Total noob
Frank Warner
Maybe you will be kind enough to help me out.
As I've grown older I find my sleeping habits have changed. Often in
bed by 8, up at 1 or 2 in the morning with not a lot to do except plunk
around on the internet. (Be patient, there's a point, and a question.)
A few months ago I stepped out into the back yard at 3 AM or so and was
astonished by the night sky.
I haven't really paid a lot of attention to the night sky during my
life. (Had other interests. Like sleeping. When do astronomers sleep?)
But here I was, awe-struck. Then, zoom! a shooting star! How cool was
THAT! Pretty soon, another one! Wow. This happens more often than I
thought.
So I found myself out on my patio more and more often. (I'm on the
central California coast.) We've had a LOT of cloudless skies lately.
Around mid-October I heard about something called the Orionids, a nice
meteor shower radiating out of the constellation Orion. Only I didn't
know where Orion was or how to find it. (See? Total noob.)
Googling around a bit I was able to pick out the correct pattern of
stars and found Orion. The meteor shower was a big hit. Loved it. Just
loved it. Some of those puppies leave nice trails in the sky, don't
they?
So now I'm looking for more information. Just basic stuff. What are the
other constellations? What are the names of the stars? Where are the
planets? What else is out there?
I found the link below, and it's helpful, but I wonder if there are
better guides to the night sky for someone like me. Something online
and preferably free. And simple. And Mac-friendly.
http://www.astroviewer.com/interactive-night-sky-map.php
Remember, total noob. Don't pull any of that astro lingo stuff on me
just yet. Wait until I've got my feet a little more wet.
-Frank
--
Here's some of my work:
http://www.franksknives.com/
VicXnews
war...@verizonDOTnet.net:
Chris L Peterson
<war...@verizonDOTnet.net> wrote:
>So now I'm looking for more information. Just basic stuff. What are the
>other constellations? What are the names of the stars? Where are the
>planets? What else is out there?
There are a lot of good basic books about the sky to be found in any
bookstore. But I'd suggest that you use some of that early morning
Internet time to look around your area for an astronomy club. There's a
good chance you have a local one. If so, that's a great place to meet
like-minded people and learn about the sky, observing techniques, and
helpful equipment.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
Frank
<ne...@news.com> wrote:
> Frank Warner <war...@verizonDOTnet.net> wrote in news:181120091607207674%
> war...@verizonDOTnet.net:
>
> > I found the link below, and it's helpful, but I wonder if there are
> > better guides to the night sky for someone like me. Something online
> > and preferably free. And simple. And Mac-friendly.
Omygosh. That is awesome. Thank you, my friend. Now I must go and play
. . .
-Frank
lal_truckee
> In article <he23j8$p1a$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, VicXnews
> <ne...@news.com> wrote:
>
>> Frank Warner <war...@verizonDOTnet.net> wrote in news:181120091607207674%
>> war...@verizonDOTnet.net:
>>
>
>> http://www.stellarium.org/
>
> Omygosh. That is awesome. Thank you, my friend. Now I must go and play
> . . .
Stellarium is spectacular, but it's aimed at reproducing the star gazing
experience.
When you get into deep sky viewing and larger aperture telescopes you
might want to try Xephem and Cartes du Ciel AKA Sky Chart.
Bob Lawblaw
magazine.
Chris.B
In article <181120091607207674%war...@verizonDOTnet.net>,
please make a small donation to the dennis bishop memorial fund
the sci astro amateur group welcomes you to join in the discussions
this site takes paypal
http://tinyurl.com/as5ufc
shitetard my tard your tard our tard spammertard
wagontard clomping around on his prosthetic hockey puck foot
with his trusty radio flyer toy wagon in tow together they would fly like the wind
up 20th st to the local off license squeek clomp hobble clomp squeak squeak clomp
wangdoodletard wonkytard barmytard wankertard tinkytard gerbiltard
twonk twonk buh bye tard buh bye
Martin R. Howell
> shitetard my tard your tard our tard spammertard
> wagontard clomping around on his prosthetic hockey puck foot
> with his trusty radio flyer toy wagon in tow together they would fly like the wind
> up 20th st to the local off license squeek clomp hobble clomp squeak squeak clomp
>
> wangdoodletard wonkytard barmytard wankertard tinkytard gerbiltard
> twonk twonk buh bye tard buh bye
So now that you have put this repetitive crap up once again, are you
somehow better off? Are you nearer accomplishing whatever screwed up goal
you may have? Are you capable of no more than this? Are you proud of
yourself? I'll say it again. You are a one-trick pony irrelevant jerk.
