|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
It's currently stormy and snowy here (USA/CO); observing is out of the
question for a while. Here's a fun topic to kick around... what type of observing do you like better - Solar System or deep-sky? I'm a definite Solar System observer. In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. Things outsite our Solar System are interesting only on an abstract, theoretical basis. We won't interact with them in my lifetime, and probably not in the lifetimes of my great-great-great-great-great-great grandkids either. I view deep-sky stuff sometimes... like the Andromeda Galaxy. Andromeda is about 2.2 million light-years away - just over 13000000000000000000 miles. But seriously - would it matter so much if there were a couple more zeros in that number? It is *so* far away that it just doesn't matter! And Andromeda is a relatively nearby galaxy. It's a different story in the Solar System. Objects within the solar system are close enough to interact with. They move with respect to background stars. We've sent probes to many places, and we've even sent people to one other place. We can interact with them, we can ponder historical missions, we can dream of going there... (like we should be doing with Mars!). This is why I'm into Solar System observing much more than deep-sky; for me, it is more tangible. I view the planets whenever they're out, and I love seeing how many moons I can spot (currently 16, and I should be able to get to 19 or 20 with current equipment). I'll have to get into Asteroid spotting too, that would be fun. To me, glimpsing these things is cool because they increase my personal connection with them. I know Tethys really exists, not just from Voyager photos, but because I've personally seen it and tracked its orbit. If that sounds excessivly romantic - it is. But, deep down, all amateur astronomers are romantics; if we weren't, we'd stay indoors and download Hubble pictures rather than drag the scope out and look ourselves. IOMHO, YMMV, and all that! --- Dave Boll http://www.daveboll.com/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
Hi
I actually like deep sky more....i guess because there is SOOO much to see.... But, going along with your thought processes.....2 things almost occur to me....both kinda depressing when I view deep sky objects... My first thought is always.....No way in hell will mankind ever be going THERE......unlike at least some reasonable potential we have to vist stuff in the solar system or the very nearest stars.... And the second thought that immediatly follows....well thats at least ONE place man will probably never screw up..... take care Blll |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
Ο "BllFs6" έγραψε στο μήνυμα ... Hi I actually like deep sky more....i guess because there is SOOO much to see.... But, going along with your thought processes.....2 things almost occur to me....both kinda depressing when I view deep sky objects... My first thought is always.....No way in hell will mankind ever be going THERE...... Nobody knows that, for sure. You cannot exclude an extant future possibility, based on premises which depend on our current technology. For all we know, the next generation might develop technology that takes advantage of wormholes or time travel. Nobody knows for sure. unlike at least some reasonable potential we have to vist stuff in the solar system or the very nearest stars.... Solar system, yes. Nearby stars, hmmmm. Let me give you a typical example: Saturn V that went to the moon, will take roughly 120,000 years to reach alpha Centauri, and that, assuming it utilizes its initial speed throughout the entire trip. And the second thought that immediatly follows....well thats at least ONE place man will probably never screw up..... Indeed. Because if man manages to "go there", he will probably **** up the places, in exactly the same way he has screwed up this planet. We still have a long way to go. The following is fiction, but it may give you some insight on what is to follow, before "we screw up elsewhere" :*) http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/jgal/wr...micLadder.html take care Blll -- Ioannis Galidakis http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/jgal/ ------------------------------------------ Eventually, _everything_ is understandable |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
"BllFs6" wrote in message
... Hi I actually like deep sky more....i guess because there is SOOO much to see.... But, going along with your thought processes.....2 things almost occur to me....both kinda depressing when I view deep sky objects... My first thought is always.....No way in hell will mankind ever be going THERE......unlike at least some reasonable potential we have to vist stuff in the solar system or the very nearest stars.... And the second thought that immediatly follows....well thats at least ONE place man will probably never screw up..... Don't count on it. -- ---- Joe S. take care Blll |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
I tend to favor deep sky viewing. Somehow, the very remoteness and
enormity of it all is more mind stretching for me. Just looking at the dim fuzzies and wondering what it's all about is liberating somehow. On one hand, my daily problems fade into a more reasonable perspective. On the other, I feel like I'm a part of something so much greater than myself. The solar system is nice, (and I do live here,) but let me sail away into deep space... Marty |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
To start off with, while I am set up as an Sidewalk Astronomer, I use the
plantets and our moon as viewing subjects, just not that many other things are seeable threw the street lights. But when I am set up at home or my hidden viewing area, then I mostly go for the Deep Space objects, as they can fire up my mind and adds fuel to what I can dream about. I don't let the knowage that it'll be a long time coming before man goes out there, but as I look at M42, or other DSP's, my mind is far from being planet bound, instead it's out there riding the Stellar Winds between the stars. -- "In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening towards an east that would not know another dawn. But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go again." Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars SIAR www.starlords.org Freelance Writers Shop http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com Telescope Buyers FAQ http://home.inreach.com/starlord Ad World http://adworld.netfirms.com "Dave & Janelle" wrote in message ... It's currently stormy and snowy here (USA/CO); observing is out of the question for a while. Here's a fun topic to kick around... what type of observing do you like better - Solar System or deep-sky? I'm a definite Solar System observer. In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.538 / Virus Database: 333 - Release Date: 11/10/03 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
