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.

Jim M

Members
  • Content Count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jim M

  1. You get what you pay for. The celestrons can have quality issues. There are a fair few dissatisfied customers if you care to check. I have been reading this and other forums for a couple of years now and haven't heard a single complaint about any pentax bino's (except maybe the 20x60 having too narrow a field of view) nor of any of the nikon action extremes. In fact they are excellent bino's but you are looking at £160 here. You could be lucky and get a nice pair of celestrons - well ones that are passable. I have the nikons action ex 12x60 and they are just great, better than the opticrons I had prior which came with hair and dust on the prism's and the coatings were uneven. It's always best to try out and examine your bino's before parting with cash unless you are sure you can return them later. Some shops will argue the hinds legs off a donkey rather than give you a refund.
  2. Use flash if you don't want anyone to peruse your site. Stick with html.
  3. I bought a pair of opticron countrymans and they were disgusting inside with what looked like hair and dust and the coating was uneven and in places the coating looked like it was poured on. They can keep them. Nikons are good as are pentax.
  4. "Best 10x50 Bins. Pentax PCF II or Opticron Imagic TGA ?" Nikon Action EX 12x50. £169 - John Lewis.
  5. I posted this the other day but it didn't scan too well so I messed about with the light curves in gimp to make it a bit clearer. Jupiter wasn't like it all the time as you will know and not only that but I think the old brain drew some of it in on its own or so it seemed, averted vision was no use. Not sure about these Maks. Mine is hard to focus and I'm not fully happy with the sharpness of focus. Jupiter was a little soft at x214 for my liking.
  6. Foam rubber is mostly fireproofed anyway - it is for beds and furnishings.. All fire proofings are a health hazard.
  7. Great picture. What scope? The 16"? I made a drawing of Jupiter at 00:30 am 03-09-10 too using my SW 127Mak with Baader ortho' 7mm:
  8. I dont think it's a naked eye object for most people (mag 5.7) in the city but binocs (10 or 12 by 50's should easily show it.
  9. Yes, tetenterre is right. If you want to "move up" in quality as well as size but not too big then a pair of pentax 20x60's may do you. They seem to get good reports over on cloudynights forum. About £200.
  10. Yes, I saw the same thing, Io coming out from Jupiter, watched it for about 1/2 an hour. Saw the red spot in my 127 mak + baader 12.5 mm ortho but it was touch and go. The 7mm ortho was hopeless.
  11. A very good pair of binoculars for the price (about £150 depending on the shop) are the Nikon 10 and 12 by 50's action extremes (EX). Waterproof/nitrogen filled porro prisms. Got a pair myself and they are excellent. They are well rated by Edz of cloudynights. See: http://www.cloudynights.com/documents/nikon.pdf
  12. First DNA molecule made almost entirely of artificial parts Their experiment neither proves nor does anything. It's like taking a human arm and grafting a mushroom on to it. Wait and see how it does nothing but die.
  13. What nonsense! If anyone had created "living" DNA that would be huge news. A self replicating organism be it a virus or bacteria/whatever. They can only just get amino acids to form from within very controlled conditions. Certainly far too controlled to be anything like those which may have occurred on an early Earth. And then there is also the problem of chirality - the preponderance of the L form of amino acid molecule over the D form when in nature it is a 50-50 split between the two. Scientists have tried all that "chemical soup" stuff experiments in the 50's and none of them produce anything beyond a few amino acids (simple chemicals) which don't survive more than a few minutes in the reactor and which have to be removed to another environment for their continued survival.
  14. "You misunderstand sir! While I was not quoting you I was paraphrasing but I can see how you have interpreted my statement. To avoid doubt I was making the same point as you - that oil is generally depositied in small pores/voids etc - as you said - of course I did embellish it with the reference to large voids (er open deposits)..." LOL I think your original remark is ambiguous at best. ;-)
  15. Slip some sort of packing underneath the binocs.
  16. The coathanger (Collinder 399) is a lovely sight in my 12x50's. It's the asterism imbetween Vulpecula and Sagita but you probably wont be able to see it just now, shame.
  17. <<This is not such a daft question and in the right circumstances some of the effects you mention can occur, not withstanding that oil deposits are distibuted in small pores rather than large 'open' depositis, as Jim said.>> Eh? I said no such thing sir! I told the original poster that oil was distributed throught the rock in small spaces as in a sponge - or words to very similar effect.
  18. Jim M

    Celestia

    I don't know about Celestia for winblows but the linux version is fantastic. You can journey around the galaxy, past betelgeuse past rigel and wherever you want and see the stars as they would be. I can tell you it's almost impossible navigating your way back to our Sun when your that far away (virtually speaking).
  19. <<What the observer sees as the flow of time is really only a change in position relative to some other change in position.>> Well it would be since we know of no other way of measuring it. But who knows in the future?
  20. From polar latitudes it generally is best in the winter and cooler seasons for several reasons. One, the nights are longer and deeper (darker). Two the winter climate is more amenable to better seeing and transparency. Three the summertime is generally none of the above. Four I'm sure there are more reasons but that could be something for you to discern off your own bat :-)
  21. Oil and gas is dispersed throughout the structure of underground rock, in small spaces like in a sponge.
  22. Get the best ep's you can afford - within reason. Personally I'd put a limit at about £40 - £60 per ep . Observing with the crappy supplied modified achromat type is just one huge disappointment. I'd say a beginner doesn't need many ep's - just 2 or 3 to start with.
  23. Yes, excellent. I saw the dark area in my skymax 127 Maksutov last night at x150. It was in and out though with only fleeting appearances lasting a second or so.
  24. Yes I heard it on R4 this am. Not a surprise really. I mean, as if they were ever going to get bases on the Moon by 2020. LOL
  25. Most of the politicians I have come across are looking for troughs to put their snout in. Sure some of them start out with good intentions and a few manage to keep their good intentions but the majority are just two faced pocket lining scientific ignoramuses. Moving on to scientists, the majority are honest. The remaining few are as corrupt as the politicians and in fact are in bed with them witness the AGW /Climategate carbon tax con.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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