What do you get out of astronomy?

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 00:11:57 -0400, Walter Watson wrote:

I've been interested in physics and astronomy for as long as I can remember,
and indeed once got a degree in physics, but ended up going into software
development. I'm now tempted to buy a telescope to have a closer look at
what's up there. The thing I'm wondering is, in these days of the Hubble and
the Internet, is an amateur going to see anything that can't be better
viewed in the Nasa website photo gallery? Hasn't amateur astronomy become
like ham radio - essentially obsolete?


Ham radio is not and will never be obsolete.

The difference between looking at Hubble/observatory photos and looking
through a telescope is when you look through a telescope you are seeing
the object live with your very own eyes. PHotos are nice but seeing things
live are better.


I'm probably missing the point here, but what exactly do you guys get out of
looking through a telescope? Is it comparable to bird watching? You're
probably not going to see a new species of bird, but because you see it in
real life, it's somehow a thrill? I have a feeling that whatever I would see
through a telescope would never be enough. I would get frustrated with the
limitations of using a small instrument in variable atmospheric conditions.
Apart from the local planets, everything else is just a point of light. How
interesting is that?


Seeing something in person is better than seeing it on paper or in
film/movies. There are many other things up there besides planets that
show more than a point of light like stars do. Nebula, galaxies,
comets, star clusters.

It's o.k. if you don't get it, I think bowling and golf are 2 of the
most stupid "sports" around but some people love those games.

What I get out of astronomy is wonder,amazement and awe. It never gets
old to me. There is ALWAYS something new being learned and seen, it's
always exciting!

Astronomy rules!

Tom

"Tom Randy" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 00:11:57 -0400, Walter Watson wrote:

Ham radio is not and will never be obsolete.

I am a qualified radio ham. I did my exams many years ago in the UK, but
never got around to doing the morse test which would have allowed me to
operate then in the SW band. However, a couple of years back they dropped
the requirement for the morse test, so I guess you could now say that I'm a
fully qualified ham. I believe that one reason they did this was because of
the declining interest in the hobby. Without a sufficient number of people
using the ham bands they are in danger of losing them.

I started to listen to shortwave radio as a kid. Since then the traffic on
the ham bands has declined to the point where there is very little
happening. My expensive Sony (ICF-2001D) shortwave radio is now virtually
useless. With the Internet and with satellite comms, it just seems crazy to
be erecting a 40m rotatong Yagi on top of your house. The is still a place
for ham radio, but I it's heyday is past.

"Tom Randy" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 00:11:57 -0400, Walter Watson wrote:

Ham radio is not and will never be obsolete.

I am a qualified radio ham. I did my exams many years ago in the UK, but
never got around to doing the morse test which would have allowed me to
operate then in the SW band. However, a couple of years back they dropped
the requirement for the morse test, so I guess you could now say that I'm a
fully qualified ham. I believe that one reason they did this was because of
the declining interest in the hobby. Without a sufficient number of people
using the ham bands they are in danger of losing them.

I started to listen to shortwave radio as a kid. Since then the traffic on
the ham bands has declined to the point where there is very little
happening. My expensive Sony (ICF-2001D) shortwave radio is now virtually
useless. With the Internet and with satellite comms, it just seems crazy to
be erecting a 40m rotatong Yagi on top of your house. The is still a place
for ham radio, but I it's heyday is past.

No it's not obsolete, not when a neb was seen and has been named after an
amateur who took the time to document it and report it. Not when it's
amateurs who still find comets and are now, because of high tech gear on the
market, doing research that was once the domain of the big boys.

I'm not only a amateur who just enjoys looking at the sky, but I'm also a
Sidewalk Astronomer, and I meet people every night when I set up on the
Sidewalk, that 1. have never really looked up at the sky very much, 2. have
Never looked through a telescope at all, 3. have never even bothered to look
at Hubble pictures even.

