat and light signature of spacecraft. Spectral analysis of that data has allowed intelligence analysts to detail the capabilities, as well the successes and failures, of other countries' space programs. "We know how [various] composites and metals react to the intense heat, and we can do analysis, for example, of carbon peeling off a reentry vehicle or asbestos burning," said a long-time intelligence official. Materials analysis of any object reentering the atmosphere is done by plotting wavelengths of radiance (changing colors in the re-entering vehicle's fiery trail) against altitude and time. Initially, it was thought that detailing Columbia's last minutes would be limited by the visual-light film used to record the spacecraft's breakup. The reason for the limitation is that a significant portion of the data that allows the U.S. to analyze the results of test flights and materials makeup of foreign spacecraft is gathered in parts of the light spectrum, particularly the infrared, that aren't picked up by conventional video cameras. However, Kostelnik said, an AH-64 Apache crew at Ft. Hood, Tex., was watching the reentry and recorded it using the attack helicopter's forward looking infrared system sensor. The film has been sent to NASA for review. Measurement and signature intelligence specialists at the National Intelligence Center are already at work on other available data, according to Pentagon officials. Satellite-based sensors also may have recorded the event, but it is believed that most of the intelligence-gathering spacecraft that could provide the necessary kind of spectral detail were tasked by national agencies to look at other parts of the world. "We might get lucky and have had something [overhead] that could analyze the materials and record the timing of events, but there's generally not much coverage in this hemisphere," the intel official said. � 2003 The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Adaptive Optics for amateurs
by Dale Hooper 08 Feb '03

08 Feb '03

One of the reasons for adaptive optics is that the atmospherics are changing all the time. But, with a normal CCD image you are building up an image - of a star for instance - on a specific pixel (or pixels) over time. So you lose the aspect of what happened at a SPECIFIC time. Perhaps there might be something that could be done if you were to use a CCD in TDI mode (i.e. drift scanning) like the Sloan Digital Sky survey. I'm not sure, but perhaps that might provide a way to store the diffraction info/atmospherics info separately. Of course, TDI also limits the exposure time. It would certainly be fun to have a budget to try. <g> > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 4:16 PM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Adaptive Optics for amateurs > > > I wonder if software alone, or perhaps software > combined with a seeing monitor/recorder, could work as > well as a deformable optical surface driven by a > seeing monitor? Re-construct a diffraction-limited > image from the data later...is this an old idea, or a > dead end? I'm envisioning a green laser pointer, or > relatively inexpensive component laser module, monitor > telescope with CCD, all riding on the main instrument > with the imaging CCD...might need a collimator on the > laser also. I'm thinking that by not doing it in > real-time you can reduce the computing demands on the > hardware. Enough to make a difference? Incorrect > assumption? > > What does the FAA say about lasers shooting into the > sky? > > Brent, Rich, and any other computer experts on the > list? > > C. > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >

3 2

Shuttle update
by Patrick Wiggins 07 Feb '03

07 Feb '03

For those who may not have been able to watch today's STS-107 accident briefing, much of it was old news and (I'm about to editorialize here) reporters asking the same already answered questions and sounding like they were just trying to get some air time. However, two things I had not heard before had to do with the crew near the end and debris west of Texas. A reporter asked about the "California debris" and asked if such debris had been confirmed. The reply was that "I'm not aware that we have confirmed any debris as being shuttle debris west of Ft. Worth." The speaker had commented earlier that a lot of "junk" had been turned in, including, if you can believe this, a piece of burnt toast. The next reporter asked "Is there any evidence, and/or your personal opinion, about whether the astronauts were aware in the minutes before you lost communications that there was a significant or serious problem." The answer was "Absolutely no evidence, no communication to the ground, no voice of concern, data was looking fine, there doesn't appear to be any indicator that says the crew was doing anything off nominal." Patrick -- Patrick Wiggins NASA Solar System Ambassador to Utah http://planet.state.ut.us 435.882.1209 (observatory) 801.918.9092 (cell)

