Well, based on the article (ie, "facts" without proof), and your logic, I can thus put forward, without review, or the need for evidence:
Myth: I am not God. Fact: I am God.
So, given that my "myth" has a "fact" listed under it, by your logic, it must be so.
Or, back to reality, the definitions that *our* good friend Mr. Webster has for "fact", "myth", and "confirmation" haven't changed, but instead, the problem here your misunderstanding of "unproven and unattributed statement somehow equals fact."
Taking ten suppositions and making suppositions about those suppositions (I'm getting dizzy) is not debunking. All I see here is lots of questionable, completely unattributed information.
For example: "The average 17-inch LCD monitor consumes 35 watts of electricity". Really? Where did this information come from? Did you pull this information from the glossy for a 17" monitor? Did you just test your monitor? Did you test a large sample of monitor's here? Did you pull this information from a study? Out of your ass?
Uwe said he will stop if 1 Million people ask him to.) I don't think a million people have seen his movie, so it might be hard to get that many signatures.
Well, the kicker here is the "Andrew Vilenchik is dismissed from the case" part. In other words, he just won a $20k judgment against what is most likely a shell corporation at this point. Unless he can get that part appealed, he'll never see a dime. Seems to be a pretty hollow victory to me (leaving out the emotional satisfaction).
Even if he does win on appeal, the guy sounds shifty enough to dodge any serious attempt to get him to pay up. At best, even if he can get the courts to run this guy to ground, I think he's looking forward to, at best, $50/week court ordered checks for the next 7 1/2 years or so.
However, I think if you totaled up the various court costs and just the simple time it took, it probably wasn't worth it. Sure, the Defendant looks to be (imho) a scumbag, but guess what, the world's full of them, and if there isn't enough time in the day to deal with all of them.
I'm not saying don't go after someone who steps on your work, but (IANAL) going pro se with anything to do with money in this day and age is incredibly foolish. The playing field at the Federal level isn't even close to balanced. To hit a home run in case like this (which this guy didn't come close to) would be like winning a pro baseball game when you're the only player on your side.
Like it or not, if you don't have the dollars to run a case like this to ground with a pro at the helm, you're taking a hell of a risk. At the end of the day, this guy managed to stumble and bumble his way to a not very favorable judgment. If the other side (attorney's and client) hadn't been largely incompetent, it might have gone very badly for him.
To our photographer friend: On the emotional satisfaction front, way to jump up and down on a scumbag. 13,758,126 more of them to go (just in America). And, if you're not to busy, Canada has 3 or 4 you might want to take care of as well.
Ok, down to some stuff that I've learned over time about scopes that I'm hoping you might find useful. This is very general, and from my point of view (the horses mouth). Confirm everything with the real experts - local clubs and stores.
Also, don't get overwhelmed by all of the terminology. This hobby takes practice like anything else, and before long you'll have it all figured out.
A telescope is really several parts - scope, mount, diagonal - eyepiece, filters, and accessories. When you buy a telescope, you need to think about all of them when making a purchase.
Scope: All optical telescopes basically have the same function. To collect and focus as many photons as possible. Think of your scope as a light bucket. Basically the bigger the bucket, the more photons it can capture, and the more things it can "see" (or see more clearly). An 8" scope can't see as deeply and clearly into the night sky (with the naked eye) as a 10" or a 12" scope.
The size of the scope is really all about it's opening at the front, or aperture size. When people talk about a 8" or 12" scope, they are talking about its aperture size. The bigger the aperture size, the bigger the light bucket, and the more you see. Aperture size has NOTHING to do with magnification. Magnification happens at eyepieces.
There is a tradeoff in aperture size versus weight. The bigger the scope, the heavier the scope gets, and thus requires a stronger mount, which in turn gets heavier. An 8" scope with EQ mount might weight in at 50 points, but a 12" with EQ mount might weigh in at 125 pounds. Imagine lugging that in and out of the garage.
As someone else pointed out already - the best telescope is the one that is being used, and not gathering dust in the garage. Avoid "aperture fever" (i.e., bigger is better) when buying your first scope. Make weight one of your primary considerations.
