So, I'm just not that clever.... lasers and astro..
DougD
So, I've been a member of our local astro group here for the last year,
but mostly in name only as their monthly meetings are on a bad day for
me, and for health reasons I can only take standing out in cold rock
quarry's for so long, when it's easier to just lounge out on my porch and
get the same show..
So, there was a special guest last night, a "real" astro person over
from the UK who wanted to get in a little more viewing time before having
to head back to the Uk next week. I had made it to the meeting the other
night and suggested a rock quarry a stones throw (bad pun, sorry) from
my home as a possible site for their "guerilla observing" which is kinda
like flash mob's for astro folks that is handled by their listserve. Went
over and met them about 8pm in time to catch the ISS flyover, and to
help carry in a 10inch or so Dob and other goodies. The club pres.
showed up at about 10 and had brought his green pointer with him
which with his brains was a big help in finding things..
So, folks were clustered around the 'scope, and he was pointing
out Andromeda, etc. I just half jokingly (figuring this was old news
to them) made the suggestion "So, you folks ever try running your
laser pointer in reverse through your scopes?"... There was a gasp,
and worried mumblings about the danger to the scope, and I
reassured them that it would not hurt the optics, so the Pres sticks
his up to the eyepiece and Voila!!! big old green beam pointing
exactly at the object that they were trying to find with their fancy
red led viewscope pointer gizmo... They were just in awe, and had
to take turns trying it out, it was liking watching the discovery of
fire for the first time!!
Now, I'm just not that clever, I cannot be the first person to ever dream
this up for amateur astro's?!!!! I pointed out to them that this is basically
the same thing as a guide star, or corrector for deformable array's, which
they were well aware of, so I'm just curious if any of you cross dressing
laser/astro folks may have seen this before?
Sorry about the long tale, just trying to give some perspective to how
startled these folks were, and they are some very sharp folks when it
comes to astronomy, at least one PhD if not more..
So, if this really is not a well known technique, there's some good $$
to be made with a combo of a decent pointer and a bit of lathe time!!
Although I'm thinking of a flip in/out mirror thingy that could be dropped
down the inside of the tube, but then would need an expansion lens of
it's own, not nesc. a bad thing to save the nerves of folks with pricy
eyepieces... Any takers?!
Thanks!
D.
Lostgallifreyan
news:SpKdnZu1kOPshyDX...@supernews.com:
Do you mean like a big beam expander? If so, I've heard of it once. I was
making red diode lasers, selling on eBay before prices fell too hard for it
to be worth it, and several buyers were astronomers. Most bolted them to the
sides of scopes, but one guy mentioned sending it through the scope directly.
I wouldn't know how useful this is for accuracy but it does seem to solve a
couple of things, one being that nearby observers taking a peek into the
business end aren't so likely to get a full strength shot into an eye (and
perhaps dazzle off relections or diffractions is less likely in the dark),
the other is less divergence so a lower power beam works better than it
otherwise might. There might be more to it but I'm not so clever either, I
don't know what else there might be, and if there was anything remarkable in
what I was told that time, I didn't recognise it.
o...@uakron.edu
mirrors, why not go a little hotter and expand some green with it
steve
Samuel M. Goldwasser
I built one a few years ago for a friend....
The people at his astro club were just as inpressed... :)
Apparently it is not as well known as we would think.
--
sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html
Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.
Too_Many_Tools
I would think it might affect one's night vision.
Less light is always better.
Waving your laser pointer around on a viewing field will get you
kicked off fast.
TMT
DougD
>Do you mean like a big beam expander? If so, I've heard of it once. I was
>making red diode lasers, selling on eBay before prices fell too hard for it
>to be worth it, and several buyers were astronomers. Most bolted them to the
>sides of scopes, but one guy mentioned sending it through the scope directly.
Yup, just a nice big collimator of sorts.
>I wouldn't know how useful this is for accuracy but it does seem to solve a
>couple of things, one being that nearby observers taking a peek into the
>business end aren't so likely to get a full strength shot into an eye (and
>perhaps dazzle off relections or diffractions is less likely in the dark),
>the other is less divergence so a lower power beam works better than it
>otherwise might. There might be more to it but I'm not so clever either, I
>don't know what else there might be, and if there was anything remarkable in
>what I was told that time, I didn't recognise it.
