Polls 5.0

[summer turret]

just make starless images
theyre better anyways

[rain void]

we all know that aberrations ONLY affect stars right???

[summer turret]

yess

[pliant escarp]

Just blurx it™

[restive fiber]

@summer turret It mean it obsorbs more light

[delicate lance]

You guys are mad

I’d rather have a few clear Nights but with exceptional seeing for that small Galaxy Game

[strong hatch]

my seeing is already good enough

[marble hearth]

Bro clearly has never had a cloudy period of over 2 months

[delicate lance]

I did but being able to go with a huge Cassegrain without Limits is better than no clouds

yall are all mad

like actually

[leaden copper]

not everyone shoots tiny galaxies at 1 billion focal length

[summer turret]

me at 250mm 🥀

[marble hearth]

"don't image ANYTHING or image reasonable sized objects" ahh questions

[summer turret]

bros gonna put me in jail

[delicate lance]

I knew it you filthy widefield Imagers

I knew you could never appreciate good seeing.

[leaden copper]

bros talking like he doesnt have a 130pds 😭

[summer turret]

he forgor

[delicate lance]

I have a 12“ dob too sir

[tribal coral]

you should transform that into something you can really image with

[ivory mural]

how strong are these machines

is this impossibly clear seeing and zero clouds?

[delicate lance]

It’s the best possible seeing you can get with air by stopping turbulentes in the path of the light.

the anti cloud machine just clears your sky of clouds entirely.

[ivory mural]

well then in that case seeing of course

once every never event vs once every few months event

[pliant escarp]

I would lean towards an anti-seeing machine, because wow would that ever be awesome. Hubble detail lets goo

BUT its sooo cloudy here thay honestly, the anti cloud gun

It would like 10-20x my imaging time

[delicate lance]

No, I’ll Sell it to fund my DIY scope project

[ivory mural]

More tbh

[pliant escarp]

yeah

id rather have 20x the data than have the ability to get better resolution on a setup i dont own (with my current setup, perfect seeing would be an improvement but not a night and day difference like it would be on a huge ota and a mount that can track that accurately)

[rain void]

even though my seeing is shit, you underestimate how cloudy Denmark is

also "anti-seeing" sounds worse lol

[strong hatch]

you dont need the seeing, would mean you need a different rig to use it

[rain void]

i am seeing limited tho...

[strong hatch]

it really does, makes it sound like you cant see anything

[strong hatch]

at your fl you are seeing limited?

[rain void]

ye... :(

my seeing is SHIT

[strong hatch]

i thought you were fl limited to get rid of seeing limit

😭

[rain void]

my sampling is 1.25" so it's not too bad

[strong hatch]

you need 3"

[rain void]

:(

[low lance]

Isnt anti seeing machine just called adaptive optics

[low lance]

What is it

[low lance]

Boring literally zero challenge everyone with decent skill can get a good nebula photo not everyone can get good galaxy photos

[strong hatch]

like usually 1-2.8

[low lance]

I need that fr although what's weird is my friend with a 12 inch gets more detail under the same sky

But I'm not diffraction limited so idk what's going on

[low lance]

Thats avg to bad

Good would be like 0.9-1.5 excellent would be <0.9

[strong hatch]

average is 3-4

what sources are your average lmao

[low lance]

No 1-2.5 is avg

[strong hatch]

source?

[low lance]

I've legit never seen anywhere worst than 3

[low lance]

Okay fine 2-3 but certainly not 3-4

[leaden copper]

holy L take 😭

that also doesnt even counter my point

you read what you wanna read i guess

[leaden copper]

bros living in sunshine and rainbows

[low lance]

you need good seeing for galaxy and I'm not talking about Andromeda or triangulum galaxy those are closer to a nebula than an actual galaxy thus not everyone can do it it also takes a lot more finest in processing and often requires significantly more integration due to their low surface brightness also you cant use filters on them and it also requires large apertures

So again not everyone can do them

[leaden copper]

1. seeing is luck not skill
2. galaxies are objectively easier to process
3. more integration is not skill
4. not putting in a filter isnt skill
5. having a big telescope also isnt skill

[low lance]

Well obviously your seeing is going to atrocious if you want it to ge ie looking through a heat plum but I'm talking about free atmosphere

[leaden copper]

what is free atmosphere

[low lance]

Never argued it was

[leaden copper]

what was your original point 😭

[low lance]

basically what it is is an atmosphere free of ground connection ie heat plums from the ground

[leaden copper]

you literally said anyone with decent skill can get nebulas but not galaxies

[low lance]

I didnt specify who couldn't do it

You just read my comment wrong

Anyone with enough skill can get a good nebula photo on any setup but for galaxies skill doesn't work that was my original statement

[leaden copper]

alr im not gonna argue about the specifics of the english language because its a shitty language but when you say you dont need skill to get a good nebula photo and then say that not everyone can get a good galaxy photo right after, that highly implies you are still talking about skill, ie. galaxies require more than “decent skill”

[low lance]

Yeah i could've worded it better

[leaden copper]

yeah i agree with this more

more things need to work together for a good galaxy img

[ivory mural]

doesnt have to be deep sky either

if you manage to grab a giant dob, guaranteed insane planetary anytime

[flat wolf]

my average in my area is 1.5-2.5, but can sometimes be under 1

[strong hatch]

it really depends

which is why avg is 3-4

theres some awful olaces out thrr

ignore my spelling

[pliant escarp]

Yeah

Bot theyre complex, expensive systems

And they can only correct a very small field (not that big of an issue since if youre seeing limited youre probably not running widefield)

[flat wolf]

and clouds are called being on a mountian

[low lance]

No

Wait

Do you mean mountains cause clouds or you can be above clouds on a mountain

Because that last one is not true for most mountains

[flat wolf]

be on mountian to be above clouds

[delicate lance]

[delicate lance]

The Kind and humble high clouds:

[normal fox]

The Kind and humble nuh uh:

[pliant escarp]

Didnt mention the height of the mountain

[normal fox]

100km sounds about right

[pliant escarp]

Imagine the seeing and transparency 🤤

[normal fox]

imagine the hypoxia and generally death

[cedar dome]

The humble cirrus cloud:

[marble hearth]

