HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sterner@warper.jhuapl.edu (Ray Sterner)
Subject: Re: PC Software
Keywords: For the PC
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: 27 Jan 93 13:49:15 GMT

mld900@anusf.anu.edu.au (Murray Dow) writes:


>|> 
>|> one year ago, i bought a shareware called skyglobe. it's useful 
>|> for observing the sky (my version is rather slow, but new ones
>|> are certainly better). you should be able to get it from a 
>|> shareware club
>|> -- 
>The version of skyglobe I have only calculates the moons position
>once a day, so that it moves in jumps. Does any one know if new versions
>have fixed this?
>-- 
>Murray Dow                         GPO Box 4 Canberra ACT 2601 Australia
>Supercomputer Facility             Phone: +61 6 2495028
>Australian National University     Fax:   +61 6 2473425
>mld900@anusf.anu.edu.au

  Yes that problem is fixed.  I just tried version 3.5 (3.52 I think) by
  zooming in on the moon, telling SkyGlobe to track the moon, and
  stepping by 1 minute steps.  The moon appeared to move smoothly
  against the background stars.  There are a number of new features in
  the latest version.

  Ray Sterner                     sterner%str.decnet@warper.jhuapl.edu 
  Johns Hopkins University        North latitude 39.16 degrees.
  Applied Physics Laboratory      West longitude 76.90 degrees.
  Laurel, MD 20723-6099
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher)
Subject: Re: "Modeling" the Expanding Universe?
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:51:38 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Just so I'm clear on this: 

If one adds two test particles to the universe, the general
expansion does NOT by itself cause the test particles to move
apart. Subsequent movement of the test particles depends on
their mutual gravity and the gravitational or electromagnetic
forces imposed on them by other matter/energy in the usual,
non-cosmological ways. Distant objects will in general 
move away from the test particles, because the distant objects
inherited their velocity from the big bang and continue to move
with that velocity (slowing due to mutual gravity, to which the
test particles add trivially). One can say that space itself is
expanding, but this expansion does not drag particles along
with it; it might be better to say that the expanding distribution
of original matter/energy creates new space as it expands. 
A big, misleading flaw in the "expanding balloon" or "rising loaf"
pictures is that added test "particles" (dots painted on the balloon,
raisins stuck into the loaf) WILL move away from each other.

Right?
Xref: sparky sci.astro:14513 sci.space:19893
From: bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Modelling the expanding universe?
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:22:58 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I would like to point out to Tom and others that I never suggested
that the solar system was contracting, in the sense that the actual
radii of orbits were getting smaller.  It should be obvious that I do not 
believe this since I supported Tom in arguing that if the solar system
were expanding the effect on orbits would be detectable.  Of course,
just because you don't believe something doesn't mean someone won't
ascribe that belief to you anyway.

I was, rather, trying to say that Newtonian gravitational collapse
and a "contracting universe" were two sides of the same coin.
Consider two points separated by a small amount in the early universe
with some tiny mass-excess in between them (say the points are particles
destined to wind up in our galaxy.)  In the early universe, the points
will separate due to the overall expansion, but as matter collapses
into the overdense region the points will eventually fall into it and
come together again, like long-lost cousins.  Here are some kludgy
ASCII graphics:
                        --------------
                --------              --------
  early  *------                              -----_____  galaxy forms
         *------                              -----
                --------              --------
                        --------------
    time ----->

The lines represent geodesics followed by the particles.  I hope
this shows 

I will now answer another question of Tom's.  I had stated that regions
whose density is greater than somewhat above the critical density of
the universe do not participate in the general expansion; thus the solar
system, and galaxy, are not expanding.  Tom asked, if the density is
so much greater than the critical density, why don't these regions
collapse like expanding universes in reverse?  

Obviously, one could say that a star's collapse to a dense remnant or
black hole is something like that, but I find that unsatisfying.  Tom
is asking, why don't these regions behave like miniature closed 
universes?  The answer is, boundary conditions.  You have to match
the overdense region onto the rest of the universe.  We observe that
the universe as a whole is fairly close to flat at the present time,
and a closed-universe geometry can't be "matched up" to the flat 
geometry, unless the curvature of the dense region is itself almost
flat. 