We played around with using small spotting scopes, etc. at LM for
fiber output collimators on some of our larger projects, they worked
quite well and you couldn't beat the price compared to building them
from scratch in house. Why or how all of these backyard astro's
with green pointers weren't figuring this out on their own kinda
amazes me!! Considering the getting on hands and knee's, etc.
of trying to get these Dob's lined up, the reverse laser works
great, basically point and shoot.. I guess the risky part would
be what the consequencs of hitting aircraft with the tighter
beams would be.. You def. can see that the range of the
beam is greatly extended. I'm on the short list on their
scope loaner program so in a week or so I'll have a 10
or 12 inch scope to play around with and do some actual
testing. Could be a nice little project!
d.
DougD
Yeah, that was kinda the first comment made! The hot product
is this red dot projector that bolts on the scope, they're not that
expensive, but it seems like it was a major improvement over
the regular finder scopes, but still a pain as you have to crouch
to ground level to use them. The reverse pointer thing really
worked quite well for just eyeballing the beam. The pointer
used last night I think was a 5mw that had been bumped up
a bit, would be fun to use something in the 50-100mw range!
d.
DougD
>I built one a few years ago for a friend....
>
>The people at his astro club were just as inpressed... :)
>
>Apparently it is not as well known as we would think.
I think it's time we incorporate...
Alt.lasers.Inc.
d.
Skywise
> Ok, I need an opinion on this, prefer by any folks that are into
> astronomy..
Been there, done that. Long time ago.
But now that you mention it, it's probably only occured to those
of us who have interests in both subjects. Pure astronomers
probably wouldn't have had that "I wonder what would happen if I..."
moment, seeing as until recently they likely weren't to have a
bunch of lasers laying around in addition to their scopes.
I also used to use smaller lenses to collimate a HeNe attached to
the side of my 6 inch Newt and then look through the scope to see
what I was hitting.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
DougD
>
>I would think it might affect one's night vision.
>
>Less light is always better.
>
>Waving your laser pointer around on a viewing field will get you
>kicked off fast.
>
>TMT
The amount of light coming out of the scope vers just using it
handheld was a lot less "intrusive" for lack of a better word.
Also, less chance of accidental exposure I think as you just
can't swing it around as fast as handheld. I get the idea that
there is quite a bit of etiquette regarding their use at star
parties, etc. Which is a good thing..
d.
DougD
>m...@here.com (DougD) wrote in
>news:SpKdnZu1kOPshyDX...@supernews.com:
>
>> Ok, I need an opinion on this, prefer by any folks that are into
>> astronomy..
>
>Been there, done that. Long time ago.
>
>But now that you mention it, it's probably only occured to those
>of us who have interests in both subjects. Pure astronomers
>probably wouldn't have had that "I wonder what would happen if I..."
>moment, seeing as until recently they likely weren't to have a
>bunch of lasers laying around in addition to their scopes.
>
>I also used to use smaller lenses to collimate a HeNe attached to
>the side of my 6 inch Newt and then look through the scope to see
>what I was hitting.
>
>Brian
Yeah, I was taking a peek at Jupiter while someone was pointing
it out with the laser, that was kinda interesting.. I've def. got the
bug now though, it helps that I can just step out on the back porch
on most nights and mistake the milky way for a cloud, nice and
dark here! I've got a whole pack of seniors now that spend their
nights looking for the ISS and Irid. flares, they're like little kids
again!
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:uKOdnSzsUe5pHyDX...@supernews.com:
Exactly. If the light comes from a scope directly, it diverges less so is
narrower at far field, so need not be so powerful at start. Further, it
points only where the scope points, so it's hardly a loose cannon to get
someone into trouble. Also, as I said in my first post, I think that so long
as any internal diffractions or reflections don't occur inside the scope, and
so long as the beam is not as wide as the big lens, the only chance of local
diffraction or reflection will be off dust particles, instead of the nasty
glaring points of light that usually cling to the edges of pointer apertures,
AND even if there is still such spill as that (from airborne dust if nothing
worse), the intensity at any point will be so low that dark adaptation won't
be disturbed, and even if you plant your face over the business end it's
going to be so wide a beam that it will be safe even if there's a few tens of
mW, and the same will be true for pilots of aircraft, provided the beam isn't
focussing to a point out there before diverging again.. It's the kind of idea
that astronomers will want, or should want, if they're going to use lasers at
all.
If someone's going to make it into a business, I suggest forget patent, no
time, rely on copyright law and get them built ASAP. That way people can
independently come up with their own methods and not fight over it even if
they turn out the same, if it's clear they managed to design and build faster
than they could have copied someone else.
Lostgallifreyan
news:vofvm.191122$I07.1...@newsfe04.ams2:
> Pure astronomers
> probably wouldn't have had that "I wonder what would happen if I..."