Wimdy

[summer turret]

scones

ngl for scones i just have them with cream

😋

esp if its fresh cream

[low lance]

Eh 30km would achieve 99% of the benifts of 100km

[pliant escarp]

oh damn

what im hearing is we need to build the worlds tallest building, and specifically for a telescope

like a big tower held up by cables with a 10m mirror telescope on top lmao

[strong hatch]

isnt 30km like leo

[low lance]

Helll noo

30km is LEO in space flight simulator

Try more like 300km

[strong hatch]

ohh yeahh

i forgot it was 1000 meters to a km

i thought it was juust a little more

[low lance]

The reason why i didn't say 100km is because that orbit is very unstable and decays within days to weeks

[strong hatch]

reaction wheels exist

[low lance]

Not what the issue is

[strong hatch]

it is

[low lance]

There is still too much air at 100km

[strong hatch]

reaction wheels can prevent orbital decay

[pliant escarp]

they cant prevent atmospheric drag

[low lance]

No they cannot reaction wheels can only turn and rotate a satellite

Across all 5 axis

What they can't do is move a satellite linearly

Well actually it doesn't need to be specifically a satellite it could be anything

[strong hatch]

how do they keep up the iss then

checkmate liberal

[pliant escarp]

periodic burns with a docked rocket

[low lance]

They dont use reaction wheel they use thrusters to boost it up

[strong hatch]

nuhh uhh

they use reaction wheels

[low lance]

Also it's orbital decay is several years instead of days to weeks

[flat wolf]

what is this ragebait

[strong hatch]

yeah, reaction wheels

[strong hatch]

do you agree its clearly reaction wheels

[low lance]

Correction it decays within minutes to hours not days to weeks

[strong hatch]

[strong hatch]

which is why we need to use reaction wheels to keep it in orbit

[pliant escarp]

https://tenor.com/view/ragebait-rage-bait-lol-lmao-gif-3554026694133497645

[strong hatch]

:3

[strong hatch]

you agree its obviously fixed by reaction wheels

[low lance]

Yup i agree

It's fixed by reaction wheels

[strong hatch]

like makes logical sense

[pliant escarp]

no the astronauts just do that thing where you try to spin yourself on an office chair without touching the ground

[strong hatch]

every action has an opposite and maybe an equal reaction

[strong hatch]

!!!!!!!!!

[low lance]

Infact they got to the moon using reaction wheels rocket engines are fake

[pliant escarp]

goodbye rocket equation

[strong hatch]

yup

the moon is hollow btw

just to add it in

[pliant escarp]

nah the earth is

[strong hatch]

earth is flat

[low lance]

Lizard people live in the center

[pliant escarp]

we are on the inside side, the sun is in the center

the outside is forbidden territory

its like platos cave omg

nasa is playing us for fools

[strong hatch]

tectonic plates are nasa just moving stuff around on rails to open the hole

[pliant escarp]

truee

[low lance]

Facts

[restive fiber]

yeet

[ivory mural]

yall are crazy

my images with a bad collimated newt with no coma corrector are so so much better than my images with a frac with terrible ca

[marble hearth]

Are you like purposely trying to jinx ts or what

[woeful rose]

🙁

[delicate lance]

transit it where

[woeful rose]

Netherlands

[flat wolf]

Nasir Bin Olu Dara Jones

[marble relic]

Wtf is that name

[flat wolf]

im me

[flat wolf]

https://tenor.com/view/thanos-perfectlybalanced-gif-18301221

[lofty jetty]

Astrology

[low lance]

Ewwww 🤢

[devout tinsel]

Celestial mechanics my beloved

[cloud stratus]

me when I am in the Trying To Get Myself Banned From an Astronomy Forum competition

[lofty jetty]

[leaden copper]

what dis even mean

[cloud stratus]

It means what’s the best physics

[strong hatch]

biology

[cloud stratus]

This is the only good thing about biology

[strong hatch]

😭

[cloud stratus]

Am I wrong tho

[strong hatch]

yea :(

[leaden copper]

not consistent categories

[cloud stratus]

I was running out of ideas

[leaden copper]

AMO, soft matter, condensed matter, particle physics 😢

[cloud stratus]

At the end of the day, particle physics is just quantum physics but more specific

Soft matter physics is basically just material science so I don’t care about it

Again, AMO is just a subset of quantum (but quirky)

And condensed matter physics I lowkey just forgot

[leaden copper]

me when im wrong 💀

[leaden copper]

calling it all quantum is way too broad lol

could say the same thing about nuclear

[cloud stratus]

That’s why I said (bit quirky)

[leaden copper]

then you should also include electromagnetism, thermodynamics, and relativity because those are equivalent comparisons to quantum

[cloud stratus]

I ain’t typing out allat

They can all be quantum and it’s just really broad

[leaden copper]

your comparison is like, Best Vehicle?
Toyota Corolla
BMW (the company)
V12 Engine
F1 car
Steering Wheel

[cloud stratus]

Nope

[leaden copper]

yes lmao

even if you were going for branches of physics, nuclear is weirdly specific, and theoretical doesnt make sense lol

[cloud stratus]

fym theoretical doesnt make sense

[leaden copper]

ah yes, the branches of physics, astro, quantum, E&M, and theoretical

theoretical applies to all branches

[cloud stratus]

as for the nuclear part, i left it seperate because it is a rapidly developing field (fusion and such), and IMO its gonna be hella important soon

[leaden copper]

quantum theory, astro theory, soft matter theory, etc.

[cloud stratus]

summonign E&M out of your ahh 💀

[cloud stratus]

and i didn't say branches of physics

[leaden copper]

exactly which is why none of it makes sense 😭 its just a jumble of unrelated physics words

[cloud stratus]

unrelated??

[leaden copper]

soft matter is growing faster

[cloud stratus]

your just being crazy pedantic

[leaden copper]

i can show this to any of my physics friends and they wouldnt know how to make sense of the options

[leaden copper]

again its like this

[cloud stratus]

all the question is asking is what part of physics people enjoy the most, and some people are gonna enjoy theory the most

[leaden copper]

but theory applies to astro, quantum, nuclear, and classical...

