I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year: Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale? Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes? Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser. Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)). I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption. Thanks for listening. Dion
Hi Dion. Battery: sounds like the one you bought is defective. They should never take two days to charge and definitely not go dead that fast. Return it for a refund? I use a small portable automobile emergency jump starter battery pack that has a cigarette lighter plug in it. I think I bought it at Pep Boys. It drives my C11 all night with no problem, and recharges in a few hours. Viewfinder: While some kind of magnification for fine positioning is helpful, nothing beats a zero-magnification finder such as a Telrad or an Orion "Easyfinder." They're also pretty cheap - something like $30. Collimation: Others on this list can offer expert advice. If it's a Dobsonian the process of collimating you scope should be fairly straightforward once you've practiced with it a bit. There are laser collimating eyepieces you can buy to facilitate the collimation process. Again, I'll let the experts here speak to that issue. Finding stuff: Super-juicy topic! For a beginner, I strongly recommend the book "Nightwatch: A Practical Guide to Viewing the Universe" by Terence Dickinson. We sell it here at the planetarium, or you can buy it online. Do you have any star charts? Do you have a laptop computer, smartphone or tablet computers that can run any of the many good astronomy apps? The first Saturday of every month we have a "Gateway to the Stars" lecture here in our dome theatre that teaches audiences how to find cool things in the current night sky. 6:45 PM. Good luck, and feel free to communicate with us if we can be of any assistance. Seth Jarvis Clark Planetarium sjarvis@slco.org -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dion Davidson Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year: Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale? Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes? Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser. Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)). I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption. Thanks for listening. Dion _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
I'll offer some advice on your battery question: I'm not exactly sure what battery you are actually using, but inverters are power hogs. Even though your telescope drive only consumes 4 watts AC (per Meade's owner's manual), the ac inverter running your scope is consuming considerably more. A newer model might be a bit more efficient that an older one. An annoying feature of most AC inverters is the "battery saver" function. This is to prevent running your car battery down so low that it can't start the car. If you are on a portable battery, this isn't a concern, but I have found most inverters voltage threshold are too sensitive and they will shutdown with a low battery indicator. If you add accessories like dew heaters, cameras with thermoelectric coolers, and laptop the power usage increases dramatically and you will need a full size battery to last through the night. If you aren't using all the extra equipment, you can probably get by with a small 12V lawn and garden battery available at hardware stores. I would recommend a sealed version if at all possible. -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dion Davidson Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 10:36 AM To: Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year: Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale? Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes? Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser. Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)). I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption. Thanks for listening. Dion _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
For the battery, using the inverter side of things will drain it very fast compared to using the DC side. I'm not sure what the requirements of your scope are, but if it'll take 12V DC, that's the way to go. For example, my Losmandy G-11 runs at least several days on my battery pack when plugged into the DC cigarette lighter, but only a few hours when plugged into the inverter. It's possible the battery has already sulfated, but try using the 12V side (assuming it has one). For the finder, I'd suggest using a target reticule like a Rigel Quickfinder or a Telrad. It doesn't magnify, which helps me when star hopping--I don't have to recalculate anything in my brain. Collimation is still a topic I'm working through, but I use a chesire on my newt, and it works pretty well, although it can be a little more difficult to use sometimes. Finding stuff...best book I've found is Nightwatch, and another one I recommend is Turn Left at Orion. I still struggle with it myself, I can find the half a dozen favorites of mine each season, but otherwise I have to rely on my goto. Each season I add a few more objects to my star hopping abilities though. Come to a SPOC star party and setup next to someone, that's helped me a lot in the past as well... Dan On May 17, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com> wrote:
I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year:
Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale?
Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes?
Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser.
Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)).
I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption.
Thanks for listening. Dion _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
-- Daniel Holmes, danielh@holmesonics.com "Laugh while you can, monkey boy!" -- Lord John Whorfin
Dion, I also recommend the Telrad as a finder. It really helps to be able to see the stars visually and the target superimposed on them. That's what the Telrad does the best. You can also purchase finder charts that have a correctly placed and sized Telrad target already printed on them for individual objects. I have found this system really works for folks who are just starting, and those more experienced also. Now for the shameless commercial portion of the message. I almost hate to mention this part, but this system works really well. My wife and I have a small company that sells Telrads, and we also publish several sets of the finder charts referenced above. You can go to our web site to get a sample. It is www.sky-spot.com. We are local and so can get you the stuff pretty quickly. We sell mail order to a large part of the world, and have many dealers as well. If you google Telrad Finder Charts you can find testimonials. One person at Riverside a few years back came up to me after using the charts for one noight and told me of finding over 40 Messier oobjects in just a few hours where he had not had particularly good success before. On May 17, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com> wrote:
I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year:
Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale?
Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes?
Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser.
Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)).
I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption.
Thanks for listening. Dion
A fellow who lives in Reno owns it now. He is pretty involved with the product and keeps everything working right. I get a chance to help evaluate some things from time to time. There are still a bunch sold.
I'll second Brent's "shameless promotion" by telling you his telrad finder charts are excellent -- highly recommended. I like having a telrad AND an optical finder scope -- the telrad will get you close, and an 8x50 will show you many of the brighter M objects; if the two are in sync, it makes finding objects much easier. I also really like printing up the latest edition of skymaps.com monthy star charts -- it's a two-page pdf file that's free and shows you a nice sampler of what's up, divided into categories -- naked eye, binocular objects, and stuff for small telescopes. I have an expensive laser collimator that I really like, but you certainly don't have to go that route to get your scope collimated well. Best thing is to have someone with experience/knowledge of collimation techniques and inexpensive tools show you how (that would NOT be me however!). I also recommend getting to know your way around the night sky WITHOUT a telescope -- familiarize yourself with the constellations. Best book I know for that is H. A. Rey's "The Stars -- A New Way To See Them". Copies are available at the Clark downtown. It's the book that cemented my interest at a young age in fact. /R ________________________________ From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 12:54 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Dion, I also recommend the Telrad as a finder. It really helps to be able to see the stars visually and the target superimposed on them. That's what the Telrad does the best. You can also purchase finder charts that have a correctly placed and sized Telrad target already printed on them for individual objects. I have found this system really works for folks who are just starting, and those more experienced also. Now for the shameless commercial portion of the message. I almost hate to mention this part, but this system works really well. My wife and I have a small company that sells Telrads, and we also publish several sets of the finder charts referenced above. You can go to our web site to get a sample. It is www.sky-spot.com. We are local and so can get you the stuff pretty quickly. We sell mail order to a large part of the world, and have many dealers as well. If you google Telrad Finder Charts you can find testimonials. One person at Riverside a few years back came up to me after using the charts for one noight and told me of finding over 40 Messier oobjects in just a few hours where he had not had particularly good success before. On May 17, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com> wrote:
I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year:
Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale?
Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes?
Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser.
Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)).
I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption.
Thanks for listening. Dion
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
I just wanted to say thank you to all who chimed in for your helpful and generous comments, both on and off the list. Dion ________________________________ From: Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I'll second Brent's "shameless promotion" by telling you his telrad finder charts are excellent -- highly recommended. I like having a telrad AND an optical finder scope -- the telrad will get you close, and an 8x50 will show you many of the brighter M objects; if the two are in sync, it makes finding objects much easier. I also really like printing up the latest edition of skymaps.com monthy star charts -- it's a two-page pdf file that's free and shows you a nice sampler of what's up, divided into categories -- naked eye, binocular objects, and stuff for small telescopes. I have an expensive laser collimator that I really like, but you certainly don't have to go that route to get your scope collimated well. Best thing is to have someone with experience/knowledge of collimation techniques and inexpensive tools show you how (that would NOT be me however!). I also recommend getting to know your way around the night sky WITHOUT a telescope -- familiarize yourself with the constellations. Best book I know for that is H. A. Rey's "The Stars -- A New Way To See Them". Copies are available at the Clark downtown. It's the book that cemented my interest at a young age in fact. /R ________________________________ From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 12:54 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Dion, I also recommend the Telrad as a finder. It really helps to be able to see the stars visually and the target superimposed on them. That's what the Telrad does the best. You can also purchase finder charts that have a correctly placed and sized Telrad target already printed on them for individual objects. I have found this system really works for folks who are just starting, and those more experienced also. Now for the shameless commercial portion of the message. I almost hate to mention this part, but this system works really well. My wife and I have a small company that sells Telrads, and we also publish several sets of the finder charts referenced above. You can go to our web site to get a sample. It is www.sky-spot.com. We are local and so can get you the stuff pretty quickly. We sell mail order to a large part of the world, and have many dealers as well. If you google Telrad Finder Charts you can find testimonials. One person at Riverside a few years back came up to me after using the charts for one noight and told me of finding over 40 Messier oobjects in just a few hours where he had not had particularly good success before. On May 17, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com> wrote:
I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year:
Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale?
Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes?
Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser.
Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)).
I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption.
Thanks for listening. Dion
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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".
I'm a little late to the party, but I use Stellarium (google it), which is both FREE and multi-platform, on my laptop when I go out with the telescope. After giving it your location, it gives you a pretty accurate map of the sky you're seeing, with a search feature and zoom-in to a picture of (most) objects. It's an easy way to learn your way around, without having to memorize a chart. Bear in mind that I'm incredibly lazy, so this probably wouldn't be a considered a 'professional' approach to stargazing. Actually, I'm pretty sure that most of my methods would barely get me into the range of 'amateur' but that's an entirely different story... On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com>wrote:
I just wanted to say thank you to all who chimed in for your helpful and generous comments, both on and off the list. Dion
________________________________ From: Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
I'll second Brent's "shameless promotion" by telling you his telrad finder charts are excellent -- highly recommended. I like having a telrad AND an optical finder scope -- the telrad will get you close, and an 8x50 will show you many of the brighter M objects; if the two are in sync, it makes finding objects much easier. I also really like printing up the latest edition of skymaps.com monthy star charts -- it's a two-page pdf file that's free and shows you a nice sampler of what's up, divided into categories -- naked eye, binocular objects, and stuff for small telescopes. I have an expensive laser collimator that I really like, but you certainly don't have to go that route to get your scope collimated well. Best thing is to have someone with experience/knowledge of collimation techniques and inexpensive tools show you how (that would NOT be me however!). I also recommend getting to know your way around the night sky WITHOUT a telescope -- familiarize yourself with the constellations. Best book I know for that is H. A. Rey's "The Stars -- A New Way To See Them". Copies are available at the Clark downtown. It's the book that cemented my interest at a young age in fact. /R
________________________________ From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 12:54 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
Dion,
I also recommend the Telrad as a finder. It really helps to be able to see the stars visually and the target superimposed on them. That's what the Telrad does the best.
You can also purchase finder charts that have a correctly placed and sized Telrad target already printed on them for individual objects. I have found this system really works for folks who are just starting, and those more experienced also.
Now for the shameless commercial portion of the message. I almost hate to mention this part, but this system works really well. My wife and I have a small company that sells Telrads, and we also publish several sets of the finder charts referenced above. You can go to our web site to get a sample. It is www.sky-spot.com. We are local and so can get you the stuff pretty quickly. We sell mail order to a large part of the world, and have many dealers as well. If you google Telrad Finder Charts you can find testimonials. One person at Riverside a few years back came up to me after using the charts for one noight and told me of finding over 40 Messier oobjects in just a few hours where he had not had particularly good success before.
On May 17, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Dion Davidson <diondavidson@yahoo.com> wrote:
I need help with a few things that are causing frustration for me at the scope this year:
Battery: I bought a Ryobi battery/light/tire pump to use as an power source for my scope. But it is always dead! Useless. Even if I charge it for 2 days prior to an event, it will be dead within minutes of using it. Suggestions for a better battery? My old Meade 2120 10 SCT uses AC power, so I use an inverter between the battery and the scope. Know of anything better for sale?
Viewfinder: I have the straight-through 8x50 viewfinder that came with my scope. It works fine but I have a hard time finding stuff, especially when looking up. I'd like to get a right angle correct image viewfinder. Suggestions? Know any for sale? If I bought a non-Meade one, could someone show me how to connect it to my tube? Would I have to drill holes?
Collimation: I think my scope is ok (I had it collimated at Scope City when I bought it), but I've heard other opinions from SLAS members. Could I get help from someone who knows what they are doing on a) determining if my scope needs collimation, and b) how to do it. I have read a bunch online and watched youtube videos but I'm none the wiser.
Finding stuff: I would love to have a class/lesson/tutorial on how to find cool stuff in the sky. I struggle to find anything but the most basic things in the sky. Having the image inverted/upside down in my viewfinder doesn't help, and it seems I can always see more stars in the eyepiece than I can on a star chart, which makes it difficult to know if I'm in the right area. I probably need some basic instruction on star hopping and recognizing star magnitudes, fields of view, map orientation, etc. (FYI: I can usually find the moon, planets, and some familiar deep sky stuff: M8 (Lagoon), M31 (Andromeda), M13, Orion Nebula, and even M57 (ring nebula)).
