Slashdot Mirror


Serious Home Observatories

peatbakke writes: "Here's an interesting article about the affordability of backyard observatories. Rich kids get all the fun at the moment, but it's getting better." Getting away from city lights may be the hardest part, though.

52 of 110 comments (clear)

  1. Ar alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    you could use a program like Celestia and look into the heavens from your own computer monitor.

    1. Re:Ar alternatively by richjoyce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      top ten signs you spend too much time on the computer:

      10-you look at the stars on your monitor

      seriously though, where is the fun in looking at the stars on a computer than actually getting outside and looking up at the sky, possibly with the help of a backyard observatory

    2. Re:Ar alternatively by H3XA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      when I was young I lived in country QLD, Australia - no light pollution and brilliant views.

      then I moved to a city with more light pollution - okayish night views

      now I live in a large city in China..... haven't seem stars since I got here..... damn pollution, both light and air :(

      Think I will stick with software for my star gazing.

      - HeXa

    3. Re:Ar alternatively by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2

      Seeing a celestial body with your own eyes is so utterly far much more amazing than seeing pictures of it, no matter what the quality.

    4. Re:Ar alternatively by treat · · Score: 2
      seriously though, where is the fun in looking at the stars on a computer than actually getting outside and looking up at the sky, possibly with the help of a backyard observatory

      You can't see the stars where I live. On a really clear night, you can maybe count 10 stars. TEN. Out of billions! And nine of them are probably just helicopters anyway.

    5. Re:Ar alternatively by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      Many amateur astronomers dream of discovering a new comet-- something that is impossible with a computer astronomy simulator.

  2. KStars by Klerck · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want to see the stars without using a telescope, KStars is an excellent program. It's simply an amazing piece of work.

    You can do stuff like click on a star to get a real picture of it from various sources.

    It's, of course, free and open source.

    1. Re:KStars by rknop · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah... and for that matter, why ever go visit the Grand Canyon or Yosemite National Park when you can find photographs of them on the web? And why go to a concert when you can buy a CD or download a MP3 of the same music? Gee, with computer software and Google, we never need to leave our desks at all and view nature first hand!

      (Sarcasm off.) Don't get me wrong. I'm very fond of programs like XEphem and KStars, not to mention sites like the Astronomy Picutre of the Day. But most amateur astronomers aren't in it for seeing the absolute best possible HST picture, or for viewing the constellations as abstract patterns however those patterns are presented. They... er, we are like birdwatchers in many ways. You can find all the pictures of birds you want in various bird books, but there's something different about seeing it first hand.

      So while programs like Xephem and projects like the national virtual observatory are great, only those with a fundamental misunderstanding of amateur astronomers (such as the one described in the article here) would think it reasonable to suggest that they are a substitute for a good dark sky and seeing faint, fuzzy galaxies first hand.

      -Rob

    2. Re:KStars by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      Your analogies are exaggerating somewhat, since whether you see pieces of the sky through your own telescope or pictures taken using somebody else's, they're only distant images...

      If anything, I find the analogies less compelling. The "magic" of having photons hit your eyes after starting their journeys years, centuries, or even longer, ago can't be captured by seeing a photo. Neither is their any skill in just viewing a photo. Catching a glimpse of a faint object using averted vision, finding a comet not visible to the naked eye, or watching the changes on the face of Jupiter as the nights go by is something that will never be equaled by viewing a photo.

  3. Searching for aliens by Tim+Ward · · Score: 2

    Some colleagues of mine has a large radio telescope dish in their back garden, with a couple of racks of electronics in the kitchen. Most of this gear, I think, came out of the skip at a company they did some work for, so I don't think you have to be very rich to do this.

    When it detects some aliens a red light flashes and a siren goes off. So far they've all been false alarms.

    1. Re:Searching for aliens by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It's still reasonably expensive to get hold of all the equipment though (I know, I'm in the final stages of doing it - the antenna arrives next week :-)

      The dish (3m diameter minimum) will set you back ~150 quid, the radio receiver (1.4GHz typically) is ~300 quid for the WinRadio 1550e (PC-attachable high-frequency radio receiver), and the LNA (low-noise amplifier), feed-horn, cable and fittings came to another 300 quid. So a total of ~750 quid.