[cloud stratus]

yes

[leaden copper]

thats why its the most odd one out

[cloud stratus]

but if someone enjoys theory as a whole thats what they enjoy

[leaden copper]

ok

[cloud stratus]

does that make sense

It's not about how physics itself is divided, its about what people enjoy

[leaden copper]

i dont see how "Best Physics" implies that

[cloud stratus]

i don't see how it implies your interpretation either

[leaden copper]

it implies none and doesnt make sense for any

[cloud stratus]

wym "doesn't make sense for any"

[leaden copper]

does not make sense for any interpretation

[cloud stratus]

sure it does

[leaden copper]

its ok

i think best physics is quantum

[cloud stratus]

as I said, if its about what part of physics you enjoy the most/find the coolest, it works perfectly

astro for astronomy, nuclear for people who like energy and such, quantum for ppl who like quantum, classical for people who like seeing real world scenarios, and theory for people who liek theory

[cloud stratus]

I could make a new poll about the best branch of physics tho, but that would either be 5 options or 500

[strong hatch]

its all just quantum physics

[glacial bear]

The heck answer you expecting other than "yes" and who the heck on this server votes "no"?

[dreamy cloak]

Kind of does exist already with earth hour which usually is in march iirc?
Doesnt really Work already tho, so idk If that would either

[urban quiver]

what the hell is earth hour

[dreamy cloak]

Started as an Action from the WWF to spread awareness for the climate i think
In some cities, lighting of important buildings etc are turned Off for one hour

[urban quiver]

clearly not that popular since I’ve never heard of it 💀

[dreamy cloak]

Jup.. unfortunately didnt gain much tracktion...
Thats why i think OP's Idea wouldnt either

[ivory mural]

every purchase ever depends on the price

[strong hatch]

correct!

[pliant escarp]

Gerg

[rain void]

A telescope made by the same people who discovered Hooke's law and the fundamental theorem of calculus? Hell yeah

[strong hatch]

its sad that you cant buy them commercially

i wanna build some outta wood

[rain void]

Wood doesn't reflect very well smh

[strong hatch]

the body :(

actual mirrors will be standard glass

[strong hatch]

browi, do i grind myself an f2 parabolic mirror

[rain void]

why

are you planning to have a working telescope or just for shits n giggles?

[strong hatch]

why the hell not is the reason

f4 is the lowest i would go for serious reasons

[strong hatch]

i also found out 100mm blanks are £25 so i could do so so so many stupid projects with them

[cedar dome]

This has me thinking

[strong hatch]

buy 4 and make mini jwst

[cedar dome]

Hmmm

[strong hatch]

400mm line mirror

[cedar dome]

Mini Functional JWST

[strong hatch]

yk that thing where they were thinking of making a massive line scope

you can do that with regular mirrors

if you know how*

[cedar dome]

I do not lol

It sounds interesting though, please do tell

[strong hatch]

you basically just have to form the radius of curvature using smaller mirrors

[cedar dome]

Ohhhhh

So like JWST, or Vera Rubin

[strong hatch]

yeah xD

issue is due to not having off axis mirrors you suffer from spherical aberration

but you will be diffraction limited anyways

[cedar dome]

Yeah

Spherical aberrations would suck

[strong hatch]

and you have to very very very carefully align them

[strong hatch]

it wouldnt since it would all land in the airy disk

i may make myself 2 f20 100mm mirrors

and try offset them enough

perfect alignment

[glacial bear]

Explain why special? 🙂

[dreamy cloak]

How big would diy-noot be?

[marble hearth]

8 or 10 inches

Basically my mount's max

[woeful rose]

Newt man...

[marble hearth]

B-b-but apsc sensor....

[strong hatch]

hand made mirrrors?

[woeful rose]

yes but Newt

[marble hearth]

Not by my hand, it's more the construction and design that I'll be making myself.. Idk sounds just exciting

If anything, I think they'll be made by ur hands

[strong hatch]

😰

[marble hearth]

I'm sorry is this bad news for you? 😭

[strong hatch]

probably not

i got plenty of time so its not like it can go bad

am also currently tryna work out the price for coatings

[woeful rose]

How much for a 12 inch?

[rain void]

why is noone choosing the fantastic imx571 mono???

what do you have rn?

[marble hearth]

Ikrr

[marble hearth]

Mono 533 + 36mm filters, askar 71f, ragdoll 17

[rain void]

i see why people are choosing the noot then

[marble hearth]

[rain void]

get that sweet f4

idk about 10" tho

[marble hearth]

Won't that be too fast?

[rain void]

there is no such thing

[marble hearth]

Like for any abberations or filters? Idk

[rain void]

f4 is just a regular noot

but you should definitely have a coma corrector

honestly i'd probably prefer 8" over 10"

[marble hearth]

Why is that?

But I kinda feel like if I'm getting a newt, might as well get a 1200mm FL one for the smaller galaxies, no?

[rain void]

they'll both be limited by the same seeing, and get the same amount of photons (same f ratio), but the 8" images will have larger FOV, thus greater image radius / fwhm

which means the image will look "sharper"

because you will be able to capture more variations across the frame

[rain void]

the FL doesn't help with that at all, since you're seeing limited HARD. The aperture means more signal tho

[strong hatch]

i need to actually make a few high quality pieces before i work out the price

especially for these larger ones

[marble hearth]

I see, but if I'll be getting a newt of the same focal length, what would I benefit from an 8" as opposed to 10"?

[marble hearth]

Since u mentioned that longer won't really help anyways

My current fov is a bit too tight for larger nebulae but too wide for smaller galaxies

Hence why I want to either get a larger sensor for the bigger nebula, or a larger scope for the smaller galaxies, yk?

[rain void]

oh if they're same fl bigger aperture is always better for signal

[rain void]

longer FL is essentially equivalent to digital zoom when you're seeing limited

all it does is throw away fov

[strong hatch]

24" f2.9 🤤

[rain void]

https://tenor.com/view/holy-moly-gif-2379897567703251318

[strong hatch]

(apparently works well with the big paracorr)

[rain void]

dr500?

no that's f3

[strong hatch]

send a limk

[rain void]

https://planewave.com/products/deltarho-500-ota/

[strong hatch]

no!

[rain void]

yeah that's what i said it's f3

[strong hatch]

people have made 24" f2.9 mirrors

[rain void]

parabolic?