I spent a beautiful weekend in Montana this weekend under dark skies and spent a few hours one night looking for stuff and finding none of it! (I looked for M51, M81, M82, M101, M108. I even looked for PANSTARRS). I went back out early in the morning on another day and did see M31, M57, and got M81 and M82 in the same field of view. So, some redemption.
Thanks for listening. Dion
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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@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".
I'm even later to this thread, and what worked for me typically won't work for most people. I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example. I learned the sky starting when I was about nine or ten years old, from my parents back yard on the light-polluted east bench of Salt Lake City, with 3 to 4-inch scopes. The light pollution actually helped me at first, by reducing the number of stars visible to only the brightest. Picking out constellations was easy. As I got older and got to darker sites, it was then easy to fill in the gaps in the charts with progressively fainter stars. BTW, when I speak about learning the consellations, I don't see mental lines connecting the dots. I see patterns of individual stars. Those lines you see in books that try and make the constellations look like an outline of what they are named for seem very obfuscatory, to me at least. It took me about two or three years before I could glance at any part of the sky visible from here and know my way around pretty well. Knowing the brighter stuff first helped me to not get overwhelmed when under a pristine, dark sky. The southern sky is totally unknown to me. It would be like starting all over, or suddenly being on an alien planet across the galaxy. Once you know the star patterns, you can easily pinpoint the locations of objects on the sky from their positions on an atlas chart. Having a good eye for spacial relationships and proportions helps. Back in those days, before GoTo or reflex sights, I invented my own method of finding objects. I use a straight finder, and keeping both eyes open, superimpose the cross-hair in the finder on the spot in the sky seen with the unaided eye. In a low-power eyepiece, the object is there 95% of the time, first attempt. You can see that I'm not even using the sky view that the finder offers, just the cross-hairs. Sometimes, and for dim objects, I'd concentrate on the finder view to tweak the view in the main scope after rough aiming, but not often. These days we have a myriad of reflex sights that essentially do the same thing, and you don't have to do the two-eye mental overlapping that I did. It seems that dealing with a different image in each eye simultaneously isn't a very easy thing for some people. Anyway, more old-timer blather. I could go on but wont since I hear crickets and snoring. My 3 cents.
Amen to what Chuck said -- I was about the same age when my dad brought home the copy of "The Stars" by H.A. Rey (of Curious George fame) that really hooked me. I spent many nights thereafter with a penlight (bulb painted with my sister's red nail polish) learning the night sky from the various constellation charts in my fairly light-polluted back yard in So. Calif. The stars are like old friends now as a result of that early effort. I also learned to unscrew the annoying porch lights of many an unsuspecting neighbor... :) ________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:02 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I'm even later to this thread, and what worked for me typically won't work for most people. I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example. I learned the sky starting when I was about nine or ten years old, from my parents back yard on the light-polluted east bench of Salt Lake City, with 3 to 4-inch scopes. The light pollution actually helped me at first, by reducing the number of stars visible to only the brightest. Picking out constellations was easy. As I got older and got to darker sites, it was then easy to fill in the gaps in the charts with progressively fainter stars. BTW, when I speak about learning the consellations, I don't see mental lines connecting the dots. I see patterns of individual stars. Those lines you see in books that try and make the constellations look like an outline of what they are named for seem very obfuscatory, to me at least. It took me about two or three years before I could glance at any part of the sky visible from here and know my way around pretty well. Knowing the brighter stuff first helped me to not get overwhelmed when under a pristine, dark sky. The southern sky is totally unknown to me. It would be like starting all over, or suddenly being on an alien planet across the galaxy. Once you know the star patterns, you can easily pinpoint the locations of objects on the sky from their positions on an atlas chart. Having a good eye for spacial relationships and proportions helps. Back in those days, before GoTo or reflex sights, I invented my own method of finding objects. I use a straight finder, and keeping both eyes open, superimpose the cross-hair in the finder on the spot in the sky seen with the unaided eye. In a low-power eyepiece, the object is there 95% of the time, first attempt. You can see that I'm not even using the sky view that the finder offers, just the cross-hairs. Sometimes, and for dim objects, I'd concentrate on the finder view to tweak the view in the main scope after rough aiming, but not often. These days we have a myriad of reflex sights that essentially do the same thing, and you don't have to do the two-eye mental overlapping that I did. It seems that dealing with a different image in each eye simultaneously isn't a very easy thing for some people. Anyway, more old-timer blather. I could go on but wont since I hear crickets and snoring. My 3 cents. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
