ThePortForum.com

The BBC, in an article entitled [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25860454]Nearby supernova dazzles astronomers[/url], wrote:

An exploding star has been spotted in the night sky - the closest supernova to Earth that has been seen in decades.

The dramatic event happened 12 million light years away in Messier 82 - known as the cigar galaxy for its shape.

It was discovered by undergraduates during a telescope class at the University of London Observatory.

"One minute we're eating pizza then five minutes later we've helped to discover a supernova. I couldn't believe it," said student Tom Wright.

"It reminds me why I got interested in astronomy in the first place."

Other links: ucl.ac.uk; space.com.

The BBC almost wrote:The Official Astronomer to ThePortForum was not available for comment.

According to my books the cigar galaxy is easily viewed through my new telescope. If the sky clears I will look for it and report back.

Presumably underground natural cellars are protected by brick and wet soil, but are ‘shed cellars’ safe from the scary super-explosion neutrino rays? Or do I really need eight light years of lead?

If the light from the explosion that happened 12 million years ago has arrived here then so have the neutrino rays. If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

DRT wrote:If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

We are all already doomed. We are all going to die. Eventually. Don't Panic.

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

We are all already doomed. We are all going to die. Eventually. Don't Panic.

Indeed, the death rate remains steady at one per person.

I think I found the galaxy, but the sky is too bright and too hazy to make out any detail

LGTrotter wrote:

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

We are all already doomed. We are all going to die. Eventually. Don't Panic.

Indeed, the death rate remains steady at one per person.

Higher, I think. Some people die, are revived, and then die again.

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

We are all already doomed. We are all going to die. Eventually. Don't Panic.

Does this mean that I should open my cellar doors and ask for help to drink everything?

AHB wrote:

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:If we are doomed we are already doomed. Enjoy the view.

We are all already doomed. We are all going to die. Eventually. Don't Panic.

Does this mean that I should open my cellar doors and ask for help to drink everything?

No. It means you should contact someone in the American mid-west and ask them how to build a anti-apocalypse bunker. You then move your Port, Riedel glasses, guns, laptop, canned food and bottled water, fuel and family (note priority order) into the bunker. You will be fine.

AHB wrote:Does this mean that I should open my cellar doors and ask for help to drink everything?

Open one bottle of the 446 different ports you have (see pointless statistics) and we'll be there as soon as we can to help you clear up the stragglers. Incidentally I wonder what the practical limits on the number of ports at a tasting would be?

The decision has been made.

Having spent a year with my 5" Skywatcher Heritage Dobsonian I experimented by purchasing the 8" Skywatcher Skyliner Dobsonian to see for myself whether or not size matters. It does.

I have done lots of research into what is available and what is ideal for my needs. The decision has been made and the order has been placed. At some point soon one of these will arrive at Chez T...


Celestron CPC 1100 GPS (XLT)

I am lost. I thought that with telescopes there was a limit on how many one could usefully own. Will this replace the other one you have been cheering to the rafters? Looks very nice though. Nothing so vulgar as a price I see.

LGTrotter wrote:I am lost. I thought that with telescopes there was a limit on how many one could usefully own. Will this replace the other one you have been cheering to the rafters?

An analogy that might explain the problem:

1. Owen buys a case of Fonseca 1985. He drinks two bottles and decides that he likes Fonseca 1985.

2. Owen buys a case of Fonseca 1970. He likes it more than 1985.

Question: Does Owen sell his remaining bottles of Fonseca 1985 or does he choose to use them at an appropriate time?

LGTrotter wrote:Looks very nice though.

{smugness}

LGTrotter wrote:Nothing so vulgar as a price I see.

Nothing to see here. Please move along.

Looked up the price. In the above analogy you have just bought a case of 48 Fonseca after the first two bottles of 85. And you've been drinking bin 27 up til now.

Good work.

LGTrotter wrote:I thought that with telescopes there was a limit on how many one could usefully own.

