Are we stargazers?

[iantaylor2uk]

7 hours ago, saac said:

Exactly my thoughts too.  I've always been very hesitant calling myself an astronomer even amateur astronomer.  That implies some scientific endeavour is going on and while I have dabbled in spectroscopy I have only done what has been done before - no boundaries were pushed back or new knowledge won.  I know there are other members who make real scientific studies with photometry and spectroscopy and they could rightly say they are amateur astronomers.  So I think using the term astronomer would be like misusing the term doctor or engineer, best avoided. If anything else it makes light of the serious academic endeavour astronomers undertake followed by their professional work.  Stargazer suits me. 

Jim 

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. 

[mikeDnight]

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

I could never quite understand the title. Surely it should have been Starlit Nights?

The subtitle could be something like Adventures of a star lover.

Gazing just sounds too ineffectual and distracted.

For a passionate lens licker with a handle fetish, you have a cold, steely heart Jeremy. Mine is much more like a squishy marshmallow!  

[Paul M]

8 hours ago, The60mmKid said:

I don't want to be taken seriously, and I love the word stargazer 🙂 Part of what I love about it is the lack of seriousness.

Me too!

There are a few things I take seriously in life, and they are all in the death and taxes categories.

Astronomy has been, perhaps, the only constant in my life. I first became aware of the stars at about 7 years old. By aware I mean inquisitive.  Since then I've dipped in and dropped out as life dictated, but always looked up and gazed at the stars when opportunity presented itself. Just gazing and wondering. No depth of thought beyond "Hi Orion, nice to see you again".

I do much more stargazing than I do astronomy.

Does anyone else talk to the constellations, or is it just me? 

[Paul M]

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

Gazing just sounds too ineffectual and distracted.

You sound like my old teachers! 🤣

[saac]

1 hour ago, 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. 

For me Ian the term Astronomer implies a scientific method and purpose, something more than observing.  Like I said earlier, I observe nature elsewhere but I am neither a botanist nor geologist.  In the UK we have a lazy culture of abusing professional titles.  In my previous life I was a Chartered Engineer and an active member of the professional institutes that worked to raise the status and recognition of professional engineering in the UK.  Compared to Europe, and indeed the rest of the word, the term engineer here has been eroded almost to the point of carrying little to no meaning.  Professional titles are important, they carry meaning and should be safeguarded. Just as there is no law in the UK to prevent anybody calling themselves an Engineer ( without education, training or certification) so too anybody can call themselves an Astronomer.  I just chose not to that's all.  I guess it's partly in respect for those who are educated and employed in the professional field, and partly because I am not skilled as an Astronomer and I do not engage in scientific work.  I just observe for my own enjoyment, so for me stargazer  is a more appropriate fit.  All of that said, the most important thing not to lose sight in this I guess is that for the most part we all do this for enjoyment: imagers, visual observers, EAA types, refractor people and mirror lovers. I guess the "hobby" is large enough to hold us all no matter what we call ourselves.  

Jim 

Edited February 10 by saac

[saac]

28 minutes ago, Paul M said:

You sound like my old teachers! 🤣

Yep that is teachers the world over 🤣

Jim 

[Ags]

Looking at all the stuff I've bought lately, I can say I'm no stargazer... I'm a storegazer!

[paulastro]

With respect to all those who have contributed to this thread, does it all really matter?

Personally, I don't care what anyone calls me.  I'm not going to change what I do astronomy-wise whatever anyone calls  me, or folks who have similiar interests.

 

 

 

 

[Vallantho]

1 hour ago, John said:

I suspect consensus is going to be elusive on this one ....... 🙂

Well if we had consensus what would we talk about 😂😂

[Vallantho]

8 minutes ago, paulastro said:

With respect to all those who have contributed to this thread, does it all really matter?

Personally, I don't care what anyone calls me.  I'm not going to change what I do astronomy-wise whatever anyone calls  me, or folks who have similiar interests.

