HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Night Lights
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:55:44 GMT

In article <roelle.724110715@uars_mag>, roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes:
> mcovingt@aisun3.ai.uga.edu (Michael Covington) writes:
> 
>>One idea we ought to be promoting vigorously is the use of passive
>>infrared motion detectors on outside lights.
> 
>>Advantages:
> 
>>(1) Lights come on automatically when needed.
>>(2) Lights are NOT on when NOT needed.  Save electricity, save money,
>>     save astronomy...
>>(3) Lights scare the _wits_ out of a burglar (whereas continuous
>>     lighting merely helps him find his way in).
> 
> disadvantage:
> 
> (1) The next door neighbor, who's an amateur astronomer, gets drenched
> with light every time he raises his arm to focus the telescope.
> 
> I guess the advantages outweigh the disadvantages! :-)


Hear Hear!!  If everyone followed the rule "If it crosses your property 
line and falls on someone else's land, your light is trespassing", then 
there would be a lot less problems.  Forgive me if I interpret being 
shot with photons on my own property as a hostile act.  If you must 
use outside lights, keep their output to yourself.  

And for (3) - the time I was burgled, the first thing the scum did 
upon gaining entry was to TURN ON the damn LIGHTS so they could see 
what they were doing.  Burglers can actually be SCARED of the dark! 

Wm. Hathaway 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu (Michael J. Edelman)
Subject: Re: Purchasing a portable telescope
Reply-To: mje@pookie.pass.wayne.edu
Organization: Wayne State University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:55:21 GMT

In article 3986@linus.mitre.org, chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux) writes:
         
                    [...stuff on Coulter deleted...]
>
>My own view is that any 8" mirror not usable on the planets without masking
>above 40x ought to be used as a dinner plate. Even the original optics on
>a Meade 8" SCT I owned were sharp at 100x and I made Meade replace them. The
>fact the mirror is F 4.5 is no excuse either. I have a 20" F5 which is more
>difficult to manufacture by far than a 8" F4.5 that is absolutely crisp at
>100x (proportionately the same) and if you have been following my Mars Observations is used on the planets at 360x.
>
>I have looked through optics that were tested as almost 1 wave out at the
>wavefront that are better than what you are describing.
>
>This is not said to make Mike feel bad. After all he does have some
>appreciation of Good Optics since he bought a Questar 3.5" for a good
>deal more than he paid for the oulter. It is saying beware of bad mirrors.
>Personally, I wouldn't use a 8" Scope that wasn't sharp above 40x on
>Deep Sky let alone planets.

I couldn't agree more. The fact that a Coulter 8" mirror can be had for
$150 or so doesn't really make up for the bad resolution. Still, *someone*
has to buy my Coulter! It's been noted that you *can* buy real 1/10th wave mirrors...but they'll cost a lot more than $150, or even the $400+ that most
vendors charge. 

>
>Some thoughts about off axis masks: I find it interesting that Mike has mentioned
>using a 3" off axis mask to help. If a mirror is a figure of revolution with
>a 1/2 mirror masking the mirror it is still 1/2 wave. Maximum Longitudinal and
>transverse aberrations will be just as bad.
>
>I think that a mask can help in two ways.
>
>1) You can get better seeing.

That's certainly a big part.


>2) The part of the mirror that is worst is almost certainly the outer rim. The
>outer rim also collects the most light. By using an offaxis mask you are still
>using a small portion of the outer rim but since the mask is circular it is
>contributing less light compared to the middle of the mask. You'll still get
>garbage from that part of the outer rim you use but the amount of garbage is
>much less. It stinks like an outhouse instead of like a Sewage Treatment Plant.
>

Well put. I think there's also the fact that you're now working with an f/12
system instead of an f/5 system, and certain errors like spherical aberrations are 
minimized to an extent. 