      All of this is in the UK, and apart from the dish, I bought new kit. I'm sure that (a) outside the UK it's easier to get large dishes, and (b) if you bought 2nd hand, you'd be able to get the price of the hardware down. You can even make your own components if you have the knowledge.

      A good source of info is the setileague website for the mini-manual or the UK site run by Jenny Bailey, although it was a bit out of date last time I looked.

      Anyway, this time next week, I should be searching for aliens from my back-yard too :-)

      Simon.

      --
      Physicists get Hadrons!
    2. Re:Searching for aliens by Space+cowboy · · Score: 2

      I am, in fact :-) Probably on www.gornall.net when I get it all together. Nothing there yet, but the PS2 site is slowly coming together (ps2.gornall.net).

      I'm planning on using a PC to do the data analysis (and my background is in signal processing, so I'm quite looking forward to it), but another idea is to use a PS2 to do the work - my PC is worth ~1.5 GFlops (Athlon 1700), but the PS2 can do ~6 GFlops, and the vector units are native-floating point devices. At that rate I could look into doing chirp analysis (compensating for time-distortion due to the motion of source and the earth) as well as plain old fourier analysis.

      ATB,
      Simon.

      --
      Physicists get Hadrons!
    3. Re:Searching for aliens by Tim+Ward · · Score: 2

      The Jennys are both now, along with me, LibDem Cambridge City Councillors ... strange world we live in when loonies like us can run a city!

  4. Re:Searching for aliens ... link by Tim+Ward · · Score: 2
  5. For any potential telescope buyer.. by BuR4N · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is a two great sites filled with reviews and tips on astro. grear.

    http://www.cloudynights.com/
    http://www.scopere views.com/

    --
    http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
  6. Low-cost alternatives by mike449 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You don't need $150,000 investment to enjoy the night skies. Begin with naked-eye or binoculars (10x50 allow seeing many deep-sky objects). Next step is a simple telescope - 8" Dobsonian reflector costs under $400. Even computerized "go-to" telescopes are mostly under $2000, except high-end models.

    Light pollution is a big problem in cities. You may have to drive quite a bit to see the Milky Way.
    Join your local amateur astronomy group (even if you don't have an instrument), these guys are generally very helpful and usually have access to some dark and safe observing sites.

    A topic that many /.ers like - hacking cheap CCD webcams to get long exposure times. This allows to take really great astro pictures even within light-polluted cities. Good place to start is QCUIAG Yahoo group.

    1. Re:Low-cost alternatives by drg55 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Although I wouldn't mind a computer controlled setup with ccd, I think many people who buy the 8" computer driven models would not use them as 1) it is not really good enough aperture, you want 10" or more
      2) you need to do the hardyards and learn the night sky. For me finding an object takes around 20-30 minutes. I then get the satisfaction and knowledge that I found it. Once you do have a grounding in the sky then it has uses obviously for advanced amertures who are basically doing professional standard work.
      And yes light pollution is a problem as any one who has been looking at the sky will tell you.

      This is a result of poorly designed public lighting which shines a large percentage into the sky making it glow brighter than many faint objects. Also the lighting is usually unshielded so that the light source causes the pupil to contract. Answer, even brighter lights. The only real reason for this is utility companies want to keep their generators going at night - and the public pays. It is a serious cultural issue and a greenhouse gas source.
      David.

    2. Re:Low-cost alternatives by fmaxwell · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Although I wouldn't mind a computer controlled setup with ccd, I think many people who buy the 8" computer driven models would not use them as 1) it is not really good enough aperture, you want 10" or more
      2) you need to do the hardyards and learn the night sky. For me finding an object takes around 20-30 minutes.


      As a serious amateur with 25+ years of experience, I know the night sky well. But I have an 8" Celestron with computerized setting circles and a 5" Celestron go-to scope.

      If I lived in Arizona, I might agree with you, but living near Washington, D.C., the computerized scopes make the hobby feasible. It's fine to star hop when you have a black sky full of stars. When you have 20 visible stars in the sky, the hops become a bit more like leaps of faith. The reality of viewing in an urban area is that many of the objects dim enough to require a 10" or larger scope are simply invisible due to light pollution. A larger scope simply gathers more light pollution.