Dave & Janelle wrote:
It's currently stormy and snowy here (USA/CO); observing is out of the question for a while. Here's a fun topic to kick around... what type of observing do you like better - Solar System or deep-sky? I'm a definite Solar System observer. In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. Things outsite our Solar System are interesting only on an abstract, theoretical basis. We won't interact with them in my lifetime, and probably not in the lifetimes of my great-great-great-great-great-great grandkids either. I view deep-sky stuff sometimes... like the Andromeda Galaxy. Dave don't be so quick to dismiss deep sky objects as non interactive. Supernovae change in days. One appearing in M31 or in the Milky way will be exciting indeed. And as far as deep sky objects go--feast your eye on the star birthing Orion nebula in the next few months... I can never get enough of those photons. Everything in the sky is fascinating! Why try to divide it up. Take an astronomy class at your local university or community college and learn about stellar evolution and some on the physics involved in those deep sky objects... why H-III regions a greater around "O" stars than "B" stars... what M57 and our sun have in common. Buy a copy of "Seeing In The Dark" by Timothy Ferris Pages 286-287 Perhaps the key to dying well--or living well--is to have laid in a stock of worthy memories. To that end, when darkness is falling for good, it is well to have in mind, in addition to memories of human love and loss and of the natural splendors of this world--of birdsong at dawn, the roaring spray of the surf, the sweet smell of the air in the eye of a hurricane, the workings of bees in the throats of wildflowers--a few memories of the other worlds as well. If you have seen plasma arches rising off the edge of the Sun, yellow dust storms raging on Mars, angry red Io emerging from the shadow of Jupiter, the golden rings of Saturn, the green dot of Uranus, and the blue dot of Neptune, the glittering star fields of Sagittarius and the delicate tendrils connecting interacting galaxies, have watched auroras and meteors writing silent signatures in the sky--if, in short, you have seen not only this world but something of the other worlds, too--well, you have lived. So, while life is in us, and we are in it, let's keep our eyes open. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
"Dave & Janelle" wrote in message ... It's currently stormy and snowy here (USA/CO); observing is out of the question for a while. Here's a fun topic to kick around... what type of observing do you like better - Solar System or deep-sky? I'm a definite Solar System observer. In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. interesting, I divide my observing into two other categories: for now I call them static and non-static. static: the goal of viewing the image is basically time independent, you watch it out of curiosity, admiration, beauty etc: e.g. nebula, star clusters, but also: moon, planets (when you watch them to just watch them). You watch objects. non-static: occultations, eclipsing binaries, supernovae, solar activity, planets (when the goal is e.g. to see the mars icecap evolve, time periods of jupiter moons etc). You witness events. I do enjoy static observations, my main interest is non-static observations though. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
I think I need to add a 3rd layer to your equation:
Solar System -- Milky Way Galaxy Deep Space There are certainly very interesting objects within our galaxy (e.g., M42, NGC7293) which are not in our solar system... while there are some incredibly boring objects (e.g., Pluto) which are in our solar sytem. This is where I like to spend most of my dark sky observing time... hunting down planetaries and other objects which are not millions of light years away, but right on the next block (cosmologically speaking). The fact that I will never get to them really doesn't bother me, because I'll likely never even make it as far as the moon (or even the ISS). "Dave & Janelle" wrote in message ... In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. Things outsite our Solar System are interesting only on an abstract, theoretical basis. We won't interact with them in my lifetime, and probably not in the lifetimes of my great-great-great-great-great-great grandkids either. I view deep-sky stuff sometimes... like the Andromeda Galaxy. Andromeda is about 2.2 million light-years away - just over 13000000000000000000 miles. But seriously - would it matter so much if there were a couple more zeros in that number? It is *so* far away that it just doesn't matter! And Andromeda is a relatively nearby galaxy. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Solar System vs. deep-sky
In a very real way, we can divide the Universe up into two pieces: Our Solar
System, and everything else. Or, equivalently, stuff that matters and stuff that doesn't. Yes, but the Solar System is so incredibley tiny and insignificant, as compared to that everything else. Are you sure it matters? I liked seeing m31 naked eye during the recent Lunar eclipse's totality. Would have been a good deep sky night, were it not for that certain pesky solar system rock. john |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PDF (Planetary Distance Formula) explains DW 2004 / Quaoar and Kuiper Belt | hermesnines | Astronomy Misc | 10 | February 27th 04 02:14 AM |
NASA Wants You to be a Solar System Ambassador | Ron Baalke | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | September 12th 03 01:32 AM |
ESA sees stardust storms heading for Solar System (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 27th 03 12:29 AM |
ESA Sees Stardust Storms Heading For Solar System | Ron Baalke | Science | 0 | August 20th 03 08:10 PM |
Chiral gravity of the Solar system | Aleksandr Timofeev | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 13th 03 04:14 PM |