I am so tempted . . .

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:47 am

I'll have to try that.

Mabye I if I used the right kind of glasses, it would go out of focus enough to match my eyes! How cool would that be!?

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:49 am

Balon wrote:I could always make a tripod, and I always WANTES to travel the world!

Well look, it's yours if you can get here.

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:51 am

Hmm...

I wonder how long it would take by bike....

I need to advance my transportation.

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:01 am

Loremaster wrote:
Balon wrote:I wonder if I stacked a bunch of field glasses in front of each other I could see jupiter......
What will happen is that you'll lose resolution and there will be less light. You need a really good mirror to focus the light.

You mentioned a mirror.

How exactally DOES a telescope work? And where does the mirror go?

Post by **stonemaybe** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:03 am

And where does the mirror go?

the mirror leads to Faerie.

(oops wrong forum

)

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:05 am

Stonemaybe wrote:
And where does the mirror go?
the mirror leads to Faerie.

(oops wrong forum )

You zigged when you should have zagged!

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:07 am

Okay there are two main types of telescopes (and many variations). There are Refractors and Reflectors. Refractors work using lenses, whereas reflectors work using mirrors.

A reflector is a tube that allows light to enter and strike a mirror. This mirror then reflects and focuses light against another mirror placed at an angle to reflect the light into an eyepice. If you have a large mirror, it therefore gathers more light than your eye can, but focuses it into an eyepice so you can see. Thus, a 4.5" mirror 'captures' four point five inches of light. The downside to this is that to get great images you need huge telescopes, and the more mirrors you have the less light reaches your eye. These types of telescopes are called Newtonian telescopes (named after the inventor). Variations include the Dobsonians.

A refractor focuses light as it passes through lenses. The downside is that you get less colour, but the huge benefit is that they are size-efficient.

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:09 am

So the light from where you live affects both kinds? I live in the back woods with very little outside light, mabye a streetlight.

But If I lived in the city, would one work better than the other?

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:12 am

Balon wrote:So the light from where you live affects both kinds? I live in the back woods with very little outside light, mabye a streetlight.

But If I lived in the city, would one work better than the other?

No. Because the more starlight (which means less artificial light), the better. You are simply receiving more light which means a better image. I live in the country and am far away from artificial light, and so the skies are glorious. And either a reflector or refractor would work well.

My opinion is get a reflector.

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:14 am

Differences in cost?

Major or minor?

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:37 am

Balon wrote:Differences in cost?

Major or minor?

Reflectors are less expensive than Refractors. But the differences aren't huge.

Post by **balon!** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:46 am

Looks like a refractor for me! Woo!

Post by **Loredoctor** » Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:52 am

Balon wrote:Looks like a refractor for me! Woo!

Post by **Zarathustra** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:47 am

Haley won't be around for quite a while. I don't have the dates at the top of my head. But many decades.

Telescopes are pretty easy to make. A little bit of math and research are the biggest intellectual barriers. But in terms of materials, the lens and eyepieces are where you'll spend your money.

I have a homemade telescope given to me as a gift from my mother's husband. I can see the rings of Saturn and stripes on Jupiter. It is breathtakingly beautiful . . . but so is a new HDTV. If I had $2300 to spend on entertainment, that's where I'd put my money. And then I could see much better pictures of the planets in high resolution on my TV, without having to go out into the cold!

Post by **Loredoctor** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:17 am

Yeah, I could make one, and have been tempted to in the past, but the whole declination and right ascension system is too 'intimidating' to engineer.

Anyway, I just placed the order for the telescope - that's nearly $3000 spent! It will be arriving in April (at the lastest) as there are no 10" in stock (in all of Australia).

Post by **Cameraman Jenn** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:42 pm

I have a Meade 90mm refractive telescope that I love love love. I also have a variety of different eyepieces and a barlow doubler that allow for variety in viewing.

Post by **A Gunslinger** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:45 pm

Telescopes are pretty easy to make.

I put that one right up there with "hand me that piano" as things you just don't hear every day.

Post by **balon!** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:40 pm

Post by **Avatar** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:23 am

--A

Post by **Damelon** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:45 am

A Gunslinger wrote:
Telescopes are pretty easy to make.
I put that one right up there with "hand me that piano" as things you just don't hear every day.

Actually, though, he's right.

Kevin's Watch

Kevin's Watch

I am so tempted . . .