      The ability take the 5" scope out my door, set it up without worrying about polar alignment, and have it track is really nice. The 8" scope, because it is not computer-driven, requires a bit more work. But both perform admirably and have the advantage of providing better seeing than a larger aperture scope when the atmosphere is turbulent -- as it often is in urban areas.

      I guess what I'm saying is that every scope has its place. If I lived in an area with good weather and dark skies, I'd probably have an observatory and a 16" or better Dobsonian -- in addition to my Celestron SCTs.

  7. light pollution by shd99004 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Getting away from city lights may be the hardest part, though.

    Light pollutions is a huge problem. I realized this myself when I started using a telescope, many nights was I standing just outside our house. Streetlights and light from our neighbours were very disturbing. So one time, I went to a nearby airfield (a very small one) and it was so dark i couldn't see my own hand. Then we looked up and saw the milky way. Not just like a faint barely visible ribbon, but it was really really bright. It was like a wide bright flood of stars across the sky, and it was basically impossible to see any constellations. Haven't seen anything quite like it before or after. Ofcourse, the lack of any artificial light source was only one good thing; the sky was probably more clear than ever. Too bad I left my telescope when I went to college...

    --
    Will work for bandwidth
  8. Observatory on the web by mikewas · · Score: 4, Informative
    The Bradford Robotic Telescope is a web enabled telescope in West Yorkshire, England. It's open to anyone (registration required). You submit a request for an observation, the request is queued, and the telescope automatically makes the observation when conditions are favorable. You get an email informing you that your image is available.

    If you're into immediate gratification, the most recent 500 observations are also available. The Yorkshire weather isn't always cooperative, so it might be a while before you get your image.

    It's not the same as putting your eye to the lens, but I don't have room for a 46cm telescope, and viewing conditions are far from ideal anywhere in New Jersey!

    --

    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." --Napoleon Bonaparte
  9. Re:Woeful ignorance by shd99004 · · Score: 2

    Remember that old story about how you can stand at the bottom of a well and see the stars during the day because the light from the sun is blocked out?

    The sun is still shining, and the athmosphere is still spreading the light from the sun. Standing in a well wont change that...

    --
    Will work for bandwidth
  10. City Lights... by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 5, Funny

    Getting away from city lights may be the hardest part, though.

    Getting away from city lights is easy.

    Leave the city. The lights won't follow you, I promise.

    --

    "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

    Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    1. Re:City Lights... by An+dochasac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah but they do. The problem is that people now feel the need to illuminate every house, garage, barn, bilboard and tree regardless of how far away from "the city" you are. A brilliant display of northern lights appeared over a lake in the northern Wisconsin woods 1987. Recent auroras are no longer visible here because neighbors across the lake illuminate the underside of trees with spot lights. While searching for a dark sky to view Comet Hale Bopp from, I drove through miles of farm land with no village larger than 5000 people and did not find a dark sky. The milky way was not even easily visible from the middle of Lake Michigan because the lights of Chicago 100 miles to the southwest illuminated the sky. The international dark sky association estimates show that up to 2 Billion dollars is spent every year illuminate the night sky.

      Really folks, is this necessary?

  11. Ah yes... by Cally · · Score: 2

    One day,.. when I've repaid the ten thousand pounds of debt I owe the bank, my landlord, my brother and various other people that I;ve run up over the last year of (mostly) unemployment;... once I've upgraded this PoS to a reasonable spec machine, and moved up to proper broadband... once I've digitised all my media onto a nice fat RAID file server... in other words, once I find someone prepared to pay me for my ten years' commerical IT experience, five years of Perl and Linux, BSD, security, networking, and system admin skills... even though I've only ever /officially/ worked as a Perl programmer... in other words, when hell freezes over... I'm gonna get me a nice Meade LX200, interface it with my Linux box, get the Astronomical Software distribution, and do some quiet little research into something unsexy like variable stars, something where professional astronomers haven't yet made all progress impossible to the amateur. I've heard it said that astronomy is one of the only remaining areas of science where a dedicated amateur can still produce useful original research. In a parallel universe, where I don't get sacked for advocating Free software (and pointing out that the employer is stealing GPL'd code and selling it without including the source, license, or acknowledgment.)

    But I digress.

    In the back of Astronomy magazine you can see many ads for home domes like these. That, I think, would give you absolute maximum geek points...

    Sigh. Life is hard.

