- Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

Thanks for your thoughts. I may still try my hand (or eyes) at visual work - doubt I'll ever do such stuff digitally. Reminds me too much of work... I'm reminded of a very funny and ironic (I thought) scene at the Bryce Canyon public star party on August 30. After much of the public had gone, there was still a number of telescopes set up for looking at Mars. Several of these were going unused while a large group of people stood around one of the park rangers who had a CCD camera, and watched the monitor on his laptop computer while he acquired a number of images. Here's Mars closer than it's been in 60,000 years and some people would rather watch a comupter screen, even when a fine telescope sits idly nearby! Some human behavior I find simply unfathomable. (Try saying that very fast five times.) -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:27 PM To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! Some people have gotten very good results using a visual micrometer, but observations must be repeated, repeated, repeated, and statistical averages used to pin-down a most-likely position. CCD data is usually much cleaner, with less scatter of the data points. In other words, much less repetition. The visual method is totally dependant on seeing conditions, whereas with a CCD you can still pull good frames out of the mass of blurred ones. You should get a bi-filar micrometer, though, and become proficient at it the old-fashioned way before proceeding digitally. Just my opinion, some folks don't see the value in "paying one's dues", or picking up fundamentals. --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > I know that this kind of work is done by imaging, > but I thought that much of > it was still done visually, as well, and just as > accurately. Thoughts? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:57 AM > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo > gallery. > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > ONE! > > > Well, that's what I posited, Kim. I guess I was > thinking you wanted to do some visual research. > Even > PA measurements are now done with CCD's. I think > this > is, at it's roots, another reason I didn't go into > science as a career...I really don't like operating > machinery, equipment, electronics...so of course I > went into woodworking! ;) We'll see how this is > resolved if and when I get my life back. > > I should have been born 60 years earlier than I was, > THEN I could have had the job I still dream about > daily! > > C. > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > Separation and position angle can both be > accurately > > measured for research. > > And, I understand that even world-wide there are > few > > people doing this work. > > Look in any catalogue and you'll see that many > pairs > > have not been measured > > for decades. As you know, such measurements are > > necessary to determine > > orbital data when possible and develop models for > > stellar evolution. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:42 AM > > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the > photo > > gallery. > > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with > just > > ONE! > > > > > > What, specifically, Kim, do you want to do with > > double > > stars? > > > > Bruce has done variable star work for decades, > > contributed to a paper or two, but I'm not aware > of > > any local double-star work, and I"m stumped as to > > what > > you could do except orbital determination. > > > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > > I still have plans to try my hand at double star > > > observations suitable for > > > research. Anyone else ever done this? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:37 AM > > > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the > > photo > > > gallery. > > > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with > > just > > > ONE! > > > > > > > > > Remember that these people are frustrated > > scientists > > > at heart. The science is more important than > > actual > > > observing-in other words, their motivations > > diverge > > > from most of ours. Most amateurs are "nature > > > lovers", > > > and enjoy the hobby for the views & social > > aspects. > > > I > > > think though, that some of us hope to conduct > some > > > type of patrol work at some point in our lives, > > when > > > the kids are grown and scattered, and we can > > retire > > > from the rat-race. > > > > > > But take heart, most of the BIG, > once-in-a-decade > > > bright comets are still discovered visually by > > > amateurs with small telescopes and large > > binoculars! > > > Thomas Bopp was using a borrowed Dobsonian when > he > > > discovered H-B. > > > > > > > > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't > > mean > > > > to be a complainer, but > > > > it seems the days for visual discoveries of > > > > virtually anything are almost > > > > gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire > > automated > > > > equipment, CCD imagers > > > > and even remotely controlled observatories are > > > > making the discoveries. > > > > However, the rest of us should never give up! > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Dale Hooper > > [mailto:Dale.Hooper@sdl.usu.edu] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:26 AM > > > > To: Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with > just > > > > ONE! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But > this > > > > also gives me hope - > > > > because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in > > the > > > UK > > > > - and at least two of > > > > their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade > and > > > > Celestron scopes. > > > > > > > > Clear skies, > > > > Dale. > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > > > design software > > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > > design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

Remember, the latin root word for amateur is amare, or love. Brent Watson once told me that Carl Sagan admitted to Brent on one occasion that he couldn't find his way around the night sky. You're right, Joe, we amateurs at least love what we do. -----Original Message----- From: Joe Bauman [mailto:bau@desnews.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:48 AM To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! Dale, I think you hit the nail right on the head. The difference between a credentialed scientist and an amateur often is that the first gets into science for love then winds up doing something a bit different than expected, for money; the other keeps it at the love level. We don't have the million-dollar research grants and don't make the big discoveries, but we do learn about the science and we have fun doing it. Respect, awe, reverence is what it's really about. In my case, amateur astronomy is simply part of my love for nature. It's a way to appreciate our universe. It's especially enjoyable to me to look at a galaxy or star cluster and think, No matter how hard humans might try, they will NEVER be able to damage this beautiful part of nature. Civilization may blot it out of the view for most through light pollution, but at least for now, we can still find dark enough places to enjoy it. -- Joe > Most of the "professionally trained" astronomers end up chasing grants >researching the things that OTHER people are willing to pay them for and >some even end up as software engineers. <g> My stuff is certainly not >on-par with their level. But, I just take my time and within my budget I >pursue the things that I AM INTERESTED IN. > Joe Bauman science & military reporter Deseret News bau(a)desnews.com (801) 237-2169 _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

