Amateurs astronomers - wasting time?

Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.



For example I have a particular interest in double stars. It seems to
me that the direct measurement of double stars wider apart than 5 arc
seconds has now been rendered obsolete. A recent experiment proved
conclusively that by data mining the new generation of astronomical
catalogues it was possible to obtain up-to-date results for just over
1000 neglected doubles in a single day.



Most double stars change their separation and position angle extremely
slowly and the measurement of the same star by multiple observers, on
even a monthly basis, has no scientific merit except perhaps as a
training aid for a new observer wanting to gain experience of the
techniques required to obtain accurate results.



It would be far more useful for the newcomer to be guided towards an
area where they could make a genuine contribution – hunting for
missing doubles comes to mind – rather than permitting them to waste
their time, energy and enthusiasm reproducing the work of others.

Trolling *******.

What makes you think that the prime motivating factor behind all amateur
astronomers is to contribute data to the community? I've been active in
amateur astronomy since a boy, and I never once thought that my purpose was
to contribute data on a regular basis. Much like many others, I enjoy
telescopes and the night sky because...well, simply because I enjoy it.

Al


"Martin Nicholson" wrote in message
om...
Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.



For example I have a particular interest in double stars. It seems to
me that the direct measurement of double stars wider apart than 5 arc
seconds has now been rendered obsolete. A recent experiment proved
conclusively that by data mining the new generation of astronomical
catalogues it was possible to obtain up-to-date results for just over
1000 neglected doubles in a single day.



Most double stars change their separation and position angle extremely
slowly and the measurement of the same star by multiple observers, on
even a monthly basis, has no scientific merit except perhaps as a
training aid for a new observer wanting to gain experience of the
techniques required to obtain accurate results.



It would be far more useful for the newcomer to be guided towards an
area where they could make a genuine contribution - hunting for
missing doubles comes to mind - rather than permitting them to waste
their time, energy and enthusiasm reproducing the work of others.

I just like looking at the sky.....don't need a project!


YMMV




"Martin Nicholson" wrote in message
om...
Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.

On 13 Mar 2004 02:55:32 -0800, (Martin Nicholson) wrote:

Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others...

Most hobbies involve the repetition of others' work, and fail to contribute
significantly to human knowledge. I can't help but think that those amateur
astronomers with a personal interest in advancing science are capable of
figuring out what kind of observation program is useful for that- and the rest
are certainly not "wasting time".

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Ed wrote
Trolling *******.

I agree that this is probably a troll, but still, "why we do this"
threads can be fun. Without carrying on at length why I simply enjoy
stargazing with no scientific goals, let me point out one of the most
basic benefits: It makes my life more enjoyable. After the
frustrations of dealing with daily life, time under the stars makes my
problems seem smaller, and I feel better. Albert Einstein said that the
contemplation of the universe "beckons like a liberation." None of us
will ever achieve anything which will affect the universe we see through
our telescopes, but I sometimes feel that my life will have been worth
living if knowingly or not, I pass my love of the night sky on to some
kid who lives a happier, more enjoyable life on account of it.
Marty

Martin Nicholson wrote:
Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.



For example I have a particular interest in double stars. It seems to
me that the direct measurement of double stars wider apart than 5 arc
seconds has now been rendered obsolete. A recent experiment proved
conclusively that by data mining the new generation of astronomical
catalogues it was possible to obtain up-to-date results for just over
1000 neglected doubles in a single day.



Most double stars change their separation and position angle extremely
slowly and the measurement of the same star by multiple observers, on
even a monthly basis, has no scientific merit except perhaps as a
training aid for a new observer wanting to gain experience of the
techniques required to obtain accurate results.



It would be far more useful for the newcomer to be guided towards an
area where they could make a genuine contribution - hunting for
missing doubles comes to mind - rather than permitting them to waste
their time, energy and enthusiasm reproducing the work of others.

Maybe you wasted your time at school? Alternatively, how did you contribute
data of scientific value while you were at school?

Amateur astronomy has many aspects. Learning is one of them. Learning is not
wasting time.

