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.
you could use a program like Celestia and look into the heavens from your own computer monitor.
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
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source of info is the setileague website for the mini-manual or the UK site run by Jenny Bailey, although it was a bit out of date last time I looked.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!
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.