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.

wulfrun

Members
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

About wulfrun

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Location
    Wolverhampton UK
  1. Before purchasing, I'd recommend some homework, try this excellent site: http://www.binocularsky.com/ Go to the "choosing and using" tab. There are good recommendations on there about what to buy and what to avoid, plus ideas within price ranges.
  2. Not sure that's quite fair. GR is accepted as the best model yet. The "fudge-factor" of dark matter is because they've yet to figure out whether (a) GR is wrong or incomplete or (b) GR is right but dark matter is something real. I think the scientific community has an open mind about what the explanation is. Worth remembering that a theory like GR is still a theory and accepted until there's definitive proof it's wrong. No scientific theory is ever accepted as truth - just something which hasn't yet been proven incorrect.
  3. Pretty calm & cold here too but I agree with Tiny Clanger, it doesn't look very good conditions in reality. Jupiter & Saturn were a bit low and a bit near to getting obscured by nearby houses. Had a quick look through the binoculars and couldn't even see Jupiter's moons. The moon had a bit of a haze so I didn't bother getting the 'scope out, don't think it would've been any better a view of anything.
  4. I had a go on Mars about a week ago, with the Hyperflex 7.2-21.5 and Svbony 7-21 zooms in a SW150PL (1200mm f/8). Neither of them gave me enough magnification really (didn't have a barlow to add at the time) but I fancy I could just make out a tiny bit of detail at the shortest FL (x170-ish). Seeing and clarity did seem very good but I'm not experienced enough to say that with conviction. By comparison, I thought the Hyperflex had a slight edge on sharpness but so slight that I'm not quite sure, could have even been seeing varying in between changes. I found the Hyperflex a little smoother and easier to zoom (maybe due to the larger barrel) but both were slightly hampered by having a helical focuser-holder - meaning you have to hold the main barrel to operate the zoom, or lose focus badly - which slows things down a bit. Since then it's been either solid cloud or more-cloud-than-sky so I've not had another chance - and a Baader x2.25 barlow has arrived so fingers crossed!
  5. The moon also doesn't orbit directly above the equator, in addition to being in elliptical orbit. The motion is complex and not a sinewave, even though the deviation isn't huge. It's enough to throw a "simple" analysis off though.
  6. I wonder if all this modern LED outdoor lighting shouldn't come with a prominent warning that light pollution is a problem and can actually be an offence. Yes, I know, who reads manuals/boxes? Maybe a prominent label on the box, a bit like health warnings on fags (perhaps not so unpleasant, mind). I know it won't stop the issue but it might make some folk pause and think. Better than nothing anyway. Plus, people can't plead ignorance either. Maybe there should just be legislation that limits the power, it's certainly about time something was done to confront the issue. Interestingly, there is (or was, I'm not sure which) EU legislation to limit the power of vaccuum cleaners, in the name of efficiency. We also have legislation governing maximum standby power of devices, for the same reason. If they can do that, why cannot they limit insecurity lights and also make them conform to approved designs?
  7. The postman brought me a new zoom EP yesterday and I'm expecting a couple of other EPs today, off FLO. So yes, you can all cheerfully blame me for the continuing clouds around this neck of the woods. I probably started it off just over a week ago by buying a scope off another member on here.
  8. If it's THAT good for photography, it begs the question as to why all professional photo-journalists haven't got one? Maybe I'm just too cynical but I suspect the reason is what I expect: it's rubbish!
  9. I'm tempted to say that if you expect the performance of a $3k scope for 48-quid you deserve the inevitable outcome. Consumer protection laws say I'm wrong though. Looks like the figures on it say 40x60, I wonder if either of them is believable.
  10. Almost. There is also causality; two observers must agree on the order of events if one causes the other. For an example, every observer must agree that your father was born before you were.
  11. I don't think that idea holds water anymore. Current "best guess" is that it'll continue to expand at an ever-increasing rate and eventually just become, essentially, a vacuum. Gravity will have lost. At least, that's my understanding of the current ideas.
  12. Slightly over your budget but I found this in stock as of now: https://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-skywatcher-heritage-100p-telescope.htm I have no experience of the store. As a starter, you could do worse although it's not likely to provide "wow" views of planets. The table-top Dob style has already been commented on for its cons but if needs must...
  13. As a small aside - Betelgeuse has exploded, not the star (as far as we know) but an oil tanker named after it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiddy_Island_disaster Somewhat ironic, not to diminish the awfulness of the disaster.
  14. Recently, Neowise, which has rekindled my astronomy interest. Ever, probably the total eclipse of 1999, for which I was not quite in the umbra region but it went very dark and I managed a series of shots leading up to and beyond totality. Just a chip of the sun showing.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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