Are we stargazers?

[ollypenrice]

Although there is no French equivalent of 'stargazer,' people I see irregularly will often ask me if I 'still have my head in the stars' - la tête dans les étoiles. It's the standard question and clearly has the same flavour of distracted, unworldly eccentricity as stargazer.  There is also a standard gesture which almost invariably goes with their question: they will mime the taking up of a long, pirate-style telescope, one hand at the eyepiece and the other at the objective, and raise it skyward while squinting through it.  Hand holding a long focal length refractor for astronomical observation would be difficult but I let it pass. 

Olly

 

[saac]

Argh to be true the tracking is terrible 

[900SL]

Navelgazers may be more appropriate, Jim lad, Argh argh!

I'm just popping out for a game of darts. Kindly refer to me as an Aeronautical Engineer  😉

[saac]

43 minutes ago, 900SL said:

Navelgazers may be more appropriate, Jim lad, Argh argh!

I'm just popping out for a game of darts. Kindly refer to me as an Aeronautical Engineer  😉

Surely Precision Ballistic Engineer Practitioner  at least or are you still under training. 😀

Jim  

[Hawksmoor]

I quite like being a stargazer. Sounds slightly ‘dreamy’ yet thoughtful.  I occasionally refer to myself as an ‘astrophotographer’ but advisedly only in front of folks who have never seen one of my photos. Stargazer will do fine for me!

George in overcast Lowestoft but not downcast because I have ‘fish pie’ for tea!🐟🐟🥔🥧

[Marvin Jenkins]

Very interesting indeed. I have found an alternative path to this whole issue of what we see ourselves as, and how people see us.. total denial!

From the beginning of this mad adventure with the night sky, and my infuriation and bewilderment that all around me would rather watch a stranger bake a cake on TV than see a real galaxy. I raged against this narrow band of interest and bored the pants off of everyone I met.

No matter how hard I tried I could not engage a soul to the night. Then it hit me.

Deny any connection or knowledge. I am now asked astronomy questions occasionally "because you do stargazing". I try to avoid these scenarios any way I can.

I have a confused looked in my armoury. "What makes you think that?" " But you have a telescope and it looks pretty impressive" "Oh you are mistaken, that is an upcycled lamp stand".

Then they start really asking questions, for some reason, denial peaks people's interest, like I am hiding something and then I turn the tables..... I make them recoil with a highly detailed speach about red shift and the past controversy over the distance of Quasars and Arp observations of interacting galaxy quasar pairs.

You see I like my astronomy, quiet and all mine. It might sound selfish to those who promote our passion via outreach and long may you be applauded, you deserve it.

I on the other hand I prefer it when someone says who's that? and I am described as "that's just the guy who comes to cuts the grass".

Marvin

[Marvin Jenkins]

2 hours ago, saac said:

Argh to be true the tracking is terrible 

Now we know what Skipper Billy really looks like.

[John]

6 hours ago, StevieDvd said:

An paleontologist looks at a small bone and says, this is what the Dinosaur looked like 65 million years ago....

 

Woody Allen used to tell a gag about a bunch of palaeontologists that found his wife's shoe on the street in Manhattan. From it they reconstructed a dinosaur 😉

[Alan White]

Just found the thread.

I do no science when observing, it’s just for pleasure and my well-being.

If the term Star-Gazer was good enough for Leslie C Peltier, then perhaps it’s too good for me,
but I have no issue, to gaze is to look steadily and carefully, I do that when observing.

 

Edited February 10 by Alan White

[900SL]

 "they live off the carrion of our mutual distrust and bribe us with symbols that equate hatred with manhood." 

John Brunner. 

[bingevader]

14 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Without going to the OED, I would suggest that gaze has clear connotations which include:

Looking while lost in reverie.  He gazed into her eyes. We can safely say that this is not an optician going about his trade. Or he gazed at the blackboard.  This will not endear him to the teacher.

Looking with wistful adoration.  I used to look at my colleague Sue like that. (I'm using the name Sue because... that was her name.)

But, if you are an 'astronomer' and have ceased to do the bottom two, I'd suggest you find a different job. 🤔

To use your analogy, if an optician has lost sight of the person whose eyes they are looking into then, personally, I'd find a different optician.

And as for Sue, if you don't see a low magnitude PN located outside the plane of the Milky Way in a Dob of 3M focal length, in even vaguely the same way, then that's a bit sad, sorry. 😢

[ollypenrice]

7 hours ago, bingevader said:

But, if you are an 'astronomer' and have ceased to do the bottom two, I'd suggest you find a different job. 🤔

To use your analogy, if an optician has lost sight of the person whose eyes they are looking into then, personally, I'd find a different optician.

And as for Sue, if you don't see a low magnitude PN located outside the plane of the Milky Way in a Dob of 3M focal length, in even vaguely the same way, then that's a bit sad, sorry. 😢

The activity of astronomy is a broad church so no single form of looking can embrace it all - which is good.

My point about the small PN at long focal length is simply that you won't find it by 'gazing,' you will find it only through some studious looking.

Olly

Edited February 11 by ollypenrice

[djhartist]

When I'm 'observing' (currently and happily with a manual dob), I am involved in the science as I want to understand what i am looking at (what is this object or these objects, how are they formed, how do they function, how are they connected in time and space, etc).

But there is also the physical experiential qualities of being outside at night, in the stars, all being part of nature.

My background isn't science, it's in art and design (which often involves technical equipment and processes anyway), with years of involvement , and lots of research into philosophical concepts. So I do consider myself to be 'an artist '.

So I don't know if 'astronomer' or 'stargazer' is a suitable description for me; in the same way that I love gardening and working with plants, wildlife and landscape, but it's strictly amateur. I would reserve the term 'gardener' and related horticultural terms, for those with the relevant applicable skills and knowledge.