More seriously, they do have different uses. "Dobs" (Dobsonian) telescopes provide a great "price-to-aperture" ratio. More aperture means more light hitting the optics of the scope so images are bigger and brighter. Other types of scope provide other qualities that Dobs cannot, but the price per inch of aperture is much greater.

I will now have three scopes. The small one will be rarely used but would be great to take somewhere in the back of the car to someone who is interested in seeing Jupiter and its moons for the first (and probably only) time or to whip out if I have five minutes to look at the moon. The 8-incher will be great if I have half an hour to spare for a quick browse around known objects. The CPC will be for when I want to spend time with it finding new things to look at or taking pictures or videos of what I am observing. Hopefully I will be able to share some of that here.

LGTrotter wrote:Looked up the price. In the above analogy you have just bought a case of 48 Fonseca after the first two bottles of 85. And you've been drinking bin 27 up til now.

Good work.

I sincerely hope that your interpretation of the analogy is correct.

DRT wrote: "Dobs" (Dobsonian) telescopes provide a great "price-to-aperture" ratio. More aperture means more light hitting the optics of the scope so images are bigger and brighter. Other types of scope provide other qualities that Dobs cannot.

What other qualities could be more important than light gathering? Surely the size of the optics is the sine qua non here. I can't imagine that looking through the back of it is an advantage.

LGTrotter wrote:

DRT wrote: "Dobs" (Dobsonian) telescopes provide a great "price-to-aperture" ratio. More aperture means more light hitting the optics of the scope so images are bigger and brighter. Other types of scope provide other qualities that Dobs cannot.

What other qualities could be more important than light gathering? Surely the size of the optics is the sine qua non here. I can't imagine that looking through the back of it is an advantage.

Is a double-magnum of Sandeman Vau 2000 better than a half bottle of Cockburn 1908?

There are a few different types of telescope, each with particular features that make it better or worse for particular uses.

The largest difference between a Dobsonian and most of the others is that a Dob only has mirrors whilst others have lenses to correct and enhance the image. Lenses cost lots of money, especially good ones. Another difference that adds ££££ is whether or not the telescope contains electronic gizmos to find and track objects across the sky. My Dob needs manual adjustment every few seconds and relies on me to point it in the correct place. The CPC will find what I want to look at and then keep it in the viewer for as long as I want to look at it.

The BBC: Astrophotography: Tips for photographing the stars.

jdaw1 wrote:The BBC: Astrophotography: Tips for photographing the stars.

If only it were that simple

I notice the newest joiner of has the nom de plume 'planetary'. New perspectives on the heavens perchance? Or are they merely 'calling occupants' as Karen Carpenter sings.

Interesting. I have the same user name here and on a couple of astro forums. My avatar is the same on all three.

Perhaps the Klingons have followed me here using their cloaking device?

DRT wrote:Interesting. I have the same user name here and on a couple of astro forums. My avatar is the same on all three.

Perhaps the Klingons have followed me here using their cloaking device?

It's definitely The Borg.

LGTrotter wrote:

DRT wrote:Interesting. I have the same user name here and on a couple of astro forums. My avatar is the same on all three.

Perhaps the Klingons have followed me here using their cloaking device?

It's definitely The Borg.

Resistance is futile. You will drink Port.

Santa visited Chesterfield today!
Unfortunately I am stuck in London until Thursday evening

Oh Derek, it's huge!

Good job you've got these lovely winter skies to try it out on.

LGTrotter wrote:Oh Derek, it's huge!

I so am not going to comment on that lol

LGTrotter wrote:Good job you've got these lovely winter skies to try it out on.

I got up early this morning and got a fabulous view of Saturn and its largest moon Titan through the new scope. Very pleased

I'm looking forward to some nice calm, dark conditions when I can get the whole family lined-up at the same object and compare the views through each to convince myself that the investment has been worth it...

The first pic through my new scope...

Very cool!

Are you going to watch the Super Bowl in New Jersey with that thing?