I know that this kind of work is done by imaging, but I thought that much of it was still done visually, as well, and just as accurately. Thoughts? -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:57 AM To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! Well, that's what I posited, Kim. I guess I was thinking you wanted to do some visual research. Even PA measurements are now done with CCD's. I think this is, at it's roots, another reason I didn't go into science as a career...I really don't like operating machinery, equipment, electronics...so of course I went into woodworking! ;) We'll see how this is resolved if and when I get my life back. I should have been born 60 years earlier than I was, THEN I could have had the job I still dream about daily! C. --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > Separation and position angle can both be accurately > measured for research. > And, I understand that even world-wide there are few > people doing this work. > Look in any catalogue and you'll see that many pairs > have not been measured > for decades. As you know, such measurements are > necessary to determine > orbital data when possible and develop models for > stellar evolution. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:42 AM > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo > gallery. > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > ONE! > > > What, specifically, Kim, do you want to do with > double > stars? > > Bruce has done variable star work for decades, > contributed to a paper or two, but I'm not aware of > any local double-star work, and I"m stumped as to > what > you could do except orbital determination. > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > I still have plans to try my hand at double star > > observations suitable for > > research. Anyone else ever done this? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:37 AM > > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the > photo > > gallery. > > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with > just > > ONE! > > > > > > Remember that these people are frustrated > scientists > > at heart. The science is more important than > actual > > observing-in other words, their motivations > diverge > > from most of ours. Most amateurs are "nature > > lovers", > > and enjoy the hobby for the views & social > aspects. > > I > > think though, that some of us hope to conduct some > > type of patrol work at some point in our lives, > when > > the kids are grown and scattered, and we can > retire > > from the rat-race. > > > > But take heart, most of the BIG, once-in-a-decade > > bright comets are still discovered visually by > > amateurs with small telescopes and large > binoculars! > > Thomas Bopp was using a borrowed Dobsonian when he > > discovered H-B. > > > > > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't > mean > > > to be a complainer, but > > > it seems the days for visual discoveries of > > > virtually anything are almost > > > gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire > automated > > > equipment, CCD imagers > > > and even remotely controlled observatories are > > > making the discoveries. > > > However, the rest of us should never give up! > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dale Hooper > [mailto:Dale.Hooper@sdl.usu.edu] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:26 AM > > > To: Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > > > ONE! > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> > > > > > > > > > I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But this > > > also gives me hope - > > > because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in > the > > UK > > > - and at least two of > > > their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade and > > > Celestron scopes. > > > > > > Clear skies, > > > Dale. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > > design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

Separation and position angle can both be accurately measured for research. And, I understand that even world-wide there are few people doing this work. Look in any catalogue and you'll see that many pairs have not been measured for decades. As you know, such measurements are necessary to determine orbital data when possible and develop models for stellar evolution. -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:42 AM To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! What, specifically, Kim, do you want to do with double stars? Bruce has done variable star work for decades, contributed to a paper or two, but I'm not aware of any local double-star work, and I"m stumped as to what you could do except orbital determination. --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > I still have plans to try my hand at double star > observations suitable for > research. Anyone else ever done this? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:37 AM > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo > gallery. > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > ONE! > > > Remember that these people are frustrated scientists > at heart. The science is more important than actual > observing-in other words, their motivations diverge > from most of ours. Most amateurs are "nature > lovers", > and enjoy the hobby for the views & social aspects. > I > think though, that some of us hope to conduct some > type of patrol work at some point in our lives, when > the kids are grown and scattered, and we can retire > from the rat-race. > > But take heart, most of the BIG, once-in-a-decade > bright comets are still discovered visually by > amateurs with small telescopes and large binoculars! > Thomas Bopp was using a borrowed Dobsonian when he > discovered H-B. > > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't mean > > to be a complainer, but > > it seems the days for visual discoveries of > > virtually anything are almost > > gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire automated > > equipment, CCD imagers > > and even remotely controlled observatories are > > making the discoveries. > > However, the rest of us should never give up! > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dale Hooper [mailto:Dale.Hooper@sdl.usu.edu] > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:26 AM > > To: Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > > ONE! > > > > > > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> > > > > > > I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But this > > also gives me hope - > > because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in the > UK > > - and at least two of > > their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade and > > Celestron scopes. > > > > Clear skies, > > Dale. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Dale Hooper 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

