Jump to content

Narrowband

Mars again, and again......


mikeDnight

Recommended Posts

Similar view on different nights. Sinus Sabaeus, Sinus Meridiani, and Margeritifer sinus are easy to see in both observations, with Mare Acidalium in the north. The (Dawes Fork) was detected in the later observation, and hinted at in the first but obvious in the second observation was the slender wisp linking Acidalium with Margeritifer. This is known as Indus, once thought to be a canal but is in reality merely a boundary indicating a difference in terrain. The first observation was made with ice in the air and detail was a little harder to see, while the second was made with thin intermittent cloud.

1063719802_2023-01-2610_54_25.thumb.jpg.4be4d0f6297ecebe3fec81ed86549c92.jpg

IMG_20230128_114121.thumb.jpg.44207e50378957ca26bd713cd2d5bd39.jpg

 

From January 31, 2023. A night with strong winds, and fast moving cloud in two directions. Detail was not immediately obvious and the sketch represents around 15 mins of observation to tease out what was on the sub 11 arc second disc. The observation was made using a diagonal prism so the image is north top, east west reversed.

Syrtis Major is on the left of the sketch.

941795304_2023-02-0116_33_45.thumb.jpg.116b6be9a6e7678c7cd12656c7c9b329.jpg

Edited by mikeDnight
  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dweller25 said:

Great drawings Mike 🙂

I observed Mars 4 days ago at x300 - it still showed details but was tiny !

Thanks Dave,

 Yes it is rapidly shrinking but still offers an observable disc. May be if you use narrow field eyepieces it will give the illusion of being bigger? :laugh2:

 It makes you wonder if the planet is only around 11 arc seconds, how wide is Dawes Fork, or even the slender Indus??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dweller25 said:

Well, hopefully greater than 1.16 arc seconds as thats where 4” scopes run out of fizz.

Unless of course you are using a big mirror 🤣🤣🤣

 I've pondered over this problem before and discussed it at length with other observers. It seems the general opinion is that the resolution limit is based on the seperation of two stellar points. Planet's are a different thing it seems, as a linear feature too narrow to split widthwise, can still be seen with relative ease due to its resolvable length. Here's a debate for another forum! :icon_cyclops_ani:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

 I've pondered over this problem before and discussed it at length with other observers. It seems the general opinion is that the resolution limit is based on the seperation of two stellar points. Planet's are a different thing it seems, as a linear feature too narrow to split widthwise, can still be seen with relative ease due to its resolvable length. Here's a debate for another forum! :icon_cyclops_ani:

I don't think there is much of a debate about it, I believe that it is well known, in practice, that a line on the limit of visibility is reduced to a potion the same length as its width is becomes invisible.  Isn't the Cassini Division below the theoretical resolution of some telescopes that can reveal it?     🙂

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • mikeDnight changed the title to Mars again, and again......

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 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.