January 2013 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Re: [Utah-astronomy] January SLAS meeting
by Joe Bauman 18 Jan '13

18 Jan '13

We missed both of you Mark and hope you are doing much better. ------------------------------ On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 11:12 AM MST Mark Shelton wrote: >Dang, Sounds like I missed a really good meeting. My wife and I were not feeling well and could not make it. Dang Dang Dang. > >Mark > > >________________________________ > From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards(a)gmail.com> >To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> >Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:41 AM >Subject: [Utah-astronomy] January SLAS meeting > >Great meeting last night, terrific speaker. It was good to get to a >meeting and I hope to make many more this year. Also good to see so many >old friends, and make some new ones. Lots of new faces- new to me anyway! >Kelly had a good time as well, despite her initial misgivings. > >Yes, Rodger definitely needs to wear the official Presidential Hat. It >lends him some badly needed gravitas. (Just kidding!) > >I'd like to speak with Dr. Seth again, hopefully we can drag him out to >SPOC a few times this year. Lots of questions on his project that time >last night didn't permit. >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

2 1

January SLAS meeting
by Chuck Hards 18 Jan '13

18 Jan '13

Great meeting last night, terrific speaker. It was good to get to a meeting and I hope to make many more this year. Also good to see so many old friends, and make some new ones. Lots of new faces- new to me anyway! Kelly had a good time as well, despite her initial misgivings. Yes, Rodger definitely needs to wear the official Presidential Hat. It lends him some badly needed gravitas. (Just kidding!) I'd like to speak with Dr. Seth again, hopefully we can drag him out to SPOC a few times this year. Lots of questions on his project that time last night didn't permit.

5 6

Re: [Utah-astronomy] January SLAS meeting
by Joe Bauman 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

Great all the way around, Patrick! ------------------------------ On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 4:13 PM MST Wiggins Patrick wrote: >On 17 Jan 2013, at 08:41, Chuck Hards wrote: > >> I'd like to speak with Dr. Seth again, hopefully we can drag him out to >> SPOC a few times this year. > >FWIW, he is a SLAS member. > >And, yes, good meeting. He spoke at a level I think most in the audience could understand. And a plus that he kept on topic and did not go overtime. > >Also, what did folks here think of earlier meeting start time? (I liked it.) > >patrick > > >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

1 0

Splitting Sirius
by Debbie 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

The forecast for Southern Utah calls for clear and cold skies all week long. I may get the refractor out on the driveway if the seeing is excellent. Was hoping to try to split Sirius so I was wondering what the ideal magnification would be to see the pup. May also try for "e" and "f" stars in the Trapezium as well. Has anybody split Sirius in the past couple of years? Clear Skies, Debbie

2 3

L&O reminder
by Chuck Hards 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

Saturday January 26th at the Left Fork Grill, starting at noon. 68 W. 3900 South, SLC Discuss your latest astro projects or anything else under the sun, whilst enjoying excellent victuals and scintillating company.

1 0

Tomorrow at NASA
by Wiggins Patrick 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

NASA will host a media teleconference at 11 a.m. MST tomorrow, the 15th, to provide an update about MSL's mission to Mars. For reasons I don't understand, as with similar recent events they will not be airing it on NASA TV where more people would be able to see it. However, recent Mars telecons have been showing up on USTREAM at the following URL. Hopefully tomorrow's event will find its way there too. http://www.ustream.tv/new/explore/technology/all?subCategory=technology-sci… patrick

2 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Your opinion: Faulkes target size
by Joe Bauman 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Many amateurs shoot luminosity unbinned and color exposures binned 2X2. The luminosity gives precise definition to the object and the color shows just as well if it has that small binning. With binning you use shorter exposures, leaving more time for the important exposures, the luminosity. I agree with Chuck that a tiny object would be a waste of aperture. But I don't like nebulae as much as galaxies. One is a gas cloud and the other is a star city -- -in my strong opinion, the star city has intelligent inhabitants. ------------------------------ On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 8:19 AM MST Chuck Hards wrote: >Thanks Rodger. That's a great combination for emission nebulae. Any idea >what the pixel size is and if any capture binning is being used? Someone >was asking about how small an object could be imaged and knowing that would >help narrow down targets. Of course, if people are going for "wow" factor, >going as big as the FOV permits is the best bet. > > > >On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Rodger C. Fry <rcfry(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >> Chuck >> >> The Faulkes imaging session will be done using a filtered monochrome camera >> using multiple exposures of various filter options (RGB, OIII, Halpha, and >> others). Last time we used 16 images with the various filters stacked. We >> also took luminescence (unfiltered) and will do the same this time. >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

4 6

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Your opinion: Faulkes target size
by Joe Bauman 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Many amateurs shoot luminosity unbinned and color exposures binned 2X2. The luminosity gives precise definition to the object and the color shows just as well if it has that small binning. With binning you use shorter exposures, leaving more time for the important exposures, the luminosity. I agree with Chuck that a tiny object would be a waste of aperture. But I don't like nebulae as much as galaxies. One is a gas cloud and the other is a star city -- -in my strong opinion, the star city has intelligent inhabitants. ------------------------------ On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 8:19 AM MST Chuck Hards wrote: >Thanks Rodger. That's a great combination for emission nebulae. Any idea >what the pixel size is and if any capture binning is being used? Someone >was asking about how small an object could be imaged and knowing that would >help narrow down targets. Of course, if people are going for "wow" factor, >going as big as the FOV permits is the best bet. > > > >On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Rodger C. Fry <rcfry(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >> Chuck >> >> The Faulkes imaging session will be done using a filtered monochrome camera >> using multiple exposures of various filter options (RGB, OIII, Halpha, and >> others). Last time we used 16 images with the various filters stacked. We >> also took luminescence (unfiltered) and will do the same this time. >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Utah-Astronomy mailing list >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > >Send messages to the list to >Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > >The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. > >To unsubscribe go to: >http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".

1 0

Your opinion: Faulkes target size
by Wiggins Patrick 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

A few of us have been coming up with lists of possible targets to image at next month's imaging session. But I just realized one thing was not included in the original list of limitations. Namely how small a target size should we consider? FOV of the scope is 7' x 7' so obviously we can't go over that. But what about minimum size? How small a target do y'all think we could work and still get a decent image with nice detail? Thoughts? patrick

6 9

Gerd Neumann
by Chuck Hards 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

Does anyone know if Gerd Neumann has a US or North American distributor or agent? http://www.gerdneumann.net/english/home

2 2