--
Carsten A. Arnholm
http://arnholm.org/
N59.776 E10.457

"Martin Nicholson" wrote in message
om...
Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.



For example I have a particular interest in double stars. It seems to
me that the direct measurement of double stars wider apart than 5 arc
seconds has now been rendered obsolete. A recent experiment proved
conclusively that by data mining the new generation of astronomical
catalogues it was possible to obtain up-to-date results for just over
1000 neglected doubles in a single day.



Most double stars change their separation and position angle extremely
slowly and the measurement of the same star by multiple observers, on
even a monthly basis, has no scientific merit except perhaps as a
training aid for a new observer wanting to gain experience of the
techniques required to obtain accurate results.



It would be far more useful for the newcomer to be guided towards an
area where they could make a genuine contribution - hunting for
missing doubles comes to mind - rather than permitting them to waste
their time, energy and enthusiasm reproducing the work of others.
Most amateurs are not interested in doing 'work' at all. They do astronomy,
for their own personal interest only, enjoying seeing objects _themselves_,
and sometimes latter moving into making scientific observations. Others
image for the joy of showing just how much _can_ be done from a usually
completely unsuitable site.
Though many amateurs will start to 'specialise, and do observations that
99.9% of the time duplicate data that could be obtained from other sources,
it is that odd 0.1%, that just like a lottery, contains the potential to
thrill. That the remaining 99.9% of the time, is duplication, is also
useful, in that just occasionally this provides the data redundancy to show
a 'history' when something is found.
Some amateurs join programs to generate useful data from their work, and
here it is again the duplication that provides both cross checking, and the
coverage from different parts of the world. These programs are themselves
capable of suggesting where the efforts would be of most use.
Your comments are along the lines of suggesting that hobby anglers should be
encouraged to move into the areas where they can best complement the work of
professional fisheries. Most fish for fun, and do not consider the time a
waste.

Best Wishes

The original poster (yes, he's a troll, but what the heck) did something oft
done; he assumed something that isn't true, then proceeded downhill from
there, usually down a 60 degree slope in top gear.

Most amateurs are not doing research, they don't want to do research, and
they are happy not doing research. Plus, there is no requirement for you to
do research. Hopefully the troll will get an arrow stuck inbetween his
optical receptors and then leave us alone.
--- Dave


"Al" wrote in message
et...
What makes you think that the prime motivating factor behind all amateur
astronomers is to contribute data to the community? I've been active in
amateur astronomy since a boy, and I never once thought that my purpose
was
to contribute data on a regular basis. Much like many others, I enjoy
telescopes and the night sky because...well, simply because I enjoy it.

Al


"Martin Nicholson" wrote in message
om...
Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.



For example I have a particular interest in double stars. It seems to
me that the direct measurement of double stars wider apart than 5 arc
seconds has now been rendered obsolete. A recent experiment proved
conclusively that by data mining the new generation of astronomical
catalogues it was possible to obtain up-to-date results for just over
1000 neglected doubles in a single day.



Most double stars change their separation and position angle extremely
slowly and the measurement of the same star by multiple observers, on
even a monthly basis, has no scientific merit except perhaps as a
training aid for a new observer wanting to gain experience of the
techniques required to obtain accurate results.



It would be far more useful for the newcomer to be guided towards an
area where they could make a genuine contribution - hunting for
missing doubles comes to mind - rather than permitting them to waste
their time, energy and enthusiasm reproducing the work of others.

On 13 Mar 2004 02:55:32 -0800, (Martin
Nicholson) wrote:

Only a relatively small number of amateur astronomers are in a
position to contribute data of value to the wider astronomical
community on a regular basis. This makes it all the more important
that they are steered into "useful" projects rather than allowing them
needlessly to duplicate the work of others.

rest snipped, with extreme prejudice

This is malarkey. Do you not understand the meaning of "amateur?"
Those of us who choose to contribute to the body of man's knowledge
will find appropriate ways to do so. The rest of us will enjoy our
avocation with no regrets.

Wayne Hoffman
33° 49" 17' N 117° 56" 41' W
"Don't Look Down"

http://users.adelphia.net/~w6wlr/