    --
    "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
  12. Re:Woeful ignorance by tconnors · · Score: 2

    >> Remember that old story about how you can stand at the bottom of a well and see the stars during the day because the light from the sun is blocked out?

    > The sun is still shining, and the athmosphere is still spreading the light from the sun. Standing in a well wont change that...

    Well, actually, you can see some stars (such as Sirius) in the day, as long as you know exactly where to look. I have successfully tracked Venus and Jupiter too, after watching them with a telescope through the morning, but as soon as I moved the telescope off the field of view, I could no longer find them!

  13. Re:light pollution by randmairs · · Score: 3, Informative

    Whenever I go outside to observe in my suburban light polluted neighborhood, there is a pesky street light. With my neighbor's permission, I shine a laser pointer ($16 - from my local mega office supply store) at the photo diode switch located as a knob on top of the lamp. I use a tripod, cloths pin, and some tape/rubber bands to hold the pointer in place. The photodiode holes are ususally oriented toward the west.

    There are people working to try to limit obnoxious outdoor lighting. They are the folks and associates of the International Dark Sky Association at http://www.darksky.org

  14. A VERY nice one in Stone Harbor, NJ by psychosis · · Score: 2

    If you are tooling around the inland waterway area of Stone Harbor, NJ, in one of the multi-million dollar beach houses, there's a large (10-20ft dia) silvered dome on one of the waterfront places.
    No idea who owns it or anything, but it's definitely a nice cap to a beautiful house. Retracting door, rotating dome, etc...
    When we were there, it was covered with a tarp, possibly for repairs or something, but you could still tell it was an observatory.

  15. The Astronomy Centre (UK) by alanw · · Score: 3, Informative
    We are a bunch of dedicated amateurs, building our own 42" (1.07 metre) telescope.

    We already have a 30 foot dome, a 30" Dobsonian, 12" reflecting binoculars, and more.

    http://www.astronomycentre.org.uk/

  16. MAJOR Geek Project! by JoeMirando · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm a bit surprised that no one has mentioned this, but you can build your own telescope for less money than you can buy one!!

    This includes grinding the mirror yourself, by the way. With a bit of care and patience, you can grind and polish a mirror that is accurate to within 1/10th of a wavelength of light.... that's quite a bit better than what you usually end up with when buying one from a store. I'm in the process of polishing a 16" mirror at the moment.... my first! The 16" blank, along with an 8" blank for a smaller scope and all the grinding/polishing materials cost me around $300. That doesn't include the optical tube assembly or aluminizing the mirror, but the mirror itself is usually the most expensive part anyway.

    There are also those who add their own "go to" drives and such, but that seems like a bit much for me... at least with THIS scope.

    My guess is that you can find an astronomy club near by with several members who can help.

    More info for those interested can be found at The ATM Site (not my site).


    Clear Skies,
    Joe Mirando

    1. Re:MAJOR Geek Project! by PD · · Score: 2

      I'm a bit surprised that no one has mentioned this, but you can build your own telescope for less money than you can buy one!!

      It probably hasn't been mentioned because it's not really true anymore. Used to be, but now you can pick up a 10 inch dob with good optics for 450 bucks.

      But you're right, grinding your own mirrors is a great geek project.

    2. Re:MAJOR Geek Project! by JoeMirando · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It probably hasn't been mentioned because it's not
      really true anymore. Used to be, but now you can pick
      up a 10 inch dob with good optics for 450 bucks.

      True, but a 10" dob isn't quite the epitome of amateur telescope making anymore.

      A 10" mirror is still a good piece of equipment, but hardly deserving of the type of observatory we're talking about here.

      While it's true that many of the discoveries that we consider important (Galileo, Cassini, etc.) were made with telescopes with smaller mirrors smaller than what's available today, they didn't have to contend with sodium street lamps and huge cities that throw stray photons about like they were free.

      Add to that the fact that what manufacturers call "good" optics are merely marginal by most standards, and it becomes worthwhile for someone interested in the process to make their own.

      AND I'll bet you that I could build a 10" dob for less than half that cost.

