What is an amateur astronomer now?

If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

On Feb 11, 8:12*pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

... The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

I couldn't disagree more.

Sure, you can learn a lot more by reading and studying on the
internet, but there is nothing quite like intercepting ancient photons
with your own eyeball from a really dark site using a quality
telescope. If you have never done this, you cannot possibly know what
I am talking about, it would be nearly impossible for me to put my own
experiences into words.

\Paul

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

Unlike professional astronomy, scientific research is not typically the
main goal for most amateur astronomers. Work of scientific merit is
certainly possible, however, and many amateurs contribute to the knowledge
base of professional astronomers very succesfully. Astronomy is often
promoted as one of the few remaining sciences for which amateurs can still
contribute useful data.

In particular, amateur astronomers often contribute towards activities
such as monitoring the brightness changes of variable stars, helping to
track asteroids, and observing occultations to determine both the shape of
asteroids and the shape of the terrain on the edge of the Moon.

In the past and present, amateur astronomers have also played a major role
in discovering new comets. Recently however, funding of projects such as
the Lincoln Near-Earth Asteroid Research and Near Earth Asteroid Tracking
projects has meant that most comets are now discovered by automated
systems, long before it is possible for amateurs to see them.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Amateur_astronomy

Im comfortable with the above definition.

Lots of people arent these days. They think more is required - so long as
it
isnt them doing the work but only preaching and looking for positive
results
FOR THEMSELVES!

On Feb 12, 4:12*am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

As a newbie to s.a.a you can now get an education on what Isaac was
doing with those absolute/relative time,space and motions things and
nothing like what the theoreticians believe them to be,at least if
that is what interests active astronomers,if they want to comprehend
timekeeping then the sprawling history of the calendar system and
longitude problem is before them,likewise the motion of planets and
the structure of the Universe on an ascending scale is before
readers.Just as the old astronomers gauged the motions of the planets
against the stellar background,there will come a time when astronomers
will consider the rotation of the foreground stars against the
background galaxies for multiple purposes.

The internet is the greatest single astronomical tool since the
telescope but it is,after all,a tool and it takes talent to put that
tool to work.There is a lot to be optimistic about when readers are
less wooden about 'defining' things and even somebody who has major
issues with those who get paid for diminishing astronomy with
speculative modeling and the junk dumped into the celestial arena
under the name of astronomy,I can say that the convergence of tools
represents a new phase of astronomy,something more ranging and deeper
rather than complaining about empirical bandwagons that roll on
regardless.


You are a refugee from the relativity forum so remember your place
here,you come to this forum as a bare novice so act accordingly.

Well, let's form a relationship between astronomy and sex. I was one of the
"old-fashioned" guys who believed having sex too early was wrong, so from
the time I was old enough to be in touch with my hormones, I read as much as
I could about it. When I was in high school, friends would continue to
laugh at my virginity and the same when I was in college with my look, but
don't touch policy..... but I kept on reading. Finally, when I was 34, I
found the right person and pursued them in the old-fashioned, traditional
manner (which meant not playing house, etc, etc). Now that I've been
happily married for 31 years, the same folks who laughed often times ended
up divorced within 5 years of their first marriages. So, can one benefit
the most astronomically by reading, participating, both, or neither? I say
read all you can first, but then participate but the latter is a must
because you never will fully understand the hobby without it.

JC


"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
...
If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

On 12 Feb., 16:04, "John Clockman" wrote:
Well, let's form a relationship between astronomy and sex. *

No thanks. I tried it once and didn't like it.

On Feb 11, 8:46 pm, palsing wrote:
On Feb 11, 8:12 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

... The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

I couldn't disagree more.

Sure, you can learn a lot more by reading and studying on the
internet, but there is nothing quite like intercepting ancient photons
with your own eyeball from a really dark site using a quality
telescope. If you have never done this, you cannot possibly know what
I am talking about, it would be nearly impossible for me to put my own
experiences into words.
\Paul

There was a discussion about # of amateurs in another thread,
that depends on the definition of an amateur, (I've had scopes
since exiting the womb, became serious at 8), but it was cloudy
out and so I took time to read Brian Tung's and study more, and
it occurred to me that's the only astronomy I could do that night,
but I was engaging the hobby best way I could.
Consider 'inner city' people, they might engage in the same 'hobby'
with the same enthusiasm (we pUrsue).
Regards
Ken

On Feb 12, 1:37 am, oriel36 wrote:
On Feb 12, 4:12 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

As a newbie to s.a.a you can now get an education on what Isaac was
doing with those absolute/relative time,space and motions things and
nothing like what the theoreticians believe them to be,at least if
that is what interests active astronomers,if they want to comprehend
timekeeping then the sprawling history of the calendar system and
longitude problem is before them,likewise the motion of planets and
the structure of the Universe on an ascending scale is before
readers.Just as the old astronomers gauged the motions of the planets
against the stellar background,there will come a time when astronomers
will consider the rotation of the foreground stars against the
background galaxies for multiple purposes.