> moment
Curiously true. I imagine that stars are the least likely objects of
experiment. I guess only people with other interests that connect to
astronomy somehow are likely to think that way, like David Malin, whose
interest in photography led him to the unsharp mask and mixing of three
seperate plates for R, G and B. Or Einstein and gravitational lensing. other
than that, most ingenuity would be directed only at how to see them better,
with thought on the matter taking the least divergent path possible. Just
like making better lenses...
Fleetie
> they were well aware of, so I'm just curious if any of you cross dressing
> laser/astro folks may have seen this before?
Well I am a cross-dressing laser/astro type person and here in the UK,
they are really starting to come down *hard* on those caught pointing
lasers into the sky. People have been sent to prison for flashing
planes. What's happened is that lasers have been elevated in the
perception of the law as "the big bad L-word", and *any* laser is
*DANGEROUS*, and those using them without proper cause are to be
hunted down and imprisoned along with the rapists and murderers.
Indeed, recently, I read on some news website that apparently the
police here now have a policy of arrest-on-sight of people seen with
laser pointers, and then you have to explain and justify your way out of
arrest to regain your freedom! I don't know how true that is, but I
did read it. I don't plan to test it.
Don't get me wrong; I certainly think that deliberately flashing
a plane is a stupid and irresponsible thing to do, but night-vision
notwithstanding, beam divergence would see to it that there was really
no actual danger at normal flight altitude, especially given the
difficulty of maintaining aim at that distance for more than fractions
of a second at a time.
However, I don't point at the sky any more. I do not think I would
thrive in a prison environment! And I like my soap in such a place
that I don't have to bend down to reach it!
Martin
Lostgallifreyan
SkyPXnZ2dn...@bt.com:
> DougD wrote:
>> they were well aware of, so I'm just curious if any of you cross dressing
>> laser/astro folks may have seen this before?
>
> Well I am a cross-dressing laser/astro type person and here in the UK,
> they are really starting to come down *hard* on those caught pointing
> lasers into the sky. People have been sent to prison for flashing
> planes. What's happened is that lasers have been elevated in the
> perception of the law as "the big bad L-word", and *any* laser is
> *DANGEROUS*, and those using them without proper cause are to be
> hunted down and imprisoned along with the rapists and murderers.
>
"Still living with the English Fear; waiting for the Witch Hunt!". (The Mob,
circa 1985, great song...) It's the same if you want to buy sulphuric acid,
beleive me, THAT will get people reaching for their magic rabbit's feet
anywhere now.
> Indeed, recently, I read on some news website that apparently the
> police here now have a policy of arrest-on-sight of people seen with
> laser pointers, and then you have to explain and justify your way out of
> arrest to regain your freedom! I don't know how true that is, but I
> did read it. I don't plan to test it.
>
Don't. When witches be burned, cast aside thy pointy hat and broom. >:)
Actually it's not so different in the US, I remember Steve Roberts telling us
(here or on PhotonLexicon, I forget which) about a patrolman pulling him
over, and him only being able to get away because he had the right phone
numbers to call to people who could explain on the spot exactly WHY Steve
Roberts had what otherwise might have been taken for alien technology in his
truck.
> Don't get me wrong; I certainly think that deliberately flashing
> a plane is a stupid and irresponsible thing to do, but night-vision
> notwithstanding, beam divergence would see to it that there was really
> no actual danger at normal flight altitude, especially given the
> difficulty of maintaining aim at that distance for more than fractions
> of a second at a time.
>
It will work out. Just not this generation. I knew 15 years ago it would come
to this and actually expected the dust to be settling by now. Obviously
things move so slowly that this might take until every living human is dead
before the new lot master their fear of what by then will have become old.
People won't accept them unless they become as usefully established as
traffic lights and mains plugs. The ability to reach far with a force that
can be truly dangerous ups the ant� to the point where it might actually take
as long for the laser to be accepted, as it took for the gun. The only thing
that can accelerate this is the fact that lasers have lots of very good uses,
and good ways to be safe, which will out in the end, no matter how scared the
public gets.
Actually it's odd that matches, as in little sulphurated heads on little
sticks of wood, didn't also take at least a generation to take hold, though I
guess happening at the hungry start of the industrial revolution instead of
appearing dangerously at a time when many people are overwhelmed by it and
have had enough, has something to do with that. And their damage can't reach
far without a lot of other helpful mass around.. It's all about perception
too, people accept some very dangerous tech (CFL's, with a risk of fire and
chemical contamination; thin-walled wine glasses, all kinds of stuff whose
dangers are ignored till something Bad Happens) into their bedrooms if they
believe them to be safe.