Consider the solar system.  Why does it not shrink into itself like
a shrinking balloon, the reverse of the expanding balloon usually
used as an analogy for the expanding universe?  After all, the solar
system is much more dense than the critical density.  The reason
is that it has to match onto the essentially flat space outside 
the solar system.  I think that now I have said enough on this topic.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: zellner@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: HST sites
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:42:57 GMT

In article <1jvcesINNki1@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>, ko_mike@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu 
(Michael Y Ko) writes:

 > I know there are three main sites that receive and control information from 
 > the Hubble Space Telescope. I think they're JPL, Goddard, and Space
 > Telescope Institute in Baltimore.
 > 
 > Can anyone tell me what the function is of the Space Telescope Institute?

HST telemetry usually goes to a TDRS in geosynchronous orbit, then down to
White Sands, then via some commercial satellite to Goddard.  People at Goddard
watch the engineering telemetry, especially for health and safety concerns,
and also do most of the real-time commanding that is necessary.  Goddard
also receives the science data but has few facilities to look at it or analyze 
it.

Goddard ships both the science and engineering telemetry to STScI in Baltimore.
We also look at the engineering telemetry, but more specifically at the actual
science observations in progress to verify that the science instruments did 
they were supposed to do.  We get all the science data, take a quick look at 
most of it to verify its integrity, package it up for the Investigators, and
archive it.  Our real-time commanding is presently limited to making small
pointing corrections and occasinally setting an event flag.  We will have more
real-time responsibilities for aligning the COSTAR mirrors. 

I do not know of any real-time link to JPL.  Perhaps you are thinking of 
Marshall Flight Center, which had some responsibilites in the early stages
following launch.

Ben
 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: neely@iowasp.physics.uiowa.edu
Subject: Dobsonians
Organization: Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:23:20 GMT


I guess I'll ad my $0.02 in.  As far as bang for the buck, the
dobsonian can't be beat.  I would reccomend buying the components
and building it yourself, however.  The earlier Odessey's were great
telescopes.  Recent models, however, leave a little bit to be
desired.  A friend of mine bought one last year.  The telescope
came with the mirror duct taped to a round block of wood with
a hose clamp tightened around the mirror so that the duct tape
would not loose it's grip.  This was the primary mirror mount.  
Needless to say, this is NOT the best way to mount a mirror.
Also, the focuser consisted of a plumbing fitting that you stuck
an eyepiece into.  Focusing was a GREAT pain.

After buying a rack and pinion focuser and a primary mirror mount,
the telescope worked great.  For the money, the optics are a good
buy.  You will have to spend some extra money on the Odessey telescope
to make it usable.  Older Odesseys have good mirror mounts and 
real focusers.  

I don't have any expierence with the other company that you mentioned.


Whatever telescope you end up with, I highly reccomend the Telrad.
I consider this the best product to come along in amateur astronomy
since I started taking notice.  I have one on my dob and I can
find objects in seconds where my comrads are taking several
minutes.

Clear skies...


			-Matt Neely
			neely@iowasp.physics.uiowa.edu


Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: kjones@luke.eecs.wsu.edu (Kent Jones - EECS)
Subject: Cloudless Earth Satellite Mosaic?
Organization: Washington State University!
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 03:01:21 GMT

My apologies for the post, but I could not locate this in the otherwise
very comprehensive FAQ. Does anyone know if the data for the cloudless
view of the earth featured in the November 1990 issue of Sky and Telescope
is available to the general public?

I have the address to write to, but would like a email address or phone
number for the GeoSphere project. 

Thanks in advance for any info...

