Telescopes

2007-05-17 03:29:54

#1

~FuzZz~: .yag era uoy fi siht deaR; +422|6786|Orrstrayleea

I need to know how they work fo a school assignment, i have googled it, wiki'd it but they both have complicateed answers with large words, so if I say that my teacher will know i coppied it from somewhere,
So can anyonw explain it simply to me ?

Ps: There is karma up for grabs

2007-05-17 03:39:57

#2

~FuzZz~: .yag era uoy fi siht deaR; +422|6786|Orrstrayleea

Oh c'mon!!.....Anyone?

2007-05-17 03:41:38

#3

AudioAtomica: Member; +53|6713

Just read the wiki, and understand it, and then simplify it in your own words.

2007-05-17 03:43:31

#4

R3v4n: We shall beat to quarters!; +433|6950|Melbourne

yeah, we cant do all the work for you.

~ Do you not know that in the service … one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?

2007-05-17 03:44:03

#5

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|7238|Noizyland

https://www.abdn.ac.uk/~u02ras4/px2013/telescope-basic.jpg

So what happens is that the objective lens gathers the light from far away things and focuses it into a single point which makes the image brighter and clearer. The light is then refocused to fit your eye's pupil so you can see it as an enlarged image, kinda like a magnifying glass.

It basicly gives you a 'bigger eye' so you can gather more light from an object. The telescope is that bigger eye, along with a magnifying glass which stretches the image to cover more of your retina.

Sorry that's as simple as I can explain it, Science was never my best subject.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2007-05-17 03:44:20

#6

AudioAtomica: Member; +53|6713

R3v4n wrote:
yeah, we cant do all the work for you.

Why is Klum holding 2 fingers to her face?

2007-05-17 03:49:17

#7

tupla_s: .; +455|7055|Finland

Read this
http://science.howstuffworks.com/telescope1.htm

2007-05-17 03:49:54

#8

some_random_panda: Flamesuit essential; +454|6854

http://science.howstuffworks.com/telescope16.htm

There.

EDIT: Damn, beaten. But it's still a different link.

Last edited by some_random_panda (2007-05-17 03:50:29)

2007-05-17 03:50:06

#9

Ty: Mass Media Casualty; +2,398|7238|Noizyland

Jeeze, I do that work for him and then he buggers off. That's gratitude for ya.

[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon

2007-05-17 03:59:20

#10

Sarrk: O-O-O A-O A; +788|7119|Brisbane, Australia

I saw on the moon's surface with a telescope, its fucking sweeeet, craters were so clear!

2007-05-17 04:12:05

#11

~FuzZz~: .yag era uoy fi siht deaR; +422|6786|Orrstrayleea

Ty wrote:
Jeeze, I do that work for him and then he buggers off. That's gratitude for ya.

Thanks man, i appreciate it

2007-05-17 06:49:35

#12

Daysniper: Member; +42|7098

In case you hadn't noticed from the links posted, there are actually three kinds of telescopes: refractors, reflectors, and catadioptric, or compound telescopes.

A refractor is pictured above by Ty.

A reflector uses mirrors, hence its name, and is arguably the most widely used telescope (not counting the 20$ department store 40mm refractors). It focuses the light with a main parabolic mirror in the rear of the 'scope and the light is then turned by a secondary mirror to go through the eyepiece.

https://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/daysniper/Image10.gif

There are many different types of compound telescopes. The three that I know are the Maksutov cassegrain, the Schmidt cassegrain, and the Maksutov Newtonian. The main premise behind these scopes is a correctional lense on the front end and mirrors on the back. The advantage of mirrors is they are cheaper and easier to build very big, but a correctional lense is needed to achieve a long focal length. Inside the scope the light is bent back and forth until it has the focal length of a reflector or refractor telescope much larger than it.
The only difference between the catadioptrics is the shape of the lense. A Maksutov has a curved lense, the Schmidt has a flat lense. A Maksutov Newtonion is just a Maksutov cassegrain except the eyepiece is where it would be on a Newtonian reflector, not a cassegrain.

https://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j318/daysniper/catadi2.jpg

I own a 120mm Maksutov and a 5.1" reflector
Have fun.

Last edited by Daysniper (2007-05-17 06:52:28)

2007-05-17 07:14:04

#13

MrE`158: Member; +103|7086

While I realise the OP is just looking for a quick fix for his homework, my advice would be to do your damndest to get your head around this stuff.

How things like telescopes work is the foundation for learning all about the way light works, and it's all pretty basic stuff for physics classes.

You don't really need all the variety that Daysniper listed (though it was cool, I like pictures!), but Ty's example was very simple and straightforward, and you should really make sure you understand what's listed on (for example) the Wikipedia page's "How it works" paragraph. It's not that complicated, and it's important you get the basics right.

Otherwise, when the more complicated optical physics comes along, you're fucked!

Good luck!

2007-05-17 15:17:44

#14

~FuzZz~: .yag era uoy fi siht deaR; +422|6786|Orrstrayleea

Yeh i understand it now, the teacher only said to choose one type, i did refractor, they seem the easiest

2007-05-17 15:19:26

#15

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7306|Alberta, Canada

In a reflector, the light from the object is gathered by the telescope (the big end is the aperture, the bigger it is, the more light you can gather and see the object better.) then bounces of a large main moirror, then off a secondary mirror into your eyepiece.

