The Future of Amateur Astronomy

wrote

If your response is the typical "Let me look on you with my own

eyes." then continue to keep them as tightly closed as you can.



LdB

To each his own, LdB. It's only a hobby. I'll stick with my tired old
cliches though, and see it with my own eyes. Otherwise, I could pick up
some amazing pictures on this laptop, any time of day...

No video picture I've ever seen can compare to the view through an eyepiece.
A "monitor" is good for showing an object to a group of people and talking
about it. It's also good for giving the people an idea of what they will be
able to see, and what to look for, when they put their eye up to the
eyepiece to see what it *really* looks like... and what they could see if
they had a similar size telescope of their own.

Howard Lester:
No video picture I've ever seen can compare to the view through an eyepiece.
A "monitor" is good for showing an object to a group of people and talking
about it. It's also good for giving the people an idea of what they will be
able to see, and what to look for, when they put their eye up to the
eyepiece to see what it *really* looks like... and what they could see if
they had a similar size telescope of their own.

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really
are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends
on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,
dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so
on.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Monday, August 12, 2013 7:11:38 PM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really

are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends

on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,

dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so

on.

If you think all galaxies are visually just grey blobs, then you have not used a proper visual telescope. My 25" easily shows not only spiral arms, but also prominent HII areas and even globular clusters in other galaxies. Direct vision, in real time. Not always, of course, but under good conditions these details are apparent.

I've seen the jet in M 87 as a golden needle going straight into the heart of the galaxy, individual stars and globular cluster within M 33, super star clusters in NGC 2366 and 1569, a super star cluster in NGC 6946, and I could go on and on. Not as good as a photo, obviously, but certainly more than just a grey blob.

\Paul A

"Davoud" wrote

Howard Lester:
and what to look for, when they put their eye up to the
eyepiece to see what it *really* looks like... and what they could see if
they had a similar size telescope of their own.

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really
are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends
on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,
dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so
on.

You know exactly what I'm talking about, but instead....

Davoud:
What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really
are just fuzzy gray blobs?

palsing:
If you think all galaxies are visually just grey blobs, then you have not
used a proper visual telescope. My 25"...

Thanks for the clarification. I have noted what a "proper" visual
telescope is, so the next time I see someone using a 14 or 16 or 20" I
can tell them "That's not a proper telescope."

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 8:03:27 AM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:
Davoud:

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really

are just fuzzy gray blobs?



palsing:

If you think all galaxies are visually just grey blobs, then you have not

used a proper visual telescope. My 25"...



Thanks for the clarification. I have noted what a "proper" visual

telescope is, so the next time I see someone using a 14 or 16 or 20" I

can tell them "That's not a proper telescope."



--

I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that

you will say in your entire life.



usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

OK, poor choice of wording on my part.

If one has a small refractor, they shouldn't expect to see much in the way of detail in the galaxies they view, those will indeed be just little grey blobs. Of course, that is not to say that they can't fully enjoy the hundreds and hundreds of objects available to them, many of which look even better in smaller instruments than in bigger scopes, like open clusters, and many large nebulae, and other objects, too.

As telescope aperture grows, more and more detail is going to be present in the aforementioned galaxies, and by the time you get mirrors over 18" or 20", quite bit of detail is available.

Next month I will be part of a group using the 60" on Mt. Wilson for an all-nighter, and I expect to see MUCH more detail then than I can see in my 25" now... and it may take me a couple of months to come back to Earth and start to enjoy my 25" again.

\Paul A

On 8/12/2013 11:16 PM, palsing wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2013 7:11:38 PM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really

are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends

on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,

dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so

on.

If you think all galaxies are visually just grey blobs, then you have not used a proper visual telescope. My 25" easily shows not only spiral arms, but also prominent HII areas and even globular clusters in other galaxies. Direct vision, in real time. Not always, of course, but under good conditions these details are apparent.

I've seen the jet in M 87 as a golden needle going straight into the heart of the galaxy, individual stars and globular cluster within M 33, super star clusters in NGC 2366 and 1569, a super star cluster in NGC 6946, and I could go on and on. Not as good as a photo, obviously, but certainly more than just a grey blob.

\Paul A


A 25" Dobstrosoty and a six foot ladder, just what mommy and daddy
need to buy junior to interest him in astronomy. I built a remote
controlled observatory to view from my living room for less that what
someone would pay for one of those monsters. Dance around on the top
step of a ladder or sit back on the couch and view on a wide screen.
Duh, Me wants to climb ladder.

I've been observing with telescopes up to 14" in size for over fifty
years. I see more with my cameras on a 10" now than I have in all the
years wasted with an eyepiece. As for low resolution cameras, maybe
its time to see what else is available. You guys have to remember that
things change in a tech environment. They change in a few days not
centuries.

I worked in a high tech environment for forty years and have seen a
lot of change. What I have also seen is a lot of resistance to change.

"This is the way it has always been done and this is how it shall
always be done."

Next time you guys invite the kids out to a star party call it
dinosaur park. At least that way they will see a few of what they came
to see.

LdB

On 8/12/2013 10:11 PM, Davoud wrote:
Howard Lester:
No video picture I've ever seen can compare to the view through an eyepiece.
A "monitor" is good for showing an object to a group of people and talking
about it. It's also good for giving the people an idea of what they will be
able to see, and what to look for, when they put their eye up to the
eyepiece to see what it *really* looks like... and what they could see if
they had a similar size telescope of their own.

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really
are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends
on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,
dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so
on.




I think what he is trying to say is that to those of us who are purely
visual observers there is a certain thrill of looking at a small faint
galaxy at 220x + magnification through our scopes that no photograph can
match, because it's the thrill of seeing it personally that grabs our
attention. I know I feel that way often looking at faint fuzzies.

If one is doing an outreach that faint fuzzy is about the worst thing
one can show a member of the public tho.



AM

On 8/13/2013 12:16 AM, palsing wrote:
On Monday, August 12, 2013 7:11:38 PM UTC-7, Davoud wrote:

What it "really" looks like? So virtually all visual galaxies really

are just fuzzy gray blobs? I always thought that how they look depends

on how one looks at them. Visual: gray blob. RGB photos: multi-colored,

dust lanes, central bulges, spiral arms, amazing jets (M87)... And so

on.

If you think all galaxies are visually just grey blobs, then you have not used a proper visual telescope. My 25" easily shows not only spiral arms, but also prominent HII areas and even globular clusters in other galaxies. Direct vision, in real time. Not always, of course, but under good conditions these details are apparent.

I've seen the jet in M 87 as a golden needle going straight into the heart of the galaxy, individual stars and globular cluster within M 33, super star clusters in NGC 2366 and 1569, a super star cluster in NGC 6946, and I could go on and on. Not as good as a photo, obviously, but certainly more than just a grey blob.

\Paul A



I remember looking at globular clusters in the Andromeda galaxy once
through a large Obsession under mag 6.5 skies once. It left a lifetime
impression on me too !


AM

On 8/13/13 2:38 PM, AM wrote:
I think what he is trying to say is that to those of us who are purely
visual observers there is a certain thrill of looking at a small faint
galaxy at 220x + magnification through our scopes that no photograph can
match, because it's the thrill of seeing it personally that grabs our
attention. I know I feel that way often looking at faint fuzzies.


That's true for me. I remember the night, a long time ago, I first
found NGC 3077. I was motivated by an article I had read about likely
past interaction between M81, M82 and NGC 3077. Then going out and
finding the faint smudge.