Kent Jones
kjones@eecs.wsu.edu
Washington State University at Spokane
From: Jeff.Cook@FtCollinsCO.NCR.COM (Jeff Cook)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Tycho Apocrypha
Date: 21 Jan 93 10:06:32 GMT
	<1993Jan20.234308.20564@athena.mit.edu> <1jlm17INNs34@gap.caltech.edu>
Organization: none
In-reply-to: jafoust@cco.caltech.edu's message of 21 Jan 93 08:14:31 GMT

In article <1jlm17INNs34@gap.caltech.edu> jafoust@cco.caltech.edu (Jeffrey Alan Foust) writes:

>Tycho...sported a silver nose (his own having been lost in a youthful
>duel over mathematics)...

Swell fellow.  I'm curious--what happened to the other guy?  That guy
missed (sort of), maybe Tycho did too.
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Cook                                  Jeff.Cook@FtCollinsCO.NCR.com
"Millions long for immortality who do not    bx711@cleveland.FreeNet.Edu
know what to do with themselves on a rainy      72506.237@compuserve.com
Sunday afternoon."  -- Susan Ertz                 Compuserve:  72506,237
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: steven.williams@p8.f416.n711.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Steven Williams)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: SCTs and their moveable mirrors.
Organization: Fidonet. Gate admin is fido@socs.uts.edu.au
Date: 19 Jan 93 00:58:18 GMT

Original to: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org
 > It is a well established result that SCTs which have moveable mirrors for
 > focusing are at their best at only one point among their many possible
 > positions.

 > Jim's Mobile now sells a focuser for SCTs that works without moving the
 > mirror (What an idea!). If positions of the mirror on one side of perfect
 > lead to undercorrected images and positions on the other lead to over
 > corrected images you could use this to tune you telescope for no
 > sperical abberation.


Just an added point here, we use a Celestron C-14 and due to the focal
length of 3,910mm, we have problems with guiding due to mirror shift. We
lock the main mirror with the shipping screws, and use the adaptor you
mentioned above. Works just fine.

Steven Williams - Astronomer.

--- Chameleon 0.10 / FastPoint 1.39
 * Origin: Grove Creek Observatory, Australia (3:711/416.8)
From: tjt@Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim Thompson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Tycho Apocrypha
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:17:32 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: world
Reply-To: tjt@Jpl.Nasa.Gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: scn1.jpl.nasa.gov

   I have consulted one of our Swedish astronomers, and he tells me that Tycho
fought a duel while he was a student, perhaps in Germany(?). At the time, the epee
or foil dueling swords were not in vogue amongst the Danish nobles, so the duel
was fought with broadswords! That was when his nose was more likely crushed than
lopped off. That's all I know. Sounds like a job for the Creative Anachronism's
folks to me.
                       Tim Thompson
                       JPL Div 32 SCN

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: chris@chrism.demon.co.uk (Chris Marriott)
Subject: Availability of "Explanatory Supplement"
Distribution: world
Organization: None
Reply-To: chris@chrism.demon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 11:12:17 +0000

Does anyone know if the long-awaited new edition of the "Explanatory
Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac" has been published yet?

The reason I ask is that I heard it was due to be published towards the end
of last year, but HMSO (The Astronomical Almanac publishers in the UK)
claim that their computer just shows the 1984 edition as "out of print"
with no replacement scheduled.

I'd appreciate any information that anyone might have on this.  I find the
old edition of the "Explanatory Supplement" an invaluable reference source,
but it *is* now very out of date, and an up-to-date edition would be useful
to have.

Thank you,

Chris
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Chris Marriott                           | chris@chrism.demon.co.uk    |
| Warrington, UK                           | BIX: cmarriott              |
|                                          | CIX: cmarriott              |
| Save the whales.  Collect the whole set. | CompuServe: 100113,1140     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: stevep@apollo.HP.COM (Steve Pearce)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: comets in 16th century
Date: 27 Jan 1993 09:17:17 GMT
Organization: SSG/CSY Pinewood, UK
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpopdlcm.pwd.hp.com