--
Martin R. Howell
Ken S. Tucker
Here's one we've been using,
http://www.skyviewcafe.com/skyview.php?version=4
Get a pair of 7x35 binoculars.
> Here's some of my work:http://www.franksknives.com/
Nice knife(s), we get pens from this site,
http://www.browncountyshops.com/
Ken
wsne...@hotmail.com
wsne...@hotmail.com
If you can get hold of a decent telescope, the "noobness" will wear
off very quickly. Try Orion Telescopes for starters.
Astronomy clubs can be a big help, but the size, expense and
sophistication of some the telescopes and equipment that you might
encounter can be a bit overwhelming.
Dennis Woos
> sophistication of some the telescopes and equipment that you might
> encounter can be a bit overwhelming.
>
I am always concerned/disappointed when I hear folks newly interested in
astronomy talk about purchasing equipment, and especially the all too common
"and I might be interested in astrophotography". I am glad that the original
poster doesn't sound like this is weighing too heavily. A lot of folks
suggest starting out by taking small steps - binos, planishere and simple
astro guide, and I think that this is the best advice. Free software is also
great, including "Where is M13". It is true that at an astro club one is
exposed to a lot of high-end and expensive gear. However, in our club there
is also a lot of more modest observing and telescope building going on. In
fact, the most accomplished observer uses binos almost exclusively, and the
best performing scopes are mostly homemade. The most valuable asset is
getting out under a dark sky, so it may be that finding more of that is
where one should concentrate one's resources!
Dennis
Bob Lawblaw
Howard Lester
>7 x 35's!!?? Naaaaaaa....7 x 50's !! It's about aperture vs. FOV.
When it comes to viewing stars and the rest of the night sky, 8 x 42's are
even better. The more magnification, the more stars seen, and 8 x 42's (or 8
x 40's, whatever) are more versatile all-around instruments. 7 x50's were
the most recommended many years ago, but this is the 21st century. ;-)
Howard
Bill
> A few months ago I stepped out into the back yard at 3 AM or so and was
> astonished by the night sky.
>
> I haven't really paid a lot of attention to the night sky during my
> life. (Had other interests. Like sleeping. When do astronomers sleep?)
>
> But here I was, awe-struck.
We'll there you went and done it... now you're hooked!
Dennis' suggestions match what I would offer a new observer.
A planisphere is really just an ultra-basic sky map (cost about $10-15
-or you can make your own) - with a neat twist that allows you to set it
to show the sky for any date and time. It's main use is just to help
you know/confirm that you're looking in the general area of the sky that
you want to look. It's too basic to do much else - so you still need a
star maps of some sort.
Planispheres won't show planets, comets, or other things that change
position relative to the stars -- but there's nothing keeping you from
putting a sticker on your planisphere if you know the position of a
planet on a given date to help you find it.
Most people like to use a planisphere that matches their location's
lattitude - if you're in central CA, then you're probably close to 35
deg North - so look for one that's within +/- 5 degrees.
If you watch the sky much at all, you'll out grow the need for one
pretty quickly - but at the start, having one is the next best thing to
having someone who knows the sky with you.
Have fun!
Bill
--
Email address is a Spam trap.
Ken S. Tucker
On Nov 20, 9:01 am, "Bob Lawblaw" <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
> 7 x 35's!!?? Naaaaaaa....7 x 50's !! It's about aperture vs. FOV.
Nope, I've got 7x50, beauts, but nearing age 60 me pupils are not
open enough, it's a standard aging thing, besides, do the math and
you'll find the weight (and steadiness) of 50's may not be worth the
slight view increment.
Might be better to go to electronic image enhancement anyway.
Ken
Bob Lablaw
7 x 50's...somethings never change.
Howard Lester
> wowee..1 x's more magnification and smaller aperture.
> 7 x 50's...somethings never change.
Read this:
http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/16
The gist of Alan Adler's article (for choosing binoculars for astronomy) is
a points formula where you take the square root of the aperture and
multiplying it by the magnification. 8 x 42 scores 51.8, and 7 x 50 scores
49.5. Since they're about equally effective for stargazing, I'll take the 8
x 42's.
I want the newbies to know that when it comes to binocular astronomy,
aperture isn't everything. Magnification plays a role, too.
wsne...@hotmail.com
wrote:
7x35 binoculars with a wide field of view can be useful for finding
and identifying star patterns and asterisms from light-polluted
areas. 10x50s are a good all-around size and magnification.
