March 2007 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Weather on Channel 4
by Michael Carnes 20 Mar '07

20 Mar '07

Channel 4 has been doing a bit of a weatherman (weatherhuman) shuffle since Dan Pope went over to Channel 5. The early morning broadcast has apparently been doing tryouts for the last couple of months (or they're just doing short-term contracts while the station gets sold). Anyway a weatherman named Todd Gross has been on several times, including the last couple of weeks. He's a familiar face to me, since he was on the air in Boston for many years while I was there. But of interest to this list is the fact that he's a very serious astronomer (http://www.weatherman.com) I don't recall ever seeing him at my old club meetings or at any star parties, so he is apparently the more solitary type. But he's pretty serious, nonetheless. Don't know if he'll be at the station for good, or if this is just a drive-by, but there might occasionally be some decent science on the weather. MC

5 4

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Lucky Duck laser
by Wayne Sumner 20 Mar '07

20 Mar '07

Yes, Chuck. Let's get together and do a comparative test. I'm sure many inquiring (astronomy) minds want to know! Rather than post back and forth on the list serve, my email is wsumner(a)dsdmail.net, and my cell phone is 721-5852. Thanks, Wayne A. Sumner Math/Physics/Astronomy/Engineering Boy's Tennis Coach Northridge High School Davis School District (801) 402-8610 >>> <cmh856(a)aol.com> 03/20/07 9:20 AM >>> That's good news, Wayne! Thanks for the post. The comments on batteries you and Acres made makes me want to try my various lasers with identical batteries now. I'm sure each was using a different brand and age. In fact the 20mw Lucky Duck was running on the off-brand batteries that came with it. I did compare mine "blind" last night, and at different times each would seem brighter than the other, but I could never be sure it wasn't just a localized difference in suspended particulates in the air. Neither was consistently brighter. Would you be up for a comparative test of your lasers one of these nights? I can fit six lasers on the test stand at one time. -----Original Message----- From: wsumner(a)dsdmail.net To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com Sent: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 8:33 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Lucky Duck laser Hi Chuck, It just so happens that I received my 20 mW laser yesterday. I now own 4 green lasers, and the 20 mW is definitely the brightest of the 4. At first, when I went outside and compared them alone, I, too, thought that the 20 mW was about the same as the optimized 5 mW laser I bought two years ago with Doug Say from the OAS (we each bought one, but got a better price by buying two together). However, when I brought my wife outside and had her turn them on two at a time with me about 15 feet away, the 20 mW was significantly easier to see. I had her use them one at a time in random order to outline the Big Dipper, and was able to pick out the 20 mW every time. I conducted these tests using Energizer e^2 Lithium batteries out of the same freshly opened package, and made sure the laser and batteries were all at the same room temperature when I started. Of the 4 lasers, the cheap one I bought from Lucky Duck two months ago is definitely the dimmest. :-( Based on my results, the email Chuck received from Noah Acres seems plausible. I'm happy with my $79 20 mW laser (plus $8 shipping). Wayne A. Sumner Math/Physics/Astronomy/Engineering Boy's Tennis Coach Northridge High School Davis School District (801) 402-8610 ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Lucky Duck laser
by Wayne Sumner 20 Mar '07

