Star Clusters - Am I missing something? Or just dont get it....

[wxsatuser]

Bravo Jim!

[Skylook123]

Thank you all, sincerely, for the appreciative comments.    The inspiration comes from an out of print small book that I wish all folks starting in observing could acquire and read - "The Light-Hearted Astronomer", by Ken Fulton.  It is an extremely practical, somewhat humorous, advice book on getting involved in astronomy.  He relates how there came a time when he just didn't feel he was getting the same return from his observing sessions he once was, and perhaps he was done with astronomy.  He mentioned his dilemma to a neighbor who was an artist.  She had a profound suggestion.  She told him to draw an egg.  Every night, take the same egg out of the refrigerator and sketch what he saw, then return the egg.  Next night, same egg, sketch again.  Each night, he saw and sketched more detail in the same egg.  By the end of the week, the change in his point of view was striking to him.  And his neighbor said, now he was seeing, not just looking.  And it translated to his astronomy.  He learned to see, not just look, and rediscovered his joy in observing. 

Fortunately, I read this passage at a time when astronomy was losing its calling to me.  Since I seem to be missing the gene that would allow my hand to express what my brain sees, my form of sketching was to write what I saw.  Suddenly, I was seeing again, not just looking.  So when I work with new observers, or visitors to my scope at outreaches, I try to elicit what they "see", not just what are they looking at.

A few years ago, I extended the concept to the sunset times at our outreaches.  Several of us thought we weren't serving our customers as well as we should by just setting up telescopes and showing eye candy.  So, when the stars are out but there is still too much twilight remaining to search for targets, we do walks around the sky to have our visitors "see" the sky for the first time.  The first school I tried this at is only a mile from my home.  The description of the night sky coming alive made a big impression on one of the English teachers.  She began to take her descriptive writing students out one night each spring and have each student choose a section of the sky to describe - make a story, use imagination, what did the sky say to each of them personally.  She says that this unveils students with gifts, or problems, that the old paradigm of writing five hundred words about a thumbtack does not reveal.  As a result, three years later, we have two astronomers permanently interacting with an astronomy club formed by the first students who went through the exercise - the seeing has become awakened.  So, when we train ourselves to see, not just look, it can extend beyond our own circles.  And we never know what one life we might touch in the process.

[Special K]

Thought provoking post, Jim, and I could do with a few of those sessions you run!

[Skylook123]

It would be a long swim across the pond, then a long hitchhike across  most of North America to get here, but I'll try to make it worth the effort! 

[Special K]

It would be a long swim across the pond, then a long hitchhike across  most of North America to get here, but I'll try to make it worth the effort! 

Ah ha, but don't be surpised if I do show up as I'm from LA am partial to a road trip through the desert!!!   You must have some wonderful skies out there.................hmmmmm..........time to move the English family back out West?!!!   All for the sake of science, of course!

But getting back to clusters: I don't have a decent pair of bins yet, but that should be sorted out by Santa, in which case, I think I'll love those clusters even more!

[AndyWB]

I like clusters. I like galaxies. I dont get it when people observe individual stars,variable stars or double stars. 

"Because they're there" ?

No, I'll be honest, I couldn't see the appeal either - and then then I tried it. I realised that it's the same as "why look at fuzzy grey blobs"; the wow factor of what you're looking at. In the summer I was marvelling over Antares; it was just a reddish dot, and a low and fuzzy one at that, but I knew how huge it was, and that connection was what interested me. And I've tracked the variability of Algol, and I'm watching two stars orbiting close to each other despite them being 90-odd light years away. And doubles can be pretty, and, if I'm honest, the technical challenge of 'can I split them' I can kind of understand too.

If it was just about pretty views, well, NASA and ESA are going to take better pictures than I'll ever see, but it's the knowledge of what you're seeing, so it's all worth looking at. I really enjoyed looking at a dark nebula I stumbled across a couple of months bad, and, well, it was kind of dark...

Personally, I don't get it when people observe 22 grown men kicking an inflated leather sphere around a rectangle of grass, but for some reason that's a very popular pastime.

[Skylook123]

Ah ha, but don't be surpised if I do show up as I'm from LA am partial to a road trip through the desert!!!   You must have some wonderful skies out there.................hmmmmm..........time to move the English family back out West?!!!   All for the sake of science, of course!

But getting back to clusters: I don't have a decent pair of bins yet, but that should be sorted out by Santa, in which case, I think I'll love those clusters even more!

With low power sweeps of the Milky Way, it is SO easy to get lost in the forest and miss the trees!  With my 10X50 binos, or even my 90mm refractor, so much flows by the view I have to slow myself down and just stop and look for a while.  One can get accustomed to looking at smaller fields and lose the context, so I really have to work at the "seeing" with low power, wide field of view journeys through the Milky Way.  Nice change from the usual view, though, even if it takes some effort to sort it all out!  Good practice.

[Skylook123]

"Because they're there" ?

No, I'll be honest, I couldn't see the appeal either - and then then I tried it. I realised that it's the same as "why look at fuzzy grey blobs"; the wow factor of what you're looking at. In the summer I was marvelling over Antares; it was just a reddish dot, and a low and fuzzy one at that, but I knew how huge it was, and that connection was what interested me. And I've tracked the variability of Algol, and I'm watching two stars orbiting close to each other despite them being 90-odd light years away. And doubles can be pretty, and, if I'm honest, the technical challenge of 'can I split them' I can kind of understand too.

If it was just about pretty views, well, NASA and ESA are going to take better pictures than I'll ever see, but it's the knowledge of what you're seeing, so it's all worth looking at. I really enjoyed looking at a dark nebula I stumbled across a couple of months bad, and, well, it was kind of dark...

Personally, I don't get it when people observe 22 grown men kicking an inflated leather sphere around a rectangle of grass, but for some reason that's a very popular pastime.

