Rusted

At the risk of pedantry.. any civilization capable of space travel, would find the creation of their own cows a piffling trifle. FTL travel is so far beyond our own capabilities, that our only feature of interest, to FTL tourists, is our extreme backwardness. We are the deliberately un-contacted natives in the steaming, Milky Way jungle. In truth, "They," for all their advanced abilities, may not even be able to readily tell cows apart from humans. So similar is our cringing level of [expressed] intelligence and ingrained behaviours. 🙈🙉🙊

I didn't get where I am today by being abducted.

Exactly. Like moving to a clearer spot on a distorted window. One could test a larger optic with a planned series of movements of the optical flat. Or of the test objective around the smaller flat. Just as one can stitch together a larger picture from smaller areas of the whole image. [Like an imaging mosaic.]

One can eliminate some zoning on the optical flat by setting the flat off centre to the test objective. It does not make the zones go away, of course. It just shows them for what they are. So the objective, under test, is not blamed for the errors on the flat itself.

Should we now automatically demand a photographic DPAC test? With witness signatures on every lens cell? What about adding AI image handling? Let's throw in "typical seeing conditions." Why stop there? Simulation of aging eyesight? A smidgen of "visual acuity" or none at all? Decades of visual observing experience on similar objects? Or none of the above? DPAC RAW? Or DPAC Lite? Isn't this optical snobbery a sign of serious self doubt? Buyer's guilt? That the huge sums being asked for "premium optics" might just be a fancy sales pitch. But we have no real idea if it is a scam because we have no valid test to prove it.. yet? Can we trust our own eyes to measure to £kx tolerances? Has optics become Hifi? Where only subjective nuances of "golden eared reviewers" are the accepted measuring stick? Who here has the "golden eyes" worthy of testing our kit to be validated as "pukka?"

Optical flats can be tested under water with a monochromatic light source. I used a mercury monochromatic yellow light when making 3 x 8.75" Monax flats. Unfortunately I used a [freely donated] matching blank with a chip on the back. That was enough to twist the whole blank into being worthless for cold pressing polishing laps.

Steve, You are good at this. Aren't you?

Fascinating.

Superb results Nigella and a rare capture for your animation!

Nice!

Well done Nigella. Your FDs are excellent.

Nice set Steve.

Well done! Lots of fine detail! Remarkably good considering how low the sun is at this time of year.

Amazing scale and beautifully captured.

The danger is always that the H-alpha observer wants to share the fascinating solar details with their fellow astronomers. The larger aperture blocking filters and etalons are then an advantage despite the extra expense. Having to later "upgrade" to the larger aperture elements means you are having to buy them twice but the second set at a mark-up. Leaving you with unused kit which is only suitable for observing. Not really for optimum imaging. If, like some enthusiasts, you decide to follow the modification route to larger H-alpha telescopes then the larger elements win here too. I specified the R&P two speed focuser on my 60MT and can highly recommend it. I own two other larger, FT focusers and recognize the same qualities in the Lunt R&P focuser. The Lunt MT series allows you to easily dismantle the instrument. It is intended to be separated into modules. You can use the H-alpha components for H-alpha viewing and imaging. I opted to use a straight though blocking filter instead of the Lunt elbow. This was a personal choice because I already owned the 12mm straight through. Those buying a complete Lunt scope should probably choose the elbow blocking filter for far more comfortable viewing. With the MT you can remove the H-alpha components and use the instrument for normal astro viewing. Or even as a spotting scope. You have a small, heavy, high quality APO refractor. You can then add a front, solar filter and use it for white light solar viewing and imaging. Or add a Herschel wedge and enjoy white light viewing and imaging. The total expense is truly terrifying but will reward you endlessly. By allowing you to enjoy your unique hobby in daylight and the [usually] greater the warmth of the daytime. You can even take your compact, H-alpha scope on holiday. Where the sun is rumoured to shine all the time. Do some outreach and become the life and soul of the beach party.

That is an excellent image!

Microsoft is said to be heartbroken that ChatGPT denies the existence of Windows 11. 😱 This may have been the reason they have applied AI to Bing. 🤣

It seemed odd [to me] that ChatGPT wanted me to register my inside leg measurement before allowing me to play. Without drifting off topic [yet again?] this makes every registered user a close potential target for "something." Targeted ads? Hacking by AI? Filtering out "high flyers" for recruitment to the AI security service nobody has [yet] heard of. Imagine an AI which has direct access to your vital signs via the Internet of things. Fitness wearables, watches, phones, etc. It could feed you live images/videos. Which rapidly and successively home in on your perfect car/telescope/face/motorcycle/person/whatever. Using your own heart rate monitor, heat sensors, etc, to leave you completely paralyzed with "admiration" as your chemistry overdoses. This isn't too far fetched already. Now that AI is already producing fake images and videos using "mixed text metaphors." I note that these AI image modification services are presently using heavy filtering. With very good reason. IMO.

The billions being invested in AI research suggest a strong commercial bias is highly likely. Probably resulting in payment for AI services depending on usage.

Alas, the average, Mk1 Human is a rather poor reviewer of anything much at all. They have product loyalty from spending a fortune on something "unnecessary to survival." To admit their purchase was inferior would be an open admittance of failure, bias or simply poor judgement. Then there are all the corrupt influencers who have received free goodies for review. YouTube, et al. ChatGPT could harvest all the reviews, both positive and negative and average them. List Pros and Cons. Provided it knew what to look for and had free access to the entire Internet. Very early days yet. Who knows where this will lead?

Which raises an interesting point: Assume an alien invader bases their chance of success on the information we have been broadcasting about ourselves for 100 years. They will be fed with increasingly more modern information as they get closer. Requiring constant updates to their strategies. Will they have access to the Internet? Is any of it being routinely broadcast into space? Will they notice we have fledgling AI? Will they then rush here to save us from AI itself? AI being a known existential threat to every growing technological civilization. Or will they let us play with fire? To see if we come up with a unique solution. One which might be used on other planets approaching the AI hurdle.

Superscopes certainly had access to some high quality castings to properly fulfill the intentions of the designer. An example of a smaller but very similar mounting was once shown at Bath Astronomical Society. 1980s? Decades ago I printed out a full scale version of this mounting for comparison with the Fullerscopes MkIII. I believe the original drawing may have been from a magazine. Though I no longer have any recollection of the source. Sadly I have no idea where the drawing is now. It used to decorate my workshop wall behind my lathe. I'd love to see an illustration of the Superscopes 'Hercules.' It would also be fascinating to hear owner's opinions of this mount.

Superb imagery and processing. It deserves a much wider showing. For its ability to attract more imagers to solar.

Nicely balanced processing and impressive image scale.

A great set of images Nigella!