> However, I don't point at the sky any more. I do not think I would
> thrive in a prison environment! And I like my soap in such a place
> that I don't have to bend down to reach it!
>
I wouldn't worry, most people in prison apparently have a healthy respect for
those put inside for things no-one should be put inside for. You'd have more
to watch regarding drugs, if you have any weakness for those. That's how
people can get a real hold over you.
>
> Martin
>
Dave
DougD
>If someone's going to make it into a business, I suggest forget patent, no
>time, rely on copyright law and get them built ASAP. That way people can
>independently come up with their own methods and not fight over it even if
>they turn out the same, if it's clear they managed to design and build faster
>than they could have copied someone else.
>
Yeah, no time at my age for patents, but unless I wanted or was able
to sink more $$ into machinery, not really worth getting into.. The cost
of farming it out would make it too expensive, or the Asians would just
run with it if it seemed worth while.. sigh...
d.
DougD
>
>or
>alt.lasers.llc
Yeah, that could work too..
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:WuidnVKf3r1lzyLX...@supernews.com:
That's about the size of it.. If my laser driver (when I finally build an
dtest it beyond Spice and my last actual board(s) it will either impress
people enough to use it and it will get copied as it's totally easy to do
that, or it won't and no-one will know or care what happened to it. Either
way I won't make any money out of it. To at least break even is possible, I
can make a few entirely here, in one room, having bought a laser printer,
PCB's, parts, chemicals, etc, but it won't be a business. Even if it works
I'd be lucky if anyone remembers who designed it. But I will go ahead with it
for one reason: it's my design, not a copy, and people have often said it
should/would not work. I'm sure it does, and even if it's overdriven hard the
results are safe for the laser because it just clips and broadens the wave
shape without overshoot. If it wasn't for all the people who said it can't
work well, I'd have asumed others had already made it work, but perhaps they
really haven't, or they wouldn't say that. This alone makes it worth it. But
it's still going to be a money sink before it happens, hence the delay. I
suspect it's sufficiently different from existing designs to allow me to rely
on copyright law, but I haven't got money to defend anything in court so it's
all meaningless to me. Either I build it for those who care, or I don't,
there is NO way, period, I can expect to get paid. True.
Bob H
solar observer. I used to drag a 17.5" dobsonian around to mountain
tops, but when I saw the sun in H-Alpha light, I was hooked! Easy
access, small scope, why look at stars you can't see deatils on?
Mounting any laser on a scope is a very dangerous thiong to do, red or
green. A handheld device is only safe because it's always in motion.
A laser mounted to a telescope as a finder or "through the scope"
pointer is not, however, as the operator must then think hard about
where the beam terminates and who or what might cross its path in the
dark. And what if the scope gets a little bump? That laser's then
pointed at who knows what.
I really think all the negative news about green laser pointers being
aimed at planes are mounted on scopes (for accurate hand operated
tracking) by those experimenting like you did. Not you, but amateur
astronomers (most of which have absolutely no idea how light or optics
work).
Laser telescope collimators are all over the place, but their beams
are centered and therefore stopped from exiting the system by the
secondary mirror. Other than that application, I'd recommend never
mounting a laser to a telescope or mount when out in public.
DougD
>on copyright law, but I haven't got money to defend anything in court so it's
>all meaningless to me. Either I build it for those who care, or I don't,
>there is NO way, period, I can expect to get paid. True.
Well, I'm sure at some point, when like I get the astro's loaner scope, I'll
turn out a couple of pointer mounts just for the heck of it and to have a
couple for myself, just to do it.. Much for the same reason's you'll knock
out some of your power supplies, it's a great exercise for the brain and
your overall Karma.. Remind me to tell you guys about the talking straws
one of these days if you really want to hear about extremes of dedication
to a project with no end..
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:bqmdndXuCLu6E13X...@supernews.com:
Talking straws? Do it now. :) Was reading Bob H's post last night, and I kind
of agree, but, there IS the simple matter of beam width attenuating density
so it is safer. It amazes me that people with experience can find so much
different takes on the subject, if we can't agree, how can the public know
what to trust? As for tipping the scope, unlikely, but sure, then fit a tilt
switch to trigger a thyristor to bypass the laser (which is presumably a
constant current type at that kind of power) so you have to switch off,
perhaps wait for a cap to discharge in a PSU, before you can get light again.
It's easier to make dangerous things safe than it is to repair unsound public
perceptions if they start out confused.