      Clear skies,
      Joe Mirando
      http://scope.joemirando.net

  17. Re:light pollution by shd99004 · · Score: 2

    Hm, that sounds like a good idea. It's hard to find a good spot to observe. Well even with some light sources around you, one can still observe the moon or comets. I like the Pleiades too. But what probably made the greatest impression on me (except observing sunspots i guess) was to watch Jupiter and Saturn through my telescope. Sure, I've seen countless of great close up images of both planets, but to see Jupiter by myself was something else. I could see different colors of the clouds and also the red spot. Saturn was quite a sight too with its rings.

    --
    Will work for bandwidth
  18. How about a gravity observatory? by thogard · · Score: 2

    Late this year, a few of my net acquaintances will be meeting in two spots (S. Africa & S. Australia) for the pending doom and end of the world... oh wait... its just a total eclipse.

    There have been some examples where pendulums swing funny durring elipses. I want to see if I can recreate this and I'm looking for help to do it on the cheap. The current expirments show that a swinging uniform sphere will have some side forces on it. My problem is measuring things in the field. I can get temps to about .01C. I can get non-moving distances to about .1mm, I can get weight to about .1g but I can get time to a few nanoseconds so I need to devise and expierment that uses just time. I've been thinking that I can get a disk spinning, I should use a simple optical coupler (like whats in your mouse) and a good timing circut to get some very precise timings. Now if I can build a disk that is well balanced but non-uniform density, that means its angular speed should be effected by the same force thats pushing a pendulum slighty to its side. The problem is the pendulum will contine to rotate as the force is applied but my spinning device will only see the force when the force is applied to one side of the disk. The smaller the disk, the shorter this time is since the shadow of the moon is travling at a rate of about 500m/s. The phenomenon I'm looking for will happen twice for about .0002 seconds. If I miss it this time there will be another 7 chances over the next decade.

  19. Dark Sky by Paul+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Informative
    City light pollution is far worse than it needs to be. Visit the International Dark Sky Association homepage for more information.

    The point the society is trying to make is that 50%-70% of the light from outdoor lighting is wasted (points to the sky, not the ground). This causes light pollution and doubles electricity bills. Their solution has been to design alternate lighting fixtures that fit ordinary light poles.

    1. Re:Dark Sky by ArcticChicken · · Score: 2

      Hmm ... which is more likely:

      A) A tiny organization that squeaks by with donations from a fringe element of society is lobbying city and council officials throughout America to make sure that people "...can't have direct rays on [their] neighbor's property, nor can [they] get waivers for security lighting."

      or

      B) NORMAL Americans are standing up for their rights to NOT have some selfish, slack-jawed moron of a neighbor install a 1500 watt "security" light in their driveway that shines 50% of the goddamn light in through other people's windows.

      I've got news for you: nobody gives a shit about "amateur astronomers" or this IDA crap, despite what the guys who sell the tin-foil hats have told you. There is no fucking "dark sky conspiracy".

      The reality is that the JACKASSES out there, who feel like they own the fucking neighborhood and can crank their goddamn stereo at all hours of the night, while simultaneously turning their neighbors yards into part of their wannabe international-airport-runway-lighting system, CAN KISS MY STUDLY, SWEATY ASS.

    2. Re:Dark Sky by Sabalon · · Score: 2

      I agree...when protesting a new local gas station at a board of corrupt commissioners meeting, I brought up the point of light pollution, and they mentioned how all new construction is required to have downcast lighting.

      Still doesn't explain why on a cloudy night, parts of the sky glows brighter than a 100W bulb though

    3. Re:Dark Sky by Kymermosst · · Score: 2

      Actually, what I said was the truth... the Dark Sky people weren't the only ones lobbying, but they certainly put in their two cents. I also didn't say that they were lobbying city council officials throughout American, I said they were doing it here. I can't speak for the rest of America.

      This is the final paragraph in a local newspaper, an article specifically about the IDA's efforts here:

      The International Dark-Sky Association in Tucson, Ariz. (http://www.darksky.org/ ) has played a key role in lobbying for outdoor lighting regulations locally, and around the world. The group recently put a detailed "Lighting Code Handbook" on its Web site. According to the introduction, "Careful and considered use of lighting at night, using light only when it is really needed, where it is needed, and as much as is needed and no more, would unblanket the stars in all but the largest cities."

      I figure I don't need to type the entire article. It appeared on Monday, July 27th in the Bend Bugle.