[strong hatch]

yeah

[rain void]

unhinged

[strong hatch]

it apparently works well with the paracorr

the one thats litterally called the big paracorr

[woeful rose]

pls do 😄

[strong hatch]

i need to make myself an 8" f3 so its light enough to go on my eq3

[woeful rose]

If you can make one me too 😄

I can always cut up my tube 😄

[strong hatch]

ive got like 6 weeks free to mess around with weird design

(its longer than that)

in 4-5 weeks

is when that starts

[marble hearth]

for how long will you be able to produce mirrors?

[strong hatch]

for as long as i have motivation

just after a certain point the production speed will greatly reduce

[marble hearth]

damn, might have to order a mirror before i even plan on building the newt

[strong hatch]

order a mirror from where :(

oouk?

oouk has a fair price

[marble hearth]

YOU

Unless you weren't serious abt the offer 😩

[strong hatch]

i want to be serious

you seem to have too much faith in me

[marble hearth]

You got this

[strong hatch]

i can get 8" blanks for £45

okayyy something feels wrong

254mm blank for £25 😭

im guessing those are the mass produced ones

[marble hearth]

Hell yeah 🤑

Unless that means bad quality

Idk

[strong hatch]

thing is, 250mm takes timeeee

[strong hatch]

no, im guessing its bc the factory produces the most of them

[marble hearth]

Eh I'm on the fence in whether to build a 8" or 10" anyways

[marble hearth]

I see

[strong hatch]

idk if i have the patience for 250mm

thats like a lotta mm

ill have to make one actually bc of the price

[woeful rose]

I can wait...

If you can make a F4 12 inch thats cool

[marble hearth]

Is it that much more difficult than a 200mm? It's a 5 cm differenceee

[marble hearth]

You'll be waiting with 100usd/hr lolol

Exaggeration but yk the point

Idk how long it takes to make a mirror

[strong hatch]

it feels big but prolly not

[strong hatch]

12 hours for a 6" 🥺

[marble hearth]

Gyattttt

Is it manual work or just keeping an eye in a cnc-like machine

[strong hatch]

manual

[marble hearth]

Zamn okay respect

[strong hatch]

it means i wont have to go to the gym

[marble hearth]

It's physically demanding?

[strong hatch]

slightly

[strong hatch]

have you seen the john dobson

video

[strong hatch]

https://youtu.be/snz7JJlSZvw?t=5m55s

luckily i like repetitive tasks

[strong hatch]

i need to stop re watching this video ive watched it like 4 times

getting the first curve in is the easy part

then you gotta parabolise the mirros

which john didnt do here

thats a sphherical mirror

i want to try make really really high quality parabolic ones

[woeful rose]

[strong hatch]

so will maybe take longer

@marble hearth i wanna make this too

i so badly want it to exist

[marble hearth]

Damn sounds complex and fragile

[marble hearth]

Woahowah

How much better is that than a regular newt design?

[strong hatch]

about 0.1x better

[marble hearth]

Just looks like extra mirrors and a collimation nightmare

[marble hearth]

?!

[strong hatch]

its like reallyyy baad

for visual use only

and planetary

it would be amazing for lunar

[marble hearth]

Why make it then 😭

[strong hatch]

it looks so stupid i just have to make it real

it also means the first ever of that design will exist

i made that design afaik

[marble hearth]

The Amy scope

[strong hatch]

tealescope

[marble hearth]

Just 10x the price for 1.1x the performance

[strong hatch]

10x the work

every surface is ellipsoidal

does mean its easier to make than a parabola

but making them correct eachother right wont be east

[strong hatch]

also, its f18 in like 40cm of length

which is pretty impressive

[strong hatch]

how i would do it is make the primary, make the tertiaries radius match the primary and cement them together

[errant quiver]

It's like f/15 native or something

But it looks cool

[strong hatch]

f18

this is the f15 450mm

[errant quiver]

Strange greg

[strong hatch]

you can use apsc sensors with no issue

[strong hatch]

nazymuth greg

for planetary

[errant quiver]

o

[strong hatch]

if you cant tell i really like gregs 😭

[errant quiver]

Are you gonna make an f/3 scope

[strong hatch]

ovc, i need an imaging rig

8" f3

[flat wolf]

sumone mention f/3

[strong hatch]

i will be getting the 250mm blank even if i dont use it, £ 25 is a steal

[errant quiver]

Imagine if you end up founding a premium mirror company

[strong hatch]

that is the dream

[marble hearth]

Cement them together? You don't want to make them adjustable justtttt in case?

[marble hearth]

Wait what equipment does one need to make their own mirrors?

Cuz if its just a grinding tool like in the vid then maybe some other reflective chemicals maybe I cna make it at home..?

[strong hatch]

the chemicals are too difficult to get

but to make a mirror you need a pitch lap, like 5 different types of grit

you can use a mirror blank as your pre-lap tool

and you need a ronchi eyepeice for figuring

[marble hearth]

damnn

[strong hatch]

it costs 300-400 for what im getting to start with

minus silvering cost, ill find someoen to silver mah mirror

or gold plate actually, most of my projects i want to be gold plated

but regular stuff will be enhanced aluminium coating

[tribal coral]

gold coating would be sick

[marble hearth]

Why gold and not silver?

Doesn't it absorb a bit more of the blues?

[errant quiver]

Gold for IR

[strong hatch]

try all

almost 100% absorbtion below 500nm

i want that extra push in ir qe

when i go mono i will be doing shit like IIL

with my 2 ir filters and a lum

[tribal coral]

gold for better IR

[pliant escarp]

Im gonna try that too

But probably only 1 target at first, i think 850nm will need a looot of int

[pliant escarp]

Does silver/aluminum absorb nir? Or is the gold for those real long wavelenghts youre trying?

[woeful rose]

yes

[pliant escarp]

Im thinking maybe m31 or m33

[woeful rose]

This is a 3 hour and 20 min stack of m106 at 850 nm.

[pliant escarp]

Oh wow

[woeful rose]

Prob not the sharpest anyway

[pliant escarp]

Could be nice to do like a m33 megaproject. Get some good int with all the filters

[woeful rose]

100%

[pliant escarp]

Osc, ir685, ir850, sho

Uv

[woeful rose]

Why shoot IR685 if u shoot IR850?