If a scope has a beam coming out of it, and it's in a fixed position, a pilot
can see it in good time and avoid if required. The idea that a moving
handheld beam is in any way less alarming to a pilot is bizarre. The worst is
obviously one that can track and aim with precision but that would take
malice aforethought, and not a little tech skill too.
Lostgallifreyan
59bd07...@b25g2000prb.googlegroups.com:
> A handheld device is only safe because it's always in motion.
> A laser mounted to a telescope as a finder or "through the scope"
> pointer is not, however, as the operator must then think hard about
> where the beam terminates and who or what might cross its path in the
> dark. And what if the scope gets a little bump? That laser's then
> pointed at who knows what.
I put most of my answer as a continuation of an answer to Doug, but it's
worth adding that on a night fit for astronomy this is not the difficult task
you might think. Far more troubling if there's cloud enough to hide a plane
as well as stars. Plenty of people can claim thirty years experience in a
field, it doesn't exempt them from having flaws in their arguments, or even
being wrong. Once cars had to have people walking in front of them with flags
before they woke up to the fact that this was NOT the best way to make them
safe. Personally I think a timed scope tracker is probably worth far more to
an astronomer than a guide laser, but if people take care with the tools they
use, (and don't assume they don't) then perceptions of an observer who knows
even less should not be used as guidance, let alone dictate what is done.
Bob H
> I put most of my answer as a continuation of an answer to Doug, but it's
> worth adding that on a night fit for astronomy this is not the difficult task
> you might think. Far more troubling if there's cloud enough to hide a plane
> as well as stars. Plenty of people can claim thirty years experience in a
> field, it doesn't exempt them from having flaws in their arguments, or even
> being wrong. Once cars had to have people walking in front of them with flags
> before they woke up to the fact that this was NOT the best way to make them
> safe. Personally I think a timed scope tracker is probably worth far more to
> an astronomer than a guide laser, but if people take care with the tools they
> use, (and don't assume they don't) then perceptions of an observer who knows
> even less should not be used as guidance, let alone dictate what is done.
Of course I could be wrong about this, but I'm not. Green laser
pointers are essentially banned from many star parties because they
wreck imagers' exposures and generally piss off all those gathered in
a likely remote and dark location. School star parties and those for
the general public are exceptions, when lots want to point things out
in the sky to those with no knowledge of things up there.
The first lesson I learned in the LEOT program when I started my
career was to ALWAYS control the termination of the beam. ALL beams.
Laser pointers came on the scene and now every yahoo has one in their
pocket. Green laser pointers came on the scene and now every yahoo
has one of THOSE. Go on the internet and they find high powered green
laser pointers, up to hundreds of mWs!!!! You think ANY of them heard
or learned that first lesson? NO.
It's easy to buy and operate a laser, it's hard to control the urges
to illuminate moving targets with one. Mounting one on a telescope
dramatically increases those urges and that's why I strongly recommend
against it. And that's comming from a serious bicyclist since '73
who's never worn a helmet and argues agressively against their
percieved necessity for everyone, everywhere and always, so I'm no
safety nanny.
Sooner or later some cute little white girl will be blinded in one eye
because of a laser pointer in the hands of some child or idiot, and
all of a sudden some idiot uneducated politician will give us a new
law banning them named after her by the idiot uneducated media.
Mounting lasers on telescope mounts is a huge step in that direction.
Lostgallifreyan
e580bc...@x6g2000prc.googlegroups.com:
Why? Sounds like you're inventing monsters. These fears have been around for
so long now, and it hasn't happened yet. Not saying it won't either, but
acting or thinking as if every stone in the street amounts to a vicious
missle in the hands of some yobbo is no more sensible than arbitrary denial.
As to those who buy a flash green pointer, the first thing they do is
gravitate to some place on the net where people are likely to think it cool.
Happens a LOT, whole forums have arisen out of this. One of the first things
they learn is the danger. Hell, that was probably part of thw allure in the
first place. The really STUPID people I've met in the past, who might
actually do something deliberately dangerous with one, wouldn't, they'd think
it an over-sophisticated, inadequate and expensive way to do someone harm.
Those people are a threat, and compared to them, lasers really aren't, at
least, not the kind thay can get at.
DougD
>Talking straws? Do it now. :) Was reading Bob H's post last night, and I kind
>of agree, but, there IS the simple matter of beam width attenuating density
>so it is safer. It amazes me that people with experience can find so much
>different takes on the subject, if we can't agree, how can the public know
>what to trust? As for tipping the scope, unlikely, but sure, then fit a tilt
>switch to trigger a thyristor to bypass the laser (which is presumably a
>constant current type at that kind of power) so you have to switch off,
>perhaps wait for a cap to discharge in a PSU, before you can get light again.
>It's easier to make dangerous things safe than it is to repair unsound public
>perceptions if they start out confused.
>
>If a scope has a beam coming out of it, and it's in a fixed position, a pilot
>can see it in good time and avoid if required. The idea that a moving
>handheld beam is in any way less alarming to a pilot is bizarre. The worst is
>obviously one that can track and aim with precision but that would take
>malice aforethought, and not a little tech skill too.
Well, this is one of those arguements that could easily turn into "Will this
be a 10 minute or a 30 minute arguement?"... My opinion and experience
of having to deal with the public with much larger lasers and with the CDRH
and FAA watching over my shoulder leads me to think that at least in
terms of safety to the public, the feds like to see huge apertures on the
ground vs. tight beams as would be found in a pointer. No matter, everyone
is welcome to their opinion, I'm not actively pursuing putting laser pointers
and telescopes into anyone's hands! But I can tell ya that the Prez of the
astro society and the visiting astro physicist from the Uk thought it was
a pretty cool idea!, me, as I said, don't have a clue..
As for the talking straws, well, another day!
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:fsudnSB2MrQIp1zX...@supernews.com:
> Well, this is one of those arguements that could easily turn into "Will
> this be a 10 minute or a 30 minute arguement?"...
Ha! :) Some places would smash the wall and join the insults room and perhaps
even the being-hit-over-the-head room so I guess we do ok. :)
DougD
Well, my 30+ years of experience with all the other humans on this planet
tells me that I've maybe only got another 20-30 to get into some more
trouble and enjoy it, why waste it on a Python sketch..
So, this one day at LM, as I see the other techs/engs for the
first time that day, each one of them asks/comments "So, you're
going to be doing that "Talking Straws" project?... (LM had an
internal newsletter to let everyone know what projects we were doing,
and who was heading out on a tour etc. so we didn't waste a lot
of time asking "Hey, has anyone seen Kenny lately") So, they
had all seen it while I had been out on the road for a couple
of weeks and it got dumped in my lap. Had I been smart, I would
have stayed out on the road.. (end of part 1 of 500)..
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:M9CdnQMMQ-ugnF_X...@supernews.com:
> In article <Xns9C95378141B...@216.196.109.145>,
> Lostgallifreyan <no-...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>m...@here.com (DougD) wrote in
>>news:fsudnSB2MrQIp1zX...@supernews.com:
>>
>>> Well, this is one of those arguements that could easily turn into
>>> "Will this be a 10 minute or a 30 minute arguement?"...
>>
>>Ha! :) Some places would smash the wall and join the insults room and
>>perhaps even the being-hit-over-the-head room so I guess we do ok. :)
>
> Well, my 30+ years of experience with all the other humans on this
> planet tells me that I've maybe only got another 20-30 to get into some
> more trouble and enjoy it, why waste it on a Python sketch..
And now for something completely different...
> So, this one day at LM, as I see the other techs/engs for the
> first time that day, each one of them asks/comments "So, you're
> going to be doing that "Talking Straws" project?... (LM had an
> internal newsletter to let everyone know what projects we were doing,
> and who was heading out on a tour etc. so we didn't waste a lot
> of time asking "Hey, has anyone seen Kenny lately") So, they
> had all seen it while I had been out on the road for a couple
> of weeks and it got dumped in my lap. Had I been smart, I would
> have stayed out on the road.. (end of part 1 of 500)..
>
> d.
>
Curious, has it got a plot like Lost Highway where we only learn what talking
straws are at the 'end'?
DougD
>Curious, has it got a plot like Lost Highway where we only learn what talking
>straws are at the 'end'?
Well, yes and no.. No, I'm not a David Lynch, so no dwarf's will be wandering
in and out and speaking backwards, nor anyone "dead and wrapped in plastic",
(wait, maybe on that last one). But it could have a neked blond in it. Errr. I
guess I better not go there..
So, the boss calls me into his office and tells me that the reason I'm getting
this project is that I'm the only one besides him that has any experience with
AO modulators, and he's figured that the only way to do this is to do some
fancy mod. schemes...
(The Talking Straw Saga, Pt. 2 of 499 part A, sub section little a)
d.
Lostgallifreyan
news:YZGdnfnIcYPxCF_X...@supernews.com:
> part A, sub section little a)
Reminds me a good song by Crass.
Re straws, I'm beginning to get a strange vision. Need more data... And a
dwarf talking backwards would have helped actually. :)
Bob H
I'm not actively pursuing putting laser pointers
> and telescopes into anyone's hands! But I can tell ya that the Prez of the
> astro society and the visiting astro physicist from the Uk thought it was
> a pretty cool idea!, me, as I said, don't have a clue..