There are two major types of consumer optical scopes - refractors and reflectors.
Reflectors: Reflectors use mirrors to take the light and concentrate it to one spot. Reflectors are generally considered solid all purpose scopes. There are several reflector models available - Dobsonians, Scmidt-Cassegrain, Maksutov-Cassegrain, etc. If you go the reflector route, you'll need to do some research to find the right combination of size + weight + portability for you.
Reflector pro's: [1] Using big mirrors is a lot cheaper then big lenses. You can collect more light for less $.
Reflector cons: [1] The mirrors have to be refocused on occasion through a process called collimation. Easy to do once you know how, and have the right tools, but the first couple of times you're going to want to watch a pro do it.
[2] Usually much heavier then their refractor counterparts.
Refractors: Refractors use lens to move the light from the front of the tube straight to the back. Generally considered to be superior planetary scopes, and good but not great deep space telescopes (primarily because of the price difference for the equivalent aperture reflector).
Refractor pro's: [1] Usually much lighter. Makes them more useful for terrestrial viewing (birds, etc). [2] Internal optics almost never need to be adjusted.
Refractor con's: [1] Price versus aperture size will force you into a smaller scope then a refractor, thus, a smaller light bucket, and you'll need darker skies to see deep sky objects.
For all telescopes, if you're going to do deep sky photography, the focal length of the telescope comes into play. This can be a complicated subject, so you'll need to do some research here.
Also, mirror coatings are something you should look into. This can increase the amount of light reflected from the mirrors, which increases the number of photons that reach your eye. Not mandatory, but very nice to have.
Mount: There are three general types of consumer mounts - altaz (altitude-azimuth), Dobsonian, and Equatorial.
I was asking the same questions about a year ago myself. I'll throw in my two cents. First, second, and last - RESEARCH everything. Talk to people. Test drive equipment.
Your budgeted amount is fine. Astronomy, and even astrophotography, contrary to some opinions here, doesn't have to be a rich man's hobby. You can get a solid EQ mount and scope for the amount mentioned. You can use an existing camera or one of the lower end astronomy specific digital cameras for photography.
Here's what I would do on the research side:
I would find the local astronomy club. Go to a few meetings and ask questions. I belong to the Denver Astronomical Society, and I went to meetings and had opportunities to talk to very helpful people, look at different types of scopes, mounts, eyepieces, and filters.
Find a local astronomy store (I'm sure the people from the local astronomy club will have opinions on where to go). The internet isn't a good way to shop for your first telescope. Go to a local store. Talk to the staff. Discuss budget, and what you want to accomplish.
After you do all of your research, then start thinking about mount + scope + eyepiece + filter + camera combinations that'll fit your budget. If your local club sells used scopes, that might be a good place to start. Sometimes a member might be looking to dump their "starter" scope. Also Craig's List or eBay might be good places to shop - ONLY IF YOU CAN EXAMINE THE SCOPE BEFORE PURCHASE. Sorry about the caps - never buy a scope "blind". See if your local store will examine used scopes for a fee (this isn't something you want to try to do on your own until you've owned one or two). If you can't find a used one that you feel safe buying, get it from the local store. Having a human being you've met be available for the setup, usage, and care of a scope is invaluable.
Hopefully, by the end of this process, but before purchase, you'll have a good feel for whether or not this hobby interests you, and what equipment you'd like to have.
"the average marine has about a high school education". Or less. So what? My best friend from the corp didn't graduate high school. One of the finest people I know.
"no morals". The most moral people I know (whether I agree with them or not) are former military. Even the lowest level grunt is aware of the ramifications of what they do. Morality plays into every action in the field.
"low threshold for the sanctity of life". Tell that to any marine, and he'll probably verbally show you his low level of regard for your bullshit. Try being an embassy marine at a hostile embassy, or a grunt in the field with ridiculous rules of engagement. The level of retraint and respect for life exercised in those situations often places the Marines life at high risk. A duty which is exercised with honor ever day.
"might as well be robots". Robots don't bleed.
Duty, honor are the Marine watchwords. We live it and breath it every day.