That's a very basic overview. Not much to it.
Then you just put in an eyepiece to magnify the image and your set.

I'm planning on buying a 5" Newtonian Reflector.
Only because it's cheap and automated, otherwise I would have went for the 10" Dobsonian.

Last edited by Ryan (2007-05-17 15:20:38)

2007-05-17 15:30:45

#16

Daysniper: Member; +42|7098

Ryan wrote:
In a reflector, the light from the object is gathered by the telescope (the big end is the aperture, the bigger it is, the more light you can gather and see the object better.) then bounces of a large main moirror, then off a secondary mirror into your eyepiece.

That's a very basic overview. Not much to it.
Then you just put in an eyepiece to magnify the image and your set.

I'm planning on buying a 5" Newtonian Reflector.
Only because it's cheap and automated, otherwise I would have went for the 10" Dobsonian.

The 10" isn't much more expensive than the Newtonian. And you can get it automated. However, getting an automated scope takes a lot of the actual experience away. Half the fun is finding the object!

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/produ … tID=276945
That's the 10 incher, here's the 8:
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/produ … tID=276944

See, not expensive at all!
Check out their Newtonians, too.

2007-05-17 15:33:11

#17

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7306|Alberta, Canada

Daysniper wrote:
Ryan wrote:
In a reflector, the light from the object is gathered by the telescope (the big end is the aperture, the bigger it is, the more light you can gather and see the object better.) then bounces of a large main moirror, then off a secondary mirror into your eyepiece.

That's a very basic overview. Not much to it.
Then you just put in an eyepiece to magnify the image and your set.

I'm planning on buying a 5" Newtonian Reflector.
Only because it's cheap and automated, otherwise I would have went for the 10" Dobsonian.
The 10" isn't much more expensive than the Newtonian. And you can get it automated. However, getting an automated scope takes a lot of the actual experience away. Half the fun is finding the object!

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/produ … tID=276945
That's the 10 incher, here's the 8:
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/produ … tID=276944

See, not expensive at all!
Check out their Newtonians, too.

Yeah, the 10" ain't much more, but to get automated, it costs much more.
I fail at finding objects, and keeping them centered. I'd rather have it find it automatically and then track it for you.

2007-05-17 15:38:33

#18

Daysniper: Member; +42|7098

Oh please you lazy bum... /fail.

2007-05-17 16:01:26

#19

confused: Member; +10|6857|British Columbia

Ty wrote:
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~u02ras4/px2013/t … -basic.jpg
So what happens is that the objective lens gathers the light from far away things and focuses it into a single point which makes the image brighter and clearer. The light is then refocused to fit your eye's pupil so you can see it as an enlarged image, kinda like a magnifying glass.

It basicly gives you a 'bigger eye' so you can gather more light from an object. The telescope is that bigger eye, along with a magnifying glass which stretches the image to cover more of your retina.

Sorry that's as simple as I can explain it, Science was never my best subject.

Its been a long long time since I studied anything like this but I thought they had two lenses otherwise the image would be upside down.

2007-05-17 16:05:04

#20

FFLink: There is.; +1,380|7154|Devon, England

AudioAtomica wrote:
R3v4n wrote:
yeah, we cant do all the work for you.
Why is Klum holding 2 fingers to her face?

She's doing a DragonBall Z pose.

Duh.

2007-05-17 16:33:39

#21

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7306|Alberta, Canada

Daysniper wrote:
Oh please you lazy bum... /fail.

I win at failing.

I can never aim at the right spot and find the object I'm looking for.
And don't tell me to star hop.

2007-05-17 17:26:44

#22

Daysniper: Member; +42|7098

Ryan wrote:
Daysniper wrote:
Oh please you lazy bum... /fail.

I win at failing.

I can never aim at the right spot and find the object I'm looking for.
And don't tell me to star hop.

Star hop.

Or use a different finder scope (like a red dot non-magnifying one). Learn the sky.

Duh.

Come on, it's not that hard is it?

2007-05-17 17:57:05

#23

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7306|Alberta, Canada

Daysniper wrote:
Ryan wrote:
Daysniper wrote:
Oh please you lazy bum... /fail.

I win at failing.

I can never aim at the right spot and find the object I'm looking for.
And don't tell me to star hop.
Star hop.

Or use a different finder scope (like a red dot non-magnifying one). Learn the sky.

Duh.

Come on, it's not that hard is it?

I supposed not, but my finderscope blows. The red dot is way to overpowering, and it dies all the time.
It's also not very dark where I live, and I have a tad bit of light pollution.

I was lucky to find Andromeda.

2007-05-17 18:35:58

#24

Daysniper: Member; +42|7098

You have a tad bit of light pollution?

Try living 5 miles from a city with 500,000 inhabitants, then talk light pollution.

Now, if you do indeed live outside a city with over 500,000 people then I have sympathy.

BF2S Forums Telescopes

R3v4n wrote:

Ty wrote:

Ryan wrote:

Daysniper wrote:

Ryan wrote:

Ty wrote:

AudioAtomica wrote:

R3v4n wrote:

Daysniper wrote:

Ryan wrote:

Daysniper wrote:

Daysniper wrote:

Ryan wrote:

Daysniper wrote:

Board footer