 

 

 

 

It doesn’t matter at all.  Just be comfortable in yourself and do what you love.

[The60mmKid]

4 hours ago, Paul M said:

Me too!

There are a few things I take seriously in life, and they are all in the death and taxes categories.

Astronomy has been, perhaps, the only constant in my life. I first became aware of the stars at about 7 years old. By aware I mean inquisitive.  Since then I've dipped in and dropped out as life dictated, but always looked up and gazed at the stars when opportunity presented itself. Just gazing and wondering. No depth of thought beyond "Hi Orion, nice to see you again".

I do much more stargazing than I do astronomy.

Does anyone else talk to the constellations, or is it just me? 

I love this. Part of what thrills and comforts me about stargazing is the passage of time and the relationship with the night sky. There's nothing like seeing a constellation or favorite sight (i.e., "object") again after a couple seasons have passed. I regularly find myself saying, "Hello, old friend," and really meaning it. Then, I wonder if they're glad to see me, too. I can't help but feel they are, gazing back at me while my life passes so quickly in relation to their own.

[The60mmKid]

3 hours ago, paulastro said:

Personally, I don't care what anyone calls me.

 

 

 

Be careful... There are people out there who would be tempted to take full advantage of such an opportunity 😇

[Stu]

9 hours ago, JeremyS said:

too ineffectual and distracted.

Probably sums up most of my sessions Jeremy 🤣.

You are a proper ‘stronomer though so I understand why you don’t associate with stargazing!

I often describe myself as a stargazer, although based on this page on Wiki, I am comfortable with being at the bottom end of amateur astronomy; I don’t contribute anything scientific though actively observe a range of objects, keep patchy records and do some outreach to encourage others to consider the hobby.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_astronomy#:~:text=Collectively%2C amateur astronomers observe a,clusters%2C galaxies%2C and nebulae.

[Stu]

7 hours ago, paulastro said:

With respect to all those who have contributed to this thread, does it all really matter?

It matters not one iota Paul, but the conversation passes the time while these clouds are around!

[Stu1smartcookie]

8 hours ago, 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. 

I agree with you … let’s take sport as an example here … if you play football you are a footballer … you may play full time for a club in the national league but you are still a footballer.. if you play in the premier league you are still a footballer. The difference is just doing the same thing but at different levels . Astronomer encompasses all levels , although the word ameteur usually means you are not getting paid it also lends itself to being a hobby . 

[JeremyS]

Three pages of impassioned lexicology, literary criticism and epistemology, yet not a word from @ollypenrice 🤔

[paulastro]

4 hours ago, The60mmKid said:

Be careful... There are people out there who would be tempted to take full advantage of such an opportunity 😇

Really?  Still don't care.

[JeremyS]

I heard someone say stargazers use refractors and astronomers use reflectors 🤔

[Saganite]

9 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I heard someone say stargazers use refractors and astronomers use reflectors 🤔

Light the touch paper why don't you .....😨

[900SL]

8 hours ago, saac said:

For me Ian the term Astronomer implies a scientific method and purpose, something more than observing.  Like I said earlier, I observe nature elsewhere but I am neither a botanist nor geologist.  In the UK we have a lazy culture of abusing professional titles.  In my previous life I was a Chartered Engineer and an active member of the professional institutes that worked to raise the status and recognition of professional engineering in the UK.  Compared to Europe, and indeed the rest of the word, the term engineer here has been eroded almost to the point of carrying little to no meaning.  Professional titles are important, they carry meaning and should be safeguarded. Just as there is no law in the UK to prevent anybody calling themselves an Engineer ( without education, training or certification) so too anybody can call themselves an Astronomer.  I just chose not to that's all.  I guess it's partly in respect for those who are educated and employed in the professional field, and partly because I am not skilled as an Astronomer and I do not engage in scientific work.  I just observe for my own enjoyment, so for me stargazer  is a more appropriate fit.  All of that said, the most important thing not to lose sight in this I guess is that for the most part we all do this for enjoyment: imagers, visual observers, EAA types, refractor people and mirror lovers. I guess the "hobby" is large enough to hold us all no matter what we call ourselves.  