Binoculars larger than that tend to be expensive and difficult to use
without a tripod, so a small short- to medium-focus telescope,
something a beginner might want to buy anyway, are likely to be a
better deal for most people, beginner or not.
Dennis Woos
> and identifying star patterns and asterisms from light-polluted
> areas. 10x50s are a good all-around size and magnification.
> Binoculars larger than that tend to be expensive and difficult to use
> without a tripod, so a small short- to medium-focus telescope,
> something a beginner might want to buy anyway, are likely to be a
> better deal for most people, beginner or not.
>
I don't think it is a good idea to turn this into a discussion of the
relative merits of binos, but when did that stop us? So, I would like to
point out that I have wonderful Celestron 7x50 Ultima binos (no longer
made), and that I recommended to my brother (a noob for sure) that he get
10x50 instead as he lives in a fairly light-polluted area. He doesn't like
his 10x50, as he simply cannot hand-hold them steady enough to be
comfortable looking at astro targets. I made him a little parallelogram
mount (a copy of the Tiny Titan from Burgess Optical - highly recommended)
and he is looking for a nice used tripod on Craigslist to go with it. The
lower the magnification the easier it is to hand-hold and the wider the
field, both advantages. Of course, there are advantages to a higher
magnification and smaller exit pupil size, which is why Howard finds his
8x42 just right. So like most things one size doesn't fit all, and joining a
club and observing with folks and trying out what they have is the best bet.
It is likely that the original poster already has adequate binos lying
around, and so doesn't need to worry about this stuff.
Dennis
wsne...@hotmail.com
> > 7x35 binoculars with a wide field of view can be useful for finding
> > and identifying star patterns and asterisms from light-polluted
> > areas. 10x50s are a good all-around size and magnification.
> > Binoculars larger than that tend to be expensive and difficult to use
> > without a tripod, so a small short- to medium-focus telescope,
> > something a beginner might want to buy anyway, are likely to be a
> > better deal for most people, beginner or not.
>
> I don't think it is a good idea to turn this into a discussion of the
> relative merits of binos, but when did that stop us?
I saw others offering opinions, I thought I would add my own.
> So, I would like to
> point out that I have wonderful Celestron 7x50 Ultima binos (no longer
> made), and that I recommended to my brother (a noob for sure) that he get
> 10x50 instead as he lives in a fairly light-polluted area. He doesn't like
> his 10x50, as he simply cannot hand-hold them steady enough to be
> comfortable looking at astro targets. I made him a little parallelogram
> mount (a copy of the Tiny Titan from Burgess Optical - highly recommended)
> and he is looking for a nice used tripod on Craigslist to go with it. The
> lower the magnification the easier it is to hand-hold and the wider the
> field, both advantages. Of course, there are advantages to a higher
> magnification and smaller exit pupil size, which is why Howard finds his
> 8x42 just right.
The above are opinions and first-hand experiences that the OP might
consider when choosing equipment. I would point out that lower power
doesn't always equal wider FOV, nor does a larger aperture equal more
light gathered, nor does higher mag always mean that the binos are
more difficult to hand-hold.
> So like most things one size doesn't fit all,
Sort of like health insurance and health plans.
> and joining a
> club and observing with folks and trying out what they have is the best bet.
Helpful perhaps, but not the last word.
> It is likely that the original poster already has adequate binos lying
> around, and so doesn't need to worry about this stuff.
Newbies need to have some idea what "adequate binos" might be like.
Many people probably have 10x22s or 8x20s these days. 7x35s or
somewhat larger, are likely to be better, but the newbies need to
understand that this is the case.
wsne...@hotmail.com
> > Astronomy clubs can be a big help, but the size, expense and
> > sophistication of some the telescopes and equipment that you might
> > encounter can be a bit overwhelming.
>
> I am always concerned/disappointed when I hear folks newly interested in
> astronomy talk about purchasing equipment, and especially the all too common
> "and I might be interested in astrophotography".
Astrophotography can be done by a relative newbie. Probably not
through-the-scope, long-exposures of DSOs but certainly piggyback
telephoto or shots of the Moon and planets with a Webcam or digital
camera are feasible with relatively little investment. This might be
just the thing to spark a newbie's interest. You don't know.
> I am glad that the original
> poster doesn't sound like this is weighing too heavily. A lot of folks
> suggest starting out by taking small steps - binos, planishere and simple
> astro guide, and I think that this is the best advice. Free software is also
> great, including "Where is M13". It is true that at an astro club one is
> exposed to a lot of high-end and expensive gear.
Never look through more aperture than you can afford.