>
> As for the talking straws, well, another day!
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's been my experience that astronomers, pamateur and professional,
generally have no idea how lasers work or how to manipulate light
emitted from them. They use telescopes to ddo something else. For
example, one can use a camera to take pictures without needing to know
how the lens in the camera does what it does. Same with astronomers.
Not all, obviously, but the vast majority in my experience.
Lasers on a telescope mount in public is a dangerous and very bad
idea, from a laser safety perspective.
Michael Anton
news:Xns9C9391FDA24...@216.196.109.145...
> dtest it beyond Spice and my last actual board(s) it will either impress
> people enough to use it and it will get copied as it's totally easy to do
> that, or it won't and no-one will know or care what happened to it. Either
> way I won't make any money out of it. To at least break even is possible,
> I
> can make a few entirely here, in one room, having bought a laser printer,
> PCB's, parts, chemicals, etc, but it won't be a business. Even if it works
> I'd be lucky if anyone remembers who designed it. But I will go ahead with
> it
> for one reason: it's my design, not a copy, and people have often said it
For really inexpensive professional PCB manufacturing check out Seeed
Studios prototyping service at:
http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/propaganda-service-prototyping-service-c-64_12.html
You can get 10 5x5cm boards for as little as $25USD, if you don't do e-test.
If you are prepared to publish the design and make it public (under whatever
license terms you desire), it can drop to $13USD for 5 pieces.
Note that I am not affiliated with them in any way. I am just a satisfied
customer.
Mike
See my projects at http://manton.wikidot.com
Lostgallifreyan
news:00412406$0$9125$c3e...@news.astraweb.com:
> For really inexpensive professional PCB manufacturing check out Seeed
> Studios prototyping service at:
> http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/propaganda-service-prototyping-service-c
> -64_12.html You can get 10 5x5cm boards for as little as $25USD, if you
> don't do e-test. If you are prepared to publish the design and make it
> public (under whatever license terms you desire), it can drop to $13USD
> for 5 pieces.
>
> Note that I am not affiliated with them in any way. I am just a
> satisfied customer.
>
> Mike
> See my projects at http://manton.wikidot.com
>
That sounds cool actually, like a kind of anarcho-DIY-opensource sort of
method of working, and with proper gear to do it with. I'd definitely be ok
with letting anyone use the design, and if that become contractually binding
so much the better, it can be a way to stop others copying them and claiming
private profit easily if more than one person is looking out for it. Same
idea as the GNU licensing scheme, etc.. I'm in the UK, and I actually like
making my own boards, but if I ever need double sided then I'll look into
this for sure because I haven't done those yet so I haven't figured out and
practised an easy and reliable way. Haven't got the solder resist either,
can't do that on my own yet.. If they can also make stencils for applying
solder paste for SMT layout, it's even better.
Skywise
0e8ec5...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> It's been my experience that astronomers, pamateur and professional,
> generally have no idea how lasers work or how to manipulate light
Glad I'm one of those exceptions
> Lasers on a telescope mount in public is a dangerous and very bad
> idea, from a laser safety perspective.
Unless you know a lot about lasers and the safety issues.
It's like anything. It's only safe if it's done in a safe manner.
Everything can be dangerous if used improperly - lasers, guns,
cars, water...
Not that I've had the urge to do so revcently, but I'm sure I could
mount a laser through my 6" newt and no one would be the wiser because
I'd take appropriate safety precautions. Technically, that doesn't
say anything about it being legal or not.
Legal <> safety, and safety <> legal.
Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
DougD
>Bob H <bobh...@comcast.net> wrote in news:5ba5567c-82b1-4d9c-9639-
>0e8ec5...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>
>> It's been my experience that astronomers, pamateur and professional,
>> generally have no idea how lasers work or how to manipulate light
>
>Glad I'm one of those exceptions
>
>
>> Lasers on a telescope mount in public is a dangerous and very bad
>> idea, from a laser safety perspective.
>
>Unless you know a lot about lasers and the safety issues.
>
>It's like anything. It's only safe if it's done in a safe manner.
>Everything can be dangerous if used improperly - lasers, guns,
>cars, water...
>
>Not that I've had the urge to do so revcently, but I'm sure I could
>mount a laser through my 6" newt and no one would be the wiser because
>I'd take appropriate safety precautions. Technically, that doesn't
>say anything about it being legal or not.
>
>Legal <> safety, and safety <> legal.