Jim 

As a fellow Chartered Engineer I concur.

Personally speaking, I am an observer, a smatterer, a dabbler, a money and timewaster, but I am not an astronomer. In fact, I'm closer to being a meteorologist, given the weather here.

My hobby does not contribute to science, it only seeks to experience the wonder of the night sky.

 

[ollypenrice]

19 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

Three pages of impassioned lexicology, literary criticism and epistemology, yet not a word from @ollypenrice 🤔

This is your fault! 

Language is nuanced. All of the following involve looking: Look, stare, peer, leer, glance, peep, peek, gape, regard, observe, gawp, etc etc. Clearly, though they are not equivalent, each having its own connotations and register.

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

Looking without seeing or sometimes even trying to see. He gazed into the distance. Compare this with he peered into the distance. In both cases the person looking may not see anything but in the second case he is actively trying to do so.

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.)

I suggest that we may sometimes gaze at the stars but that doing so will not enable us to find a low magnitude PN located outside the plane of the Milky Way in a Dob of 3M focal length. In general it misrepresents the way in which astronomers look at the sky and casts them as eccentric romancers unlikely to be able to put a nut on a bolt. In fact they are eccentric romancers addicted to the fantasy that the clouds will part on a moonless night before the month of December the year after next.

Olly

[JeremyS]

12 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

This is your fault! 

Language is nuanced. All of the following involve looking: Look, stare, peer, leer, glance, peep, peek, gape, regard, observe, gawp, etc etc. Clearly, though they are not equivalent, each having its own connotations and register.

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

Looking without seeing or sometimes even trying to see. He gazed into the distance. Compare this with he peered into the distance. In both cases the person looking may not see anything but in the second case he is actively trying to do so.

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.)

I suggest that we may sometimes gaze at the stars but that doing so will not enable us to find a low magnitude PN located outside the plane of the Milky Way in a Dob of 3M focal length. In general it misrepresents the way in which astronomers look at the sky and casts them as eccentric romancers unlikely to be able to put a nut on a bolt. In fact they are eccentric romancers addicted to the fantasy that the clouds will part on a moonless night before the month of December the year after next.

Olly

This is very helpful Olly. The term gazer, as defined above, does not describe Leslie Peltier. Perhaps he used it in a self deprecating manner. Perhaps many of us do.

I wonder if I could move you on to part two of the question, the use of Starlight rather than Starlit in the title Starlight Nights. I feel more of a literary allusion at play…

Edited February 10 by JeremyS

[mikeDnight]

9 hours ago, paulastro said:

Personally, I don't care what anyone calls me.  

 

 

 

 

Oh good! I'll phone you later with the list I've made!! 

Chat soon!

[badhex]

I don't mind stargazer at all and it does have some romanticism to it, though I don't particularly use it to describe myself. I feel like stargazer perhaps captures the idea of the hundred billion or so humans before us who, during the vast period of history when the stars were not drowned out by artificial light, looked up at the stars with wonder. Some of them even wrote stuff down! 

That said, I have a physicist friend who does "real" science at a synchrotron, and a few years back I was chatting about observing Nova Herculis 2021 over the course of a few nights, and showing him light curves and spectra recorded by folks on here which I thought was really cool. He responded with words to the effect of "yeah, you can write to Nature and say 'look we discovered that stars contain hydrogen'". 🙄 I retorted that it was like saying Darwin had written to Nature to report that tortoises had shells; the devil is in the detail. 

The whole thing reminded me that actually you don't need to be wearing a lab coat or working in a giant observatory to be contributing to science. Even if you're only observing for yourself - seeing, and possibly writing down, something like a rare nova or the formations of sunspots or colour differences in multiple star systems is genuine astronomy, and I have referred to myself as an astronomer since then without feeling like a fraud. 

[Mr Spock]

We need to respect what people identify as