2 1

FW: AO at the MMT Observatory
by Dale Hooper 07 Feb '03

07 Feb '03

This is a bit long, but extremely fascinating. I wonder if we might see some trickle down of this technology into the amateur ranks in 15-20 years? -----Original Message----- From: Mark Greenman Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:16 PM To: Dale Hooper Cc: David Anderson; Pranab Banerjee Subject: FW: AO at the MMT Observatory Hi Dale, I found the next upgrade for your home observatory MG -----Original Message----- From: Alfred Schultz [mailto:schultz@stsci.edu] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 6:47 AM Subject: AO at the MMT Observatory ASTRONOMERS GET ULTRASHARP IMAGES WITH LARGE TELESCOPE IN ARIZONA >From Lori Stiles, UA News Services, 520-621-1877 February 4, 2003 Astronomers have successfully tested a new method to remove atmospheric blurring from large ground based telescopes. The experiments were made in November 2002 and January 2003 at the 6.5-meter (21-foot) telescope at the MMT Observatory on Mount Hopkins, Ariz. The project is a collaboration of the University of Arizona's Steward Observatory and Italy's Osservatorio Astrofisico di Arcetri in Florence. It uses revolutionary new technology developed with support from the U.S. Air Force. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FOR PHOTOS, IMAGES AND MOVIES OF THIS EXCITING NEW PIECE OF IMAGING TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION, SEE http://athene.as.arizona.edu/~lclose/AOPRESS ----------------------------------------------------------------- Large ground based telescopes can make images as sharp as or sharper than the Hubble Space Telescope, but only if atmospheric blurring is corrected. Previously, the deformable mirrors available to do this were small, flat, and relatively inflexible. They could be used only as part of complex instruments attached to conventional telescopes. But in this new work, one of the two mirrors that make up the telescope optics is used to make the correction directly. The new secondary mirror makes the entire correction with no other optics required, making for a more efficient and cleaner system. Like other secondary mirrors, this one is made of glass over 2 feet in diameter and is a steeply curved dome shape. But under the surface, it is like no other. The glass is less than 2 millimeters thick (less than eight-hundredths of an inch). It literally floats in a magnetic field and changes shape in milliseconds, virtually real-time. Electro-magnetically gripped by 336 computer-controlled "actuators" that tweak it into place, nanometer by nanometer, the adaptive secondary mirror focuses star light as steadily as if Earth had no atmosphere. Astronomers can study precisely sharpened objects rather than blurry blobs of twinkling light. "The reason no one has done this before is because it turns out to be enormously technically challenging," said Michael Lloyd-Hart of the UA Center for Astronomical Adaptive Optics (CAAO), project scientist for the MMT adaptive optics system. Lloyd-Hart and chief system engineer Francois Wildi led the design and engineering effort. "We found out the hard way just how difficult it is. It's taken us a number of years to build a mirror with a shape that deforms in real time," Lloyd-Hart said. One of the system's unique features is its ability to make corrections according to the detail of the distortion measurements. If very faint stars provide no useful data, the shape can be fixed to mimic a conventional mirror of solid glass. The mirror can also be used to rapidly "chop" the viewpoint of the telescope, as required for infrared imaging. "It's been 25 years or so since anyone's tried a radically new way of building a deformable mirror, and this technology really is different, " said Laird Close, UA assistant professor of astronomy and CAAO scientist. "But the ability to build large, curved, deformable mirrors for adaptive optics is a boon to astronomers using the giant new ground-based telescopes." ---------------------------------- Contact Information Michael Lloyd-Hart 520-621-8353 mhart(a)as.arizona.edu Laird Close 520-626-5992 lclose(a)as.arizona.edu Philip M. Hinz 520-621-7866 phinz(a)as.arizona.edu Francois Wildi 520-626-6720 fwildi(a)as.arizona.edu Guido Brusa 520-626-9529 gbrusa(a)as.arizona.edu ----------------------------------- "The adaptive secondary mirror made for the UA and Smithsonian Institution's 6.5-meter telescope at the MMT Observatory is a tremendous advance over conventional adaptive optics, which are systems that involve extra relay optics and mirrors in a box separate from the telescope, Lloyd-Hart said. "One key feature is that we correct for blurring effects of the atmosphere at a mirror which is an integral part of the telescope," Lloyd-Hart said. "The conventional approach has been to build the telescope, then build a box of optical tricks to improve the resolving power of the telescope." The new system solves a big problem astronomers face when they try to observe at longer infrared wavelengths, where special targets like Jupiter-like planets and circumstellar disks are brightest. "Everything in the world glows with thermal energy, or heat. When you try to do astronomy at those wavelengths, even the optics that you are looking through glow. So the more optical surfaces and telescope parts you can eliminate the simpler the system is optically, the better it is for doing infrared astronomy," Lloyd-Hart said. The Steward Observatory Mirror Lab made the MMT's large deformable convex, aspheric secondary mirror. Learning how to make glass 2mm thick so that it's "infinitely floppy" was a major challenge to building the system, Lloyd-Hart said. The biggest equivalent flexible mirror available commercially at this time is 12 cm, or about 4 and 3/4 inches, across, Close said. But once Steward Observatory researchers realized how to do it, they also realized they could make big deformable mirrors for use in space. Steward Observatory has been developing new space-based optics as a spin-off of this ground-based technology. The Italian partners designed very powerful computer electronics that drive the MMT's adaptive secondary mirror with a cluster of 168 