Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Just the normal stars.


Size9Hex

Recommended Posts

The only prospect of a clear night for some time, but blighted with a near full moon which wobbled horribly, even at low magnification. Anything faint was invisible, and what was left refused to stop dancing and come into focus. The dew was dripping off to form puddles. Not exactly spoiled for choice with worthy targets, I spent a peaceful and surprisingly enjoyable hour looking at bright stars, and reading a little about each one.

I slowly got my eye in, noticing subtle colours that I'd never spotted before. Pale blues and subtle yellows, alongside more intense golds and orange and sapphire.

Such exotic variety and interesting stories. Distant giants and nearby neighbours. Double, quadruple, even a sextuple star system. Stars with dusty planet forming disks. Stars dopplering back and forth with an eclipsing planet. A star with an eccentric orbiting companion that made planets an impossibility. Systems that defy our understanding. Binaries that swap an atmosphere back and forth, occasionally flaring up. Pulsing stars, inhaling and exhaling with their dying breaths. A star that may have already gone supernova, to be brighter than the moon when news reaches us. A star near and large enough for Hubble to see detail on the surface. A star with no traditional name, that may have since become much brighter. A star spinning so fast that it sheds its own atmosphere and then lights it up. A star that passed close to us historically, scattering comets towards the planets. Stars creating shockwaves as they hurtle through space. 

I guess there's nothing ground breaking here, but it was a nice way to make something from the bad conditions. The thing that really got me is that these were all the normal bright constellation stars that I use for star hopping to more interesting targets, but also that it was every single one of them. It definitely gave me a new appreciation of the night sky. I had no idea there was so much going on.

Thanks for reading :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a fantastic post, a pleasure to read :rolleyes: I haven't every done what you did, but it is definitely inspiring. :)

Thanks very much for sharing this here. I look forward to reading your next session out!

Piero

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's nice to appreciate the simple pleasures of looking and wondering.

It's something I used to do with my old 60mm refractor as a boy, mostly because it wasn't great for much else! The books I had then didn't give an awful lot of detail but it was still a good way to get to know them.

They all have a story to tell!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jkwhinfrey said:

I loved your post. 

Stars really don't get the attention their variety deserves. Stars is a great website, but I couldn't get the link to work (might just be me). The non-secure http link might?

http://stars.astro.illinois.edu/sow/sowlist.html

James

Thanks for supplying a proper link,James.

It may seem a bit 'basic',but an enjoyable session can be spent working your way through the different Star spectral (colour) groups ,an annotated version of the Hertsprung-Russell diagram is a good guide.

I find the cool,intensely red 'Carbon' stars to be very interesting to contemplate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than interesting , especially for newbies or those struggling with light pollution. 
I've had folks spending far too much time and aperture searching for elusive fuzzy dso's. Simple stars, many of them named , like "La Superba" , "The Garnet Star" and "Hind's Crimson Star" are lovely targets. 

Many of the main constellation stars are either double or multiples. Then there's the mass of double stars in such sources as Sissy Haas and Eagle Creek. 

Then move on to the open clusters, with colours and asterisms. These include some stunning star clouds , that's before exploring globular clusters which orbit in the galaxy halo.
There's a great deal to find out and observe, before delving deeper for the fainter stuff !

you don't need huge aperture, just an achro, which even looks like a proper scope !?

clear skies!

Nick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cotterless45 said:

 

you don't need huge aperture, just an achro, which even looks like a proper scope !?

clear skies!

Nick.

 

acrow_prop.jpg    Yes, you're right Nick, they do kinda look like telescopes, but I think this is the wrong achro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.