20 Mar '07

Hi Chuck, It just so happens that I received my 20 mW laser yesterday. I now own 4 green lasers, and the 20 mW is definitely the brightest of the 4. At first, when I went outside and compared them alone, I, too, thought that the 20 mW was about the same as the optimized 5 mW laser I bought two years ago with Doug Say from the OAS (we each bought one, but got a better price by buying two together). However, when I brought my wife outside and had her turn them on two at a time with me about 15 feet away, the 20 mW was significantly easier to see. I had her use them one at a time in random order to outline the Big Dipper, and was able to pick out the 20 mW every time. I conducted these tests using Energizer e^2 Lithium batteries out of the same freshly opened package, and made sure the laser and batteries were all at the same room temperature when I started. Of the 4 lasers, the cheap one I bought from Lucky Duck two months ago is definitely the dimmest. :-( Based on my results, the email Chuck received from Noah Acres seems plausible. I'm happy with my $79 20 mW laser (plus $8 shipping). Wayne A. Sumner Math/Physics/Astronomy/Engineering Boy's Tennis Coach Northridge High School Davis School District (801) 402-8610 >>> <cmh856(a)aol.com> 03/20/07 7:17 AM >>> Noah Acres of Lucky Duck was very prompt in his reply to my email. It turns out that there is a happy ending. After checking the serial number of my laser to see what the actual tested power was, he wrote: *** "Chuck, We have that one tested on 2/15 at a little over 19mw. Normally they will vary about 10% depending on batteries, temperature, etc. I think it's more likely your older pointer is greater than 5mw. There really is no such thing as "factory tuned." It just means they tested their lasers and set aside the higher powered ones to sell for a bit more. When did you buy it? Up until about 2 years ago it was pretty common to find lasers that were way over powered (being 10mw or more). As manufacturing processes become more refined lasers turned out a lot closer to spec (the spec being exactly 5mw). It used to be where you might find a few 1mw and a few 20mw in the same batch and a lot more in the range between; but now they're all really close to 5mw. We actually set these to 20mw by design though. Thanks, Noah Acres Luckyduck.com" *** So, it would appear that my old faithful Beta pointer was in the 20mw range all along- no wonder I felt it superior to all other 5mw lasers I'd seen, it actually was- and that explains why the Beta and Ducky laser beams are identical in brightness. But of course had we done the laser test in 2005, we probably would have discovered that by now. Folks could have had a 20mw laser long before now; those of you who bought the Beta pointer should feel good that you were ahead of the trend in this instance. Don't feel cheated if you bought the Lucky Duck "20mw" unit, you got what you paid for, and for a little less money than the Beta. One more thing, Acres wrote in a prior email, in answer to my observation that the label didn't match the power rating of the laser: "There is a bit of difficulty in importing lasers greater than 5mw. To simplify things, we used the same 5mw labels as always, even though some are of greater strength." That seems a bit sketchy, but as long as the laser is really a 20mw unit, I'll accept an "eyewash" label. He's the one that has to deal with government import restrictions, not me. I still want to do the laser comparison test, anybody else? ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com

2 1

Re: Lucky Duck 20mw laser
by cmh856＠aol.com 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Tonight, outdoors in the backyard with no direct lights visible, I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the beam visibility of the Ducky laser and the Beta laser. They are virutally identical in brightness to my eye. Now, my non-optimised laser (~3mw) is about half as bright as my Beta laser (5mw), so one would reasonably expect a 20mw beam to be substantially brighter than a 5mw beam. The only conclusion I can come to is that I did not receive a 20mw laser pointer from Jasper (the Lucky Duck people). Hopefully they will respond to my email with a reasonable explanation. Perhaps I was shipped the wrong product. If anybody else bought one of these, I would like to compare yours with mine, side-by-side. I have the laser test-stand build for the stillborn club project. Too, I'd like to see how the "fat" Ducky laser stacks-up against others. Perhaps the time for the laser test, or at least an abbreviated version, has arrived? ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Re: Lucky Duck 20mw laser
by cmh856＠aol.com 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