> However, in our club there
> is also a lot of more modest observing and telescope building going on. In
> fact, the most accomplished observer uses binos almost exclusively,
He observes planets too, with binos???
> and the
> best performing scopes are mostly homemade.
Often the case.
> The most valuable asset is
> getting out under a dark sky, so it may be that finding more of that is
> where one should concentrate one's resources!
There are many ways to get started in astronomy. I suspect most people
start out more or less on their own, under light-polluted skies and
with equipment that some would sneer at.
Odysseus
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't believe the latter is available in a Mac OS version.
Another application I'd recommend is Celestia, which might be described
as a planetarium plus a virtual spacecraft:
<http://www.shatters.net/celestia/>
--
Odysseus
Ken S. Tucker
A friend uses a "monocular", which is half a pair of binos,
they're less expensive lighter are give the same image.
Might make a nice finder too, for a larger scope if one
moves on.
Ken
lal_truckee
> In article <he29s1$254$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> When you get into deep sky viewing and larger aperture telescopes you
>> might want to try Xephem and Cartes du Ciel AKA Sky Chart.
>
> I don't believe the latter is available in a Mac OS version.
Installed and running on the MacBook I'm posting from. I use it for
observation planning.
Odysseus
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
You have to use Windows -- under Parallels, Boot Camp or whatever -- to
do that, don't you? The website doesn't mention of a Mac OS version, or
even Unix/Linux.
<http://www.stargazing.net/astropc/>
I took the OP's "Mac-friendly" to mean something more than "possible to
be run on the latest generation of Macs".
--
Odysseus
Sketcher
>
> When it comes to viewing stars and the rest of the night sky, 8 x 42's are
> even better. The more magnification, the more stars seen, and 8 x 42's (or 8
> x 40's, whatever) are more versatile all-around instruments. 7 x50's were
> the most recommended many years ago, but this is the 21st century. ;-)
>
8x42s. In practice, based on my own experience, for astronomy the
extra magnification is clearly superior to the extra aperture of
7x50s. The generally smaller size and lighter weight of the 8x42s is
icing on the cake. I've owned more than one pair of 7x50s in the past
-- one long ago and one more recently. (The more recent pair was won
as a star-party door prize. By that point in time I knew better than
to waste money on 7x50s.) The older pair of 7x50s was dismantled. One
objective now resides in a home-made finder. The other pair was given
away as a gift. I'm keeping the 8x42s!
Naturally, no instrument can do everything. Thus my own binocular
arsenal consists of 8x42s, 20x80s, and 25x100s. Each has capabilities
that the others lack. Nevertheless, 8x42s represent an excellent,
hard to beat binocular to start with. Besides their excellent
suitability for astronomy, 8x42s are a good general purpose, daytime
binocular. If an astro-newbie fails to stay with astronomy the 8x42s
(unlike some binocular and telescope choices) should remain very
useful for a variety of daytime applications.
Sketcher,
To sketch is to see.
lal_truckee
> In article <hechkp$ff8$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Odysseus wrote:
>>> In article <he29s1$254$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> When you get into deep sky viewing and larger aperture telescopes you
>>>> might want to try Xephem and Cartes du Ciel AKA Sky Chart.
>>> I don't believe the latter is available in a Mac OS version.
>> Installed and running on the MacBook I'm posting from. I use it for
>> observation planning.
>
> You have to use Windows -- under Parallels, Boot Camp or whatever -- to
> do that, don't you? The website doesn't mention of a Mac OS version, or
> even Unix/Linux.
>
<http://www.ap-i.net/skychart/> - see links from site for downloads
Versions for Linux, Windows, Mac OS X.
Version 3 of SkyChart / Cartes du Ciel
Runs native.
It's a rewritten version (now in beta) which I find fully usable with
minor issues - see the Yahoo dedecated groups. I believe you are
thinking of version 2 - (2.76 latest) which is windows only.
Odysseus
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
> <http://www.ap-i.net/skychart/> - see links from site for downloads
> Versions for Linux, Windows, Mac OS X.
> Version 3 of SkyChart / Cartes du Ciel
> Runs native.
>
> It's a rewritten version (now in beta) which I find fully usable with
> minor issues - see the Yahoo dedecated groups. I believe you are
> thinking of version 2 - (2.76 latest) which is windows only.
Thanks; I guess the stargazing.net site is out of date. V3 might be of
use to the OP, if his Mac isn't too old -- he didn't say what model he
has -- but it's apparently for x86 CPUs only, so I won't be able to run
it on my G5.
--
Odysseus