M36 / NGC 1960 in Auriga

Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead a couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

... the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of
Auriga

I find M37 much more impressive, and in fact have never heard anyone comment
that they favored M36 over it, so I would find your reasons for preferring
M36 interesting. Thanks.

Dennis

Dennis Woos wrote:
... the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of
Auriga



Hi Dennis,

I find M37 much more impressive, and in fact have never heard anyone comment
that they favored M36 over it, so I would find your reasons for preferring
M36 interesting. Thanks.

My problem with M37 is that the brightest member stars are not as bright
as those in M36. As a result, when looking at M36, I believe there is a
nicer sight through the field of view. In one way, it is similar to M45
where you have have a handful of (very) bright member stars that add an
extra dimension to the whole experience.

Anthony.


Dennis

My problem with M37 is that the brightest member stars are not as bright
as those in M36. As a result, when looking at M36, I believe there is a
nicer sight through the field of view. In one way, it is similar to M45
where you have have a handful of (very) bright member stars that add an
extra dimension to the whole experience.

Anthony.


Thanks - next time I am out I will give it a look with this in mind. BTW,
this kind of info is why we have a blast at our club's observing events -
sharing favorites, likes and dislikes, how to find stuff, etc. I encourage
anyone who isn't a member or who doesn't participate in an astro club to
consider getting involved.

Dennis

Anthony Ayiomamitis a écrit :
Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive
transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three open
clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead a
couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

Et en français ça donne quoi?

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead a couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

I normally leave astrophotographers to their own devices but as you
specialise in the 17th century celestial sphere fudge known as the
analemma,let me educate you briefly in what the Equation of Time is
and what it does.

"A seemingly contradictory condition in the time of sunrise is often
noted by critical observers. In the northern hemisphere the shortest
day of the year is the first day of winter, December 21. Yet the time
of sunrise continues to grow later into early January when the duration
of the daylight period is actually lengthening. The reason is that this
is the time of the year when the equation of time still dominates the
seasonal effect, causing both sunrise and sunset to occur later each
day. "

http://www.cso.caltech.edu/outreach/...Y/twilight.htm

Would anyone like to know why this geocentric event occurs from a
heliocentric standpoint ?.

The answer is of course the Equation of Time and the Total length of
the day which effectively ignores daylight/darkness asymmetry or at
least keeps it seperate from the observed phenomena.As an
astrophotographer who chains the Sun's apparent motion and position
within the 24 hour day through promoting a barren analemma concept you
are unlikely to approach the matter correctly from the point of view of
the Total length of the natural day and what causes it and how
brilliant men overlayed the system on terrestrial geography to create
the clock system and its correlation with axial rotation.

You couch your terms 'astronomical twilight',constellations and
analemmas without the slightest trace of using your ability to promote
the heliocentric reasoning and that is the real shame.

Franck Danard wrote:

Anthony Ayiomamitis a écrit :

Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive
transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three
open clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead
a couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.

Clear skies!

Anthony.

Et en français ça donne quoi?

Quel est le problème ? Le groupe n'est-il pas au sujet de l'astronomie?

oriel36 wrote:

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead a couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.

Clear skies!

Anthony.


I normally leave astrophotographers to their own devices but as you
specialise in the 17th century celestial sphere fudge known as the
analemma,let me educate you briefly in what the Equation of Time is
and what it does.

snip

I hope this garbage will NOT accompany each of my postings?! I am sure
you can find other ways to be a pest and a troll.

Anthony.

Quel est le problème ? Le groupe n'est-il pas au sujet de l'astronomie?

Fr tout de même

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:
oriel36 wrote:

Anthony Ayiomamitis wrote:

Dear Group,

With very good seeing last night (FWHM ~ 1.9") and equally impressive transparency, I decided to pursue the most impressive of the three open clusters in the constellation of Auriga which is nicely overhead a couple of hours after the end of astronomical twilight.

For those interested, please see

http://www.astrovox.gr/forum/album_pic.php?pic_id=3079 (1200 x 900)
http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-DSO-NGC-1960.htm (image details)

The LRGB image is based on two-hours total exposure.
Clear skies!

Anthony.


I normally leave astrophotographers to their own devices but as you
specialise in the 17th century celestial sphere fudge known as the
analemma,let me educate you briefly in what the Equation of Time is
and what it does.

snip

I hope this garbage will NOT accompany each of my postings?! I am sure
you can find other ways to be a pest and a troll.

Anthony.

The Equation of Time or the correction which reduces the observation of
natural noon to the human devised principle of the equable 24 hour day
never had anything to do with the celestial sphere creation of the
'analemma', a ridiculous creation based on limiting observations of
the altitude of the Sun against the horizon using a 24 hour clock.

No doubt the childish observers among you can easily live with the
pseudo-dynamic of variable axial tilt (hence the analemma) even when
actual observations from space reflect that the change is due to the
orbital path of the Earth and the variation between the division of the
orbital shadow/direct solar radiation with fixed axial orientation -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Seasonearth.png

The Equation of Time reflects the rate of change of the division
between the orbital shadow/solar radiation as constant axial rotation
is moving in concert with orbital motions.-

http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...ages/04f15.jpg

You express the Equation of Time with a variable axial tilt component
which the Earth does not have and contain the Sun within a 24 hour
framework,the very function which the Equation of Time serves now turns
into a lethal cartoon principle where clocks dictate the motions of the
Earth rather than being a complimentary human convenience created by
brilliant men.

I believe that there are also brilliant men here who can undo the
damage done in the 17th century, initially through Flamsteed's false
correlation between celestial sphere geometry and the Earth's axial and
orbital motions,at least the main error of using the return of a star
to a location in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds to justify the axial
and orbital motions of the Earth hence the analemma nuisance.

Your 'analemma' creations becomes a huge obstacle to climatological
studies insofar as you do correlate the position of the Sun against the
horizon with global climate and hemispherical weather patterns
(seasons) using a pseudo-dynamic of variable axial tilt.Most of
humanity,at least those over 40 years of age ,can tell you that there
has been a dramatic change in annual temperatures and consequently
more extreme meteorological events but they have yet to receive an
accurate astronomical mechansim for climate based on the Earth's
motions in received solar radiation.

The garbage is all yours and it is destructive garbage based on
pretension rather than substance.I know that there are people who can
adapt modern imaging to reflect 21st century concerns and especially
the fact that most people are astronomers through living by the daily
and annual astronomical cycles.If you cannot hanfdle basic
correlations such as the 24 hour day and axial rotation then get out of
the way or at least propose your harmless creations for those who know
no better or are inclined to consider astronomy as an exercise in
magnification.