Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Posted by David Arditti at 18:00 on 2010 Nov 16
Yes, Dave Tyler is always very helpful with the technical aspects of high-resolution imaging. He has taught me many things as well. One of those people who is a real credit to the hobby.
Posted by Tom Moran at 17:42 on 2010 Nov 16
Thanks David. However I must give Dave Tyler credit because I have been having problems getting control of the image with the Toucam and Herscel wedge. He suggested aligning the polarising filter and adding a darker ND filter. Worked a treat.Tom
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 14:57 on 2010 Nov 16
I’m not sure how late 9yr-olds are allowed to stay up these days but if you get a clear night on Wednesday (17th) and can avoid hypothermia (!), your "apprentice" might be interested in the disposition of Jupiter’s Galileans that evening. From 21:15 until 23:06, there will only be one moon visible! (Callisto – a long way to the east). Io is either occulted or in eclipse, Europa is in transit (as is its shadow) and Ganymede is occulted. The start is defined by Ganymede disappearing behind Jupiter, the end by Europa appearing again (both at the western limb). Io comes out of eclipse at 23:37 and Ganymede re-appears at the eastern limb at 00:15. [All times UTC]While such "only one moon visible" events are not particularly rare they are definitely unusual so should be worth observing. It could also be the start of a discussion about how often such an event should occur. With randomly-chosen orbit periods such a line-up would be very rare but of course the periods of the inner three Galileans are locked together by gravitational resonance and so line-ups actually happen much more frequently.Clear skies!Steve
Posted by David Arditti at 18:45 on 2010 Nov 15
Well done with this, Tom. I was looking at it this afternoon. There is also a promising group 1026 developing. So tomorrow there should be two significant groups on the disk.
Posted by Nick Hudd at 17:48 on 2010 Nov 15
The one I’ve got involved outreach when the child found out that grandma could point out Ursa major, Cassiopeia and the area round Polaris for her as well. It began as an exercise in getting her Brownie badge in stargazing, but she never bothered with that and has got gripped by the astronomy itself. Nick
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 12:21 on 2010 Nov 15
I’m moving in the opposite direction – my 80+ yr-old mother is absolutely fascinated by all things celestial and so takes great delight in even my modest efforts. I think it’s what they call "outreach"!Steve
Posted by Nick Hudd at 10:55 on 2010 Nov 15
It has at least got her Mum a bit more academic street cred. To the "apprentice" Mum was just a maths teacher, but Mum actually has a PhD in physics, which daughter only realised through conversations with me about astronomy!Nick
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 17:06 on 2010 Nov 14
The "transitions" do indeed take a finite time – a couple of minutes. I recently took some images of a double re-emergence of Io and Europa and they both gradually brightened before becoming full visible. A good illustration of how big the Galileans are.Nice to see you have a 9yr-old interested in these things!Best regards, Steve
Posted by David Arditti at 13:53 on 2010 Nov 14
Yes we have all been suffering from lots of cloud and terrible seeing when it clears.I managed to image on November 10 and captured the bright SEB spot (it was just next to Europa in transit). In binoviewers on the C-14 the spot was visible visually as well. Images from elsewhere since then have shown the development of the dark streak next to the spot, which looks to be the beginning of the propagation of the new SEB.David
Posted by Nick Hudd at 08:17 on 2010 Nov 14
Thanks very much Steve. That is very useful and informative. I have been investigating this myself, and had discovered the Sky and Telescope site which has a great deal of handy data for observing. I have known about the site for ages but never explored it properly.I am not an experienced observer but my eyes tell me that eclipses and emergences take a noticeable time. My asking for the "best" prediction is largely down to having an enthusiastic "apprentice" (9), and making sure that (without saying what is going to happen) she gets the telescope for the relevant minute or two!! The eclipses and emergences particularly are an excellent demonstration, for a bright kid, of the relation of Jupiter, Sun, and Earth, and, indeed, of the relation of the satellites to each otherMany thanksNick
Posted by TonyAngel at 07:48 on 2010 Nov 13
Cetainly. As I know this is not the only reference to him, I will also think about what other references I have come across.