Just got this one this morning. I'm a winner baby!.Apologies for the poor formatting, but I posted it "as is" (or would be that "as was"). Anyways:
FROM:THE DESK OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR INTERNATIONAL/PRIZE AWARD DEPT REF:PL2/209318/09 BATCH:18/103/HME. Attn:Dear Sir/Madam We are pleased to inform you of the result of the Lottery Winners International programs held on the 23/3/2004. Your e-mail address attached to ticket number 653164251591-6011 with serial number 7321410,batch number 7151085135,lottery ref number 6376527711 and drew lucky numbers 4-9-17-36-44-78 which consequently won in the 1st category, you have therefore been approved for a lump sum pay out of US$1.500,000.00 (One Million, Five Hundred Thousand United States dollars) CONGRATULATIONS!!! Due to mix up of some numbers and names, we ask that you keep your winning information confidential until your claims has been processed and your money Remitted to you. This is part of our security protocol to avoid double claiming and unwarranted abuse of this program by some participants. All participants were selected through a computer ballot system drawn from over 40,000 company and 20,000,000 individual email addresses and names from all over the world. This promotional program takes place every year. This lottery was promoted and sponsored by Association of software producers. we hope with part of your winning,you will take part in our next year US$20 million international lottery. To file for your claim, please contact our paying officer: Contact Person:Mr.Paul Zimmerman TEL:+31-617 786 389 FAX: +31-847 518 429 Email:adsqueen_rhoda07@yahoo.de Remember, all winning must be claimed not later than 14th of August 2005. After this date all unclaimed funds will be included in the next stake. Please note in order to avoid unnecessary delays and complications please remember to quote your reference number and batch numbers in all correspondence. Furthermore, should there be any change of address do inform our agent as soon as possible. Congratulations once more from our members of staff and thank you for being part of our promotional program. Note: Anybody under the age of 18 is automatically disqualified. yours Sincerely, Mrs.Queensley Rhoda, For Management.
Slashdot Mirror
Dammit, beat me to it.
Well, based on the article (ie, "facts" without proof), and your logic, I can thus put forward, without review, or the need for evidence:
Myth: I am not God.
Fact: I am God.
So, given that my "myth" has a "fact" listed under it, by your logic, it must be so.
Or, back to reality, the definitions that *our* good friend Mr. Webster has for "fact", "myth", and "confirmation" haven't changed, but instead, the problem here your misunderstanding of "unproven and unattributed statement somehow equals fact."
Taking ten suppositions and making suppositions about those suppositions (I'm getting dizzy) is not debunking. All I see here is lots of questionable, completely unattributed information. For example: "The average 17-inch LCD monitor consumes 35 watts of electricity". Really? Where did this information come from? Did you pull this information from the glossy for a 17" monitor? Did you just test your monitor? Did you test a large sample of monitor's here? Did you pull this information from a study? Out of your ass?
Well, the kicker here is the "Andrew Vilenchik is dismissed from the case" part. In other words, he just won a $20k judgment against what is most likely a shell corporation at this point. Unless he can get that part appealed, he'll never see a dime. Seems to be a pretty hollow victory to me (leaving out the emotional satisfaction).
Even if he does win on appeal, the guy sounds shifty enough to dodge any serious attempt to get him to pay up. At best, even if he can get the courts to run this guy to ground, I think he's looking forward to, at best, $50/week court ordered checks for the next 7 1/2 years or so.
However, I think if you totaled up the various court costs and just the simple time it took, it probably wasn't worth it. Sure, the Defendant looks to be (imho) a scumbag, but guess what, the world's full of them, and if there isn't enough time in the day to deal with all of them.
I'm not saying don't go after someone who steps on your work, but (IANAL) going pro se with anything to do with money in this day and age is incredibly foolish. The playing field at the Federal level isn't even close to balanced. To hit a home run in case like this (which this guy didn't come close to) would be like winning a pro baseball game when you're the only player on your side.
Like it or not, if you don't have the dollars to run a case like this to ground with a pro at the helm, you're taking a hell of a risk. At the end of the day, this guy managed to stumble and bumble his way to a not very favorable judgment. If the other side (attorney's and client) hadn't been largely incompetent, it might have gone very badly for him.
