Shuttle launch tonight at 7:43 EDT

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"
wrote:


I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.

No. Not even with basic binoculars.

Brian

On Mar 17, 3:35 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"

wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.

No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Brian

Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.
Ken

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:35 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"

wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.
No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Brian

Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.
Ken

It depends on the definition of resolution. The atmosphere alone
limits resolution.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 17, 3:55 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:35 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"

wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.
No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Brian

Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.
Ken

It depends on the definition of resolution. The atmosphere alone
limits resolution.

ahh, not much, do the high school trig.
Ken



Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:43:37 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"
wrote:

I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.

No. Not even with basic binoculars.

Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.

Does personal experience count? Have you actually tried to make out
more than a point? I have. Not in the real world, you can't.

Wish it were so, but it isn't. :-)

Brian

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:55 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:35 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"
wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.
No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Brian
Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.
Ken
It depends on the definition of resolution. The atmosphere alone
limits resolution.

ahh, not much, do the high school trig.
Ken


Trig doesn't account for air density variations.

If you haven't noticed lenses with focal lengths similar to those
found in binoculars can't resolve buildings from the space station. Why
do you think recon satellites have focal lengths on the order of several
feet? Contrary to myth the Great Wall of China can't be seen from space
with the naked eye.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

On Mar 17, 5:31 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:43:37 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"

wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.

No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.

Does personal experience count?

Not much, it's science.

Have you actually tried to make out
more than a point?

No.

I have. Not in the real world, you can't.
Wish it were so, but it isn't. :-)
Brian

The person I refer to has good eyes and is a fellow scientist.
I'll ask him to put a paragraph together and I'll post it, but
Brian I really wish you'd do your own math, for your good.
Ken

Dan see my post to Brian.
On Mar 17, 9:21 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:55 pm, Dan wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On Mar 17, 3:35 pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"
wrote:
I'd say it was certainly as bright as I've seen Venus, also, I'm
informed, with good eyes, one can resolve it beyond a point.
No. Not even with basic binoculars.
Brian
Sorry Brian, you're out classed :-).
A professional associate did the arc visual acuity calculations
and I found his computations to be correct.
I'll help you out if you have any notions of what binoculars are.
Ken
It depends on the definition of resolution. The atmosphere alone
limits resolution.

ahh, not much, do the high school trig.
Ken

Trig doesn't account for air density variations.
If you haven't noticed lenses with focal lengths similar to those
found in binoculars can't resolve buildings from the space station. Why
do you think recon satellites have focal lengths on the order of several
feet?

Magnification, no-brainer.

Contrary to myth the Great Wall of China can't be seen from space
with the naked eye.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Dan you're talking about scintillation, (twinkling) it comes
and goes.
A few years ago, Jupiter and Saturn were sitting beautifully
close (bright) out my office window, it was 0F outside, to
cold to deploy exterior optics so we decided to set-up the
60mm inside peering through double pane windows, which
I figured would brutalize the image.
Well holy poop, I kid you not, it was the best I've seen!
Jupiters moons and belts, Saturns rings and even Titan,
awesome and sharp.
Ken

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
...

The person I refer to has good eyes and is a fellow scientist.
I'll ask him to put a paragraph together and I'll post it, but
Brian I really wish you'd do your own math, for your good.
Ken

You know, you're reminding me of a guy in my Freshman year that "proved" to
me that it was impossible to see Long Island from the Connecticut shoreline.
Despite the fact that I had done so numerous times.

While in a strictly atmosphereless situation you and your friend are of
course right, atmospheric diffraction really makes a huge difference here.

That said, I am going to have to try this for myself.



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

On Mar 18, 3:30 am, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote:
"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ...



The person I refer to has good eyes and is a fellow scientist.
I'll ask him to put a paragraph together and I'll post it, but
Brian I really wish you'd do your own math, for your good.
Ken

You know, you're reminding me of a guy in my Freshman year that "proved" to
me that it was impossible to see Long Island from the Connecticut shoreline.
Despite the fact that I had done so numerous times.

While in a strictly atmosphereless situation you and your friend are of
course right, atmospheric diffraction really makes a huge difference here.

That said, I am going to have to try this for myself.

I've also been informed Venus when bright and close,
ie cresent, can be resolved, with good naked eyes,
beyond point-like.
Ken