Full disclosure: that has pretty high probability of being “Lew’s moon.” And even if that particular focusing job wasn’t his, the set-up, choice of exposure time, snap, upload and/or download were all his. Speaking of snap — we got one with a 16 second exposure in which Jupiter and Regulus move a remarkable amount. (I guess, since I’m remarking on it, that was a tautology.)
Wow. I’m very impressed. Tell Lew I say nice job. And thanks for the new word, Jen. I’m going to work it into my conversation somehow today. I’m sure it wont be difficult. I tend to lean toward tautology anyway.
I’ve been away, and feel quite remiss in not thanking all for your contributions — pronounciation, compliments, having Saturn and Regulus renamed as mine, etc. Although, that last one worries me — I wouldn’t want anyone to think I had mistaken a planet for a star.
There’s lots of great precedent for that, Jennifer. In one of his notebooks, Galileo noted the position of a “star” a few degrees from Jupiter — much much later it was found that the star was actually Uranus!
There are people who claim to be able to see 7th magnitude stars. I can’t, and not from dint of trying. 6.0 is my limit, and that’s in the darkest sky I’ve ever been in — near Datil, NM. My brother-in-law can see some faint moons of Saturn in binocs that I can’t see at all, and a semi-pro astronomer friend can see faint comets with ease that are invisible to me. I believe this latter guy could see Ceres if he tried.
Full disclosure: that has pretty high probability of being “Lew’s moon.” And even if that particular focusing job wasn’t his, the set-up, choice of exposure time, snap, upload and/or download were all his. Speaking of snap — we got one with a 16 second exposure in which Jupiter and Regulus move a remarkable amount. (I guess, since I’m remarking on it, that was a tautology.)
Comment by jennifer — February 21, 2008 @ 7:16 am
Wow. I’m very impressed. Tell Lew I say nice job. And thanks for the new word, Jen. I’m going to work it into my conversation somehow today. I’m sure it wont be difficult. I tend to lean toward tautology anyway.
Comment by Jen — February 21, 2008 @ 8:19 am
I’ve been away, and feel quite remiss in not thanking all for your contributions — pronounciation, compliments, having Saturn and Regulus renamed as mine, etc. Although, that last one worries me — I wouldn’t want anyone to think I had mistaken a planet for a star.
Comment by jennifer — February 24, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
There’s lots of great precedent for that, Jennifer. In one of his notebooks, Galileo noted the position of a “star” a few degrees from Jupiter — much much later it was found that the star was actually Uranus!
Comment by rakkity — February 25, 2008 @ 6:48 pm
I did not know that. I just read that Pluto was seen and recorded over a hundred years before it was discovered (as a planet) too.
Hey, can one see Ceres without visual aids?
Comment by jennifer — February 25, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
From The Wiki:
Ceres’ apparent magnitude ranges from 6.7 to 9.3, hence at its brightest is still too dim to be seen with the naked eye.
Comment by michael — February 26, 2008 @ 8:07 am
There are people who claim to be able to see 7th magnitude stars. I can’t, and not from dint of trying. 6.0 is my limit, and that’s in the darkest sky I’ve ever been in — near Datil, NM. My brother-in-law can see some faint moons of Saturn in binocs that I can’t see at all, and a semi-pro astronomer friend can see faint comets with ease that are invisible to me. I believe this latter guy could see Ceres if he tried.
Comment by rakkity — February 26, 2008 @ 12:00 pm