saac

Look some folk believe reflectors are better than that other type of telescope - doesn't mean we need to laugh at them or fear them Jim

It's not strictly speaking friction as such that creates the heating effect it's rather the effects of the compression (shock) wave that generates heat as the ship enters the atmosphere. Effectively kinetic energy is traded to thermal energy. Jim

Any backlash JIm

So there you are moving along at 7000 Km/h and a speck of interstellar dust hits your shiny new space craft. That's going to make your eyes smart. Best divert more dilithium crystal energy into the forward shield Scotty Jim

Hi MCHandauM, I bit the bullet and purchased a licence for PI last month and have not regretted it. It is such a well put together piece of software and is very well supported with tutorials (videos books etc). It is expensive but in the long run I think it makes sense. I'm slowly getting up to speed , trying to process a capture of M13 at the moment, so lots to learn. It's good to have company on the learning curve. Good image you have there and good luck with PI. Jim

It is a corrosion protection - it should be removed abrasively prior to welding. Cold bright steel is simply black bar that has been given further processing, generally such as cold rolling, to improve dimensional tolerances. Black steel has no further machining done on it so is not as dimensionally stable as bright steel - generally used where dimensional tolerance is of less of a concern. Easiest way to remove the black coating is to use an angle grinder and surface skim it. Jim

I'd happily watch an hour long programme. I'm also another big fan of Maggie, she is absolutely brilliant and the right person to front SAN together with Chris. Jim

Thanks for the reminder, I'd have missed it otherwise Jim

I hope I got it right, I wouldn't be surprised if I have my own misinterpretations Hopefully anybody who can speak with authority will correct anything that needs correcting. It is an amazing story though don't you think - utterly fascinating and complex as it should be too. If you ever get an opportunity to visit CERN in Geneva I would thoroughly recommend it - the history of the universe exhibition is wonderful Jim

Yep we are all theoretical physicists - (armchair variety) Jim

Your making us work for this Pig, good on you. We need to take this down the pub Jim

Of course if the many universe theory is correct it could, if you are unlucky, at least make your eyes smart Jim

I bought a guide camera and scope from them a few weeks ago , service was excellent , could not have been happier. Always found service from Telescope House to be excellent and wholly reliable. Jim

"I find it very difficult to believe that everything in the observable universe came from a relatively single tiny source." I am with you on that Pig - anybody who finds it easy does not understand what is being asked of them. In an adult human body it is thought that there are more cells than stars in the observable universe yet it (the human body) originated from only two; one of which was at the limit of visibility to the naked eye. Pig, to suggest that our universe originated from a singularity (an infinitely small, hot, dense place) is to many an act of insanity, it is ridiculous by any normal measure of our experience. That is exactly the charge faced by Lamaitre. He was ridiculed, publicly by Hoyle who taunted with the term Big Bang, and more privately by Einstein who warmed to his physics but questioned his mathematics; he would later win Einstein's support. The Big Bang theory is completely counter intuitive, nonsense, utterly ridiculous, owing more to fantasy than reality. And yet, it is supported by evidence. And not any old casual evidence, it has been subjected to a level of scrutiny to support a confidence level that would put manufacturers of experimental cancer drugs, aircraft engineers, rocket designers, nuclear power plant engineers (you get the picture) to shame 100 times over. The evidence is simply compelling particularly when taken in light of associated findings of our large high energy particle accelerators which can generate the conditions (in terms of energy density) which existed close to the big bang. From this energy density we are able to see how matter precipitated out from energy - we are seeing as close to the moment of creation as we can at present. Yes it is a theory - to a scientist a theory is a continuum, a moment in a spectrum of reading nature's story where we root our self in an understanding supported by the best evidence we have, tested to a confidence level that, to be honest, is as rigorous as to all intents to represent an unequivocal proof. We are also prepared and accepting for the story to unfold, to bring a new understanding, but as yet we are still on the Big Bang chapter. To the public a theory then means something altogether different - it is more akin to an opinion. As for the number of planets , that was never a theory, that was an observation. Jim Sigma 5 - Understanding Confidence Levels In Particle Physics