No, Amateur Astronomers are far from being Obsolete, just as my other hobby
"Model Rocketry" is far from being obsolete too.


"Walter Watson" wrote in message
...
I've been interested in physics and astronomy for as long as I can
remember,
and indeed once got a degree in physics, but ended up going into software
development. I'm now tempted to buy a telescope to have a closer look at
what's up there. The thing I'm wondering is, in these days of the Hubble
and
the Internet, is an amateur going to see anything that can't be better
viewed in the Nasa website photo gallery? Hasn't amateur astronomy become
like ham radio - essentially obsolete?



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/04

No it's not obsolete, not when a neb was seen and has been named after an
amateur who took the time to document it and report it. Not when it's
amateurs who still find comets and are now, because of high tech gear on the
market, doing research that was once the domain of the big boys.

I'm not only a amateur who just enjoys looking at the sky, but I'm also a
Sidewalk Astronomer, and I meet people every night when I set up on the
Sidewalk, that 1. have never really looked up at the sky very much, 2. have
Never looked through a telescope at all, 3. have never even bothered to look
at Hubble pictures even.

No, Amateur Astronomers are far from being Obsolete, just as my other hobby
"Model Rocketry" is far from being obsolete too.


"Walter Watson" wrote in message
...
I've been interested in physics and astronomy for as long as I can
remember,
and indeed once got a degree in physics, but ended up going into software
development. I'm now tempted to buy a telescope to have a closer look at
what's up there. The thing I'm wondering is, in these days of the Hubble
and
the Internet, is an amateur going to see anything that can't be better
viewed in the Nasa website photo gallery? Hasn't amateur astronomy become
like ham radio - essentially obsolete?



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/04

http://home.inreach.com/starlord


"Walter Watson" wrote in message
...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/04

http://home.inreach.com/starlord


"Walter Watson" wrote in message
...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/04

"starlord" wrote in message
...
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

Your FAQ does not have the answer to every question ever asked about
astronomy... including mine. I actually read it, top to bottom, a couple of
weeks ago. I thought it was good and I appreciate the (mostly) individual
effort you put into creating it. However, it is not as good as I would
expect an alt.astronomy group FAQ to be. Surely the very first question
should be "Why astronomy?", which was my question and one you have not
addressed.

"starlord" wrote in message
...
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

Your FAQ does not have the answer to every question ever asked about
astronomy... including mine. I actually read it, top to bottom, a couple of
weeks ago. I thought it was good and I appreciate the (mostly) individual
effort you put into creating it. However, it is not as good as I would
expect an alt.astronomy group FAQ to be. Surely the very first question
should be "Why astronomy?", which was my question and one you have not
addressed.

That's because the TELESCOPE BUYERS FAQ is NOT just about Astronomy, it's a
guild to those who want to buy a TELESCOPE to take part in astronomy. It's
NOT a FAQ for or about the Newsgroup.

I'll ask YOU a question ... Why NOT Astronomy?

I enjoy many things in life, NASCAR, Model Rocketry, Cat Breeding,
Astronomy, Photography, Model Building, Gardening, and even a little bit of
Sci-Fi writing.

You stated that with the internet and hubble that Am.Astronomy was a dead in
the water field, and as I plainly pointed out that is far from being true.
In fact, I'd say it's more like a good Go Fast boat and it's running at full
speed ahead.

Clouds to the Right ... City Lights to the Left ... Dammed the minds, full
speed ahead!


The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond, the Telescope in the Desert.



"Walter Watson" wrote in message
...
"starlord" wrote in message
...
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

Your FAQ does not have the answer to every question ever asked about
astronomy... including mine. I actually read it, top to bottom, a couple
of
weeks ago. I thought it was good and I appreciate the (mostly) individual
effort you put into creating it. However, it is not as good as I would
expect an alt.astronomy group FAQ to be. Surely the very first question
should be "Why astronomy?", which was my question and one you have not
addressed.




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/04