Posted by Steve Holmes2 at 23:35 on 2010 Nov 12
I suspect that the accuracy of "Jupiter’s moons" predictions is mainly down to the accuracy of the programming platform used to produce them rather than any basic differences in the theory used. All "non-commercial" predictor programs seem to use the same set of equations and methods originally devised by Jean Meeus and so, all other things being equal, should give the same answers. The fact that they don’t (to some small degree) may be down to the differences between the maths libraries for Java, JavaScript, C+, QBASIC etc. The orbital parameters of the moons themselves will probably not change greatly, not least because their periods are locked together by gravitational resonances.Additional factors influencing the relative accuracy of such things as the timing of transits would be the precision to which the answer is specified (a difference of just 1sec could change a "rounded" time by a whole minute); whether the the latitude and longitude of the observer are taken into account; the model used to represent the shape of the globe of Jupiter; and whether the timings were relative to the leading edge, centre or trailing edge of the moon: this alone can make a difference of +/-1 minute.As to which source is the most accurate, this can of course only be determined by comparison with "real life"! However, I would certainly expect the predictions to be accurate to +/- 1 minute. On the other hand, one is not going to begin observing precisely at the moment an event is predicted to start, and so the fact that different sources differ by a few minutes is surely not of any practical consequence. For truly accurate data one must consult sources deriving from internationally acknowledged organisations. For example, the BAA Handbook takes its timings from the French Institut de Mechanique Celeste et de Calcul des Ephemerides. These organisations use much higher precision calculations than "Meeus-type" programs but often supply their data only in tabular format, not usually online, and not interactively.There are many places on the Internet where predictions for the Galileans can be obtained (for example the ‘Sky & Telescope’ website) but the reason that sites giving ephemeris information for comets, asteroids etc. are perhaps easier to find is surely that the orbits for such bodies are not always well-known, being liable to change due to perturbations and as new observations come in. Reliable long-term models for them are thus not possible.I myself wanted to make some observations of shadow-transit events at the recent close opposition, so I also had to rely on timing predictions. My usual source is the (rather old!) program "The Planets" but I also use a number of other such programs as well as Starry Night. The predictions made by these programs were consistent to about +/- 1 minute but, as stated in the post, not all programs identified the occultation and eclipse events correctly – this is presumably down to the skill of the programmer though, rather than any output accuracy issues.Before composing this reply I investigated other programs on the Internet and found a couple that seemed quite good. "Galileo" and "Jupiter2" cover basically the same ground as each other, though each has its own "unique selling points". Their predictions are identical to each other (bearing in mind that Galileo does not use seconds whereas Jupiter2 does), and when I checked several transit events from the BAA Handbook for 2011 their predictions were exactly as listed there. They cannot, however, produce lists of satellite events (though Galileo will find the next one) so for that I return to "The Planets" – this will list not only all events for a given period but also only those actually visible from a given location.The Planets may be found at http://www.cpac.org.uk/download.aspGalileo may be found at http://astrosurf.com/durey/galileo.htmlJupiter2 may be found at http://www.astrosurf.com/rondi/programmes/index.htmHope this is helpful! Steve Holmes Laxfield, Suffolk UK
Posted by David Arditti at 15:55 on 2010 Nov 12
Thanks Tony for that reference. I’ll see if I can find it. If not, could you do me a photocopy? This is interesting as it is the first indication I have had that someone else might have researched Common in modern times.David
Posted by Marlyn Smith at 15:32 on 2010 Nov 12
A couple of images of AR1121 by Dave Tyler from November 6th and 10th shwoing the group in H-alpha light.
Posted by TonyAngel at 22:33 on 2010 Nov 11
There is a nice article on Common in the Web Society’s Deep Sky Observer Magazine. In was one of the very first when it was in a glossy A5 format. I have just checked my archive and it is in No. 4 (1994 April). It was written by David Wright. Hope this helps,Tony Angel
Posted by Denis Buczynski at 19:47 on 2010 Nov 08
Hi Sheridan,I have a copy of THE FIRST 50 YEARS.If no one else has offered you a copy then I will have to do my duty and do so. I assume you will want to "destroy" it to scan it successfully. I would like the separate sheets returned so that I can keep it together as best I can. How are you progressing with the scanning from the old JBAA’S I sent you? Are you any where near finished? I would like to receive the CD of the scans and the finished PDF of the booklet. Let me know if you want me to post the booklet down to you.Best wishesDenis
Posted by Andrea Tasselli at 09:39 on 2010 Oct 31
Hard to say. Usually the best advice is to try before you buy as something that work fine for one individual might not going to work that well for some else. You also need to account for astigmatism if you have any. As a rough guide I would say that Vixen’s ortho are quite OK but Zeiss own old ortho (.925" barrel) are very very good. Also very good are Pentax’s SMC ortho line (again .925" barrel) and Takahashi LE series. Of newer design I’d reckon that TV Radian series is quite good as well the TMB SuperMonos. One key thing to look for is for good AR coatings in an EP, probably more than the specific of the design itself. Besides that simpler designs with narrow AFOV are probably better suited than very complex wide-field designs which usually compromise on on-axis correction to achieve better field correction.Andrea T.
Posted by Nick Atkinson at 18:00 on 2010 Oct 30
There are several variables to consider a larger telescope will look through a wider column of air. With good seeing a 12" scope will always be able to see finer detail Using my 150 triplet I have failed to see the red spot despite using different coloured filters. I always remember looking through the army telescope at Aldershot I believe a 10" F15 achromat and the colour of the red spot was quite brilliant but then I was 18 not over 60 as now. So perhaps another thing
to consider is how good are our own detectors in both eyes. My right eye is much better than the leftAnother factor over which we have some control is the eyepiece so everybody which eyepiece is best for planetary work?