Ok, am now realising it gets complicated once taxonomies become involved! I just like getting my scope out. Maybe I could refer to this as being a "celestial phenomenologist".

(I don't know!)

[ollypenrice]

13 minutes ago, djhartist said:

 

Ok, am now realising it gets complicated once taxonomies become involved! I just like getting my scope out. Maybe I could refer to this as being a "celestial phenomenologist".

(I don't know!)

On looking into this idea I found that I have, throughout the 50 years since I took a course in Phenomenology of Religion, misunderstood the term. I understood it to mean the grouping and studying of things according to the phenomena they present, so myths of flood, myths of creation, conceptions of an afterlife, etc. It seems, though, that the term is more concerned with looking at things in terms of the experience they elicit. I'm not sure where that leaves me regarding astronomy, though... 

Olly

[ollypenrice]

Question: can one 'gaze' into a telescope?

Olly

[tomato]

21 hours ago, DaveS said:

I have both, and both have cameras on the end of them.

Same here, my Esprit 150s have never had an eyepiece in them.
I’d like to see someone stargaze with a RASA, it would be like a dog chasing its tail.

[Saganite]

Try typing into Google, " What is a Stargazer "  and it comes up with someone who is an Astronomer or Astrologer.......simples ..

[djhartist]

14 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

On looking into this idea I found that I have, throughout the 50 years since I took a course in Phenomenology of Religion, misunderstood the term. I understood it to mean the grouping and studying of things according to the phenomena they present, so myths of flood, myths of creation, conceptions of an afterlife, etc. It seems, though, that the term is more concerned with looking at things in terms of the experience they elicit. I'm not sure where that leaves me regarding astronomy, though... 

Olly

In this context i'm working with the phenomenological idea of lived experience.. of being embedded within time and space, perhaps with 'primordial sense perception' (a state of consciousness before and without cultural taxonomies) . So rather than having specifically (and potentially contentious) 'religious' connotations, it's about living and being within a time and space rather than being 'detached'. In simple terms it's about being conscious and part of the fabric of things.

So in relation to astronomy, for me it's the experience of going out and studying and browsing the quiet night sky, getting a thrill at finding faint galaxies, PNs or globulars, and trying to understand them ; all the time sitting on the surface of the planet which is an active and living part of the fabric of the universe above, below and all around me. And I'm connected to the planet and the universe through biology, chemistry and consciousness.

So science, optics, experience, nature, creativity and perception potentially co-exist; but by its very nature this is qualitative rather than quantative. (I can see the potential pitfalls of applying a 'religious' dimension to this approach, but in a way it's ok to do that too). I understand though, that those with a more pragmatic scientific outlook would and should query this approach.

Friends may ask if i've been out stargazing ("Yes"), and whether I saw any UFOs ("No"). My wife isn't interested in astronomy, but is happy for me to go out, and she knows where I am . Generally most people aren't interested. I just enjoy the experience, being part of things; it's a time to reflect and learn. It's a bit of time out, sitting in the frost listening to owls. So I don't mind what I'm called..

[Saganite]

On 09/02/2024 at 23:18, iantaylor2uk said:

Not sure I agree. An astronomer is someone who does astronomy, which is what we all do. Calling yourself an astronomer doesn't imply you are doing research. Those who do such things can call themselves professional astronomers if they wish, but I think most of us (and most of the public) regard ourselves as amateur astronomers and we're not misleading anyone in any way and we don't need to justify it either. 

This is how I feel, and when asked about my interests I reply that I have a great passion for Astronomy and that is usually enough to elicit interest and questions.  

[Second Time Around]

21 minutes ago, Saganite said:

Try typing into Google, " What is a Stargazer "  and it comes up with someone who is an Astronomer or Astrologer.......simples ..

Very strange!

I haven't come across anyone who believes in astrology these days who actually looks up into the night sky.   

Could this simply be a definition that hasn't been amended over time?  

BTW, I find the results of the following 2015 Yougov survey encouraging, and in fact rather surprising:

"Overall, the rate of belief in the predictive power of astrology, is 8% in Britain and 14% in the United States. Notably only 82% of British people and only 65% of Americans are definitive “NOs” on this question – the rest are unsure."

 

[Mr Spock]

Astrologer - isn't that someone who looks through a horror scope...? 

[maw lod qan]

Earlier I saw a member say he thinks the term astronomer seems to imply some sort of intellectual or scientific endeavor. 

When I "gaze" into the heavens thru my telescope I'm doing it to enjoy the beauty above me and to increase my knowledge of the infinite universe. 

I guess that falls into both groups, scientific and intellectual. 

But deep down inside I still know I'm an amateur amateur!

[StevieDvd]

Important factor in my calling myself an amateur is that I have to pay for my equipment.

[Saganite]

13 minutes ago, maw lod qan said:

Earlier I saw a member say he thinks the term astronomer seems to imply some sort of intellectual or scientific endeavor. 

When I "gaze" into the heavens thru my telescope I'm doing it to enjoy the beauty above me and to increase my knowledge of the infinite universe. 

I guess that falls into both groups, scientific and intellectual. 

But deep down inside I still know I'm an amateur amateur!

I think it highly unlikely that anyone who spends four hours plus in the freezing cold is just gazing.  I engage with what I look at and concentrate for detail and I know this to be true of many of my colleagues on this forum. I have no real problem with Stargazer but nor do I with Amateur Astronomer.

 

Edited February 11 by Saganite

[Xilman]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

Question: can one 'gaze' into a telescope?

I would say so, and claim to have done it.

Sometimes I seek things out and/or try to understand and/or recognize and/or pay close attention to what I am looking at. Sometimes I just watch the stars drift by because I find it a pleasant experience.

Again, the difference between seeing and observing.