Most of us "old timers" learned to ply the sky in the same manner already mentioned. I began when I was in High School as a way to begin celestial navigation. I spent the better part of a year leanring the sky a small portion at a time as it would reveal itself along the eastern horizon from my east bench Salt Lake back yard. I didn't worry much about light pollution then. I had an incandescent street light at the corner of our yard that illuminated some of our back yard, but my friends always seemed to make sure that it was non-functional. I never learned much about celestial navigation except for the basic principles. Instead I gained a lifelong appreciation for the night sky. I added much of the southern sky while I served in Argentina. I remember the Magellanic Clouds, and seeing Omega Centauri and 47 Tucani without optical aid. What majestic skies can be accessed from the southern climes! At one point I even remember seeing the Big Dipper handle stars just barely visible on the northern horizon. The rest of the "northern" constellations were all upside down. I honed my stellar recognition skills when I worked at the Planetarium, and later during the development of Digistar. I added some of the third dimension to my knowledge of the constellations. If you didn't know the sky, it was pretty difficult to give demonstrations. Years later I taught observational Astronomy to teachers as a part of the Iomega Astronomy Enrichment program. During our evening sessions and our early morning sessions we would lay on the ground in a circle with our heads together and I would point out constellations using a six cell Maglight. I would then pass the flashlight to the next person and they would repeat the precess. We continued around the circle with each person repeating the identification until the major constellations became somewhat familiar. Then we would adjourn to telescopes to learn the art of star hopping. This was the genesis of my finder charts. Like Rich, Chuck, and others who have taken the time to gain astro knowledge, I feel the sky belongs to me. It is a personal possession. I rejoice when certain stars appear to herald the changing seasons, or stimulate memories of dark nights spent on mountain tops with my 22 inch scope and the cherished views through it. I could go on for pages about those views and experiences. Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs. From: Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Amen to what Chuck said -- I was about the same age when my dad brought home the copy of "The Stars" by H.A. Rey (of Curious George fame) that really hooked me. I spent many nights thereafter with a penlight (bulb painted with my sister's red nail polish) learning the night sky from the various constellation charts in my fairly light-polluted back yard in So. Calif. The stars are like old friends now as a result of that early effort. I also learned to unscrew the annoying porch lights of many an unsuspecting neighbor... :)
Those of us who are somewhat dyslexic and have trouble finding our way around the stars are still capable of immense enjoyment in the night cosmos. Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks. As far as I'm concerned, the exact orientation of various constellations doesn't concern me a much as studying the structure of a galaxy or exploring a globular. I can use my go-to to get there. If we happened to live on an Earth-like planet in a different part of the Milky Way or in another galaxy, the orientation would be entirely different -- we might be exclaiming over the Snout of the Beetle Constellation -- but our enjoyment of globulars, planets and other wonderful sights would be just as great. So folks should not be condescending over the way people gain entrance to the wonders of the universe. Just be glad that all can share in the joy, however we get there. -- Joe ________________________________ From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Most of us "old timers" learned to ply the sky in the same manner already mentioned. I began when I was in High School as a way to begin celestial navigation. I spent the better part of a year leanring the sky a small portion at a time as it would reveal itself along the eastern horizon from my east bench Salt Lake back yard. I didn't worry much about light pollution then. I had an incandescent street light at the corner of our yard that illuminated some of our back yard, but my friends always seemed to make sure that it was non-functional. I never learned much about celestial navigation except for the basic principles. Instead I gained a lifelong appreciation for the night sky. I added much of the southern sky while I served in Argentina. I remember the Magellanic Clouds, and seeing Omega Centauri and 47 Tucani without optical aid. What majestic skies can be accessed from the southern climes! At one point I even remember seeing the Big Dipper handle stars just barely visible on the northern horizon. The rest of the "northern" constellations were all upside down. I honed my stellar recognition skills when I worked at the Planetarium, and later during the development of Digistar. I added some of the third dimension to my knowledge of the constellations. If you didn't know the sky, it was pretty difficult to give demonstrations. Years later I taught observational Astronomy to teachers as a part of the Iomega Astronomy Enrichment program. During our evening sessions and our early morning sessions we would lay on the ground in a circle with our heads together and I would point out constellations using a six cell Maglight. I would then pass the flashlight to the next person and they would repeat the precess. We continued around the circle with each person repeating the identification until the major constellations became somewhat familiar. Then we would adjourn to telescopes to learn the art of star hopping. This was the genesis of my finder charts. Like Rich, Chuck, and others who have taken the time to gain astro knowledge, I feel the sky belongs to me. It is a personal possession. I rejoice when certain stars appear to herald the changing seasons, or stimulate memories of dark nights spent on mountain tops with my 22 inch scope and the cherished views through it. I could go on for pages about those views and experiences. Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs. From: Richard Tenney <retenney@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Amen to what Chuck said -- I was about the same age when my dad brought home the copy of "The Stars" by H.A. Rey (of Curious George fame) that really hooked me. I spent many nights thereafter with a penlight (bulb painted with my sister's red nail polish) learning the night sky from the various constellation charts in my fairly light-polluted back yard in So. Calif. The stars are like old friends now as a result of that early effort. I also learned to unscrew the annoying porch lights of many an unsuspecting neighbor... :) _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying. You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life. Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe ________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying. You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life. Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
Also, what about this comment by you, Chuck? It sounds pretty condescending to me: "I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example." What does that sound like, "don't even feel it necessary" -- a compliment? -- Joe ________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe ________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying. You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life. Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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".