microprocessors, which are all packed in an electronics crate that is mounted behind the secondary mirror. The computer cluster is essentially a supercomputer, more powerful than any computer available during the Apollo space era. It senses the positions of and drives the actuators. Guido Brusa, CAAO/Large Binocular Telescope adaptive optics scientist, said that he is "personally very happy" with the results of effort, achieved during the past 7 to 8 years through "patient and persevering work of many people in both Arizona and Italy....It is great to see that the adaptive secondary mirror performs beautifully, even in the presence of relatively strong wind (20 to 30 mph) and in environmental conditions very different from those in the lab." Brusa called the success "an important step" in integrating adaptive optics into an astronomical telescope. An adaptive primary telescope mirror is "a foreseeable future development," he said. In the MMT's new adaptive optics, a wavefront sensor camera mounted at the base of the telescope senses atmospheric turbulence and sends that information to the MMT adaptive secondary mirror. The powerful computer cluster behind the secondary mirror sends electronic current through coils so that each of 336 actuator magnets spaced across the mirror is instantly moved to the desired position. The result is a "flat," non-wavy wavefront seen by the astronomer's science camera. The unique adaptive optics system also includes its own plumbing. Its half-water, half-methanol liquid cooling system can dissipate up to a kilowatt of heat. DETWINKLING AND BLOCKING STARLIGHT UA astronomer Phil Hinz' observing run Jan. 22 illustrates why the new adaptive optics system is ideal if you're looking for planetary disks or planets around bright, nearby stars. On Jan. 22, Hinz and UA astronomer emeritus Bill Hoffmann took Hinz' nulling interferometer called "BLINC" and Hoffman's infrared "MIRAC" camera to the MMT, while UA, Italian and Smithsonian Institution MMTO staff ran the new adaptive optics. "Without adaptive optics, nulling interferometry is able to suppress the star to only 5 to 10 percent of its original brightness," Hinz said. "In addition, the intensity of the star rapidly changes because of atmospheric turbulence, so the star appears to blink on and off." Nulling interferometry works by creating two "sub-telescopes," both looking at the same bright star, but positioned so starlight from each sub-telescope travels in slightly different paths before hitting the detector. When properly aligned, crests of lightwaves from one sub-telescope will line up with the troughs of the lightwaves from the other, in effect canceling the light of the bright star. Hinz, who used the 6.5-meter MMT as two 3-meter sub-telescopes, said the initial Jan.22 observations were successful in showing the power of adaptive optics to stabilize the star and suppress all but two percent of its light. "Once we've refined this technique, we should be able to stabilize and suppress all but one-tenth of a percent, down to three-hundredths of a percent of the starlight and see faint, planetary dust disks much like our own solar system around nearby stars," Hinz said. "Our own dust disk is about one-hundredth of one percent of the brightness of the sun, which sets the ultimate goal of this technique. This is the level of suppression we're aiming for with the Large Binocular Telescope Interferometer," he added. ADAPTIVE OPTICS FOR THE LBT University of Arizona scientists are developing two adaptive secondary mirrors for the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT) on Mount Graham, said UA astronomer John Hill, who directs the LBT project. The LBT won't have conventional secondary mirrors, Hill said. Each of the LBT's 8.4-primary mirrors will have an adaptive concave (rather than convex) secondary mirror 91 cm (36 inches) across, held by 672 actuators that will bend it moment by moment to the required shape. In principle, even a 6.5-meter ground-based telescope could be used to image a Jupiter-like planet in a solar system like our own within the 8 parsec neighborhood, Mirror Lab director and CAAO director Roger Angel has noted in research papers. (Eight parsecs is about 26 light-years, or more than 153 trillion miles.) As for the really giant telescopes of the future telescopes with 20-meter-or-more diameter primary mirrors ground based telescopes with adaptive secondary mirrors should be able to directly detect and study nearby Earth-like planets, Angel predicts. Success in making deformable adaptive secondary mirrors for large telescopes is "a natural stepping stone to so-called 'multiple-conjugate adaptive optics,'" Lloyd-Hart said. This system would use several deformable mirrors in series and correct for atmospheric turbulence in 3 dimensions. "You could cancel the atmospheric error anywhere you look. You'd have a very large field of view with high resolution all at once. And when you can capture huge fields of view and see them with extreme clarity, then you're talking real scientific progress," Lloyd-Hart said.

3 2

RE: [Utah-astronomy] FW: AO at the MMT Observatory
by Dale Hooper 07 Feb '03

07 Feb '03

Interesting, I didn't realize that they used that method with the AO-2. Unfortunately, it was only for planets - and as you mentioned - it is no longer in production. But, it sure would be fun to have one for the Mars opposition! I noticed from the Stellar Products website that the follow-on product (AO-5) will be about $50k! > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 10:19 AM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] FW: AO at the MMT Observatory > > > Actually, Dale, a deformable mirror star-diagonal was > offered commercially several years ago....I"m not sure > if it is still in production. > > As I recall, it was called the "AO-2" or similar, and > I think the manufacturer was something like "Stellar > Products". S&T reviewed it favorably based on tests > by Roger W. Sinnott. > > C. > > --- Dale Hooper <Dale.Hooper(a)sdl.usu.edu> wrote: > > This is a bit long, but extremely fascinating. I > > wonder if we might see some trickle down of this > > technology into the amateur ranks in 15-20 years? > >

4 5