Glenn E. wrote:Are you going to watch the Super Bowl in New Jersey with that thing?

My garden faces west so I might give it a go

Really good. I went for a walk with the littl'un at dusk and noticed that lovely sliver of a moon. Nice to see you enjoyed the same view, although better.

My wife and I went for a walk after the rugby as well and noticed that as well as the brightly lit sliver, the rest of the moon's disc facing us seemed to have a small amount of light on it - it looked like a shadow against the black of the sky; I could only assume this was reflected light from the earth causing it to be faintly visible?

These moon slivers are always rather faint. I keep waiting to see one at midnight, for better contrast, but never seem to look on the correct night. Admittedly I’m not assiduous about looking.

Venus was rather bright this morning when I went for my constitutional. Very noticeable against even quite a bright dawn sky.

jdaw1 wrote:These moon slivers are always rather faint. I keep waiting to see one at midnight, for better contrast, but never seem to look on the correct night. Admittedly I’m not assiduous about looking.

The moon is tracking fairly close to the sun in the sky at the moment so will be gone well before midnight. Your best chance of seeing this sliver on a dark sky is to look SSW at between 18:30 and 19:30 this evening, clouds permitting.

DRT wrote:

jdaw1 wrote:These moon slivers are always rather faint. I keep waiting to see one at midnight, for better contrast, but never seem to look on the correct night. Admittedly I’m not assiduous about looking.

The moon is tracking fairly close to the sun in the sky at the moment so will be gone well before midnight. Your best chance of seeing this sliver on a dark sky is to look SSW at between 18:30 and 19:30 this evening, clouds permitting.

‟moon slivers” = ‟moon is tracking fairly close to the sun”? Gosh, you don’t say.

My fault: I should have added a wink to the earlier post.

Not only a budding astronomer, he's also a bit of singer, our DRT. See below for his theme song:

Moon sliver, thinner than a smile
I'm tracking you in style, all night
Cassegrain reflector, a faint light detector
11 inch aperture makes everything bright

Polished mirrors, with which to see the sky
There's such a lot of sky to see
I'm after the very highest end
Where light doesn't bend
My very distant friend, moon sliver and me

All together now!

PopulusTremula wrote:he's also a bit of singer, our DRT.!

I'm not planning on applying for X-Factor any time soon

DRT wrote:

PopulusTremula wrote:he's also a bit of singer, our DRT.!

I'm not planning on applying for X-Factor any time soon

Do we need to hold the 2014 pre-Harvest Tour tasting in a karaoke bar?

Glenn E. wrote:

DRT wrote:

PopulusTremula wrote:he's also a bit of singer, our DRT.!

I'm not planning on applying for X-Factor any time soon

Do we need to hold the 2014 pre-Harvest Tour tasting in a karaoke bar?

No. My rendition of It's Raining Men was not well received the last (and only) time I performed it so I have officially hung up my microphone.

DRT wrote:

Glenn E. wrote:

DRT wrote:

PopulusTremula wrote:he's also a bit of singer, our DRT.!

I'm not planning on applying for X-Factor any time soon

Do we need to hold the 2014 pre-Harvest Tour tasting in a karaoke bar?

No. My rendition of It's Raining Men was not well received the last (and only) time I performed it so I have officially hung up my microphone.

Perhaps you just needed more Port before your performance?

I didn't have any Port, but it was in Portugal.

Raining men is a wonderful thought which cheered me terribly. But I always assumed that 'I will survive' would be your anthem.

The floor of heaven is not 'thick inlaid with pattines of bright gold' tonight. I can hardly wait for you to put up some pictures of celestial thingummys, or failing that a view of Daniel's smalls.

LGTrotter wrote:I can hardly wait for you to put up some pictures of celestial thingummys, or failing that a view of Daniel's smalls.

I can assure you that my 11-incher will never be pointed at Belfast.

What's this about panties of bright gold? I thought this thread was meant to be about the higher things.