To our photographer friend: On the emotional satisfaction front, way to jump up and down on a scumbag. 13,758,126 more of them to go (just in America). And, if you're not to busy, Canada has 3 or 4 you might want to take care of as well.
-Sarge
Ok, down to some stuff that I've learned over time about scopes that I'm hoping you might find useful. This is very general, and from my point of view (the horses mouth). Confirm everything with the real experts - local clubs and stores.
Also, don't get overwhelmed by all of the terminology. This hobby takes practice like anything else, and before long you'll have it all figured out.
A telescope is really several parts - scope, mount, diagonal - eyepiece, filters, and accessories. When you buy a telescope, you need to think about all of them when making a purchase.
Scope:
All optical telescopes basically have the same function. To collect and focus as many photons as possible. Think of your scope as a light bucket. Basically the bigger the bucket, the more photons it can capture, and the more things it can "see" (or see more clearly). An 8" scope can't see as deeply and clearly into the night sky (with the naked eye) as a 10" or a 12" scope.
The size of the scope is really all about it's opening at the front, or aperture size. When people talk about a 8" or 12" scope, they are talking about its aperture size. The bigger the aperture size, the bigger the light bucket, and the more you see. Aperture size has NOTHING to do with magnification. Magnification happens at eyepieces.
There is a tradeoff in aperture size versus weight. The bigger the scope, the heavier the scope gets, and thus requires a stronger mount, which in turn gets heavier. An 8" scope with EQ mount might weight in at 50 points, but a 12" with EQ mount might weigh in at 125 pounds. Imagine lugging that in and out of the garage.
As someone else pointed out already - the best telescope is the one that is being used, and not gathering dust in the garage. Avoid "aperture fever" (i.e., bigger is better) when buying your first scope. Make weight one of your primary considerations.
There are two major types of consumer optical scopes - refractors and reflectors.
Reflectors:
Reflectors use mirrors to take the light and concentrate it to one spot. Reflectors are generally considered solid all purpose scopes. There are several reflector models available - Dobsonians, Scmidt-Cassegrain, Maksutov-Cassegrain, etc. If you go the reflector route, you'll need to do some research to find the right combination of size + weight + portability for you.
Reflector pro's:
[1] Using big mirrors is a lot cheaper then big lenses. You can collect more light for less $.
Reflector cons:
[1] The mirrors have to be refocused on occasion through a process called collimation. Easy to do once you know how, and have the right tools, but the first couple of times you're going to want to watch a pro do it.
[2] Usually much heavier then their refractor counterparts.
Refractors:
Refractors use lens to move the light from the front of the tube straight to the back. Generally considered to be superior planetary scopes, and good but not great deep space telescopes (primarily because of the price difference for the equivalent aperture reflector).
Refractor pro's:
[1] Usually much lighter. Makes them more useful for terrestrial viewing (birds, etc).
[2] Internal optics almost never need to be adjusted.
Refractor con's:
[1] Price versus aperture size will force you into a smaller scope then a refractor, thus, a smaller light bucket, and you'll need darker skies to see deep sky objects.
For all telescopes, if you're going to do deep sky photography, the focal length of the telescope comes into play. This can be a complicated subject, so you'll need to do some research here.
Also, mirror coatings are something you should look into. This can increase the amount of light reflected from the mirrors, which increases the number of photons that reach your eye. Not mandatory, but very nice to have.
Mount:
There are three general types of consumer mounts - altaz (altitude-azimuth), Dobsonian, and Equatorial.
Altaz
Altaz mounts have
I was asking the same questions about a year ago myself. I'll throw in my two cents. First, second, and last - RESEARCH everything. Talk to people. Test drive equipment.
Your budgeted amount is fine. Astronomy, and even astrophotography, contrary to some opinions here, doesn't have to be a rich man's hobby. You can get a solid EQ mount and scope for the amount mentioned. You can use an existing camera or one of the lower end astronomy specific digital cameras for photography.
