# Astronomy



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

I have not noticed this subject discussed previously amongst the fora but I am a keen astronomer. I own a six inch TAL reflector which is a formidable instrument and in suitably clear skies will reveal many of the wonders of this glorious Universe. 

Nothing makes me happier than examining the results gathered by the plethora of interplanetary probes launched this last 40 years, most especially those providing data from the satellites of the gas giants. The Cassini–Huygens mission being arguably the single greatest achievement of the human race. 

So, I was wondering: are any of you chaps similarly inclined?


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

I'm certainly interested, although not to the degree of owning a telescope. I have often wished I had one available in the field since the night sky in a remote desert location takes some beating, but sadly it just wouldn't be practical.

For now I'm mainly eagerly awaiting the Juno mission's arrival in three years' time.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Belfaborac said:


> I'm certainly interested, although not to the degree of owning a telescope. I have often wished I had one available in the field since the night sky in a remote desert location takes some beating, but sadly it just wouldn't be practical.
> 
> For now I'm mainly eagerly awaiting the Juno mission's arrival in three years' time.


Belfaborac my friend much decent observation can be achieved with a reasonable pair of binoculars and a little instruction*. Indeed many objects (the Andromeda galaxy or the host of Galilean satellites, as example) are in fact better observed through the smaller degree of field that these optics provide.

The Juno mission is a belter. Jupiter as a brown dwarf (essentially a failed star) is a deeply intriguing body and a considerable deal of information about the formation of the solar system will be potentially gained by this craft.

* I recommend this book;https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product...ils?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1370648497&seller=&sr=8-1 available from as little as £3.57 delivered.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Astronomy used to go with my job; probably still does, only no longer my job. I'm getting rusty on star identification now, but I could name most of the major stars, when visible, even on a cloudy night. I love the curious names that many of them have. Zubenelgenubi and Betelgeuse being a couple of my favourites.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

I can't say I've taken too much interest in the topic recently but can still navigate by the stars thanks to childhood nights spent with my grandfather long ago. I've tried to pass this rather basic knowledge onto my children as well but they're still a bit too young. Of course city life isn't very conducive to such studies but every once in awhile we head up to the mountains & enjoy the wonders of a night free from "light pollution". I suppose when the children get a bit older I'll have to invest in a decent telescope but for the moment anything breakable in the house is almost certain to get broken.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Ahhh Betelguese and Rigel - two of my favourites to show uninitiated people. They can be quickly located are easily identifiable and particularly interesting in that once your 'eye is in' their colouring (red and blue respectively) is rather readily perceived. Throw in a few facts about the properties of these supergiant stars - almost everybody can be intrigued by the night sky if properly introduced to its wonders. :icon_smile:

.
.
.
.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Shaver said:


> Belfaborac my friend much decent observation can be achieved with a reasonable pair of binoculars and a little instruction*. Indeed many objects (the Andromeda galaxy or the host of Galilean satellites, as example) are in fact better observed through the smaller degree of field that these optics provide.
> 
> The Juno mission is a belter. Jupiter as a brown dwarf (essentially a failed star) is a deeply intriguing body and a considerable deal of information about the formation of the solar system will be potentially gained by this craft.
> 
> * I recommend this book;https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product...ils?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1370648497&seller=&sr=8-1 available from as little as £3.57 delivered.


Thanks a lot for the tip mate, I'll make sure to pick up the book as soon as I return home. I usually pack only a pair of light and compact Nikon binoculars, but perhaps next time I ought to pack my Zeiss Victorys instead, as they can be mounted on a tripod.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Belfaborac said:


> Thanks a lot for the tip mate, I'll make sure to pick up the book as soon as I return home. I usually pack only a pair of light and compact Nikon binoculars, but perhaps next time I ought to pack my Zeiss Victorys instead, as they can be mounted on a tripod.


A tripod can be useful for ultra high magnification binoculars but, for me, one of the main advantages of using 'bins' is the freedom of sweeping about the sky unfettered. The old elbows-wedged-into-your-chest technique (or even lying down if the target object is of sufficient degree of elevation in the firmament) should keep the view steady enough for up to around x50 mag.