Lot's of wisdom in there, Andy.   I have a friend that can't understand watching any sport with grown men on a field with a round or pointy ended ball; he wants there to be the risk of crumpled metal, fire, and possibly extending into the crowd.  That, he'll watch.

[LukeSkywatcher]

"Because they're there" ?

Let's be honest. There is a limited range of star types. So each one in any group look identical to the next or the one before. Nebs can also be put into groups, but each and every single one is unique. No two nebs in the same "grouping" look the same.

They are very sexy objects to observe. I admit they look better when they are imaged and colour is added,but none the less they are simply stunning even without colour.

[AndyWB]

Well... I was being specious, but actually, that is the reason most of my (non-astronomer) friends would ever look at the stars; just 'cos they're pretty, and they're there.

I won't argue that yes, a lot of individual stars are just points of light, and yes, they're rarely that unique. If they didn't do something, and they don't have history or some curious property, then an individual star isn't all that interesting. But I got a kick out of watching Algol vary. I got a kick out of finding Herschel's Garnet star, knowing what science that led to. It was just a point of light, and a part of a continuum classes of stars, but there you go; I'm something of a history geek too. Heck, Nova Delphinus 2013 was just a point of light, but it made me go 'wow' when I thought of how novae work, of what I was seeing happen.

I would say, though, I prefer open clusters, just 'cos they're sparkly, and can cut through the light pollution at home. It's the same with Jupiter and Saturn. And nebulae are fascinating (I take your point about their differences and they're so variable in shape), though it's rare I get skies dark enough to see any other than the Ring.

But that's just me, and there's no reason why others shouldn't feel differently.

[Moonshane]

but are nebulae not just clouds of gas which have not even managed to form a star yet? what's the difference between a cloud of gas and a cloud of vapour in oiur sky, they look very similar in many ways.

it's what's behind the image in the eyepiece that matters for me. I refuse to be restricted to one kind of object as I find them all equally fascinating and as I said above (I think) gives me observing options when conditions vary.

each to their own I say and we can all enjoy this excellent hobby for a variety of reasons as diverse as the types of objects we observe.

[LukeSkywatcher]

but are nebulae not just clouds of gas which have not even managed to form a star yet?

Some nebs are. Some are not. Some nebs are stellar wombs where stars are being born, others are formed by the death of stars.

Nebs to me are like works of art.

[Moonshane]

I know what they are Paul and what planetary nebulae and supernova remnants are too but my point was that we all like to observe in different ways for different reasons, all of which are equally valid.

[TenBears]

Dropping in on this thread brings many points to mind, many of which could be chapters in a (not too serious but somewhat helpful, perhaps) introduction to observing.

..........

Jim, Wow....   That was awesome! Thanks for sharing. 

[Skylook123]

I know what they are Paul and what planetary nebulae and supernova remnants are too but my point was that we all like to observe in different ways for different reasons, all of which are equally valid.

Thanks, TenBears.  And Moonshane nails it down.  My points were to try to awaken interest through a bit more effort on the part of the observer, but we are all individuals and there is not, as far as I know, a requirement to love every item in the eyepiece to be allowed to participate.   To paraphrase, it's all valid, in whole, and in any part we find we enjoy.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I know what they are Paul and what planetary nebulae and supernova remnants are too but my point was that we all like to observe in different ways for different reasons, all of which are equally valid.

Absolutely.

[sbj]

I must admit, last year when I first got a scope I was instantly on the hunt for nebula because they are mightily impressive.  Lately I've really enjoyed looking at clusters more and more - especially now I can find some globulars and use averted vision to start seeing some of the detail.   

only downside - got aperture fever

[mdstuart]

I bet if you had been travelling through space for years and then you come across NGC 7243 all in a group...

Suddenly you are immersed in the light of the cluster you look around and you realise they are all related...WOW.....I think the word striking would then be an understatement!

Mark

[TenBears]

My 12" Dob came in the mail yesterday.

So it is likely that my - somewhat misplaced - attitude will change.

Well, honestly, it already has.

[Astro Imp]

My 12" Dob came in the mail yesterday.

Good luck with the new toy.

[Skylook123]

My 12" Dob came in the mail yesterday.

So it is likely that my - somewhat misplaced - attitude will change.

Well, honestly, it already has.

And did the weather gremlin come along with the new scope?

[TenBears]

I've actually gotten it (Zhumell Z12) out a couple of times.  Been mostly cloudy, but have had a couple of clear nights.  Not good seeing, but clear.

Some of the bands of stars along the milkyway are amazing with this thing using the 30mm 2" EP!  I'm sure this isn't that great of an EP, but it is far better than anything I have seen so far.

Orions neb looked VERY cool.  All I had seen of it so far was through my 15x70 binos. HUGE difference.

The 9mm EP that came with it is, so far, useless to me.  Stars just look like bug spatters on a car window.  I just can't get any kind of focus with it (more on that).

Two problems with that though.

1) I haven't been able to collimate it yet.  The laser that came with the scope - died. Batteries went dead after one use, and they are stuck inside and I can't replace them.  Trying to get a replacement.

    I collimated the scope when I first got it...  but the next day, I found out I had to collimate my laser first.  I got that fixed, but it died when I started on my scope.

2) I'm 50, plus I had lasik done on both eyes 10 months ago.  Although I have near 20:15 vision, I still see shimmering/flares from lights at night.  NO WHERE NEAR as bad as the first couple of months after the surgery though.

I hope that those flares go away eventually.  They seem to be getting gradually better.

This is an EXTREME representation of what bright stars look like to me.  Reduce that down to just around the edges would be closer to what I see.

But that is what it would have looked like 8 months ago.  Most certainly.

I hope part of that is just the scope being out of alignment.