In article <3403@ucl-cs.uucp>, O.MostynOwen@cs.ucl.ac.uk writes:
|> Please can someone help me?
|> 
|> I need to find references to the major comet sightings in the year 1506.
|> 
|> Is there a compendium of such things, and if so what is it called.
|> 
|> Does anyone know of ANY comet sightings in the early 16th century.
|> 
|> I have been asked by a historian to calculate the countries in which a comet
|> would be visible given that it was visible in Britain at a particular date.
|> His reference does not specify in which constellation the comet was seen in
|> 1506, hence my question.
|> 
|> Thanking you, 
|> 
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Owen Mostyn-Owen				     +44 71 387 7050 ext 3673
|> Internet: omostyno@cs.ucl.ac.uk
|> Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT

There was a comet in 1506. It was discovered by the Chinese on July 31st and
described as a "large sphere" without a tail. Several days later it passed above
Ursa Major and at maximum the tail was estimated to be nearly 15 degrees. It
was last observed on August 14th. The perhelion date has been estimated as
September 4th.

I hope that helps.

-- 
=======================================================================
!!             Steve Pearce		Hewlett-Packard              !!
!!					SSG/CSY Pinewood, UK	     !!	
=======================================================================
From: chris47@uxb.liv.ac.uk (Chris Brown )
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: PC Software
Date: 23 Jan 93 15:51:14 GMT
Organization: The University of Liverpool
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Try Astronomical Algorhythmns by Jan Meeus and you can get the software
on disk.
To get a copy quickly phone directory enquires (uuugh!!! --  sorry!!)
ask for Earth and Sky /Rosmary Naylor  in Todmorden.
If she aint got it    nobody has.

Chris
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: era_pul@halley.ericsson.se (Peter Ulfheden consultant)
Subject: Dew (was Frosty the telescope)
Organization: Ericsson Radio Systems AB, Kista, Sweden.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:54:36 GMT

In article <33608@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson) writes:

|   Path: ericom!sunic!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!agate!boulder!csn!scicom!wats
|   From: wats@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM (Bruce Watson)
|   Newsgroups: sci.astro
|   Date: 21 Jan 93 17:55:36 GMT
|   References: <1jgr7eINN11f@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu|
|   Organization: Alpha Science Computer Network, Denver, Co.
|   Lines: 14
|
|   In article <1jgr7eINN11f@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu| clv2@po.CWRU.Edu (Clayton L. Van Doren) writes:
|   |
|   |my dealer.  I brought it in and gently warmed and dried it
|   |with a hair dryer, with the scope pointing up and the visual
|   |off (to let the cold air inside the scope out.  I warmed and
|   |dried all of the optics the same way.  Is this a safe method?
|   |Does anyone have any other suggestions?  
|   |
|   I would have brought the telescope inside and let it warm to a temp
|   above freezing slowly -- the same with dew.
|
|
|
|   -- 
|   Bruce Watson (wats@scicom) Bulletin 629-49 Item 6700 Extract 75,131
|

The reason to that dew forms is that the abient air is cooled by your
telescope, which radiates its heat into space, to a temperature which
is below the dewpoint..

If dew hasn't formed yet, it probably will when you bring your scope
indoors. That is because the indoor air has a higher humidity and
can't keep it's moist when it is cooled by scope/bino/eyepiece or
whatever you have.

A way to avoid that dew forms on your equipment is to keep it in dry
air. That means, if you put your stuff in a plastic bag _BEFORE_ you
bring it indoors you will have dry air inside the bag. The dew will
instead form on the _OUTSIDE_ of the plastic bag. This procedure is
however only possible if dew or frost hasn't formed while outdoors.

Clear Skies

Peter




--

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


 Peter Ulfheden              |  era_pul@ki.ericsson.se
 Amorinav. 3                 |  Phone: +46 8 751 02 15
 S-191 44 Sollentuna, SWEDEN |  Fax:   +46 8 35 04 29
=======================================================
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Televue PRONTO
From: mt_vodicka@fencer.cis.dsto.gov.au
Date: 22 Jan 93 09:35:26 +1100
Organization: D.S.T.O. Aeronautical Research Laboratory

Does anyone have any experience with the new Televue PRONTO telescope.
The list price seems to be around $700 (US) which is a lot for a 70mm
although it does have ED glass.
Roger.V.
w
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology-Office of Information Technology
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 03:07:22 EST
From: <LABBEY@GITVM1.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: research grade vs. commercial grade
Distribution: na

"Research grade" means that his telescope is just like any other.  There are
no grades in telescope quality.  No such system exists.  Quality varies
from specimen to specimen.

