Re: Refractor vs. Reflector?

From: David Nakamoto (res07oeg_at_verizon.net)
Date: 09/13/04 

Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:16:53 GMT

"Morris Jones" <mojo@devilrock.whiteoaks.com> wrote in message
news:ci4rq8$4rf$1@devilrock.whiteoaks.com...
> Chris.B <chris.b@mail.dk> wrote:
>>What most experienced amateur astronomers quickly forget is that the
>>sky is a big place. Most beginners haven't a clue what to look at (or
>>for).
>
> Typical computerized telescopes don't help much with this. You still
> have to research what's worth looking at. What are M's and NGC's and
> why can't I see Saturn right now? "The computer says it's pointed to
> Pluto, but all I see are stars. Maybe I'll try M74 ..."

As with any hobby or interest, the more you know of the subject the more you
get out of it. GOTO telescopes DON'T negate this important investment in
time and effort to learn something about the skies. They do make it easier
to find the hard to find stuff, but it seems to me that they hinder finding
the easy stuff like bright planets and the moon. I can point any telescope
quicker manually at such objects.

And you're right in that it'll help you to know the movement of objects in
the sky. It's no different than a bird watcher knowing when and where to
watch for certain kirds, or for that matter any sports fan who follows a
certain team to know when they'll be in town and when they're on the TV.

However, the inexpensive GOTO telescopes are not really aimed, I think, at
the person who is already quite interested and knowledgable in things
Astronomical. I suspect they're aimed at the larger group of people who
took that quick look through a telescope and wants to experience more on
their own time, or were attracted to it through an event such as this year's
Venus transit or last year's Mars opposition. Just my opinion.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

>>Where in the rules does it say you have to learn the sky before you
>>can own a telescope?
>
> It's right there in the alignment instructions for your telescope.
> "Use the control paddles to point the telescope at Arcturus."
> (Or Vega, or Spica, or Rigel ...)
>
> Reminds me of a "digital telescope review" I saw in a magazine called Time
> Digital a few years ago. The reviewer bought it so he could observe the
> 2000 "alignment of the planets." The telescope didn't help -- all the
> planets were on the far side of the sun. So he used it to look at stars.
> He kind of gave up because "one star looks pretty much like another."
>
> What if you want to look at a flock of geese or an airplane -- or "that
> star over there?" There are a lot of computerized telescopes that just
> won't do that.
>
> As I've always said, where you observe has more impact than the
> telescope you use.
>
> Honestly, I have nothing against GOTO telescopes, but saying that
> they excuse you from having to learn how the sky works is naive.

Very true. My analogy to bird watching or sports team fan applies quite
well.

But as I see it, the current world is fostering the belief that knowledge,
wisdom, and just plain using your brain are relics of a by-gone era, and
that you can get money, and supposedly the happiness that comes with it, by
using just about anything else except the mental capacity that the Good Lord
gave humans and no other animal on the face of the earth. True for a VERY
few people, not true for almost everyone you're likely to meet.

And with computers, the job of thinking appears to have shifted from the
person to the machine, another falacy. I wonder about the future world.

> I still contend that giving a beginner a typical computerized telescope
> approximately doubles the amount of time required to start having fun
> with it.
>
> So you don't learn how the sky works, instead you spend the time learning
> the quirks of the controller. And you _still_ have to learn the sky.
>
> I think it's much more fun to do it the other way around.
>
> Mojo

People forget that we used to depend on some basic knowledge; the time the
moon is in the sky, the patterns of stars that can tell direction and time,
the passage of the Sun across the sky. It wasn't that long ago that such
knowledge was replaced for the vast public by watches, calendars, et al.

And it wasn't that long ago that the only way to get more from astronomy
than an occasional look at the moon was to know when things were going to be
up there, and any old telescope would do.

For those novices that want to get more from the hobby, the real question it
seems to me is how much real desire there is to invest the time and effort
to learn. Computer's aren't going to substitute for learning, in ANY hobby
or interest. It might make the process easier, but that's all. 

-- 
   Yours Truly,
   --- Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
       'raid if you're afraid you'll have to overlook it.
   Besides, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantcast