Deep Space Astronomy

[Flippant]

I wonder if any experts could give me some advise.

I currently own this

http://www.barska.com/Starwatcher_Telescopes-40070_300_Power_Starwatcher_Telescope_by_Barska.html

but I might buy this from kijiji for $75-$100

http://www.kijiji.ca/v-hobbies-craft/st-catharines/bushnell-north-star-goto-telescope/567278325?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

Will this telescope be worth it used at $75 - $100?

Both of them, if they have stable mounts, would be great for local stuff: planets, the moon. Even something like the Pleiades would be revealed as splendorous.

But my opinion is go big. Get the biggest aperture you can put the money into.

 

[Thanos]

Looking out into the sky: there is absolutely no way we are alone in the universe. It saddens me that we will probably never discover life elsewhere due to absurd distances.

I've always wondered that if the world could ever set its religious views aside and world leaders wound concentrate on science and exploration, how more advanced a civilization we would be in terms of our species seeding the galaxy with our presence

but the human race is more occupied killing each other in the name of religious beliefs, persecuting others for different beliefs, super power nations invading other countries, wa, corruption in the governments of the world for money

we are setting ourselves up for our own destruction

the absolute truth resides in the stars, not in a book

 

[Flippant]

Space is my first real passion but...
The cost is insane. The dangers are insane. The distances are insane. The benefits to a more advanced society could be considerable but as things stand right now it's kind of like our oceans: largely unexplored, and cost prohibitive. We only really use the top twenty feet of our oceans and there's a lot of jack-squat-nothing making it up... the same with space exploration. There's no real money to be made.
We could eventually see a mining civilization spring up out where the asteroids reside and wind up with a culture of planet-bound people and folks who essentially live in orbital crafts or space stations. Maybe... that's all dreaming though.

 

[CoolB]

Both of them, if they have stable mounts, would be great for local stuff: planets, the moon. Even something like the Pleiades would be revealed as splendorous.

But my opinion is go big. Get the biggest aperture you can put the money into.

So what you're saying is I need to increase my budget a little higher then $75-$100 :icon_lol:

 

[Flippant]

So what you're saying is I need to increase my budget a little higher then $75-$100 :icon_lol:

LOL
I'll say this: in the case of telescopes for the amateur, the difference between spending a hundred and a thousand has dramatic payoff. Not just in terms of science-grade optics but also availability of objects within your instrument's reach.

 

[jmadtx]

interesting thread.

 

[Chaos Spawn]

I have a few framed on my wall. My place looks like the inside of a planetarium.

i used to have that comparative nat geo poster that would go from the solar system all the way out to the observable universe in steps. i would stare at it all the time. i wish i would have kept it.

Spoiler

LOL
I'll say this: in the case of telescopes for the amateur, the difference between spending a hundred and a thousand has dramatic payoff. Not just in terms of science-grade optics but also availability of objects within your instrument's reach.

i used to read an astronomy column in my local paper when i was growing up. every year (around christmas) the author would write a telescope buyer's guide. i remember he wrote that the best ones look like little cannons.

do any of the telescopes sold to the amateur astronomer have the ability to take photos? im would guess yes.

if so, do any of you guys have any of your own pictures to post?

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Mirror size is important. You need a big mirror to gather as much light as possible. I'd go with a Dobsonian. The second most important thing is a good mount. If the setup is shaky in the wind it's no good to you.

Celestron and Meade are long time, dependable companies with a big line of great amateur telescopes.

Thanks.

 

[Flippant]

The Hubble Deep Field amazes me.

Spoiler

It's worth looking at this again: they chose a portion of the sky the size of your thumb, because it seemed devoid of stars or anything else much. It's a representative portion of the sky since most of the sky away from the plane of our Galaxy (which we see as the bright band of stars, dust, and gas we call the Milky Way) is fairly empty.

Then they did these lengthy exposures, revealing that the sky in any direction we look is absolutely covered in galaxies.

 

[Flippant]

i used to have that comparative nat geo poster that would go from the solar system all the way out to the observable universe in steps. i would stare at it all the time. i wish i would have kept it.

Spoiler

i used to read an astronomy column in my local paper when i was growing up. every year (around christmas) the author would write a telescope buyer's guide. i remember he wrote that the best ones look like little cannons.

do any of the telescopes sold to the amateur astronomer have the ability to take photos? im would guess yes.

if so, do any of you guys have any of your own pictures to post?

That's a cool chart. It's really, really hard to convey the very large and very small in a way that can be understood, both extremes are not things we intuitively grasp, they're just too far outside our daily understanding of the words, though it may be some comfort that scientists who routinely use high powered micro- and tele-scopes also have trouble wrapping their brains around these concepts.

Back when I first started observing it was all about taking photographs. I had to take a photo if an object, then take another a week or two later and use what's called a blink comparator to check for any novae. I never was the first though I came close a few times, and once had a find confirmed by the Naval Observatory within a day of it beginning to shine.

I no longer have the time or equipment to do all nighters! If my daughter develops an interest I'll gladly get back in.

Here is an example of the tiny but massive explosions I used to obsess over.

http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/03/new-supernova-spotted-in-whirlpool-galaxy/

 

[Chaos Spawn]

...

Here is an example of the tiny but massive explosions I used to obsess over.

http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/03/new-supernova-spotted-in-whirlpool-galaxy/

i remember that.

i often wonder if i will live to witness the supernova of betelgeuse. i know it would have already happened ~500 years in the past, but you get my meaning. from my understanding, the milky way is overdue for one.

despite all of the enthusiastic reading i have done on astronomy, i was never able to accurately conceptualize some of the scales, distances etc. the universe had an episode i think in season six called "how big, how fast, how far". it was exceptionally well done, and that is when everything finally fell into place for me. i was left thinking "yeah, there is no way we will ever develop faster than light travel, and no way we will ever explore past our own solar system". kind of disheartening tbh.

 

[Flippant]

I was hoping you'd post.
Those teensy little lights are what got me into astronomy. I recall showing a friend a photo of SN 1987A I'd traveled with my astronomy club to observe.
He couldn't understand.
"So?"

I too have fantasized all my life about a Milky Way supernova, but have to guess SN1987A in the LMC is as close as I'll get to it.
Maybe there has been one in our Galactic hub, hidden from us by all the obscuring matter. That's where x-ray astronomy shines, so to speak.

A supernova locally would be among the most exciting events of my life!

 

[Flippant]

*respectful snip*

despite all of the enthusiastic reading i have done on astronomy, i was never able to accurately conceptualize some of the scales, distances etc. the universe had an episode i think in season six called "how big, how fast, how far". it was exceptionally well done, and that is when everything finally fell into place for me. i was left thinking "yeah, there is no way we will ever develop faster than light travel, and no way we will ever explore past our own solar system". kind of disheartening tbh.

I had the same let down. The realization that FTL travel is physically improbable if not strictly impossible, and that even reaching speeds that approach C is beyond anything we can achieve anytime soon. Bussard ramjets might eventually help us reach the near stars, there's no upper limit to their velocity once they're going. Even out at the edges of our Solar System where the interstellar hydrogen thins out to almost nil, the occasional monatomic stellar wind push will add to it.

I always had my eye on Eta Carina as a likely SN candidate.