[woeful rose]

Heh yes and radio 😄

[pliant escarp]

I want yo try a palette where
R: 850
G: 685
B: Red osc channel

[woeful rose]

Ohh... 850 for the sharpness? 685 for the deep red for penetration and Red for color itself?

[pliant escarp]

Im just hoping theres any structure seperation between them 😄

[woeful rose]

aha

[pliant escarp]

850 and 685 might not be much at all

But red atleast has Ha nebulae, i think it will look funny with them in the blue channel

[pliant escarp]

I might unironically try the uv

Uv-vis-ir palette

But ill need to run uv without the coma corrector, thatll be fun...

And like 10% qe

[strong hatch]

yes, but we kill the ritch

[uneven shore]

If we really are the only place that holds any meaning in the universe, we should spread life to promote the evolution of new life across the galaxy imo, whilst we may never experience the gift or horror of meeting extraterrestrial life, we should make that possibility a reality for potential future civilisations that could arise from billions of years of evolution

[heavy aspen]

you should get zemax student

[strong hatch]

what about just zemax (im jk i use student)

i wasnt at my pc so i coudldnt use zemax

[strong hatch]

and caldwell 6 for good luck

[heavy aspen]

does student let you do optimization?

[strong hatch]

yes but i like to make all my stuff by hand

[heavy aspen]

huh

[strong hatch]

like optomise myself

i also make sure all my stuff is grindable by hand

with ease

[heavy aspen]

well if they are all spheric

[strong hatch]

they all elliptical

[heavy aspen]

breh

might aswell make a rc then

[strong hatch]

false

[heavy aspen]

wuh

[strong hatch]

hyperbola is so so so much ahrder to make than ellipticals

[heavy aspen]

yeah?

then just make spherics

[strong hatch]

nothing will be sharp

i will need like 8 spherical mirrors

[heavy aspen]

a f8 sphere noot is

[strong hatch]

nou

[woeful rose]

Would that mean that eventually we may walk around in M81 with consciousness?

[errant quiver]

The thing is, why would we be the only instance of life in the universe? We're just from a planet, among septillions of them

[marble hearth]

votetetete

[strong hatch]

571 imo bc theres no way you regret it

[marble hearth]

6 for newt, 7 for apsc

https://klipy.com/gifs/bosnov-67--k01KS0W66WXMNJV61JVWRWVHP80

[marble hearth]

ur saying i can regret a newt?

[strong hatch]

no

[woeful rose]

Ban this man

[marble hearth]

your newt gang is losing the poll, r1m

[woeful rose]

Yeah it’s fine. they probably have fracs 😆

[uneven shore]

Naur

[marble hearth]

im happy to announce that today marks exactly 1 year since i stopped working

[strong hatch]

yeah i do

[strong hatch]

get a job

[marble hearth]

im trying :((

just dont wanna be stuck behind a cashier desk again

[strong hatch]

own resteraunt

[low lance]

Eh idk depends on the brand like for my newt i do regret buying it and wish i bought an RC instead

[low lance]

No it's just the value of 571 far outweigh the value of any telescope unless it's like ultra high end

[woeful rose]

the back of wendies maybe?

[low lance]

Btw I'm assuming you already have a good telescope like something other than a cheap newt or refractor

[marble hearth]

Yeye I have a trusty 71f and a mono 533

So it's either expand my fov with a larger sensor for nebulae (save time to not have to do mosaics) or get/build a larger scope for smaller targets

[low lance]

Smaller targets are only worth doing if you have good seeing

And good transparency but that can be fixed with more integration so it's not as bad of an issue

[marble hearth]

Yeah true, and considering it's awful most of the time here..

[low lance]

So id say get the 571 or you could also get a 6 inch newt it's pretty flexible

More light gathering faster f ratio and you get to do both nebuals and galaxies whenever you want with your 533 sensor

It's up to you

[summer turret]

light gathering is in reference to aperture size, not speed

[low lance]

Ik

But most newt are between 4-5F so it's faster regardless

[summer turret]

you can get some f/6 noots

[low lance]

Still faster than the askar 71f

[summer turret]

i do not tolerate this frac slander

[low lance]

I love fracs man but unless you can give me a frac with the price of a reflector ima take ths reflector but i love the compactness of fracs

Both have their purposes

[summer turret]

yea they do

[uneven shore]

You’re a frake (fake Frac)

[summer turret]

true

but alsoo

kit lenses use glassx

so therefore

they frac

tbh im just done imaging stuff with 35mm aperture

legit cant tell whats bad seeing or if im not able to resolve stuff

[strong hatch]

trust me it isnt bad seeing

[summer turret]

ive figured

[limpid geode]

Why does everybody want me to image with a rickety dob wtf

[cloud stratus]

How small is small home obs

[delicate lance]

handles 12" cassegrain

actually, 12" F/5 newt

[errant quiver]

A 12" noot in an observatory would be much easier to work with compared to a 20" dob

[marble hearth]

Way more imaging possibilities too

• option for remote imaging when you're away

20" goto dob just sounds like a pita for anything other than planetary/satellite

[errant quiver]

The observatory is already set up

[strong hatch]

hear me out, i love small things

small are good for lucky imaging

[low lance]

What bortle

Desert or nah

If low enough bortle I'd say home observatory makes sense but if it like b7 or higher id take the dob

[leaden copper]

...wherever your home is

[ivory mural]

unid it says home observatory

[low lance]

Yeah but where is your home is what I'm trying to figure out

Some people live in bortle 1 others live in b9

Some live in extremely dry environment others in very wet ones

It depends

[ivory mural]

.

[low lance]

But if you have a 20 inch dob those dont really matter because you can take it wherever whenever

[low lance]

Ohh it's a question directed at the reader

Okay well in that case I'll take the 20 inch dob

[ivory mural]

how else would it be directed what

[low lance]

Like some people come here to ask for advice

So i thought yk it was like that

[ivory mural]

it says if you could pick

[low lance]

Right guess i just read it wrong

[devout tinsel]

HSS my beloved

[urban quiver]

dual 6" newt rigs?

with same cameras?

hell ya

[marble hearth]

much cheaper as well

at least cheaper and easier to find 2nd hand

[zealous cloak]

depends on the target

[strong hatch]

IHO

or ISH

[errant quiver]

I knew it

[strong hatch]

its the only coreect choice

or IIL

IIL is also a good choice

[low lance]

Single 10 inch has more surface area more snr per unit of time than 2 6 inches

[marble hearth]

True

However

200 euro for two scopes...