Joe, the difference is that you, by your admission, have a learning disability. It's not a choice. Therefore you and those who cannot learn, at least by the methods Brent and I are familiar with, are not the people we were referring to. Well, speaking for myself, at least. If you can't (and I know you've tried), then you are not among those who won't. See the difference? It wasn't directed at you. My humblest apology if you took it personally. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Also, what about this comment by you, Chuck? It sounds pretty condescending to me: "I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example." What does that sound like, "don't even feel it necessary" -- a compliment? -- Joe
________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe
________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying.
You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life.
Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com
wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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@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".
Hey! Don't make me separate you two! It's like anything else though really, times change. Spellcheck means that you don't really need to learn grammar anymore. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't, doesn't mean that you have to. Same way you don't want to learn to use Sky charts, you can use the computer. You don't want to learn how to read a map to drive from here to New York, let GPS do it for you. On Wednesday, May 29, 2013, Chuck Hards wrote:
Joe, the difference is that you, by your admission, have a learning disability. It's not a choice. Therefore you and those who cannot learn, at least by the methods Brent and I are familiar with, are not the people we were referring to. Well, speaking for myself, at least.
If you can't (and I know you've tried), then you are not among those who won't.
See the difference? It wasn't directed at you.
My humblest apology if you took it personally.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com<javascript:;>
wrote:
Also, what about this comment by you, Chuck? It sounds pretty condescending to me: "I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example." What does that sound like, "don't even feel it necessary" -- a compliment? -- Joe
________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe
________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying.
You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life.
Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com
wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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>
I do not have a learning disability. I have a difficulty involving directional orientation -- it's a mild type of dyslexia that causes people to get turned around easily but does NOT interfere with ability to learn! As far as I'm concerned it's not the same. My saying that is not an "admission" that I have a learning disability today. It's a little obstacle. When I was a child I had trouble telling a b from a d, but as a writer, that's no longer a problem. As a child I couldn't tie my shoelaces the proper way and I still just tie them using granny loops. I think I can remember not knowing left from right, but I have known that one for a very long time now. It's a particular kind of wiring problem. I also don't feel anyone should be snobby about people with no dyslexia or other problem who do not choose to learn the constellations. It's really not what astronomy is about for many. If knowing which constellation abuts another rings your bell, fine. To me it seems like a trivial subject to invest time and energy on when you could spend the same time and energy LEARNING (as I have) about many other astronomical factors. But as they say, to each his own. -- Joe ________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Joe, the difference is that you, by your admission, have a learning disability. It's not a choice. Therefore you and those who cannot learn, at least by the methods Brent and I are familiar with, are not the people we were referring to. Well, speaking for myself, at least. If you can't (and I know you've tried), then you are not among those who won't. See the difference? It wasn't directed at you. My humblest apology if you took it personally. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Also, what about this comment by you, Chuck? It sounds pretty condescending to me: "I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example." What does that sound like, "don't even feel it necessary" -- a compliment? -- Joe
________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe
________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying.
You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life.
Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com
wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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@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@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".
