Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

80 Excellent

1 Follower

About impactcrater

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. The Shuttle took Hubble into space and it could not have been done without it . And it could not have been repaired without it either . The Shuttle could take heavy payloads and then gently place them where they needed to be and re-catch them if required later. This is remarkable and as Astrologicophiles we owe the Shuttle a great deal indeed. Hubble is the success story of the Shuttle.
  2. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-24/nasa-astronaut-bill-anders-says-sending-humans-to-mars-stupid/10666708 Is it a bit like Everest...we climb it because "it is there" ? I have looked at Buzz Aldrin's technique to get to Mars and it shows how complex this is and the expense would be 'astronomical'. The Rover programs are bringing us wonderful science and you have to wonder if it is just human hubris that makes us want to land on this planet.There is a held view that when a human lands on Mars they will be stuck there in the sense that they will be colonists rather than visitors. It brings up very challenging psychological dilemmas. Has anyone suffered with 'homesickness'? All in all it is not much of a place for humans. One breath of its dismal atmosphere filled with CO2 would near kill you and its temperatures are fluctuant and unpleasant. It's very sandy and more desert like and when you look on Earth where similar geology exists these areas are sparsely populated. No one really wants to live there. They are as the Americans say 'the Badlands'. The Moon is certainly worse although clearly more reachable. This all points to the conclusion that we should stop fighting and look after the (less than ideal) Planet Earth and be good farmers of it rather than taking it for all its worth.
  3. it is always frustrating at first , speaking from experience and note it is not a mechanism that is 'spot on' . two star auto is best in my opinion and I learnt that from a tutorial on the net . find a known star earlier in the night so that it is bright and the other stars do not confuse you . when you can just see the first stars is a good time. auto 2 star will then ask you to chose a second star and I base that on looking at stellarium . I like two stars that subtend a 'sensible angle'(a slight roatation of the head) in a reasonably horizontal plane. let the scope sit on these stars to allow it to darken up and every now and then go out and fine tune to the second star (or the first if you prefer) as the night goes on and it darkens and you start looking at other objects ( chose bright things ) you will find the accuracy improves remember it is not an exact system and you will have to use the finder scope to bring things into accuracy PS the planets and moon are not good alignment objects unless you just want to watch one object
  4. the S Holmes is hilarious...I will use it at Xmas Two Children of the Universe are talking to each other about the game of 'Hide and Seek' and one says to the other 'its not fair , you always get to play dark matter '
  5. Nicolaus Copernicus was pretty amazing . . He is quoted as saying : "For it is the duty of an astronomer to compose the history of the celestial motions through careful and expert study.
  6. ....and not a cafe in sight ......what's the point !
  7. Galileo was an amateur Astronomer...HOW ABOUT YOU ? Come join us as we stare at the Stars and the Cosmos. Be amazed ! No skills required other than a curious mind... YOU may discover something NEVER seen before !
  8. anyone fascinated by this?....every time we take a look we find something we did't know...available on NASA....and related to MR Spitzer...
  9. always a popular topic...I guess we really don't have enough experimental data to really know....take a look at TRAPPIST-1 and note it has 7 Earth sized rocky planets (and perhaps some with moons?) and it makes you wonder whether they are similar in composition and whether the capture theory may apply...
  10. another first in our lifetime ! you do have to hand it to the Americans...
  11. hi karencm...i just couldn't leave your call for help with one reply.....I have a celestron nexstar unit so i am not ideal to help...i wonder if you have the nexstar controller as you said you have two..the other being a starsense one, i assume...can you just try that and see if you can enter the time and place on this simpler unit....the setup for starsense is tricky as a watched the video with lots of 'enters' in sequence for setup. if you cannot enter 'time and location' then i suspect the computer in the scope has failed and you will need the 'shop' 4 years without use may leave the computer grid in a 'confused' state as things do fail with time you could try a 'factory reset' as that may work...let the SGL lot know how you go
  12. PS i had a look again at the photos which are blurry and i found hard to work with. however, the 3rd from the top shows what i assume is the back of the mirror in the centre of the corrector plate and it looks badly cracked. does anyone agree with this ?
  13. I'm sorry your scope fell. i have the same one and my early experiences had frustrations and i had it back at the repairers but the only thing needing repairing was me ! However, a fall means you need someone who knows whether it is working properly to have a look at it and if not 'back to the shop". that said, i have heard of people putting a clothes peg on the focuser knob to graduate the turns more but a spanner may be an SGL first. good luck with sorting this out.
  14. I like your 'let's try this' approach . it is very refreshing. when my corrector gets too dewy i just give up and take everything inside and leave the caps off and in the morning everything looks fine. telescopes are pretty tough. a little bit of lint on the corrector does not affect viewing and whilst initially I used a microfiber cloth i suspect this is a 'no-no'. certainly don't rub it round and round. I'm sure 'windex' is a definite 'no-no' as it will smear and may damage the protective film over the corrector lens. Please note i picked up what I think I know on this site and I am no optics expert.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.