Re: Titan image from the USA

From: matt (mariusrf_at_bellsouth.net)
Date: 12/05/04 

Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 11:33:01 -0500

Chris1011 wrote in message <20041203104853.06431.00000780@mb-m26.aol.com>...
>>I note he reported seeing as a 5-6/10, Trans 4/6, nothing exceptional..
>>Orion
>
>He is B-S ing. You don't get this kind of detail in mediocre seeing.
>
>Roland Christen

well, let's not go full circle on this one. Theoretically one could get this
kind of detail in 2 arcsec seeing as it was discussed . I realize you are an
accomplished amateur astronomer but please point at some peer-reviewed
professional publications that say Fried is wrong, and his paper determining
the probability of getting a lucky frame through turbulence is wrong, and
all others that followed are wrong. Don't forget that the probability of
imaging such a small target as Titan si actually even better than Fried's
conclusions might imply, because his paper calculates the probability of a
full frame to be diffraction limited, whereas in actuality only a 1 arcsec
patch of it needs to be good in order for the imaging to work .

However, there's something else that indicates the image details are not
real , so my final conclusion is that particular image is not real. Titan's
atmosphere doesn't allow imaging the surface in visible light . The recent
Titan images from NASA are false color, so any attempt to match this guy's
Titan image with the real surface details is nonsense . He's either imaging
in IR , which I don't recall as being the case, or these are
imaging/processing artifacts and he's b.s.'ing , knowingly or not .

best regards,
matt tudor