Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes this is as good a result as could be expected. The Board has been kept up to date on this by Lyn Smith and I have seen the Dundee City Council report that recommends the council provide enough funding to keep the observatory open for the next 3 years.
Another thing I note from the report is that they appear to be planning to floodlight Broughty Castle! As well as being bad for astronomy, this is particularly hard to understand as their objective was supposed to be to save money.
Members may be interested that I have just written the following letter to The Guardian:
Dear Sir,
The article by your columnist John Harris (Sunday 17 November) ‘The streetlights going out all over Britain tell a brutal story: austerity isn’t over – it’s getting worse’, linking the switching off or dimming of streetlights to ‘cash-strapped local councils… hacking down basic amenities’ is seriously misguided.
There are very good reasons for reducing the period of operation and intensity of street lighting that have nothing to do with saving money.
There is increasing evidence linking artificial lighting negatively to health. A House of Lords committee report last year called artificial light a ‘neglected pollutant’ that can ‘disrupt sleep and circadian rhythms’.
Moreover, artificial light damages ecosystems. CPRE says ‘Light pollution can disrupt the natural rhythms of wildlife, including their migration, reproduction, and feeding patterns’.
Artificial lighting throughout the hours of darkness that cannot be escaped by the population of our towns and cities leads children to grow up in ignorance of the wonder of the natural, dark, star-filled night sky, and this is a loss to our collective culture, as well as to the public understanding of science.
Finally, as we are in a climate crisis, reducing energy consumption is essential for global sustainability.
It is obvious that a certain amount of outdoor lighting is essential to our society. However, we need an evidence-led discussion about how much, where, and at what times is optimum for our wellbeing, and for nature. Local authorities having that discussion with their citizens is a good development.
Yours,
Dr David Arditti
Vice-President, British Astronomical Association
I don’t think so. Last year’s was produced by Ann Davies, but this year she is busy updating the ‘Observing Guide’ and I do not think she is doing another calendar, but I will ask her.
David Arditti
Vice-PresidentThat’s a brilliant achievement Bill, congratulations. You should write this up for the Journal, or at least a short article about it.
J. Br. Astron. Assoc., 134(5), 2024 – Commission for Dark Skies (349)
I fear the CfDS committee’s aims of forming a coalition to campaign together with other groups against the harm that excessive artificial light causes will achieve little other than for the media to lump us in with climate activists. Probably not to be recommended since action that could be deemed to have a negative economic impact carries a longer prison sentence than GBH.
I really don’t see why that would be the case. This has little to do with climate activism. Also nobody is talking about breaking the law, so I don’t see the relevance of prison sentences.
The argument that the BAA’s CfDS should co-operate with others who are campaigning to reduce artificial lighting from different perspectives seems a sound one to me. The CfDS would not lose its independence, however, nor its ability to speak on behalf of astronomers. In my experience most non-astronomers actually can understand, and do sympathise with (to some extent), the astronomical argument for limiting light pollution. They’d like it for them and their children be able to see the stars better. Combining that with arguments about protecting wildlife, preserving natural environments, and improving human health just makes it all the more powerful.
Yes, we need the government to adopt a clear policy on this. The last government had either no policy, or rather a pro-lighting one, to judge from their responses to the Lords committee report. I have no evidence whether or not the current government will take any more interest.
The CfDS recently has concentrated on trying to influence local government leaders and staff, which I think is actually the most effective use of limited campaigning resources, as those people have the ability to positively influence what actually happens on the ground even without better national policy direction.
I am glad it is ‘explainable’. That means Andy could explain it to a BAA meeting some time! (I daresay there is some specialised meaning of this term in play though).
Well-done Andrew, not easy doing a PhD on a part-time basis.
David
Will Tirion also drew a set of star charts specifically for the BAA, which we published in the 1980s. I covered mine in adhesive plastic and hung them up in my observatory – where they still are (well actually transferred to the warm room now, and rather yellowed). I’m thinking that due to this connection with the BAA, at least, the BAA should officially mark his passing, probably in the Journal.
The fact that it is Orion Telescope & Binocular as well is bad. These names disappearing would mean a significant contraction in choice in the amateur equipment market. But Meade has gone bankrupt before and then been rescued. We’ll have to see.
So they have not been re-named, according to the document linked to by Nick.
If, even, the IAU or any other authority could be considered to have the ability to rename natural objects whose names have been in literature and common parlance for centuries.
This has certainly long been John Roger’s view, that Cassini’s spot was not the current one. 19th Century drawings and early photographs show the GRS as a huge pale area at that time, unlike Cassini’s more concentrated dark spot. It seems likely Cassini was seeing a late stage of a contracting, darkening and accelerating spot, just as we are now seeing the similar late phase of the 19th C GRS.
Yes the BAA does have Mary Ashley’s notebooks in its archives. To look at these you would have to speak to the archivists: see the inside back page of the Journal for their contact details. I’ll also message you privately about this.
David Arditti (President)
Glad to have you with us, please allow me to welcome you to the Association, Robert.
You may be interested to know that we will be discussing the future of the Mills Observatory at the next BAA Council meeting.
David (President)
The discussion on this subject by Simon Banton, who I think works for English Heritage on Stonehenge, at the Winchester Weekend, was really interesting as well. A pity it was not recorded. Afterwards I discussed his views with him, comparing his take with that of Prof. Clive Ruggles, who is much more sceptical of some of the claimed predictive purposes of Stonehenge in relation to the movements of the Sun and Moon. Banton takes the view that the builders of these monuments understood quite a lot of astronomy, and has reasonable arguments to back this up.
I’ve encountered this problem of the trains on the West Coast Main Line on Sunday as well, Mike. It means I’ll have to travel back to London using a complicated route via Edinburgh, walking between the two Glasgow stations.
This doesn’t help you however; you may have to use the dreaded rail replacement buses.
David
There are always going to be clashes like that if we organise anything at a weekend, Jack. There are only 52 weekends in a year.
Embedding the video didn’t work very well because of portrait orientation; better seen on Facebook:
https://fb.watch/rt_1gKyFZL/Capturing nebulosity requires low focal ratio. To get optimal correction of chromatic aberration and coma at low focal ratios requires more lens elements. Yes you can use an ED (or similar) doublet with a coma corrector, but that’s 4 lens elements in total, and in most cases it won’t be as optimal as it could be, and there’s likely to be spacing errors, so better really, if you know the telescope will be used for imaging at this focal ratio, to build it all into one optimised, correctly measured-up tube assembly. Many people wish to use the dual-band, tri-band and quad-band filters for one-shot imaging, so chromatic aberration will still be a moot point.
It’s an interesting subject. There is a Moon Treaty to which the UK is a signatory, but it is a product of Cold War thinking, in that only bans nation states from claiming ownership of the Moon or parts of it, it does not prevent businesses based in those states from exploiting the Moon. How can you exploit something you do not own? It is a situation analogous to that with the deep oceans, which are not owned by states, but can be exploited. However there is an international mechanism to regulate that (not without controversy). There is no mechanism at all for the Moon.
This is all a rather different subject to light pollution, however, which is a fairly local issue, within the remit of national and local governments to deal with, if they care.
Incidentally, I don’t think it is a good idea to have a thread in the forum called ‘General’. Threads should be specific to the topics they are concerned with. What you have tried to do here is create a thread for what should be a forum sub-category. I don’t know if we actually can have sub-categories in this forum though.