(ofc takes some luck finding such deals but def doable)

[low lance]

Hmmm that's a compelling choice

[marble hearth]

The other three trillion would have to go into the 2nd camera and set of filters 😭

[low lance]

Idk if you can find a 8 inch then that would be pretty good

[marble hearth]

Yeah i keep arriving at the conclusion of 8" being in the sweet spot in basically every aspect

[errant quiver]

24"

[low lance]

24 inch dob would be pretty good

[rain void]

shut

noone gets to speak lies when it comes to SNR

not on my watch

[strong hatch]

mfw the f3 6" has like twice the fov a 10" f4

compress the light

[strong hatch]

browi do you compress the light?

[rain void]

i am the compressor of light

[strong hatch]

i want to

buut i cant

:(

[rain void]

:(

[strong hatch]

do i make a 6" f3 mirrora

eyebrows

[rain void]

wah

[strong hatch]

browi -> eyebrows

sorry 😭

[rain void]

https://giphy.com/gifs/reaction-eyebrows-unibrow-IzCO8jnS2YNPy

[strong hatch]

electroboop?

[rain void]

why is that so unsettling lmfao

[strong hatch]

idk :(

[rain void]

4 f4 noots is as fast as rasa... just sayin

smol image circle tho unfortunately

[strong hatch]

browi le triangle

[low lance]

Dont blame me blame the math SNRobj = Sobj/SQRT(Sobj + Sskyfog + DC + RN^2)

Sobj = signal of object
SQRT = Square root
Sskyfog = Electron rate of light pollution (you can use the chart for this plus your known magnitude)
DC = dark current
RN = read noise

[strong hatch]

why even you

[low lance]

Here is the chart and yes it is based on vega

[rain void]

if you do the math wrong i can blame you tho

[low lance]

Don't worry the formula takes into account your f stop

In the form of pixel per arcsecond

[rain void]

your formala tells me nothing about relating the SNR to aperture or F ratio. also it's wrong

unless you by "signal" mean signal per pixel

i.e. photons per second per pixel

...which scales proportional to s²/F² where s is pixel size and F is f ratio

meaning, if you disregard read noise and dark current, that SNR scales as 1/F

(which means you are wrong if you didn't catch that yet)

[strong hatch]

browi, 5 10" or 20 4" both f4

[rain void]

5 10"

but not because of raw signal considerations

tho the 5 10"s will probably also gather more signal if i get to use a camera that fits the image circle

[strong hatch]

bc of details?

[strong hatch]

it hshould youes

[rain void]

ye, no way you're getting seeing limited at 4"

[strong hatch]

ur not nour

[rain void]

nour?

[strong hatch]

sorry i gave up on typing

no

[rain void]

lmfao

[rain void]

hahahaha now i understand

[strong hatch]

i can see clearly now the rain is gone

i bet unid listens to ai geneerated misic too

[low lance]

Yes

[rain void]

...in which case the math proves me right

[low lance]

I already said the math takes into account F stop

In the form of pixel per arcsecond

[rain void]

... and i used that consideration to directly prove me right...

[rain void]

"in the form of pixels per arcsecond" -> formula has no mention of pixels per arcsecond

[low lance]

Oops i think that's the wrong formula hold up

Well it's part 2

[rain void]

???

[low lance]

This is the first part γ/m²/s/arcsecond²

[strong hatch]

trully a ???

[rain void]

SNR equation part 2

mathematicians should start naming their equations like that

[low lance]

That one calculates your total snr including noise

[rain void]

???

it's almost as if SNR is the ratio between signal and noise

[low lance]

This one calculates your electron rate per second

Which can then be used in the part 2 of the equation

[rain void]

i have idea what you mean by this

[low lance]

Just follow this

Also your pixel is already arcsecond² you dont need to square it again

[rain void]

[low lance]

The square just means a two dimensional area

[rain void]

it's the side length of your pixels

measured in μm

[low lance]

Like for example 4m²

Is a square measuring 2m by 2m

[rain void]

brother what are you talking about

[low lance]

No

Arcsecond

[rain void]

s is the side length of a pixel. commonly measured in μm

[rain void]

yes. If you're measuring in arcseconds, you're probably talking about your sampling, which is not part of the formula

[low lance]

Your sampling relies on your fl pixels looking at a smaller section of the sky collect less overall electrons and you dont have enough aperature to supply them with enough electrons then you have a high f stop telescope and vice versa do you get it

[low lance]

That's irrelevant in the formula it means nothing doesn't affect how much electron each pixel collects

But larger pixels means bigger sampling of the sky

Which means more electrons

And vice versa

[rain void]

i indeed do get it. what you're saying with words is the fact that s²/F²=(s/f)²*D², where s/f is your sampling and D is the aperture. however, you're not considering the fact that your sampling can't be the same for both the rigs, as they obviously have same pixel size and different focal length

[low lance]

Yeah but say you have a larger aperature which naturally gives you more fl and that in turn gives you smaller sampling (each pixel is looking at a smaller area of the sky) but you also have a larger aperature (multipilcation factor) so it balances out

So yes you are correct same F stop same snr per second

Assuming everything else is the same

[rain void]

an thus two of the same F stop collects more than one of that F stop...

thus you get sqrt(2) times the SNR

meaning the two 6" f4 will get better SNR than the 10" f4

[low lance]

Hmm yeah they would unless you balance out the integration time on the 10 inch

But yeah you can collect twice the snr in the same unit of time

[rain void]

nonononono

not twice the SNR

[low lance]

Oh right 0.25 times

[rain void]

obviously, that's why we're talking about SNR per time

[rain void]

huh??

it will get sqrt(2) times the SNR in the same amount of time, or equivalently, get the same SNR in half the time

[low lance]

Well it takes 4 times the int to double the snr

[rain void]

yeah?

[low lance]

So 1.25 times

[rain void]

...

by that logic, if you double your int twice, you get (1.25)² times the SNR, but doubling twice is the same as 4x which doubles your SNR, so you're saying (1.25)²=2

squares ya know

it will be a factor of sqrt(2), not 1.25

[low lance]

I meant 1.25 times more time

[rain void]

what

[low lance]

Nvrm

[low lance]

So what is it

[strong hatch]

so what is it?