I've done a few desert observations myself, and as you will know, in the right place at the right time the atmospheric conditions can be almost turbulence free - very still clear skies ideal for astronomy.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

One of my childhood worries - not exactly a terror, but getting on that way - was the idea of infinity. If the universe is expanding in every direction, at the speed of light, what is it expanding into, what was there before? I could not then and still cannot comprehend the idea of space without end, without knowable dimension, nor have I yet read any intelligible explanation. 

The problem with astronomy is that the physics of so many of its important concepts are too advanced for any but a few people to understand, nor do names such as 'Higg's Bosun', 'quarks' or 'dark matter' help to convey anything meaningful. 

The stars, milky way, shooting stars and indeed space travel can be enjoyed purely as spectacle - for most people (I am in this category) that may be the best way, as a reminder of our own infinite smallness in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

I "inherited" an older 8" SCT-style Celestron NexStar several years ago. It is great fun and makes things pretty much stupid-proof as long as you can find true-north. It has a GPS type deal in it that will let you select a particular body of interest, and will then automatically move towards it. I never got into the photography end of it, but it made for loads of fun in high school, especially when coupled with a bottle of bourbon or an illicit substance and a few buddies, a truck tailgate, on a remote tract of land my folks owned. 

Unfortunately, light pollution is bad enough here in DC that I wouldn't bother to bring it up here. I do still take a peek through it when I visit, though.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Langham said:


> One of my childhood worries - not exactly a terror, but getting on that way - was the idea of infinity. If the universe is expanding in every direction, at the speed of light, what is it expanding into, what was there before? I could not then and still cannot comprehend the idea of space without end, without knowable dimension, nor have I yet read any intelligible explanation.
> 
> The problem with astronomy is that the physics of so many of its important concepts are too advanced for any but a few people to understand, nor do names such as 'Higg's Bosun', 'quarks' or 'dark matter' help to convey anything meaningful.
> 
> The stars, milky way, shooting stars and indeed space travel can be enjoyed purely as spectacle - for most people (I am in this category) that may be the best way, as a reminder of our own infinite smallness in the grand scheme of things.


I would suggest that there exists a measure of confusion between Cosmology (even Quantum Physics) and Astronomy here, my friend. Whilst I adore all three of the aforementioned subjects it is possible to simply appreciate the night sky without any understanding of the mechanism which underpins the firmament.

If infinity disturbs you then please, for Heaven's sake, do not study the work of Cantor and his mathematical proof of transfinite numbers i.e. an infinite number of infinities. :icon_pale:

The universe _is _expanding but not into anything at all. The boundary of space time is, to the best of our current models, turned in upon itself: a hyper-dimensional topology. Here is a rather clear explanation of the basics: https://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/cosmo/lectures/lec15.html

The majesty of the micro to macro realm of our universe does not conspire to overwhelm me, due to my smallness of mass, for I can contain the whole of it within my head - simply by understanding it. :icon_smile:


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

> The universe _is _expanding but not into anything at all. The boundary of space time is, to the best of our current models, turned in upon itself: a hyper-dimensional topology.


^^ Thank you for the light entertainment, but I am afraid I am beyond education on this matter, and I feel your posting (and particularly the article linked) perhaps illustrates my complaint about the opaque terminology that astro-physicists resort to.

I can accept the idea of the universe as being one of various shapes, but the idea that it might look a bit like a tenor saxophone (as illustrated in the oregon paper) I find a trifle hard to swallow.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Langham said:


> ^^ Thank you for the light entertainment, but I am afraid I am beyond education on this matter, and I feel your posting (and particularly the article linked) perhaps illustrates my complaint about the opaque terminology that astro-physicists resort to.
> 
> I can accept the idea of the universe as being one of various shapes, but the idea that it might look a bit like a tenor saxophone (as illustrated in the oregon paper) I find a trifle hard to swallow.