The internet is the greatest single astronomical tool since the
telescope but it is,after all,a tool and it takes talent to put that
tool to work.There is a lot to be optimistic about when readers are
less wooden about 'defining' things and even somebody who has major
issues with those who get paid for diminishing astronomy with
speculative modeling and the junk dumped into the celestial arena
under the name of astronomy,I can say that the convergence of tools
represents a new phase of astronomy,something more ranging and deeper
rather than complaining about empirical bandwagons that roll on
regardless.

You are a refugee from the relativity forum so remember your place
here,you come to this forum as a bare novice so act accordingly.

LOL, boi, I've had a scope 2 minutes away from me most all my life.
You'd get an audience in the 'relativity forum' now, it's full of
idiots.
Ken

On Feb 12, 7:04 am, "John Clockman" wrote:
Well, let's form a relationship between astronomy and sex. I was one of the
"old-fashioned" guys who believed having sex too early was wrong, so from
the time I was old enough to be in touch with my hormones, I read as much as
I could about it. When I was in high school, friends would continue to
laugh at my virginity and the same when I was in college with my look, but
don't touch policy..... but I kept on reading. Finally, when I was 34, I
found the right person and pursued them in the old-fashioned, traditional
manner (which meant not playing house, etc, etc). Now that I've been
happily married for 31 years, the same folks who laughed often times ended
up divorced within 5 years of their first marriages. So, can one benefit
the most astronomically by reading, participating, both, or neither? I say
read all you can first, but then participate but the latter is a must
because you never will fully understand the hobby without it.

Well John that's a topical Valentine Day reply, congrads.
We've been married ~40 and star-gazing is one hobby we share.
We just built a new house called 'Skyview'.
Ken





JC

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in ...

If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

On Feb 12, 5:34*pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
On Feb 12, 1:37 am, oriel36 wrote:









On Feb 12, 4:12 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

If I read articles like this for a few hours a night,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri

I'm an amateur astonomer, otherwise I'd need to spend alot of effort
to travel south to an observatory, to see it, but what about his part,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_C...#Binary_system

Studying that, knowing Newton, is beyond amateurs.
The 'net' has changed the meaning of amateur astronomy,
it's hard to justify a scope, if knowledge is persued.
Ken

As a newbie to s.a.a you can now get an education on what Isaac was
doing with those absolute/relative time,space and motions things and
nothing like what the theoreticians *believe them to be,at least if
that is what interests active astronomers,if they want to comprehend
timekeeping then the sprawling history of the calendar system and
longitude problem is before them,likewise the motion of planets and
the structure of the Universe on an ascending scale is before
readers.Just as the old astronomers gauged the motions of the planets
against the stellar background,there will come a time when astronomers
will consider the rotation of the foreground stars against the
background galaxies for multiple purposes.

The internet is the greatest single astronomical tool since the
telescope but it is,after all,a tool and it takes talent to put that
tool to work.There is a lot to be optimistic about when readers are
less wooden about 'defining' things and even somebody who has major
issues with those who get paid for diminishing astronomy with
speculative modeling and the junk dumped into the celestial arena
under the name of astronomy,I can say that the convergence of tools
represents a new phase of astronomy,something more ranging and deeper
rather than complaining about empirical bandwagons that roll on
regardless.

You are a refugee from the relativity forum so remember your place
here,you come to this forum as a bare novice so act accordingly.

LOL, boi, I've had a scope 2 minutes away from me most all my life.

Magnification does not qualify anyone as an astronomer,it could just
as well mean you are a birdwatcher or a peeping tom for all I know yet
magnification is a magnificent astronomical tool in its own right,some
might even believe that the size and expense of a piece of glass
distinguishes an amateur from a professional and indeed that
distinction is just to a certain degree.It is when these same guys
tell people what astronomy is not through the mantra chanting of the
empirical method that whatever advantage they gain through
magnification,they lose it a thousand times over as astronomy is more
than the sum of its parts.


You'd get an audience in the 'relativity forum' now, it's full of
idiots.
Ken

There are some readers in s.a.a. who can actually keep the issues at a
technical level but there are a lot of nuisances also,not wrong,not
one thing or another but just headache inducing people who are best
left to their own devices.You come from a relativity forum which puts
you on the bottom rung of everything as the distortions of astronomy
can really be traced to a short period of Royal Society empiricism and
these issues have been resolved here in s.a.a. long before you entered
this forum just as I leave it.