       --mike



Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 12 December
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 13 Dec 92 10:19:16 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 347, 12/12/92
10.7 FLUX=165.6  90-AVG=134        SSN=179      BKI=2101 2221  BAI=004
BGND-XRAY=B5.2     FLU1=1.3E+06  FLU10=1.1E+04  PKI=2001 2222  PAI=006
  BOU-DEV=018,006,006,005,012,012,010,-5506   DEV-AVG=009 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C2.6   @ 1552UT    XRAY-MIN= B4.6   @ 1740UT   XRAY-AVG= B6.2
NEUTN-MAX= +002%  @ 2145UT   NEUTN-MIN= -003%  @ 2050UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.0%
  PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 2305UT     PCA-MIN= -0.3DB @ 1510UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55422NT @ 0257UT   BOUTF-MIN=55396NT @ 1847UT  BOUTF-AVG=55415NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+134NT@ 1834UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+006NT@ 1007UT  G7-AVG=+089,+026,+011
GOES6-MAX=P:+151NT@ 1834UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-014NT@ 2237UT  G6-AVG=+105,-007,+031
 FLUXFCST=STD:170,170,175;SESC:170,170,175 BAI/PAI-FCST=010,007,005/010,010,010
    KFCST=2233 3322 2223 3322  27DAY-AP=013,007   27DAY-KP=3222 4433 3122 2222
 WARNINGS=*SWF
   ALERTS=**245STRM:2202-2346UTC
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Detecting Second-Order GR Effects in Binary Pulsars
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:55:44 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <BzD29o.G43@well.sf.ca.us> metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern) writes:
>
>matt@physics2.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:
>
: The claim, then, is that gravitational radiation is *not* a solution to the
: vacuum form of the Einstein field equations?
:
: Frankly, I find that claim very difficult to accept.  The vacuum Einstein
: equations just aren't all that complicated, and I don't see any way that
: you could fail to get waves from them.  Can you provide some more details?

>     Okay, Matt, here's a quick summary of Yu's argument.
... He comments that several versions of the quadrupole
>formula have been derived with different interpretations and varying degrees
>of consistency by these authors.

	Huh? All the GR literature I've ever seen has quoted only
_one_ formula for the lowest order of G-wave emission. There _might_
have been some controversy in the early years of the field, but that's
long gone. For what reason does Yu claim that this consensus is all wrong?

>     Yu then cites the earlier, similar conclusions of Denisov and Logunov
>(1983), who argue that GR does not and cannot have energy momentum
>conservation laws when a gravitational field and matter are taken in
>conjunction; and that the inertial mass defined in GR has no physical
>meaning.  Although Yu does not cite him, Yilmaz has made similar points in
>arguing for his own "completion" of GR.  But Yu admits these arguments are
>controversial, so he adopts a different approach.

	That is essentially correct in the general case, but in the
asymptotically flat limit, one _can_ define globally conserved energy,
momentum, angular momentum, and center-of-mass location. There is a
whole section or even chapter of Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler's (MTW's)
classic book _Gravitation_ on that subject.

>     Next, Yu derives the quadrupole radiation formula (-dE/dt = ...),
>emphasizing its one-body nature.  Then he says, "However, for a finite
>neutral particle system, the theory proves illusory ...," and he proceeds to
>show that the right-hand side in that equation must reduce to zero for such a
>system. ...

	But in an asymptotically flat system, a total energy _is_
meaningfully defined, so Yu's criticism is unfounded. And the HT
pulsar is essentially an asymptotically flat system, so GR does give a
meaningful prediction for the G-wave energy loss.
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Size of Second-Order GR Effects in Binary Pulsars
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:13:50
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: lip@s1.gov's message of 18 Dec 92 00:40:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.004051.10602@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

	   Any prospects for the known binary pulsars, like the HT
   pulsar?

Wolszczan's pulsar [1] has a sharper pulse profile and might give
better data - M15C has too much background contamination from
cluster field acceleration. I think 1855-09 (?) has a Shapiro
delay measured, but is otherwise not a good test example,
Steve do you know if 1534 will give Shapiro delay?

It is likely that more NS-NS pulsars will be discovered,
the relativistically interesting ones tend to be
observationally selected against - it's tough to find
millisecond pulsars in systems with high accelerations and jerks.

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  The laws of gravity are very,very strict			*
*  And you're just bending them for your own benefit - B.B. 1988*

Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 14 December
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 15 Dec 92 07:19:53 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 349, 12/14/92
10.7 FLUX=167    90-AVG=135        SSN=161      BKI=2211 2222  BAI=006
BGND-XRAY=B6.6     FLU1=8.0E+05  FLU10=1.1E+04  PKI=3111 1222  PAI=006
  BOU-DEV=018,011,008,008,015,015,015,012   DEV-AVG=012 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C3.5   @ 1756UT    XRAY-MIN= B5.6   @ 0634UT   XRAY-AVG= B9.5
NEUTN-MAX= +003%  @ 2250UT   NEUTN-MIN= -002%  @ 0450UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.4%
  PCA-MAX= +0.1DB @ 1650UT     PCA-MIN= -0.3DB @ 1310UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55425NT @ 1503UT   BOUTF-MIN=55398NT @ 2031UT  BOUTF-AVG=55416NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+118NT@ 1938UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+003NT@ 0115UT  G7-AVG=+078,+025,+009
GOES6-MAX=P:+138NT@ 1938UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-014NT@ 2341UT  G6-AVG=+096,-005,+030
 FLUXFCST=STD:170,165,165;SESC:170,165,165 BAI/PAI-FCST=005,005,005/010,010,010
    KFCST=2222 3222 2222 3222  27DAY-AP=006,005   27DAY-KP=2321 2221 2111 3221
 WARNINGS=*SWF
   ALERTS=**245STRM:0000-2359UTC
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: monta@image.mit.edu (Peter Monta)
Subject: Re: Universal time 
Organization: MIT Advanced Television Research Program
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 06:40:45 GMT

chris@chrism.demon.co.uk (Chris Marriott) writes:

> I strongly suspect that getting time to an precision of 0.01s is impossible
> on the Internet, given the fact the packets are dynamically routed, and two
> packets sent out consecutively from the host might take totally different
> routes in their journey to you, with non-predictable delays at each
> routing node.  I think you'd be lucky to get the time right to within
> *one* second!

True, packet-switched networks are noisy media from this viewpoint,
but protocols exist that intelligently remove nonrandom routing delay
differences, as well as average over long time spans, discipline the
local clock, etc.  Check out NTP, the Network Time Protocol (in
comp.protocols.ntp, or see Internet RFCs).

Accuracy in the low millisecond regime is possible, so 10ms should be
routine.  Many Internet hosts supply time directly from attached
radio clocks.

Peter Monta   monta@image.mit.edu
MIT Advanced Television Research Program
Xref: sparky sci.astro:13218 sci.physics:21327
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Detecting Second-Order GR Effects in Binary Pulsars
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:44:20 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <STEINLY.92Dec15104937@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.205537.12618@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

:	   About the precession rate, is there an alternate theory of
:  gravity that predicts (1) a significant departure from the GR value
:  for the HT pulsar and (2) nearly perfect agreement for the Solar
:  System?

>Come now Loren, you should know that one. There are several sets
>of theories that predict agreement with the solar system and
>significant departure from one of the GR predictions for the HT
>pulsar - which is compensated for by a shift in some other parameter
>to get a match with the result.

	I've never seen any such theory in the GR literature I have
read.

... essentially Damour et al constructed a new
>(infinite) family of theories of gravity...

-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: rlm@sunlight.Physics.UIowa.Edu (Robert Mutel)
Subject: Re: Moon Map (Astrophotography)
Organization: Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Iowa
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 18:39:31 GMT

Two books on the moon you might find useful:

1. The Moon Observer's Handbook, by Price, published by Cambridge but available
through Willman-Bell ($37.50, 804-320-7016). We use this in our undergraduate
lab.

2. Atlas of the Moon  ($29.95 Kalmbach, see S&T ads). This is a new book which
I just ordered but have't received yet. 

Another useful new resource:

The CD-ROM version of Distant Suns (Virtual Reality) has an over 1800 astronomy
images in BMP format including about 100 lunar images of various features taken
from NASA's Lunar Orbiter missions in the late 1960s. Many images have
overlayed text information, including pinpointing all Apollo landing sites. It
runs under MS Windows on IBMs. I seem to recall there's a sale going until the
end of December on all Virtual Reality software (also including Mars Explorer -
an extremely fine CDROM-based program allowing exploration of the surface of
Mars using Viking orbiter images). Virtual Reality's number is 805-545-8515.

Needless to say, I have no pecuniary interest in any of the above companies.