      At any rate, the stupid ordinance says that if a neigbor can see the actual light bulb/direct emission source/whatever, than the light is illegal. Furthermore, no lights were grandfathered in. Everyone in the county has to change.

      It is complete and utter bullshit to the point that you can't even have a porch light light your porch, really, unless it is via recessed lighting.

      And, yes, the Dark Sky Association was certainly involved in working up the ordinance. They were there. The local newspaper ran the article, and I am pretty sure they weren't lying.

      It STILL doeesn't matter. The county streetlights are exempt from the direct light rule, so you have plenty of those shining all over the place. In addition, it seems that big industry (mills, factories, etc.) seem to be exempt, too.

      Instead, normal Americans are the ones paying.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    4. Re:Dark Sky by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

      To some extent. But, that light would be going into the sky regardless of whether the light was aimed at the object reflecting, or the light was coming from a 360 degree illumination source.

      Think about a 100W bare bulb vs. a 50W reflectorized bulb. Both will provide roughly the same light on the object you're trying to illuminate. The object will reflect roughly the same miniscule amount of light into the sky from either setup. But the bare bulb is in addition wasting 50% of its power pumping light into the sky, where it does no good and obscures the night sky.

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  20. DIY GoTo by Boulder+Geek · · Score: 2
    Mel Bartels has a great web site for making computer controlled scopes here.

    I know people who use this sytem in backyard observatories. The current implementation can correct for all sorts of problems in the mount, and compares favorably with the software used by professional observatories.

    --
    A well-crafted lie appears unquestionable - Dama Mahaleo
  21. Build your own GEODSS by Animats · · Score: 2
    Now this would be a great geek project. GEODSS, the Ground-Based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance, is a worldwide network of computer-controlled telescopes operated by the USAF. Telescopes at each site automatically scan the sky, log each known star, detect satellites both known and unknown, and watch for unidentified orbital objects, including ICBMs. Anything bigger than a basketball in near-earth orbit should be found within a few days. Even opaque objects can be found in time, because they occult stars. The results are reported constantly to NORAD.

    GEODSS is rumored to have the ability to illuminate its targets with a laser. (A USAF site in Maui is known to have such capabilities.)

    GEODSS was the first major computerized telescope system. It's an old system from the late 1970s, modernized in the 1990s. Back then, it took a huge military project to build something like this. Now, it wouldn't be that big a deal. With computer-controlled CCD telescopes widespread, this could be a good amateur project.

    Most of the work is in the back-end data processing. The goal is to take all the images coming in, compare them with star maps and satellite ephemeris data, and see what new stuff turns up. Track satellites. Find space junk.

    Doing this standalone could be fun, but the real payoff would be a network of amateur sites that cooperated over a peer to peer network. As soon as one finds something interesting, it should immediately communicate that to other sites so they can point at the same target if in view.

  22. Re:City Lights... QWZX by alienmole · · Score: 4, Informative
    Actually, I'm not a city boy, and what I'm talking about is that "the country" can be a hellofa distance from a major metro area like New York, which is surrounded by other cities and towns.

    The kinds of skies that I grew up with can't be found anywhere on the East coast of the US, including places like Vermont and New Hampshire. The combination of air pollution and light pollution has pretty much destroyed astronomical viewing conditions in all but the most remote places.

    This problem is not confined to the most densely populated areas, either. If you go to Mesa Verde National Park in Colorado, they'll tell you about how the views from the various overlooks have degraded over the past few decades due to air pollution. Mesa Verde is in a location that's pretty "country", 9 miles from the tiny town of Cortez, and 35 miles from the only slightly larger town of Durango.

    This level of pollution translates into poor astronomical viewing, and it's much worse when you're not that far out in the country.

    Astronomy clubs in New York go to pathetic viewing locations in small parks along highways north of the city, where you can still barely see the Milky Way with the naked eye.

    The bottom line is that the country which you so fondly fantasize about barely exists in the U.S. any more.

  23. Re:City Lights... QWZX by nomadic · · Score: 2

    I don't know, Maine still has some amazing skies.

  24. Innovative features by guanxi · · Score: 2

    This has some cool features. From the website:

    "Celestia is a free real-time space simulation that lets you experience our universe in three dimensions. Unlike most planetarium software, Celestia doesn't confine you to the surface of the Earth. You can travel throughout the solar system, to any of over 100,000 stars, or even beyond the galaxy. All travel in Celestia is seamless; the exponential zoom feature lets you explore space across a huge range of scales, from galaxy clusters down to spacecraft only a few meters across. A 'point-and-goto' interface makes it simple to navigate through the universe to the object you want to visit."

