| |
Main
Date: 28 Aug 2006 02:48:58
From: Mark F.
Subject: Montana nights
|
I was in Montana Fly fishing last week, WOW what a star filled sky.(eyes
only)
The second night I saw 5 satellites in about 15 minuets. 10 shooting stars
in about 1/2 hour.
Wish I had some binoculars with me.
Mark F.
--
Hike High Mountains
Fish for Wild Trout
|
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2006 21:13:18
From: deb and todd
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
I live in Montana and love the naked eye and binocular view of our
skies. Unfortunately we live under the jet stream, have mountains
meeting plains and consequently the seeing is often mediocre at best.
Mark F. wrote:
> I was in Montana Fly fishing last week, WOW what a star filled sky.(eyes
> only)
>
> The second night I saw 5 satellites in about 15 minuets. 10 shooting stars
> in about 1/2 hour.
> Wish I had some binoculars with me.
>
> Mark F.
>
> --
> Hike High Mountains
> Fish for Wild Trout
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 03:18:46
From: Willie R. Meghar
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
"Mark F." <res049nn@gte.net > wrote:
>I was in Montana Fly fishing last week, WOW what a star filled sky.(eyes
>only)
>
>The second night I saw 5 satellites in about 15 minuets. 10 shooting stars
>in about 1/2 hour.
>Wish I had some binoculars with me.
Now you have some idea of what I have to put up with ;-)
I type this at the end of a 20x80 hand-held binocular session -- from
Montana. My zenith naked eye limiting magnitude was 6.4 (Often it's
6.5; but not this time).
Observation times and descriptions for 29 deep sky objects were
recorded during this session. Also observed were Uranus and Neptune.
Uranus was unmistakably visible to the naked eye.
Willie R. Meghar
|
| | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 12:43:11
From: TMA
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
> I type this at the end of a 20x80 hand-held binocular session -- from
> Montana. My zenith naked eye limiting magnitude was 6.4 (Often it's
> 6.5; but not this time).
>
LOL..as if 0.5 of a magnitude matters!!...what kind of ultra scopic eyes do
you think you have??
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 15:14:42
From: Willie R. Meghar
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
"TMA" wrote:
>LOL..as if 0.5 of a magnitude matters!!...what kind of ultra scopic eyes do
>you think you have??
Perhaps you meant 0.1 magnitude. Regardless, when the limiting
magnitude at the zenith worsens by a small amount, depending on the
cause, the limiting magnitude at lower altitudes (closer to the
horizon) can worsen by greater amounts. Such a change can (and often
does) translate into the difference between seeing and not seeing some
low altitude faint fuzzies.
A difference in NELM of 0.5 magnitude is very significant and easily
noticed by those who regularly make night time astronomical
observations. Such a difference has at times been the deciding factor
for me as to whether I take the time to set up a telescope or settle
for casual binocular work -- or even scrap the night entirely!
As for my eyes, I wish they were better! Without corrective lenses
the starry sky has larger, more diffused, and fewer visible stars in
it. With my daytime glasses the situation is greatly improved. With
a pair of eyeglasses that provide even better night vision the stars
sharpen even more. The difference in each level of improvement is
significant and immediately noticeable.
Willie R. Meghar
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 18:23:15
From: nick
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
Willie R. Meghar wrote:
>
> As for my eyes, I wish they were better! Without corrective lenses
> the starry sky has larger, more diffused, and fewer visible stars in
> it. With my daytime glasses the situation is greatly improved. With
> a pair of eyeglasses that provide even better night vision the stars
> sharpen even more. The difference in each level of improvement is
> significant and immediately noticeable.
>
> Willie R. Meghar
What are the differences between your 'day' and 'night' eyeglasses?
Thanks - Nick
--
Never trust anyone over 10*[int(my_age/10)+1]
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 19:33:49
From: Willie R. Meghar
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
nick <nbspam@bresnan.net > wrote:
>What are the differences between your 'day' and 'night' eyeglasses?
Day eyeglasses: Eyeglasses that match the corrective prescription as
determined by an optometrist during a typical eye exam. They're fine
for normal daytime purposes, but at night they're not as sharp as I
would like. For many people, eyeglasses that provide 20-20 vision in
the daytime don't provide the same level of correction under low light
conditions. Also, in my case they're bifocals. I use them for
everything except (sometimes) naked eye astronomy.
Night eyeglasses: In my case, they're an older pair of 'day
eyeglasses' that just happen to be sharper for night use than my
current day eyeglasses. They were made by a more astronomy sensitive
optometrist several years ago and correct only for distance (They're
not bifocals). I use these glasses only for naked eye astronomy.
It is believed that a gradually growing number of eye care
professionals have an awareness of this special need (or desire) that
many of us astronomy people have, and are willing to provide a
prescription for this specialized purpose.
Willie R. Meghar
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 00:09:41
From: Tim Killian
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
Willie R. Meghar wrote:
> nick <nbspam@bresnan.net> wrote:
>
>
>>What are the differences between your 'day' and 'night' eyeglasses?
>
>
> Day eyeglasses: Eyeglasses that match the corrective prescription as
> determined by an optometrist during a typical eye exam. They're fine
> for normal daytime purposes, but at night they're not as sharp as I
> would like. For many people, eyeglasses that provide 20-20 vision in
> the daytime don't provide the same level of correction under low light
> conditions. Also, in my case they're bifocals. I use them for
> everything except (sometimes) naked eye astronomy.
>
> Night eyeglasses: In my case, they're an older pair of 'day
> eyeglasses' that just happen to be sharper for night use than my
> current day eyeglasses. They were made by a more astronomy sensitive
> optometrist several years ago and correct only for distance (They're
> not bifocals). I use these glasses only for naked eye astronomy.
>
> It is believed that a gradually growing number of eye care
> professionals have an awareness of this special need (or desire) that
> many of us astronomy people have, and are willing to provide a
> prescription for this specialized purpose.
>
> Willie R. Meghar
S&T had an article recently about corrective lenses for astronomy. When
focusing on dim, nighttime objects in the sky, our eyes become slightly
myopic (nearsighted). People with mild farsightedness often see
perfectly without their glasses when viewing the night sky. Those with
normal vision and nearsighted people need extra correction to offset the
induced myopia.
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2006 17:50:57
From: rat ~( );>
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
Mark F. wrote:
> I was in Montana Fly fishing last week, WOW what a star filled sky.(eyes
> only)
>
> The second night I saw 5 satellites in about 15 minuets. 10 shooting stars
> in about 1/2 hour.
> Wish I had some binoculars with me.
>
> Mark F.
>
> --
> Hike High Mountains
> Fish for Wild Trout
Catch any fish?
rat
~( ); >
|
| | |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 12:39:56
From: Mark F.
Subject: Re: Montana nights
|
50 to 60 a day on the Big Horn River.
My arm still hurts.
"rat ~( ); >" <ratboy99@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156812657.242282.92480@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Mark F. wrote:
>> I was in Montana Fly fishing last week, WOW what a star filled sky.(eyes
>> only)
>>
>> The second night I saw 5 satellites in about 15 minuets. 10 shooting
>> stars
>> in about 1/2 hour.
>> Wish I had some binoculars with me.
>>
>> Mark F.
>>
>> --
>> Hike High Mountains
>> Fish for Wild Trout
>
> Catch any fish?
>
> rat
> ~( );>
>
|
|