-- 
Robert Mutel
Department of Physics and Astronomy
University of Iowa
Iowa City IA 52242

Telephone: 319-335-1950      FAX: 319-335-1753
Email: rlm@sunlight.physics.uiowa.edu  (internet) 
       iowa::rlm (span)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: adamsd@crash.cts.com (Adams Douglas)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.space
Subject: Re: Voyager's "message"... What did it *say*?!?
Keywords: Voyager, code, message
Date: 13 Dec 92 05:47:58 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA

In <50gHVB1w165w@wuntvor.pillar.com> slack@wuntvor.pillar.com (slack) writes:
>sbooth@lonestar.utsa.edu (Simon E. Booth) writes:
>> 
>> Pardon the odd question, but is there a recording of the "Voyager Record"
>> available?
>> I've always been interested in exactly what was recorded on it.
>> Simon
>       There is a CD-ROM out called "Murmurs of Earth: The Voyager 
>Interstellar Record" from Warner New Media. Check with your local 
>Software ETC store.....Saw it in a flyer from them....Also, there
>might be a phono record out with the audio portions on it, if memory 
>serves correctly....Don't know where to go for it though.....

Since I _worked_ at JPL for most of the 80's, you all might like this story:
I read the book version of _Murmurs_of_Earth_ about the Voyager record, which
was published in the mid 80's. I was saddened they "reviewed" the enclosed 
music and recorded messages without providing a recording as well. So, I 
trotted down two buildings to the JPL library and looked in the card catalog.
There _was_ a card for "Voyager Interstellar Record -- audio recording". I
signed for it and was given a tape casette with the admonition: "This is the
_only_ one at the Lab, please give it back intact!" I did them the favor of
making several good copies and giving them three.

Your tax dollars at work!

-- 
=====================================================================
Adams Douglas   | Always tell the truth, | You can die like the rest,
adamsd@         | then you make it the   | or be one of the best.
crash.cts.com   | other bloke's problem! | - Cyndi n'ha June, 1992
Chula Vista, CA | - Sean Connery, 1971   |
   
 
 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Subject: Re: Yet Another "New Look
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:51:43 GMT

paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett)  writes:

>Why?  Granted that some things stay the same, a collection of articles
>from _Scientific American's_ ATM columns from the 1930's and 1940's is
>simply too old to be of much use at all.  That's on of the reasons back

	Perhaps I've become confused here.  The ATM to which I
	was referring was the three-volume set Amateur Telescope
	Making.  I'm not aware that the books are comprised of
	previously-printed magazine pieces; some are simply too
	long and others too technical, IMHO.  If I'm wrong, then
	it indicates that Sci. Am. was a helluva lot better mag
	in the old days than it is today. 

	I beg to differ with the "too old to be of much use at all" part, 
	as well.

	There's nothing wrong with learning some fundamentals
	and some history in any field, if only because it'll
	help you avoid making silly mistakes.  Not only is ATM
	still a useful reference, it serves well (as do the
	Advanced Telescope Making books) to spark ideas for
	new projects/gadgets.  One example: the construction 
	of smoothly adjustable slits for optical instruments
	is still not an easy task and I've found that John
	Strong's design in ATM makes an excellent design to
	build on.  But perhaps I'm living in the past: I'd
	rather build the slit mechanism than buy it! 
-- 
"Start off every day with a smile and get it over with."  --W.C.Fields
Tom R. Rice   WB6BYH                   Holler Observatory - 
tomrice@netcom.com                     Longitude:  121 d  30 m  20 s W 
CIS: 71160,1122                        Latitude:    37 d  25 m  10 s N 
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: Bjorn.T.Mykland@tmlh.no (Bjorn Tore Mykland)
Subject: Re: Star Mar Gifs
Organization: Telemark College of Education
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 10:06:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.023614.17872@nuscc.nus.sg> eng20204@nusunix1.nus.sg (LEE MUH HWA) writes:
>Can anyone tell me whether that is an anonymous ftp site for star maps
>gifs, photographs of planets and the Moon?

>Thanks.




Try "Spacelink"   IP-Nr: 192.149.89.61   Login as ANONYMOUS (Password=GUEST)

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson)
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Detecting Second-Order GR Effects in Binary Pulsars
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:11:48 GMT
Organization: Lick Observatory/UCO
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: lip@s1.gov's message of Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:51:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.225138.8045@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:



	   As is well known, some pulsars have companions, an example
   being the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar.

	   I'm not terribly familiar with the precisions it is possible
   to achieve with pulsar timing, but how good can one do? Even the
   fastest pulsars have periods of about a millisecond or so, and one
   needs microsecond resolution to clearly resolve second-order GR
   effects, instead of just the first-order ones currently observed.

Good millisecond pulsars have timing residuals of microseconds.