Joe, knowing you, Brent and Chuck, I don't believe anyone had any intention of snobbery while sharing personal perspective regarding our early years in the hobby. Please take everything said here with a grain of salt, knowing that we're all friends at the end of the day. I for one have a great deal of respect for you, FWIW. /R ________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:15 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I do not have a learning disability. I have a difficulty involving directional orientation -- it's a mild type of dyslexia that causes people to get turned around easily but does NOT interfere with ability to learn! As far as I'm concerned it's not the same. My saying that is not an "admission" that I have a learning disability today. It's a little obstacle. When I was a child I had trouble telling a b from a d, but as a writer, that's no longer a problem. As a child I couldn't tie my shoelaces the proper way and I still just tie them using granny loops. I think I can remember not knowing left from right, but I have known that one for a very long time now. It's a particular kind of wiring problem. I also don't feel anyone should be snobby about people with no dyslexia or other problem who do not choose to learn the constellations. It's really not what astronomy is about for many. If knowing which constellation abuts another rings your bell, fine. To me it seems like a trivial subject to invest time and energy on when you could spend the same time and energy LEARNING (as I have) about many other astronomical factors. But as they say, to each his own. -- Joe ________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Joe, the difference is that you, by your admission, have a learning disability. It's not a choice. Therefore you and those who cannot learn, at least by the methods Brent and I are familiar with, are not the people we were referring to. Well, speaking for myself, at least. If you can't (and I know you've tried), then you are not among those who won't. See the difference? It wasn't directed at you. My humblest apology if you took it personally. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com>wrote:
Also, what about this comment by you, Chuck? It sounds pretty condescending to me: "I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example." What does that sound like, "don't even feel it necessary" -- a compliment? -- Joe
________________________________ From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
You can't, Chuck? Then you didn't read the email by Brent: "Today, when it is no longer necessary to learn the sky, I feel - no I know there is a great deal lost by those who don't take the time and make the sacrifice to adopt the stars as your personal friends. I am certain the heavens know my name, just as I know theirs." Well, I'm not certain the heavens know my name and I'd be creeped out if they did! -- Joe
________________________________ From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help!
I can't recall anyone ever ever acting snobbish about learning the sky, Joe. It's what worked for some of us, and we relate our stories, but don't look down on anyone who doesn't. I feel sorrry for them, but don't think they are any less of a person. To each, his own. Like my finder method, I know that some people can't do it, for whatever reason, and look at me like I'm stupid when explaining it, but hey, it works for me. I do feel that for those with conditions such as dyslexia, there may yet be a way to become more familiar with the sky than some may think- perhaps a workable methodology just hasn't been thought-out yet. I am loathe to simply give-up and walk away from even trying.
You're a bit sensitive to the issue, and perhaps rightly so- I can't walk in your shoes- but nobody looks down on you for that or any other reason. Likewise don't look down on those of us who found the sky at an early age and made it our own. Learning things in youth is always easier than late in life.
Frankly, people like Rich, Brent, and myself seem to be in the minority these days, anyway. When I was in jr. high school, there were at least 5 or 6 of us who took our telescopes out in the backyard regularly- one friend had a 10" Essential Optics reflector! I doubt you'd find that many in any random jr. high these days.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com
wrote:
Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks.
Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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@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@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@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@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".
Joe, To each his own. I find my enjoyment one way and you another. Nothing snobbish about that. What I emjoy in the sky you may not care about. I am sure the same is true in the other direction. I see that as being a part of the human condition. There are any things you and I will never agree upon, but there are many things we enjoy in common. Celebrate the commonality, and value the diversity! Brent From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 10:40 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! Those of us who are somewhat dyslexic and have trouble finding our way around the stars are still capable of immense enjoyment in the night cosmos. Frankly, I resent the snobbish attitudes of people who do know the night sky and act as if we who don't know it that well are lazy jerks. As far as I'm concerned, the exact orientation of various constellations doesn't concern me a much as studying the structure of a galaxy or exploring a globular. I can use my go-to to get there. If we happened to live on an Earth-like planet in a different part of the Milky Way or in another galaxy, the orientation would be entirely different -- we might be exclaiming over the Snout of the Beetle Constellation -- but our enjoyment of globulars, planets and other wonderful sights would be just as great. So folks should not be condescending over the way people gain entrance to the wonders of the universe. Just be glad that all can share in the joy, however we get there. -- Joe