    1. Re:Innovative features by guanxi · · Score: 2, Funny

      So why does NASA need so many billions just for a simple space probe to Mars?

      Because Celestia is in metric.

  25. International Dark Skies by discogravy · · Score: 3, Informative
    There's an organisation dedicated to cutting down on light pollution. International Dark Skies

    Check them out.

    It's a serious problem for anyone that wants to see stars without leaving all of civilisation. Check out the difference:

    The night sky from a Dark site

    The night sky from a city.

  26. Re:City Lights... QWZX by alienmole · · Score: 2

    You're right - Maine is good, since it's so large and relatively unpopulated. And there are still plenty other similarly good locations. I'm not saying you can't get "amazing" skies any more, but rather that they've deteriorated relative to what they used to be like, and what they're like in some less populated parts of the world. Getting away from the cities makes an enormous difference, but doesn't usually eliminate the effect. Finding a place where there is absolutely no visible light pollution, even on the horizon, is increasingly difficult.

  27. Re:Woeful ignorance by Tablizer · · Score: 2
    [...you can stand at the bottom of a well and see the stars during the day because the light from the sun is blocked out?] ...the athmosphere is still spreading the light from the sun. Standing in a well wont change that...

    Dammit! Let him dig and dig and dig. Youses keep ruininng my submissions for Darwin Awards by informing ignorant people. Knock it off!

  28. If you don't have the space or the money try by Sigfried_Blip · · Score: 2
    participating in the university of Kentucky's volunteer SETI search project. Unlike the passive seti@home project, the ukentuckyasrgseti project requires an active participation.

    Here is how the process works:
    • You download .wav files that were collected on the large dish at the university of Kentucky.
    • You analyze the data on your PC with the signal analysis program of your choice.
    • You choose your own search strategy limited only by your creativity, determination, and talent.
    • Any potential interesting hits are to be posted and discussed on the project website.
    The project is very educational and I recommend it to anyone who has an interest beyond using a screen saver to search for SETI. Also for those considering building a SETI station in their own backyard, the knowledge learned working with the ukentucky project will be 100% transferable.
  29. Re:City Lights... QWZX by orangepeel · · Score: 2, Informative

    Someone else posted this link within the past week on Slashdot:

    http://nationalatlas.gov/natlas/natlasstart.asp

    Once the page has loaded, go to the top right frame titled "Map Layers" and scroll down to the "People" section. Try selecting the "Nighttime Lights" option and then click the "Redraw" button over on the left underneath the main map. It gives a good rendition of where the greatest sources of light are.

    Perhaps a better way of estimating possible light polution is to instead select "Population per square mile - 1995" in the "Map Layers" frame, and then redrawing the map.

    It's too bad they don't have population density information for Canada at that site.

    --
    Whoever designed level 61 in Frozen Bubble is a sadistic bastard.
  30. How to get your neighboors to help cut out lights by Sabalon · · Score: 2

    Have them come over and look through your telescope. Explain why the view is limited due to the streetlights and that 300w halogen bulb so the dog can see when it's barking at night.

    Works pretty good.

  31. Re:City Lights... QWZX by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

    Another thing the poster to which you're responding fails to recognize is that CO2 is not a major factor in air pollution, at least the sort of air pollution that would obstruct astronomy.

    Incidentally,though, the steps which one would logically take to lessen the problem of light pollution would also greatly lower electrical consumption and thus CO2 emissions and other forms of air pollution. Some examples: lower light output to the minimum needed to illuminate an area or object, use reflectors to prevent light escaping into the sky, turn off unnecessary lights after the end of the business day.

    --

    Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  32. KStars is a good tool by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2
    KStars and similar packages are good tools to help orient yourself or plan ahead before you go out and look or guess at optimum viewing time for your location. It's especially useful if the sky is partly cloudy or visibility is obscured by light pollution.

    Dark skies are a prerequisite to any optics based astronomy. Why are we using so much money to shine light up into the sky? If half the light is going up instead of down, then we're losing half your lighting money for nothing and lowering the standard of living.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.