Wisecracks aside, they all have their legitimate uses and if someone has such a real need, by all means, use the technology. You'd be stupid not to. And I'm not just referring to research, anyone who has ever conducted a public star party knows the value of acquiring targets quickly. There are only so many hours in a night, after all. On the onther hand, simply to use them because one is not sufficiently "motivated" to actually learn to do the same task manually, or isn't interested in increasing a knowledge base or skill set, well, draw your own conclusion. If it's just a matter of personal convenience, comfort, the right to an effortless approach, well, go ahead but I can't line up behind you. I was taught that real, lasting satisfaction comes from effort, not ease. Here we would have an unbridgable comprehension gap. I think my Dob and I would do a pretty good job of finding any objects one would care to list (if it was truly visible given that aperture), in pretty good time- maybe fast enough to surprise most people, and give an expensive toy a run for it's money. Can the average, exlusive GoTo user do it manually in say, twice the time it takes me? Three times the time? Four? And I'm hardly the fastest at it, on this list. There are others who can leave me in the dust, and not all have been doing it as long as I have, either. My offer remains: Let me teach the sky to anyone who doesn't know it sufficiently to use a manual scope, THEN see which method you derive the most enjoyment from (as opposed to which method you must use to achieve specific goals other than "just because I want to"). Learing the sky sufficiently to find objects doesn't just allow one to dispense with GoTo technology, it teaches celestial relationships, fundmentals of celestial mechanics, establishes mental models of objects in space, gives a better understanding of our place in the universe. It allows a firmer grasp of seasonal mechanics, cartography in all it's variations, even hardware mechanics. The passage & notation of time, optics, a better understanding of one's own eyes- and many other areas of interest to the amateur astronomer. It's a win-win situation. I don't post this stuff just to crack jokes or insult robot telescopes & their owners- I'm actually trying to give something of value to people who don't know the true value of what they reject. With the knowledge to find it yourself, you can still use the GoTo if you want. You don't have to sell it after you've learned how to do what the computer does. You are capable of far more than you may give yourself credit for. Well, that dead horse is thoroughly beaten. Comment on low-temperature observing: If you despise it so much, you are living in the wrong locale. In the interest of your personal comfort, I urge you to move to warmer climes at the first opportunity. Go now, you are wasting valuable time that even a GoTo won't be able to make up. __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Â Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Quoting Chuck Hards <chuckhards@yahoo.com>:
I was taught that real, lasting satisfaction comes from effort, not ease. Here we would have an unbridgable comprehension gap.
I think my Dob and I would do a pretty good job of finding any objects one would care to list (if it was truly visible given that aperture), in pretty good time- maybe fast enough to surprise most people, and give an expensive toy a run for it's money. Can the average, exlusive GoTo user do it manually in say, twice the time it takes me? Three times the time? Four?
Yawn! What if somebody COULD do the same task manually but simply preferred the speed and convenience of technology? I can walk to the store, or, I can drive. If I walk, I am limited to only those items I can carry on foot, however, if I take the truck, because it is faster and more efficient, I can spend more time hitting ALL the isles, and still make it home in plenty of time to put it away and enjoy a good meal... I don't know, I've walked a hell of a lot in my life, now I prefer to drive. Don't spend so much time in the past, enjoy today!
participants (2)
-
Chuck Hards -
diveboss@xmission.com