-
Posts
1,187 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
robin_astro last won the day on May 20 2023
robin_astro had the most liked content!
Reputation
931 ExcellentContact Methods
-
Website URL
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk
Profile Information
-
Gender
Not Telling
Recent Profile Visitors
The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.
-
robin_astro started following Cosmologists? Standard Model flawed by Big Ring… anyone care to speculate? , The speed of light is…NO ITS NOT!!! , Black matter and 2 others
-
The speed of light is…NO ITS NOT!!!
robin_astro replied to Sunshine's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/370302-“we-don’t-really-know-the-speed-of-light”/ -
Black matter
robin_astro replied to Michael Kieth Adams's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
The Wikipedia entry for Dark Matter pretty much covers what you are talking about. The current thinking on what it might be and alternative theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter -
Black matter
robin_astro replied to Michael Kieth Adams's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
https://home.cern/science/physics/standard-model There are four fundamental forces at work in the universe: the strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force, and the gravitational force. They work over different ranges and have different strengths -
Black matter
robin_astro replied to Michael Kieth Adams's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
To a cosmologist, Baryonic matter is all normal matter (assembled or unassembled into larger structures like atoms) https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/b/Baryonic+Matter We know how much of that stuff was created at the big bang and it agrees with the latest measurements of all that stuff now. Dark matter if it exists was proposed to solve a different problem. It may be some exotic particle but it has to have different properties from the stuff we already know about and does not interact with it except through gravity -
Black matter
robin_astro replied to Michael Kieth Adams's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
Note that even finding more Baryonic (ordinary) matter would not solve the problem that the postulated (non baryonic) dark matter solves as dark matter would need different properties to normal (Baryonic) matter to explain the various observations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter -
Black matter
robin_astro replied to Michael Kieth Adams's topic in Physics, Space Science and Theories
As you say most of the Baryonic matter in the universe is not in stars but as dust and gas in interstellar space (Not as planets though as they make up a very small fraction of the mass in a typical system). Various techniques can be used to calculate or measure the total amount of Baryonic matter in the universe and these appear to be converging on a consensus figure. See "the missing baryon problem" in Wikipedia for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_baryon_problem This is well short of what is required to give the universe its critical density or explain the motion of galaxies though hence leading to the conclusion that there is a much larger fraction of as yet undefined non baryonic (dark) matter -
SX Spectrometer; any opinions?
robin_astro replied to rl's topic in Radio Astronomy and Spectroscopy
It had been around a long time now but like you, I am still waiting to see any serious results from one. An all reflective design has significant advantages. The things that put me off is the obvious astigmatism inherent in this type of design which broadens the spectrum which is not good for SNR with faint objects and for looking for structure in extended objects eg comets and galaxies. This is also present to a lesser extent in the Shelyak (Christian Buil's) UVEX reflective grating design where it is tamed by using a cylindrical prism. I also much prefer the WYSIWYG mirror slit (which both Baader and Shelyak and the old SBig SGS use) over the beam splitter which is highly dependent on precise alignment and focus between guide camera and slit without being able to see directly what is actually happening at the slit. If that is out even by a pixel you can lose a lot of light without even being aware of it. The built in guide camera design could also make the instrument become obsolete, rather like the SGS that used SBig's two chip guider/imager cameras. Cheers Robin- 1 reply
-
- 1
-
I suggest as a starting point something like your 90/f5.6 APO with the 120MM and ~40mm spacing which will give good resolution, plenty of room to fit the spectrum and zero order and plenty of light on bright stars.
-
With a cooled mono 8300 you will be able to go much deeper. (No need to guide, just stack many shorter exposures) eg these on my BAA page https://britastro.org/observations/observation.php?id=20230523_183229_5116a1a27f78a1ea https://britastro.org/observations/observation.php?id=20210406_144443_9e1c6a4cf219d14d https://britastro.org/observations/observation.php?id=20201216_234948_8cabda965bfe692f Robin
-
Hi, I am the chap who developed the Star Analyser (Almost 20 years ago now !) You can indeed use almost any camera and telescope but some setups work better than others if you have options. Mono cameras have many advantages and although the sensor in the 120MM is small it is still larger than the tiny sensors I originally used with the Star Analyser. Just use the calculator on the RSpec website (the calculations behind it are mine) https://www.rspec-astro.com/calculator/ to work out the distance to mount the grating to max out the space you have on the sensor. The resolution depends on size of the star image relative to the length of the spectrum so a short focal length helps. What model is your 500mm fl refractor? Well corrected APOs work well but achromats can give problems with chromatism which means the violet end of the spectrum goes out of focus. The main thing is the SA was developed to get people interested in spectroscopy without spending a fortune so whatever kit you have, you will get some sort of result and learn about spectroscopy on the way Cheers Robin
-
There does not appear to be a paper (even on arXiv) on this particular structure yet so on that basis my view so far is "there is nothing to see here" There is however a paper on the other structure discovered by this team with a paper where their statistical analysis is described, which is of course crucial given the human ability to spot patterns (even where none actually exist!) https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/516/2/1557/6657809? Robin