I have sent an email requesting an explanation for the labeling and lack of expected brightness. Here is the text: Hello: I received the laser today in good condition. I was puzzled that the label on it states that it is a "class IIIa laser, <5mw". Also, in side-by-side tests with my optimised 5mw Beta Pointer, it is actually a tad dimmer to my eye. Can you shed some light on this situation? (no pun intended!) Otherwise, it's a fine laser pointer, just not a true 20mw unit, apparently. As background, I built my first laser in the mid-seventies and have worked with them as a hobby for decades. I have also written several articles for Sky & Telescope magazine. I am not a novice to either lasers or astronomy- the intended use for this particular product. Thanks, C. Hards Let's see what the reply is. Stay tuned. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Lucky Duck 20mw laser pointer
by cmh856＠aol.com 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Mine arrived today. First impressions: The sticker states that it is a class IIIa laser, <5mw. Ah, not a good sign right out of the box. No instructions, warnings, directions or any printed material at all was included. The case seems sturdy enough, if somewhat utilitarian. In a darkened basement side-by-side test, it is no brighter than my Beta optimised 5mw pointer. To my eye, they are identical in brightness. The dot projected on a wall actually seems a smidgen dimmer than the 5mw Beta dot. The remote switch from my Beta pointer threads-on and works with this pointer. The "20mw" unit looks suspiciously like a 3mw unit I bought from ComputerGeeks.com for $43, down to the green led "pilot" light next to the switch. The switch must be pushed with excessive pressure to turn the unit "on", in comparison to my other two laser pointers. Really stiff, you have to bottom it right out. I doubt that an O-ring would hold it down for the remote switch to operate normally. The acid test is how this thing looks in the night sky, but I have to say that I think Lucky Duck (Jasper) misrepresented the product. It is certainly no brighter than an optimized 5mw laser. Of course, the price was good even for a 5mw unit, in fact $25 cheaper than my Beta laser, and I got the Beta on-sale at the time (thanks, Guy, the Beta is still the champ in my book). But had I known that it really isn't a 20mw diode, I would not have purchased it at all. Anybody else get one of these sheep in wolf's clothing? ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Expedition
by Michael Carnes 19 Mar '07

19 Mar '07

Weather looks decent for tomorrow night (Saturday) and I'm feeling the pull of those optics. So I'm considering an expedition for a few hours, and am trolling for similar interest. Lone Rock might be a possibility. Anybody know if the Gravel Pit is accessible? MC

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] What to see in the spring sky, in light polluted viewing...
by cmh856＠aol.com 17 Mar '07

17 Mar '07

Joe, galaxies, along with dim, extended nebulae, are objects that really require a dark sky to get a good view. There are a few that can be seen from the valley, but none of them will look as good as they do under a dark sky. M31 of course, though only about 1/4 of it's full extent can be seen from Salt Lake under the best conditions- it's also not favorably placed right now. Try M65 & M66, and depending on your very local conditions, NGC 3628 nearby (the Leo Triplet). Also M95, M96, & M105 nearby. M101, M108, M81 & M82, many of the other NGC galaxies in Ursa Major are visible. And of course M51, the Whirlpool. Just bear in mind that the galaxies that usually display structure and details under dark skies, will fade to smudges in the presence of light pollution. But it's still a fun challenge to try and find them. Don't get discouraged. Don't use narrowband filters like ultrablocks or the O-III, which do nothing for galaxies since they shine by starlight, not glowing gas. Sometimes a broadband filter helps- but only about half the time, from my experience. Higher power almost always helps under light-polluted skies, by darkening the background. Set up your scope where no lights shine directly onto your site. It's best to be at the center of say, a grove of trees, with only an opening overhead. Sites high on the benches with the valley stretching out in panorama are not the best. Keep your site as shielded as possible, and staying as dark-adapted as possible is even more of a requirement than it is from a dark, rural site. Good luck, Joe! In a message dated 3/16/2007 9:52:54 AM Mountain Standard Time, bau(a)desnews.com writes: Nice report, Deb. Anybody want to comment on which galaxies might be OK from a light-polluted location, if any? Cory wants to look through our telescope but doesn't want to stand outside all night at a dark location, so I will probably set up somewhere around Red Butte Garden tonight. Could someone suggest some good targets, particularly galaxies? Thanks, Joe ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

2 1

Bowling Ball Drop?
by Ken Harris 17 Mar '07

17 Mar '07

An article in the Trib this morning about a woman being struck by a falling bowling ball caused me to wonder if Patrick has been flying in the northern part of the state.!!?? Ken Harris Great Salt Lake Shipmodeling & Research Society NRG member Salt Lake Astronomical Society

3 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Bowling Ball Drop?
by cmh856＠aol.com 17 Mar '07

17 Mar '07

Or has Patrick taken up flagpole-sitting, perhaps? Avgas is getting pretty expensive these days, after all... _MichaelCarnes(a)earthlink.net_ (mailto:MichaelCarnes@earthlink.net) writes: Not so fast Ken. Have they identified the ball as having a terrestrial origin? > An article in the Trib this morning about a woman being struck by a > falling bowling ball caused me to wonder if Patrick has been flying > in the northern part of the state.!!?? ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0