Hi all. I will avoid any comment on the peripheral discussion, and add my experience to the thread. My father and I started learning together when we built a 4" refractor and mounted it on a pier in our garden. It was impossible for me to get around the sky and find objects without learning much about where those objects were located. We used the exact method described by Chuck to find objects, especially for dim objects because actually looking through the finder was usually unhelpful, due to the limited field of view and a lack of visibility for many objects in the finder scope. As we advanced and started looking for more difficult objects, we began to use an ingenious method that my father devised (I'm sure it was not an original idea). For each star atlas that we owned, he made different sized circles printed on clear plastic sheets, each one carefully sized to represent the field of view of a specific eyepiece. We would begin by finding a nearby star that was bright enough to easily locate in the finder. Then we would "walk" our way to the object, one field of view at a time. One of us would sit at the map with the printed circle for the eyepiece we were using and give directions, while the other would look through the eyepiece and move the scope. It was quite easy to find even dim and obscure objects by working our way from an easy star to the object. Over the years we had several different atlases that we used, and each time my Dad would print a new set of circles to match our eyepieces. Although I now use the computer almost exclusively (The Sky X) to find objects for my camera, my familiarity with the night sky has been the source of great pleasure over my lifetime, and I highly recommend learning whatever you can about it. I still remember much of what I learned, although I occasionally draw a blank now, even on the name of bright stars. That is my 2-cents worth. Cheers, Tyler -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:02 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Frustration at the eyepiece: help! I'm even later to this thread, and what worked for me typically won't work for most people. I know some people who don't even feel it necessary to learn the sky as one would become familiar with a terrestrial map, for example. I learned the sky starting when I was about nine or ten years old, from my parents back yard on the light-polluted east bench of Salt Lake City, with 3 to 4-inch scopes. The light pollution actually helped me at first, by reducing the number of stars visible to only the brightest. Picking out constellations was easy. As I got older and got to darker sites, it was then easy to fill in the gaps in the charts with progressively fainter stars. BTW, when I speak about learning the consellations, I don't see mental lines connecting the dots. I see patterns of individual stars. Those lines you see in books that try and make the constellations look like an outline of what they are named for seem very obfuscatory, to me at least. It took me about two or three years before I could glance at any part of the sky visible from here and know my way around pretty well. Knowing the brighter stuff first helped me to not get overwhelmed when under a pristine, dark sky. The southern sky is totally unknown to me. It would be like starting all over, or suddenly being on an alien planet across the galaxy. Once you know the star patterns, you can easily pinpoint the locations of objects on the sky from their positions on an atlas chart. Having a good eye for spacial relationships and proportions helps. Back in those days, before GoTo or reflex sights, I invented my own method of finding objects. I use a straight finder, and keeping both eyes open, superimpose the cross-hair in the finder on the spot in the sky seen with the unaided eye. In a low-power eyepiece, the object is there 95% of the time, first attempt. You can see that I'm not even using the sky view that the finder offers, just the cross-hairs. Sometimes, and for dim objects, I'd concentrate on the finder view to tweak the view in the main scope after rough aiming, but not often. These days we have a myriad of reflex sights that essentially do the same thing, and you don't have to do the two-eye mental overlapping that I did. It seems that dealing with a different image in each eye simultaneously isn't a very easy thing for some people. Anyway, more old-timer blather. I could go on but wont since I hear crickets and snoring. My 3 cents. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@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".
That's what's been called the "Star-Hopping" method, Tyler. Some people find it very useful, with and without detailed charts. On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
As we advanced and started looking for more difficult objects, we began to use an ingenious method that my father devised (I'm sure it was not an original idea). For each star atlas that we owned, he made different sized circles printed on clear plastic sheets, each one carefully sized to represent the field of view of a specific eyepiece. We would begin by finding a nearby star that was bright enough to easily locate in the finder. Then we would "walk" our way to the object, one field of view at a time. One of us would sit at the map with the printed circle for the eyepiece we were using and give directions, while the other would look through the eyepiece and move the scope. It was quite easy to find even dim and obscure objects by working our way from an easy star to the object.
Oops, I should have read all the other replies before posting. But glad to know that Telrads are still being made (I like them a bunch) and that Brent's still in business. patrick On 17 May 2013, at 15:19, Patrick Wiggins wrote:
On 17 May 2013, at 11:54, Daniel Holmes wrote:
For the finder, I'd suggest using a target reticule like a Rigel Quickfinder or a Telrad.
Agreed. And it just so happens that we have a local Telrad dealer on the list.
(Brent, are you still selling Telrads?)
patrick
participants (11)
-
Brent Watson -
Chrismo -
Chuck Hards -
Daniel Holmes -
Dion Davidson -
Fred Orrell -
Joe Bauman -
Patrick Wiggins -
Richard Tenney -
Seth Jarvis -
Tyler Allred