Sunshine

11 hours ago, clarkpm4242 said:

The 16" dob works well   

I bet, no substitute for a good Dob under dark skies, i cant wait to spend a solid night under dark skies with my Starmaster. 

Love this image, looks like you have a couple of ideal scopes to enjoy that sky.

Another beautiful piece of work!

Yes, i would suggest not displaying what could only be a Hubble image as your own. 

Simply beautiful! it really is Hubblesque.

The detail is beautiful!

This is a very common question, living in Canada means the clearest skies are often the coldest, i have been out all night in -10 celsius. My toes and fingers suffered a lot more than the scope ever has.

Beautiful observatory, it would be a shame to let it deteriorate, these are testaments to our yearning to understand our place.

Physicists may have invented “centripetal” to describe “centrifugal” I shall rename this force to “spinius forcius” there, I’m sharp too!.

2 minutes ago, saac said:

An engineer would say yes and happy with that knowledge go on to successfully design high bypass turbo jet aero engines that fly thousands of passengers across the globe. A physicist would roll his eyes at the use of the term centrifugal.   You have opened a can of worms now sunshine  

 

Jim 

Yeah, I stand by centrifugal, what we’re describing here is the force felt when inside a spinning “centrifuge” no?

33 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Let's for the moment put gravity aside, and consider following example:

You find yourself in empty space, far from effects of gravity of other bodies and you are imparted a spin along axis that goes thru your chest (front to back). You suddenly feel that "something is pulling" quite strongly on your legs and there is similar sensation in your head but to lesser extent. There is no force applied, yet you feel tension throughout your body - "something is stretching" you, and faster you spin, more uncomfortable it becomes.

What is this force that is doing this? There is no force, yet you feel this effect.

Would this not be centrifugal force? thanks for the great thought experiment.

I see, time and time again I read about gravity not being a “force” if not, then, the term gravitational “pull” makes no sense. As there shouldn’t be any “pull” between objects, therefore, objects should not by way of anything to do with gravity actually exert any physical change to one another. Yet this is clearly displayed as object deform one another and, even closer to home, the moon itself is the driving force behind our oceans tides. The only way this change could occur is if there IS a force acting upon them. What am I missing here?

A question i pose about the nature of gravity and its effects, as i understand, gravity is not a force as is commonly believed. It seems as such but, in reality, objects are merely falling toward a larger object in a circular motion caused by the well in the fabric of space time created by that larger object, as per Einstein. Having said that, how is it possible that large bodies, say Jupiter for instance, can physically affect smaller objects such as its moon by way of stretching them and such, causing friction within, leading to geologic activity?. This is where my confusion lies, if gravity is not a force, should there not be any physical effects exerted between bodies in proximity to one another?. Shouldn't they merely orbit each other without physically affecting each other?.

Beautiful capture!

If 6.5 hrs is a "quick one" i shudder at what you can do with a long one, simply sublime image really.

I knew Vlaiv would chime in with some lengthy but clarifying answers, good stuff. I was rubbing my hands together giggling maniacally waiting for his response lol.

8 minutes ago, JamesF said:

Thank you for posting that.  I was aware of the double slit experiment as covered in the first part, but the bit with the entangled photons in the second half was new and a bit mind-warping

If I understand correctly, what it is effectively saying is that the photon arriving at sensor D0 has information about what the observer will observe before the observation is made, even though it appears to be the mere act of observation that decides the result of the test.  That's utterly bonkers

James

That’s exactly what it means, yes it is beyond human understanding, as yet.

If you'd like to have your brain shaken and stirred watch this video, don't be insulted by the cartoonish presentation. I have read about this experiment and, the absolutely unexplainable behaviour of some bits. To say it is fascinating is an understatement.

As mentioned above, dark skies away from cities and other forms of light pollution helps a lot.

Hi Rich, welcome to SGL, have a great stay!

10 hours ago, JamesF said:

One mount to rule them all, and in the darkness guide them...

James

Brilliant.

thought i would forward this link, some of you fortunate enough to need such a mount for your cannons may be interested.

Great video and, a wonderful image!

WOW, that is just breathtaking, i could get lost looking into M13, imagine if a regular 100mm frac could show M13 like this, there would be no shortage of amateur astronomers.

Very beautiful indeed, your guiding must be awesome cause your stars are pinpricks.

With an 11" OTA you'll have your hands/eyes full for decades to come. I should mention that i did have an 11 inch on a fork mount and, as mentioned above, it is NOT a scope you can just grab and run off with. especially fork mounted it will be huge and heavy, always keep your circumstances in mind when considering a heavy scope. My 11" was amazing but, i had to let it go because it tried to kill me twice while carrying it down stairs, i should have known better.