Meade will stand behind their product, but I would want to have a very
experienced amateur check it out before I paid my money.

Leonard Abbey, F.R.A.S.
Georgia Tech Research Institute
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
labbey@gitvm1.gatech.edu
From: jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Frosty the telescope
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:29:36 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <24JAN199301451186@reg.triumf.ca> asnd@reg.triumf.ca (Donald Arseneau) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.211557.11926@craycos.com>, jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies) writes...
>>I've found frosting of eyepieces to be a problem on cold nights also.
>>You can un-fog an eyepiece by wrapping your hand around the barrel for
>>a few minutes, although you have to take off your glove for this and
>>will wind up with a cold hand instead :-).  Also, breathing on a cold
>>eyepiece is a real bad idea -- breath condenses really well on the
>>lens surface, and takes forever to clear up.
>
>I find that eyepiexes fog up by looking through them!  I think it is the 
>moisture coming from my eye.  Often standing up straight for half a minute
>lets it clear up; sometimes I lift out the eyepiece, hold the barrel in my 
>fist, and wave it around.

Another trick is to place the eyepiece next to your mouth and gently
inhale (drawing air across the lens).  Be careful not to exhale, or
you'll wind up with more fog.  This isn't always easy if you're cold
and bundled up, though.
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: buell@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu (Jim Buell)
Subject: Re: Dark matter
Originator: news@essex.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:42:44 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

I got this from a colloquium speaker at my department. Those
people who try to explain the structure of the Universe 
believe that you need both two types of dark matter to
get both superclusters and a Universe with omega=1.
Maybe you need both massive neutrinos and something like
axions.

Jim Buell

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
Subject: Re: Modelling the expanding universe?
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 07:29:26 GMT


     I am posting the following E-mail by request of its sender:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From buell@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu Thu Jan 21 07:51:07 1993
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:51:41 CST
From: buell@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu (Jim Buell)
Organization:  Dept. Physics & Astronomy, The University of Oklahoma
To: metares@well.sf.ca.us
Subject: Re: Modelling the expanding universe?
Newsgroups: sci.astro

In sci.astro you write:

>dpalmer@csulb.edu (David Palmer) writes:

>> is a solar system (or other volume of space less than a few cubic light
>> years) too small to show a measureable effect?  If so, this would seem
>> to fit the observation that the more distant the object, the greater the
>> apparent recession from the observer.

> [TVF] If that same rate, 50-100 km/s/Mpc, is prorated down to solar
> system dimensions, no such expansion is seen in planetary orbits.  The
> question we are discussing is, why not?  -|Tom|-

We can't see it because you can't go about solving GR for the solar
system in the same way you do for the Universe. In the universe you
have to postulate that no matter where you are the Universe will look
the same. If you go to another galaxy most of the other galaxies will
appear to be receding from you. However in the solar system you can't
make the same assumption since there is a prefered coordinate system
with the Sun at the center.
>--
> Tom Van Flandern / Washington, DC / metares@well.sf.ca.us
> Meta Research was founded to foster research into ideas not otherwise
> supported because they conflict with mainstream theories in Astronomy.

Jim Buell
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is my reply:

     Jim, what you say is true, but seems irrelevant.  If we take the
center of the local supercluster, we have a preferred frame in which Hubble
expansion does occur.  So what's the connection between choice of frame and
whether or not expansion occurs?  -|Tom|-

-- 
Tom Van Flandern / Washington, DC / metares@well.sf.ca.us
Meta Research was founded to foster research into ideas not otherwise
supported because they conflict with mainstream theories in Astronomy.