Here's what I would do on the research side:
I would find the local astronomy club. Go to a few meetings and ask questions. I belong to the Denver Astronomical Society, and I went to meetings and had opportunities to talk to very helpful people, look at different types of scopes, mounts, eyepieces, and filters.
Find a local astronomy store (I'm sure the people from the local astronomy club will have opinions on where to go). The internet isn't a good way to shop for your first telescope. Go to a local store. Talk to the staff. Discuss budget, and what you want to accomplish.
After you do all of your research, then start thinking about mount + scope + eyepiece + filter + camera combinations that'll fit your budget. If your local club sells used scopes, that might be a good place to start. Sometimes a member might be looking to dump their "starter" scope. Also Craig's List or eBay might be good places to shop - ONLY IF YOU CAN EXAMINE THE SCOPE BEFORE PURCHASE. Sorry about the caps - never buy a scope "blind". See if your local store will examine used scopes for a fee (this isn't something you want to try to do on your own until you've owned one or two). If you can't find a used one that you feel safe buying, get it from the local store. Having a human being you've met be available for the setup, usage, and care of a scope is invaluable.
Hopefully, by the end of this process, but before purchase, you'll have a good feel for whether or not this hobby interests you, and what equipment you'd like to have.
of Verizon putting his "BistroMathematics" into real world use. (Yes I posted this on the other blog, but thought it was funny enough to share here)
Hmmmm, nice job troll:
"the average marine has about a high school education". Or less. So what? My best friend from the corp didn't graduate high school. One of the finest people I know.
"no morals". The most moral people I know (whether I agree with them or not) are former military. Even the lowest level grunt is aware of the ramifications of what they do. Morality plays into every action in the field.
"low threshold for the sanctity of life". Tell that to any marine, and he'll probably verbally show you his low level of regard for your bullshit. Try being an embassy marine at a hostile embassy, or a grunt in the field with ridiculous rules of engagement. The level of retraint and respect for life exercised in those situations often places the Marines life at high risk. A duty which is exercised with honor ever day.
"might as well be robots". Robots don't bleed.
Duty, honor are the Marine watchwords. We live it and breath it every day.
- Sarge
Just got this one this morning. I'm a winner baby! .Apologies for the poor formatting, but I posted it "as is" (or would be that "as was"). Anyways:
FROM:THE DESK OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
INTERNATIONAL/PRIZE AWARD DEPT
REF:PL2/209318/09
BATCH:18/103/HME.
Attn:Dear Sir/Madam
We are pleased to inform you of the result of the
Lottery Winners International programs held on the
23/3/2004. Your e-mail address attached to ticket
number 653164251591-6011 with serial number
7321410,batch number 7151085135,lottery ref number
6376527711 and drew lucky numbers 4-9-17-36-44-78
which consequently won in the 1st category, you have
therefore been approved for a lump sum pay out of
US$1.500,000.00 (One Million, Five Hundred Thousand
United States dollars)
CONGRATULATIONS!!!
Due to mix up of some numbers and names, we ask that
you keep your winning information confidential until
your claims has been processed and your money Remitted
to you. This is part of our security protocol to avoid
double claiming and unwarranted abuse of this program
by some participants. All participants were selected
through a computer ballot system drawn from over
40,000 company and 20,000,000 individual email
addresses and names from all over the world. This
promotional program takes place every year. This
lottery was promoted and sponsored by
Association of software producers. we hope with part
of your winning,you will take part in our next year
US$20 million international lottery. To file for your
claim, please contact our paying officer:
Contact Person:Mr.Paul Zimmerman
TEL:+31-617 786 389
FAX: +31-847 518 429
Email:adsqueen_rhoda07@yahoo.de
Remember, all winning must be claimed not later than
14th of August 2005. After this date all unclaimed
funds will be included in the next stake. Please note
in order to avoid unnecessary delays and complications
please remember to quote your reference number and
batch numbers in all correspondence.
Furthermore, should there be any change of address do
inform our agent as soon as possible.
Congratulations once more from our members of staff
and thank you for being part of our promotional
program.
Note:
Anybody under the age of 18 is automatically
disqualified.
yours Sincerely,
Mrs.Queensley Rhoda,
For Management.