I'm probably one of the (at least "formerly") frustrated scientists at heart (FSAH's). As a kid I wanted to be an astrophysict or radio astronomer - but, family & school decisions, lack of funds and "just plain lack of enough smarts" landed me in the software engineering field instead. There were times that I wished I had done some things differently but then I realized a few things. Most of the "professionally trained" astronomers end up chasing grants researching the things that OTHER people are willing to pay them for and some even end up as software engineers. <g> My stuff is certainly not on-par with their level. But, I just take my time and within my budget I pursue the things that I AM INTERESTED IN. Times are certainly changing but like Chuck mentioned Dobs & big binos are still finding a fair number of comets. I know that several amateurs search for Sun grazing comets in SOHO images. For dedicated FSAH's I think there are still a lot of exciting things to do. Kim's double star stuff sounds pretty interesting. The Pro/Am collaboration session at last years ALCON makes me think that the areas to contribute are actually growing. I'm still hoping to do asteroid and supernovae observing once I get things set up right. The beauty for us FSAH's is that there is no publish or perish. Clear skies, Dale. > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:37 AM > To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! > > > Remember that these people are frustrated scientists > at heart. The science is more important than actual > observing-in other words, their motivations diverge > from most of ours. Most amateurs are "nature lovers", > and enjoy the hobby for the views & social aspects. I > think though, that some of us hope to conduct some > type of patrol work at some point in our lives, when > the kids are grown and scattered, and we can retire > from the rat-race. > > But take heart, most of the BIG, once-in-a-decade > bright comets are still discovered visually by > amateurs with small telescopes and large binoculars! > Thomas Bopp was using a borrowed Dobsonian when he > discovered H-B. > > > --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > > Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't mean > > to be a complainer, but > > it seems the days for visual discoveries of > > virtually anything are almost > > gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire automated > > equipment, CCD imagers > > and even remotely controlled observatories are > > making the discoveries. > > However, the rest of us should never give up! > >

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

I still have plans to try my hand at double star observations suitable for research. Anyone else ever done this? -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 10:37 AM To: Visit http://www.utahastronomy.com for the photo gallery. Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! Remember that these people are frustrated scientists at heart. The science is more important than actual observing-in other words, their motivations diverge from most of ours. Most amateurs are "nature lovers", and enjoy the hobby for the views & social aspects. I think though, that some of us hope to conduct some type of patrol work at some point in our lives, when the kids are grown and scattered, and we can retire from the rat-race. But take heart, most of the BIG, once-in-a-decade bright comets are still discovered visually by amateurs with small telescopes and large binoculars! Thomas Bopp was using a borrowed Dobsonian when he discovered H-B. --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't mean > to be a complainer, but > it seems the days for visual discoveries of > virtually anything are almost > gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire automated > equipment, CCD imagers > and even remotely controlled observatories are > making the discoveries. > However, the rest of us should never give up! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dale Hooper [mailto:Dale.Hooper@sdl.usu.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:26 AM > To: Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just > ONE! > > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> > > > I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But this > also gives me hope - > because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in the UK > - and at least two of > their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade and > Celestron scopes. > > Clear skies, > Dale. > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

RE: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Kim Hyatt 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

Thanks for sharing that article Dale. I don't mean to be a complainer, but it seems the days for visual discoveries of virtually anything are almost gone. Amateurs with the means to acquire automated equipment, CCD imagers and even remotely controlled observatories are making the discoveries. However, the rest of us should never give up! -----Original Message----- From: Dale Hooper [mailto:Dale.Hooper@sdl.usu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 9:26 AM To: Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: [Utah-astronomy] I'd be happy with just ONE! <http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But this also gives me hope - because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in the UK - and at least two of their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade and Celestron scopes. Clear skies, Dale. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

2 1

I'd be happy with just ONE!
by Dale Hooper 17 Sep '03

17 Sep '03

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/3112508.stm> I'd be happy with just ONE discovery! But this also gives me hope - because I've seen how cloudy the skies are in the UK - and at least two of their 6 telescopes appear to be stock Meade and Celestron scopes. Clear skies, Dale.

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Coma
by DunnDave＠aol.com 16 Sep '03

16 Sep '03

Brent, Chuck and Dave, Thanks for the comments. I probably ought to have you look at it with me. I am able to get round stars with flares. When I attempt a star test it looks round when the collimation is correct. This makes me wonder what I am seeing. I see the problem at it's worst when viewing a bright star or planet. For example, I was 78 - 406X. I could get a good focus on the planet and could see good surface detail. The planet was surrounded by a halo of light that seemed to be oscallating, possibly by my eye moving around. Bright stars never appear to come to focus even when other stars appear to be points. When I first set up the scope at Monte I discovered that the secondary was not centered in the tube. Since I used a laser to collimate, I was able to tip both mirrors and get good images of galaxies and nebula. Stars and planets were awful. I have fixed the allignment problem and now just have the halo, which I think made Mars look like a comet with a big nucleous. Dave

4 4

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Coma
by DunnDave＠aol.com 16 Sep '03

16 Sep '03

If I remember correctly, the figure on this mirror has a deep center and a little TDE. What causes spherical abberation? Dave

2 1