Goodness me! I am almost at a loss as to where to begin if you consider that straight-forward comment to be opaque. You should appreciate that the 'tenor saxophone' is but a two dimensional representation of geometry which describes an eleven dimensional space-time. Higher dimensions are quite simple to understand - if not so easy to visualise. You may find the synopsis plot of _Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions_ (published 1884) of some use in grasping this concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland


----------



## bernoulli (Mar 21, 2011)

Shaver,

I salute you for bringing this most interesting topic into the interchange. I am no astronomer, but I am a close friend to the head of a major astrophysical survey which purpose is to try to detect dark energy (JPAS = Javalambre-Physics of the Accelerated Universe Astrophysical Survey). I also partake in the history of science, and I am slowly building a nice collection of books devoted to astronomy (although it is not my major subject - Newton and Euler are my major focus right now) . Two images from books follow below: one for Flamsteed's Atlas Celeste (in the French Edition from 1776) and the other the first edition in English of Galileo's Siderus Nuncius. I prefer to read about it than study the stars directly (or as directly as one can when the light from those stars take millions of years to reach us). I still remember laying around when growing up and watching the marvelous Southern Hemisphere nightsky, though. Fond memories indeed.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

Shaver said:


> I would suggest that there exists a measure of confusion between Cosmology (even Quantum Physics) and Astronomy here, my friend. Whilst I adore all three of the aforementioned subjects it is possible to simply appreciate the night sky without any understanding of the mechanism which underpins the firmament.
> 
> If infinity disturbs you then please, for Heaven's sake, do not study the work of Cantor and his mathematical proof of transfinite numbers i.e. an infinite number of infinities. :icon_pale:
> 
> ...





Shaver said:


> Goodness me! I am almost at a loss as to where to begin if you consider that straight-forward comment to be opaque. You should appreciate that the 'tenor saxophone' is but a two dimensional representation of geometry which describes an eleven dimensional space-time. Higher dimensions are quite simple to understand - if not so easy to visualise. You may find the synopsis plot of _Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions_ (published 1884) of some use in grasping this concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland


I don't know if you're not a bit of a flaneur, Shaver - philosophy, astronomy, quantum physics, guns, whatever - you always seem very well versed in rather mystifying jargon together with a link to this or that obscure essayist. Eleven dimensional space-time?

Talk of astronomy reminds me of the scene in If..., where the school swot is studying distant galaxies at night, speculating on the possibility of distant aliens. Mick Travis adjusts the telescope for the more engaging task of observing his girlfriend disrobing.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Langham said:


> I don't know if you're not a bit of a flaneur, Shaver - philosophy, astronomy, quantum physics, guns, whatever - you always seem very well versed in rather mystifying jargon together with a link to this or that obscure essayist. Eleven dimensional space-time?
> 
> Talk of astronomy reminds me of the scene in If..., where the school swot is studying distant galaxies at night, speculating on the possibility of distant aliens. Mick Travis adjusts the telescope for the more engaging task of observing his girlfriend disrobing.


A flâneur? Huh! I wish. I'm never sat still for more than a few seconds.

Eleven dimensional space-time (could be nine - dependent on the renormalisation technique applied) allows for all the wonderful menagerie of subatomic particles to be reduced to a strikingly elegant one dimensional string. Those particles are illusory and merely experienced as possessing the distinct properties we observe (once the superposition is resolved by collapse of the wave function) when manifested as protrusions into the lesser dimensions of our D-Brane. Now if we consider the directional arrow of time, as dictated by the second thermodynamic law - the tendency of a closed system towards entropy and equilibrium - but remember that information cannot be destroyed.... Blimey! Quick! Look over there: a girl is disrobing. :icon_smile_wink:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

I once spotted klingons around Uranus. 

*coathatbuhbye*


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Can you see Uranus, no but I can see Mars.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Tilton said:


> I "inherited" an older 8" SCT-style Celestron NexStar several years ago. It is great fun and makes things pretty much stupid-proof as long as you can find true-north. It has a GPS type deal in it that will let you select a particular body of interest, and will then automatically move towards it. I never got into the photography end of it, but it made for loads of fun in high school, especially when coupled with a bottle of bourbon or an illicit substance and a few buddies, a truck tailgate, on a remote tract of land my folks owned.
> 
> Unfortunately, light pollution is bad enough here in DC that I wouldn't bother to bring it up here. I do still take a peek through it when I visit, though.