>
>Brian
I kind of look at as would I rather be exposed to the raw beam of say
a 5mw pointer, or that same 5mw expanded out to 8 inch diameter.
The FAA and CDRH certainly felt that way when we were building
the first fully automated outdoor display down there near Miramar
Air station. Their first and preferred method was to have the fixed
beams coming out of large aperture collimators vs. the small
fiber launchers that were spec'd, or raw beams off of a beam
table. For the downward terminated beams, they finally let the
large collimator/telescopes slide as the architect's came back
with larger termination targets and then fixed safety apertures
on the launch end. I would have preferred the telescopes, but
it came down to economics as we had 50+ beams to deal
with.. So, it would seem that at least the fed's feel there is
more safety in a large output aperture vs. the raw output
of a laser...
d.
Lostgallifreyan
6VvXnZ2dnU...@supernews.com:
> I kind of look at as would I rather be exposed to the raw beam of say
> a 5mw pointer, or that same 5mw expanded out to 8 inch diameter.
>
Indeed. Not sure why the point can be considered arguable. Ok, I imagine from
a pilot's point of view the beam width is still lower than that due to
divergence of a normal pointer (usually 0.5 milliradians at best) at their
kind of distance, but it IS safe, and the dwell time will almost always be
shorter too because it's not as wide. It wouldn't be as distracting because
it appears dimmer, and for less time. The only fly in the ointment seems to
be the chance of focussing to a narrow beam waist at some distance from the
scope before diverging. A wide scope fed by a narrow DPSS beam might put a
strong point of light at some distance, and it could be worth calculating
that, or certifying a method that avoids beam convergence. I imagine a
focussed telescope can risk this if it slips slightly toward focussing, so
that is worth examining.
Bob H
> I kind of look at as would I rather be exposed to the raw beam of say
> a 5mw pointer, or that same 5mw expanded out to 8 inch diameter.
When you put a laser into the eyepiece holder of a telescope, the beam
stays a raw beam when it comes out. It doesn't expand much, if at
all. You need the laser to diverge from the focal point and fill up
more of the mirror for it to come out collimated and therefore
safer.
My point was regarding mounting a laser on the tube as a finder, and
the safety of that when done by the average person with a telescope
and a souped up laser pointer they bought from Wicked that's emitting
up to hundreds of milliwatts. Telescopes, and now lasers, are in the
hands of the asses of the masses. One of them can wreck it for all of
us, especially given the encouragement that it's OK to do.
DougD
>On Oct 2, 2:46=A0pm, m...@here.com (DougD) wrote:
>> I kind of look at as would I rather be exposed to the raw beam of say
>> a 5mw pointer, or that same 5mw expanded out to 8 inch diameter.
>> > - Show quoted text -
>
>When you put a laser into the eyepiece holder of a telescope, the beam
>stays a raw beam when it comes out. It doesn't expand much, if at
>all. You need the laser to diverge from the focal point and fill up
>more of the mirror for it to come out collimated and therefore
>safer.
Ah, maybe I did not explain this well.. The laser is pointed in through the
eyepiece itself, so it follows the exact same path back out of the scope,
i.e. it fully expands to the output diameter of the scope, so it's inherently
safer at ground level, it's no longer a tight beam. From the quick experiment
we did, it was hard to judge where the new focal point of the beam would
be, however I could tell that the beam stayed expanded for at least a 1/4
mile, so it would also be safer for low flying aircraft. Also, being that it
is not now being "seen" as a tight point source, I suspect that there would
be less "dazzle" to a pilot. In any case, whether with a scope or handheld,
no one should be pointing at aircraft, and I would hope that most astro
folks would be aware of the proper use of any laser. There's no legislating
for stupidity, and if folks want to use a pointer during their astro sessions
as a teaching aid, the laser through the scope seems to be a lot safer
than just swinging it randomly by hand.
>
>My point was regarding mounting a laser on the tube as a finder, and
>the safety of that when done by the average person with a telescope
>and a souped up laser pointer they bought from Wicked that's emitting
>up to hundreds of milliwatts. Telescopes, and now lasers, are in the
>hands of the asses of the masses. One of them can wreck it for all of
>us, especially given the encouragement that it's OK to do.
Well, it was wrecked for us all a loooooong time before laser pointers
were even being considered. Prior to idiots like Blue Oyster Cult who
took great joy in burning out the retinas of whoever were in the first
few rows, there was not this hysteria or govt. intervention into what
for the most part had been a very safe industry. Common sense will
go a lot further than govt. regulation when it comes to laser safety!
$.002
d.