Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 11:49 on 2011 Feb 03
I’ve just looked at the programme again (I had it on video as I was out that night) and listed an entire A4 page of errors. Apart from the astounding claim mentioned in my first email, another good one was that the earth’s rotational axis was stable because of its spin speed. She then went on to describe how Mars was not stable but didn’t mention that its rotational speed is almost exactly the same as that of the earth! And of course Venus spins almost upright despite having a day which is considerably longer than its year! Again – oh dear.The real problem is that those without the knowledge to assess this nonsense for what it is will just believe it (well – it’s on the BBC, so it must be true). No wonder educational standards are dropping if this is what is taught in schools as well – apparently the presenter does a lot of work with children (which certainly showed in her presentational style!)What is to be done?
Posted by Gary Poyner at 10:59 on 2011 Feb 03
I heard the phrase "The Moon is a lump of rock in space" and thought…here we go again! Total bilge!Gary
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 00:06 on 2011 Feb 03
I believe it was said she "designs satellites" (of the human-built type!). Wikipedia tells us she actually now works for Astrium. Let’s hope the various errors were down to the script-writer(s) rather than herself, else I shan’t be watching anything else she presents!Anyone care to start a list of the mistakes made?
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 00:00 on 2011 Feb 03
Wasn’t she purportedly a scientist of some sort? At any rate when I heard that sentence I switched channel.Andrea T.
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 21:48 on 2011 Feb 02
Frankly, at that image scale, it is hardly a test of how good the mount is.Andrea T.
Posted by Paul A Brierley at 19:41 on 2011 Feb 02
If you would like some evidence as to the capabilities of the EQ6Pro, then take a look at IC 443 JELLYFISH NEBULAImages Courtesy of Dave Adsheadon the.http://www.webbdeepsky.com/Scroll down and you will see two excellent images by David, using the aforementioned mount.
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 16:45 on 2011 Feb 02
Well, possibly not for my definition of "good mount". As Callum remarked I don’t think the CGEM is worth the extra outlay of cash required compared to the EQ6 Pro. I once had one of the first of the EQ6s (not Pro) and it was so bad, even after upgrading worms and motors, that in the end I used the GPDX instead. From what I gather the latest EQ6 Pro are better than the used to be and with some upgrades can be used for medium resolution astrophotography (I mean around 2"/px) with moderate payloads with some confidence. This said, if I were you, I would shop for an used EQ6 Pro with all the possible bells and whistles and upgrades that can be had, possibly from someone who used it for astrophotography (even if you won’t do it yourself).Reg’sAndrea T.
Posted by Callum Potter at 15:36 on 2011 Feb 02
Hi Tom,I don’t have an EQ6 pro myself, but I know a few folk who do, and not heard of any particular problems with them.Callum
Posted by Tom Moran at 14:34 on 2011 Feb 02
CallumYes I thought that too. But you never know; after owning an LXD75 mount that presented nothing other than problems. Budgets being as they are I know I am going for something that will be substandard compared to say an Astrophysics mount.Regards.Tom
Posted by Callum Potter at 14:23 on 2011 Feb 02
I suspect Andrea means its not worth the extra £500 or so for the CGEM.Callum
Posted by Tom Moran at 13:58 on 2011 Feb 02
Thanks for the replies. Andrea by ‘isn’t much better’ do you feel the EQ6 pro is not a good mount?Tom
Posted by R S Winter at 13:08 on 2011 Feb 02
I have been using a Skywatcher HEQ5 Pro in London for about a year, and find it guides very well. I’m not very keen on the obligatory GOTO set up.I’ve just bought another for use in Wales, as my Vixen GPD is not guiding well.Get only the PRO version.
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 12:48 on 2011 Feb 02
Probably it is safer and cheaper to go for the EQ6 Pro. For what I know the CGEM isn’t much better.Andrea T.
Posted by Denis Buczynski at 22:58 on 2011 Jan 24
I have emailed Sheriden offline and offered to send my copy of the index to the first 50 years of the JBAA for scanning.Best wishesDenis
Posted by Robin Vann at 02:23 on 2011 Jan 23
I too saw the Io shadow transit, observing at 18:00 on 19th. January. Observation details follow. Note that I could not discern a seperate north and south element to the SEB, presumably due to inadequate seeing.Jupiter: 19th. January, 2011Magnitude: -2.2Diameter: Equatorial: 36"; Polar: 34"Altitude: 32°; ?: 5.3 AU; Tilt: +2°CM1: 163.6°; CM2: 302.8°; CM3: 181.3°18:00 GMT, nautical twilightLimiting magnitude: 3.0Transparency: very transparentSeeing: AIIIConditions: clear, coldOrion Optics SPX200 f/6Baader Hyperion 5mm (240x)North Equatorial Belt strongly orange.South Equatorial Belt fainter and thinner, showing revival.Polar regions similar to South Equatorial Belt but slightly browner.Shadow transit of Io (L2 ? 325°) discernable in moments of best seeing: actual transit not discernable.
Posted by David Mottershead at 11:53 on 2011 Jan 22
Thanks Andrea. Dr John Rogers (Director Jupiter section) also wonders whether I might have observed a satellite shadow (Io) as around the time I saw the dark spot on Jupiter Io was casting a shadow onto the surface (18:18 19-01-2011). If it was the shadow of Io, then that’s a first for me as I’ve never seen one of Jupiters moons shadows before.
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 10:28 on 2011 Jan 21
Hello David,Yes, in the most recently accepted theory the SEB returns starting from one (subsequently up to 3) location and then expanding to created the dark/light markings of SEBn and SEBs. So what you see as dark spot is in reality one of the source of the dark matter (maybe soot?) that will become part of the newly formed SEB.Andrea T.
Posted by David Mottershead at 20:28 on 2011 Jan 20
HelloOver the last two nights I have finally managed to do some observing in between the clouds!! The dark spot on Jupiters emerging SEB was clearly visible at 250x, and even at lower magnifications. Is the thinking that this is part of the SEB returning, or that the SEB will ‘grow’ out of this spot? Or is this dark sopt simply another marking/weather system on Jupiter. I don’t suppose that it’s the result of an unseen impact?