Those auto-location devices are amazing, I wish they had been invented back when I was younger and saved me the many hours spent freezing my butt off searching for an elusive globular cluster, or asteroid, or whatever it was on a particular evening.

Light pollution is a real problem: a frail object such as the milky way can be obliterated with even the merest hint of skyglow.

By 'inherited' do you mean what I think you mean? :redface:

.
.
.
.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

bernoulli said:


> Shaver,
> 
> I salute you for bringing this most interesting topic into the interchange. I am no astronomer, but I am a close friend to the head of a major astrophysical survey which purpose is to try to detect dark energy (JPAS = Javalambre-Physics of the Accelerated Universe Astrophysical Survey). I also partake in the history of science, and I am slowly building a nice collection of books devoted to astronomy (although it is not my major subject - Newton and Euler are my major focus right now) . Two images from books follow below: one for Flamsteed's Atlas Celeste (in the French Edition from 1776) and the other the first edition in English of Galileo's Siderus Nuncius. I prefer to read about it than study the stars directly (or as directly as one can when the light from those stars take millions of years to reach us). I still remember laying around when growing up and watching the marvelous Southern Hemisphere nightsky, though. Fond memories indeed.


Bernoulli you are a laudably well read fellow. :icon_hailthee:

A very clear case can be made that Astronomy (along with war) has driven all technological advances, the study of the Heavens being the first Science and mechanisms designed to illustrate and even predict the cycles of our firmament were the first machines.

Dark energy is an intriguing notion but dark matter conversely quite annoys me - I am convinced that it is pure folly. My ex partner's father (who discovered the coldest place known in the Universe, the Boomerang Nebula) worked with one of the chaps who proposed dark matter and he said the guy was a total jerk, which supported my distaste for the theory.


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

bernoulli said:


>


That's quite an interesting title page. For anyone puzzled by the apparent reference to a well-known TV comedy show, 'Little Britain' is in fact the name of an old street (where the book was printed, obviously), just to the north of St Paul's cathedral in the City of London.


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

I donated my old 11" Celestron to my old prep school after discovering it was just too heavy to move and set up. Downsized to 8" Celestron which is more maneuverable but used less. I actually enjoy using my Meade 11x80 binoculars which can put on quite a show on a clear night.


----------



## bernoulli (Mar 21, 2011)

Shaver,

Buying rare books is certainly no indication that I am well read (although I would like to think I am indeed well read). In any case, I am fascinated by scientific topics, so please do keep posting about it. I have no emotional attachments to theories (I am an economist, and I have seen what emotional attachment to theories do to people - economics should be close enough to a natural science that evidence should change people's minds, but no way a keynesian would change his/her ideas because of evidence, or a neoclassic economist for that matter). However, I am intrigued by the search in itself. It can wield interesting insights, even if the theories are wrong.

Langham, have you ever read Robert Hooke's bio? He was a book collector and purchased a lot of book at the markets around St. Paul's church. A lot of booksellers' inventories was destroyed at the Great Fire...Oh well...Thanks for the info on Little London, I had no idea.



Langham said:


> That's quite an interesting title page. For anyone puzzled by the apparent reference to a well-known TV comedy show, 'Little Britain' is in fact the name of an old street (where the book was printed, obviously), just to the north of St Paul's cathedral in the City of London.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

bernoulli said:


> Shaver,
> 
> Buying rare books is certainly no indication that I am well read (although I would like to think I am indeed well read). In any case, I am fascinated by scientific topics, so please do keep posting about it. I have no emotional attachments to theories (I am an economist, and I have seen what emotional attachment to theories do to people - economics should be close enough to a natural science that evidence should change people's minds, but no way a keynesian would change his/her ideas because of evidence, or a neoclassic economist for that matter). However, I am intrigued by the search in itself. It can wield interesting insights, even if the theories are wrong.
> 
> Langham, have you ever read Robert Hooke's bio? He was a book collector and purchased a lot of book at the markets around St. Paul's church. A lot of booksellers' inventories was destroyed at the Great Fire...Oh well...Thanks for the info on Little London, I had no idea.


Too modest you are Sir - you have exhibited a breadth of literary recognition that belies your denials. From arcane tomes to 21st century sequential art....