[low lance]

I'm guessing sqrt(2)

[rain void]

the two f4's will get sqrt(2)≈1.41 times the SNR as the single f4

which is equivalent to getting the same SNR in half the time

each f4 scope collects the same amount of photons per second after all, so you only need half the time because you have two

[low lance]

Makes sense

Also why do they say aperture is king

[rain void]

the number of photons per second per angle in the sky is proportional to the area of the mirror

f ratio is kind of a life hack because it in a sense gives you more signal just by increasing your FOV while getting the same amount of photons per angle

[flat wolf]

Ain’t it just getting more concentrated photons

[rain void]

so if you were exceptionally interesting in an object that doesn't give you more signal my having larger FOV, like a planet, the total signal will be proportional to the angular size of the planet times your aperture square (i.e. area)

same argument also works if you're imaging a small DSO like a PN

[flat wolf]

Cough cough planetary nebulae

I stilll have nexus tho

[rain void]

but if you just choose objects that fit your FOV, F ratio is king

but ofc that changes which objects you will want to image

[flat wolf]

I’m gonna use the nexus because it gives me much more flexibility

[low lance]

Part 2 of my formula does exactly that takes into account the size of the object and spreads its light over it's area

[rain void]

the calculations we made are specifically for an evenly illuminated field. So if you're imaging cygnus (which is MUCH larger than your FOV), you will want F ratio

[rain void]

what is part 2 for your formula

[low lance]

The first formula that was the wrong one

[rain void]

BUT! remember that a single pixel will always be an approximately evenly illuminated field, thus the SNR calculation is always true. HOWEVER, better SNR != more photons

[rain void]

i still don't know what you're referring to when you say "part 2 of your formula"

[rain void]

and actually, I always argue hard the we should be comparing total signal (i.e. number of photons), and NOT SNR

[strong hatch]

are ya winnin son

[rain void]

so i completely agree that the 10" will gather more signal in some cases, like imaging a PN or a planet, but that doesn't mean better SNR

[rain void]

progress is actually being made!

[strong hatch]

yipeeee

[rain void]

so this is actually a prime example of why we should use total signal and not SNR. If you're imaging a small PN with both of these rigs (2 6" f4 vs 10" f4) the two small scopes will get better SNR, but less signal. And in fact, if you resample both the images to the same image scale, the 10" will suddenly have better SNR!

basically, SNR is a bad measurement and you should use it VERY CAREFULLY!!

[strong hatch]

the more you know brought to you by browi

[rain void]

[strong hatch]

why have good signal when you can be at f13.8 imaging a pn one arcsec across

cat eye just barely fits fully

[rain void]

is that cats eye... but cooked?

lmfao

[strong hatch]

its a sky survey

they cant phtooto

pne

they just become stars

[low lance]

Well so basically this one γ/m²/s/arcsecond² is used to find a variable in SNRobj = Sobj/SQRT(Sobj + Sskyfog + DC + RN^2)

Sobj = signal of object
SQRT = Square root
Sskyfog = Electron rate of light pollution (you can use the chart for this plus your known magnitude)
DC = dark current
RN = read noise

The first formula finds the Sobj for the second formula

[rain void]

Your "formula" is just a unit

[low lance]

Without it you can't find the snr

[low lance]

Well actually you made me realize it doesn't need to be two parts even tho it makes it easier to understand technically you can do this
SNRobj = γ/m²/s/arcsecond²/SQRT(γ/m²/s/arcsecond² + Sskyfog + DC + RN^2)

[strong hatch]

i find snr just fine without it

[low lance]

Well you first have to take the picture to find the snr

[rain void]

this doesn't make physical sense. The "part two" is merely a unit. It's like saying the formula for area is square meters

[low lance]

With the formula you dont even need to leave your couch and it can help you figure out how much int you need for a clean image before you waste your time

[low lance]

No a better example would be the quadratic formula

[low lance]

Its a formula you use to solve a formula

This is pretty similar just instead of solving for the whole equation you are finding a single variable

[rain void]

There is no formula

Your "formula" is just a unit

[low lance]

Wdym

[rain void]

There are no physical quantities to put into the formula. You are basically just saying "square meters". That's not a formula, that's a unit

[low lance]

Oh i see what you mean here ill fix it Sobj= γ/m²/s/arcsecond²

[low lance]

Well that's wrong sobj= γ×m²×s×arcsecond²

[rain void]

Now you're basically saying v = meters / second. Still not right. The formula for velocity would be v=d/t where d is distance and t is time. m/s is the unit for velocity, not the formula

Or maybe to illustrate it more clearly, A=pi*r^2 is the formula for the area of a circle. The unit is just m^2

[strong hatch]

pie eats squares

[rain void]

This is the same as saying A = m^2 for the area of a circle

[strong hatch]

moles squared

[rain void]

It's just a weird mix of symbols and units, not a real formula

[strong hatch]

or is moles capital M

M/dm3 m/dm3

[rain void]

no

[strong hatch]

its lwer case?

[rain void]

ye

[strong hatch]

yipee i was making a joke chemistry correct

[low lance]

Well here to find Sobj you need to multiple photons per second with surface are of your scope with integration time with your angular resolution

Thats not a unit

[strong hatch]

no one has snagged my 250mm mirror yipee :D

[rain void]

i suspect you mean irradiance, and not photons per second

[low lance]

That's another word for yeah

That's what the chart is for

[strong hatch]

its ai genned remmeber

ai gets stuff wrong

[rain void]

no wait i messed it up

it's Radiance

[low lance]

Actually i got this from a website

[strong hatch]

okay is browi ai

nrowi got stuff wrong

[rain void]

so the formula is E = LAΩt

[low lance]

Domt ask for the link cause i forgor

[rain void]

where E is the total energy that hits your sensor

[low lance]

Energy per what you need to specify

[rain void]

not energy per anything

just energy

[low lance]

Should be either per pixel or per arcsecond

[strong hatch]

mass = volume / time

[low lance]

Well then it's wrong because you are solving per pixel

[rain void]

you could do E/Eγ where Eγ is the the energy per photon

[low lance]

