C'mon guys...

"palsing" wrote in message
...

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 9:57:42 PM UTC-7, Lord Androcles wrote:
"palsing" wrote in message

...



On Saturday, May 10, 2014 8:00:33 PM UTC-7, Lord Androcles wrote:

"palsing" wrote in message



...







On Saturday, May 10, 2014 10:44:36 AM UTC-7, LdB wrote:







Video astronomy is visual astronomy. Our cameras replace the eyepiece







but we still view the sky live or as live as exposure times allow.







Mallincams are just eyepieces on steroids. A Mallincamer gets the







Messier Badge while learning to operate his camera. After that he has







the NGC/IC Badge to work toward.







And just who is it that issues these video merit badges? Certainly not
the



Astronomical League...







==============================================



Didn't you know? wsnelloi, quadiblockhead, palsing, anyone that objects
to



photographing and showing others what they see and has an opinion on
what



others "should" do.







-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway



John, you should be ashamed of yourself; you are constantly ragging on

people who snip, and here you are snipping the essence of my thoughts.



===============================================

Tit for tat. Do unto others as they do unto you and never given them a

chance to explain or debate the issue in hand. Your opinion is wrong, my

knowledge is right, that settles it.



palsing wrote:

OK, I found and read the probable article...

http://ivanik3.narod.ru/TimeLifeMezon/301-305Nature.pdf

... and I understand most of it just fine.



So, tell us just how this experiment was cooked and is therefore

invalid.

=============================================

Look on page 301, top of column 2 of the text, the equation reads



" tau = tau0 DIVIDED BY sqrt(1-v^2)

where tau0 is the lifetime for the particle at rest."



Now look at

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img61.gif



How is it you understand division is multiplication just fine, palsing?

Was there a faint '/' between t and sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) that only you can see

as an object in your telescope?

No merit badges for you.

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

John, you continue to just make it up as you go along, don't you? You are
almost never correct, that's just the way it is... deal with it.
================================================== =====
How is it you understand division is multiplication just fine, palsing?
When you can't find any error you can always sputter and mumble that there
must be one somewhere, Porky.

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 1:44:36 PM UTC-4, LdB wrote:
On 5/8/2014 6:34 PM, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Thu, 8 May 2014 16:09:20 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

LsD thinks that newbie astronomers should NOT be encouraged to look through the eyepieces of telescopes.

Nothing produces a newbie imager quite as effectively as a few minutes
at the eyepiece.

People should engage in whatever form of astronomy interests them-
visual, imaging, or both. These days, I think imaging has the greatest
appeal to the most people. I don't encounter that many purely visual
astronomers anymore.

Video astronomy is visual astronomy.

So having lost the argument you simply re-define the terms, LsD?

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 11:00:33 PM UTC-4, Lord Androcles wrote:

Didn't you know? wsnelloi, quadiblockhead, palsing, anyone that objects to
photographing and showing others what they see and has an opinion on what
others "should" do.

You have that EXACTLY BACKWARDS, andorkles.

It is LsD who says that we shouldn't encourage visual observations for newbies. None of us who enjoy looking through a 'scope, have suggested that anyone avoid imaging.

On Thursday, May 8, 2014 7:09:20 PM UTC-4, wsne... wrote:
On Thursday, May 8, 2014 5:44:35 PM UTC-4, Uncarollo2 wrote:

ugh's nonsense deleted

LsD thinks that newbie astronomers should NOT be encouraged to look through the eyepieces of telescopes.

Do you share -that- opinion?

Still waiting for your answer to the above question.

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 1:44:36 PM UTC-4, LdB wrote:

Video astronomy is visual astronomy. Our cameras replace the eyepiece
but we still view the sky live or as live as exposure times allow.
Mallincams are just eyepieces on steroids. A Mallincamer gets the
Messier Badge while learning to operate his camera. After that he has
the NGC/IC Badge to work toward.

All one has to do these days to see what an astro object looks like is to "Google" the object's name or catalog number. Many/most of the images found will very likely exceed in detail and quality what your video rig will show.

Eyepieces show newbies the Moon, Saturn's rings, a few pretty clusters
and bright nebulas.

And WHY is that a problem, exactly?

Mallincams show them the Universe.

So does the internet. Any time. And not just when a few "Mallincammers" decide to "broadcast."

wrote in message
...

On Saturday, May 10, 2014 11:00:33 PM UTC-4, Lord Androcles wrote:

Didn't you know? wsnelloi, quadiblockhead, palsing, anyone that objects to
photographing and showing others what they see and has an opinion on what
others "should" do.

You have that EXACTLY BACKWARDS, andorkles.
=============================================
You were bound to say that, w****01

the dork wrote:

Didn't you know? wsnelloi, quadiblockhead, palsing, anyone that objects to
photographing and showing others what they see and has an opinion on what
others "should" do.

a wit wrote:

You have that EXACTLY BACKWARDS, andorkles.

the dork wrote:

You were bound to say that, ******

That's simply because I was speaking the truth. Good that you agree.

a ****wit

wrote in message
...

Lord Androcles wrote:

Didn't you know? wsnelloi, quadiblockhead, palsing, anyone that objects
to
photographing and showing others what they see and has an opinion on
what
others "should" do.

a ****wit wrote:

You have that EXACTLY BACKWARDS, andorkles.

Lord Androcles wrote:

You were bound to say that, w****01.

That's simply because I was speaking the truth. Good that you agree.
================================================== ==============
Which you have backwards as always because you are a retard, w****01.
I'm glad you agree you are a stupid ****, w****01, who doesn't like
photography in astronomy but can't resist being contrary.

-- Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

On Sunday, May 11, 2014 2:35:46 PM UTC-4, Lord Androcles
who doesn't like
photography in astronomy but can't resist being contrary.

wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sunday, May 11, 2014 2:35:46 PM UTC-4, Lord Androcles wrote:
A snipping **** with no reading comprehension who doesn't like photography
in astronomy but can't resist being contrary proves he is dishonest by
viciously misattributing by snipping.