----------



## bernoulli (Mar 21, 2011)

As have you Sir, and in much more depth than I! You are the quintessential gentleman, and I am jealous, in a good way. I am just a diletant - albeit one with a huge knowledge of sequential art (from my humble purchases of Aquaman appearences in More Fun Comics - missing issue #78, by the way, to Mome and other interesting "independent" titles). Just finished Death Note, my first complete Manga series, awesome. But to come back to Astronomy, have you ever seen the Southern Hemisphere sky? I have a friend, a huge Adam Strange fan, who came to Rio and I had to drive him to the rural areas of the state so he could appreciate the night sky around here (he is from Greece).

Shaver, this is what I think of this topic and your general posting: :icon_hailthee:


----------



## Langham (Nov 7, 2012)

bernoulli said:


> Langham, have you ever read Robert Hooke's bio? He was a book collector and purchased a lot of book at the markets around St. Paul's church. A lot of booksellers' inventories was destroyed at the Great Fire...Oh well...Thanks for the info on Little London, I had no idea.


I confess I had not heard of Hooke - I have just been reading about him. I happen to work in book publishing so have a mild bibliophile's interest in old books and in the history of the printing and publishing industry. Little Britain, like almost all of the square mile, is now almost entirely given over to banking and the finance industry.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

bernoulli said:


> As have you Sir, and in much more depth than I! You are the quintessential gentleman, and I am jealous, in a good way. I am just a diletant - albeit one with a huge knowledge of sequential art (from my humble purchases of Aquaman appearences in More Fun Comics - missing issue #78, by the way, to Mome and other interesting "independent" titles). Just finished Death Note, my first complete Manga series, awesome. But to come back to Astronomy, have you ever seen the Southern Hemisphere sky? I have a friend, a huge Adam Strange fan, who came to Rio and I had to drive him to the rural areas of the state so he could appreciate the night sky around here (he is from Greece).
> 
> Shaver, this is what I think of this topic and your general posting: :icon_hailthee:


I used to amuse myself with some of the southern stars, using them to find the error of the compass, Rigil Kentaurus was a favourite, and I could use it under several names, thus, in my feeble way, convincing myself that the "Old Man" would believe that I had used a different star for each error. The other names being Alpha Centauri and Proxima Centauri. I also liked Canopus and Achernar because of the names.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

bernoulli said:


> As have you Sir, and in much more depth than I! You are the quintessential gentleman, and I am jealous, in a good way. I am just a diletant - albeit one with a huge knowledge of sequential art (from my humble purchases of Aquaman appearences in More Fun Comics - missing issue #78, by the way, to Mome and other interesting "independent" titles). Just finished Death Note, my first complete Manga series, awesome. But to come back to Astronomy, have you ever seen the Southern Hemisphere sky? I have a friend, a huge Adam Strange fan, who came to Rio and I had to drive him to the rural areas of the state so he could appreciate the night sky around here (he is from Greece).
> 
> Shaver, this is what I think of this topic and your general posting: :icon_hailthee:


Oh, shush! :redface:

My all time favourite graphic novel would have to be Promethea, the history of erudite human thought and esoteric cultural belief, with scantily clad warrior babes.

I have not experienced the southern sky - this most especially irked me in 1987 with the spectacular supernova event which I was desperate to see with my own eyes. There is no doubt that the southern hemisphere is the most aesthetically pleasing to the the naked eye - the Magellanic clouds just for starters - and one of these days I shall get around to visiting (probably New Zealand) for a really good gander.

My all time favourite northern hemisphere event was comet Hale-Bopp. I was waiting in the remote countryside at three in the morning for it's first naked eye appearance. As it rose over the tree-line I was completely transfixed by the undiluted beauty, I could not avert my gaze and had to remember to breathe. Epiphany.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*Mythology*

As a youngster I came to appreciate astronomy by connecting what I read about Calssical mythology to the constellations one could see in the night sky when in the desert or mountains. I wound up explaining them at summer camp for several years. Subsequently I learned about other mythologies and other ways of describing the sky.