Wait what is this formula for

[strong hatch]

browi is this correct

[rain void]

yes

[strong hatch]

okay thanku

why does 1 = 0.00235288888888888

[low lance]

What

[strong hatch]

why does 1 = 0.00235288888888888

[rain void]

it's to determine the total energy E deposited by photons from a source of angular size Ω, radiance L, hitting an area A in the time t

[strong hatch]

oh yeah sorry i missed a part

[strong hatch]

why does 1 = 0.00235288888888888...

do you understand better now?

oh wait i wrote it wrong

[low lance]

No idea. why

[strong hatch]

why does 1 = 0.0235288888888888...

fixed it

[strong hatch]

im asking you for a reason

[low lance]

Not really what I said but Ok

[strong hatch]

i dont know

and i want to know

[low lance]

Like if you want to mock me at least do it properly

[rain void]

so to determine the amount of energy that hits a single pixel, you would insert your angular resulution as Ω, and your mirror area as A

[strong hatch]

im asking a serious question :/

[low lance]

See that's better 👍

[strong hatch]

??

??

what does it mean to mock you

like draw a mock of your genetic sequence?

idk

[rain void]

and then you can also do E/(t*Eγ)=LAΩ/Eγ where Eγ is the energy of a single photon to calculate total amount of photons per time that hits a single pixel

[low lance]

See it is per pixel so it should be E/pix = LAΩt

[strong hatch]

got ignored :(

browi do you know

[rain void]

No. the formula just does the calculation for a single pixel

[low lance]

I dont condone insolence

[rain void]

and once again, "pix" is not a physical quantity. like what would you insert there in the equation

[strong hatch]

whats insolence 😭

is this a fancy word for being mean to me

[low lance]

Well imagine this was physics class if you didn't put down proper units you would get 0 on your work

[strong hatch]

ignored again :/

[rain void]

i am putting proper units in the formula. I literally study physics bro 😭

[low lance]

Its like saying m=Lm×Wm instead of m²=Lm×Wm

[strong hatch]

can you tutor me for my physics exam 🥺
/j ovc

[rain void]

this is just the amount of photons that hits a single pixel

[strong hatch]

why are you ignoring meeee

[rain void]

you wouldn't measure a number of photons as "photons per pixel"

[low lance]

Same bro but you did use the wrong symbols

Ig it depends on the area

[rain void]

no i did not. tell me what is wrong and i'll explain

[low lance]

Different regions use different symbols

[rain void]

the symbols are arbitrary, what matter is which physical quantity i'm saying they refer to

btw Eγ should be read as a single symbol if that wasn't clear

i just can't do subscripts on discord

[strong hatch]

like the other day when we all got pissed off at you for calling a measure of luminosity something else!!!

[low lance]

Fair but there still are universal symbols that proper math mathematicians need to adhere to

[strong hatch]

are you a proper math maticiccician?

[rain void]

i wasn't saying luminosity tho, just "bright" which is not very precisely defined in physics

[rain void]

so what should i rename?

[low lance]

Search it up

[strong hatch]

i so badly want to argue this but it isnt worth it

[rain void]

my symbols should be fairly standard

[low lance]

The symbols i used where the correct form to begin with no idea why you changed it

[rain void]

you didn't use any symbols. you used units

[strong hatch]

how am i being rude and disrespectful????

ur so mean :(

[low lance]

True

[rain void]

and to be precise, Ω is the solid angle that a single pixel extends, measured in steradians. not the usual arcseconds

[strong hatch]

i wonder if unid ai'd the definitin of insolence too bc i was not once disrespectful or rude

[low lance]

What on earth is a steradians is that radiance

[rain void]

the natural unit for a solid angle, much like how a radian is the natural unit for an angle

do you know what a solid angle is?

[low lance]

Nope

[strong hatch]

an angle on a peice of wood?

[rain void]

it's basically just a "3d angle". this image probably explains it better than i can quickly

[strong hatch]

is rs the radian solid?

[rain void]

so much like an angle is a distance on the unit circle, a solid angle is a surface area on a unit sphere

[strong hatch]

thats freaky i dont like it

[strong hatch]

is a a a area?

[rain void]

ye

[strong hatch]

is r² a radians square?

what is a radian

[rain void]

basically in 2d, θ=l/(2πr) (on any circle, not just unit)

and in 3d, Ω=A/(4πr²) on any sphere

[strong hatch]

whats the silly 0 with a line through it called

i forgor

[low lance]

Also why are you using that i dont think your pixels are squares

[rain void]

where A is just an area on the sphere, like how l is just a length on the circle

[low lance]

What

Sorry my brain just

I meant why are you using solid angle your pixels arent circular

[rain void]

but the thing is, the area doesn't need to be "square" whatever that means

or circular

it works for any area on the surface of a sphere, not just a circular one like in the picture

[low lance]

Yeah but neither your fov nor your pixels are circular they are squares

[rain void]

indeed. and i'm saying they don't need to be circular

they just need to subtend a solid angle that can be any shape you'd like

like you could draw an elephant on the surface of a sphere, measure the area of the drawn elephant and the radius of the sphere, and then use the formula is showed to determine the solid angle that the elephant subtends on the sphere

nothing special about a circle

[summer turret]

guys this is #1379949653990309978

[strong hatch]

ooh its like a funky quare

[strong hatch]

we need a silly debates channel

[rain void]

grr i just noticed i cooked the formulas wrong

it's just θ=l/r and Ω=A/r²

because there are 2π radians in a circle ya know, not just one

[strong hatch]

radiaan

[rain void]

and 4π steradians in a sphere

[strong hatch]

so 2 pie stardisns is half a circle?

[rain void]

half a sphere

[strong hatch]

thats what i meant sory

[rain void]

not debates, moreso just for talking about AP, but with maths

the whole server is for AP after all

honestly i kinda wanna make an AP maths lore document

where i just derive all the important formulas that i explain every time i get into an SNR argument lol

and sampling

Anyways I have lectures in 6 hours so wtf am I doing still awake at this time

gn

[strong hatch]

hope it goes well

[low lance]

Yeah even i feel like it's getting excessive

[rain void]

It's fun tho

Maybe just wrong channel ig

Anyways for realsies gn