For those following this argument, volume 341 of the
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society is
a 25th anniversary volume on pulsar discovery,
it has some superb review articles on current research
including ones by Taylor on timing and post-keplerian
effects and Damour on testing theories of gravity.

PSR 1534+12 should provide an independent test of
strong-field effects, enabling partial disentanglement
of radiative effects and strong field effects when
used with Hulse-Taylor pulsar results.

*  Steinn Sigurdsson   			Lick Observatory      	*
*  steinly@lick.ucsc.edu		"standard disclaimer"  	*
*  The laws of gravity are very,very strict			*
*  And you're just bending them for your own benefit - B.B. 1988*
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: slevy@lobachevskii.geom.umn.edu (Stuart Levy)
Subject: Club observatories - How do you administer them?
Organization: Geometry Center, University of Minnesota
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:51:13 GMT

Our astronomy club (MN Astronomical Society) is setting up an observatory --
eventually there'll be at least one more -- and are wondering about good
ways to manage it.  Maybe some of you are already in this situation and can
give us advice.  Issues that have come up include...

  - Authority.  Who keeps track of loose ends, watches budgets,
	ensures repairs get made, sets use policies?  One person overall,
	one per site, a committee?  How are disputes resolved?
  - Who has access, and, how does necessary labor get done?
	A proposal included a system of "keyholders"; others could use
	the observatories only while a keyholder was around.
	They'd be responsible for some amount of training people to use
	the equipment, helping with upkeep, running public events, etc.,
	in exchange for some sort of priority in getting observatory time.
  - Responsibility for equipment.  Presumably the list of stuff should be
	checked when the observatory is opened and closed.  What happens
	if something turns up missing?  Large telescopes aren't very
	portable, but other expensive stuff might be, e.g. a CCD camera.
  - Time allocation.  If things get busy, time will be scarce.
	When a night scheduled long in advance turns out cloudy, what
	do you do?  Leave some fraction of nights unscheduled for
	disappointed people to take?  Do moonless nights "cost" more
	than partly-moonlit ones?  Do you allocate chunks smaller
	than a complete night?  Can people just come and use the
	observatory when no one's reserved it?  If so, how do people
	know when it's reserved?
  - Other stuff we haven't thought of?

Either post or send e-mail; if there's interest, I'll summarize the
email responses.

    Stuart Levy, Geometry Center, University of Minnesota
    slevy@geom.umn.edu

Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: howdii@patty.gud.siemens.co.at ()
Subject: the Lunar eclipse was very dark
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1992 15:51:47 GMT
Organization: SIEMENS Austria Corp., A-1100 Wien, Gudrunstr. 11
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Here in Austria (Europe) near Vienna the eclipse was also very dark.
Indeed, this eclipse blocked out the moon. When I looked out of the
window at 23:00 MET, the moon was already unseeable, blocked out by
clouds...

Better luck next time, howdii.


From: jackz@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Jack Zeiders)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:31:38 GMT
Subject: Re: First Telescope??
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: sci.astro

In sci.astro, lpress@isi.edu (Laurence I. Press) writes:

> My daughter is a astro-physics undergraduate student.  

> Can I get her a meaningful telescope for under $200?

> Tips appreciated -- thanks in advance.

> Larry

	Larry,

	$200.00 US won't go very far in buying a quality instrument in
most cases, not if you happen upon that rare estate sale or flea market 
booth where the seller just wants to be rid of some old relic or perceived
"piece of junk" you may have a small chance. In reality it is not likely.

Find out if she really wants one, many astro-physics types have little or no 
interest in observing.

If she is interested in observing,

	Does she have a good set of binoculars?

	Does she have a set of Burnhams Handbooks?

	Does she have a set of Uranometrias?

	Does she have a computer? If so does she have a good astronomy
        program or two?

If you are really set on telescope type things:

	Check the local astronomy club, a used 6" Newtonian can do some
	nice work and may not be much over 300-400 in good shape on a 
	german mount.

	Check "The Starry Messenger" there are ads for used hardware.

	I have seen small 60-80mm refractors for less than $300. For 
	urban use these can be lots of fun, planets and double star 
	use mostly. Don't ever buy a scope from a department store
	unless you know exactly what it is and what you want! Most
	are junk and will frustrate more than they will help.

	I have seen used Astroscans in the $200-300 range.

	Find a local amateur that would be willing to help you eveluate
	the instrument.


	Hope this is of some help.

	Jack Zeiders