I have not found lack of mathematical competence to preclude a qualitative unserstanding of astrophysics. Although I cannot follow the math, I can imagine multiple dimensions and believe I understand the ambiguous nature of sub-atomic particles and how seemingly solid objects are actually a sort of oscillating crowd of little bits constantly coming and going as they pop in and out of where they might be (if you can find the cat in the box). I found an image on the web a while back that was described as being of a very early (old) part of the universe. The experience of seeing and sensing the distance and time involved was quite moving. And then there is the human brain with its millions if not billions of neurons, in some ways as complex as the universe.

For the non-practitioner, the history and politics of scientific ideas can as interesting as the ideas themselves. I have found this to be true of religion as well.

Thanks for the enlightening and informative posts.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Gurdon said:


> As a youngster I came to appreciate astronomy by connecting what I read about Calssical mythology to the constellations one could see in the night sky when in the desert or mountains. I wound up explaining them at summer camp for several years. Subsequently I learned about other mythologies and other ways of describing the sky.
> 
> I have not found lack of mathematical competence to preclude a qualitative unserstanding of astrophysics. Although I cannot follow the math, I can imagine multiple dimensions and believe I understand the ambiguous nature of sub-atomic particles and how seemingly solid objects are actually a sort of oscillating crowd of little bits constantly coming and going as they pop in and out of where they might be (if you can find the cat in the box). I found an image on the web a while back that was described as being of a very early (old) part of the universe. The experience of seeing and sensing the distance and time involved was quite moving. And then there is the human brain with its millions if not billions of neurons, in some ways as complex as the universe.
> 
> ...


Gurdon, you are a man after my own heart. Mythology/Religion and Science - it is the journey and not the destination.

Alan Watts may have been a hippy Buddhist but I suspect he was correct in his assertion that we '_are an aperture through which the universe is looking at and exploring itself'._


----------



## Joseph Peter (Mar 26, 2012)

Interesting and intriguing news pertaining to the outer reaches of the solar system as reported back by the two Voyagers. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/voyager/index.html#.UdNY1dgrdjk.

Unfortunately, Mr. Shaver, our respective telescopes wont help us see the wonders of the outer reaches of our solar system...at least mine wont. :icon_smile:


----------



## bernoulli (Mar 21, 2011)

intriguing news indeed! Voyager finally out of the solar system, and still sending osme data - awesome!

Shaver, Promethea is indeed brilliant. And it helps JH Williams III is the best current artist in the market. I can't say that is the better series of all time, but I would say it is the best crafted series. BTW, posted some pics of my book collection - full of astronomy - at the OldBooks thread in the White Tie section of the interchange. I am only mention this because that part of the interchange is pretty much dead.


----------



## Shaver (May 2, 2012)

Joseph Peter said:


> Interesting and intriguing news pertaining to the outer reaches of the solar system as reported back by the two Voyagers. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/voyager/index.html#.UdNY1dgrdjk.
> 
> Unfortunately, Mr. Shaver, our respective telescopes wont help us see the wonders of the outer reaches of our solar system...at least mine wont. :icon_smile:


Joesph, Voyager is as far as I am concerned emblematic of all that is good about the human race. That lonely little robot, less sophisticated than an iphone, sweeping it's way out beyond the heliopause (the only man made object to have done so and possibly the only one that ever will) still bleeping away and discharging it's duties. I remember the launch and no-one in their wildest dreams would have imagined that we would still be in contact with the probe in 2013. The data Voyager 2 has returned to us from it's adventures paved the way for the many sucessful missions that followed in it's wake. I wonder if any other beings will ever play the golden record bolted to its side? At any rate a remarkable testament to the minds who designed and manufactured it. Praise be to NASA! :icon_smile:


----------



## Estel (Feb 2, 2013)

(Here I am back for a bit after being away for a quite a while.)

I love space and astronomy, especially the solar system. I agree, Shaver - Cassini is great. And in a couple years, Dawn and New Horizons will be giving us our first explorations of dwarf planets Ceres and Pluto! 2015 will be astronomically exciting.

I'm not a telescope user myself, though I'd like to get binoculars some time, but I enjoy getting to know my way around the sky with just my eyes.


----------

