|
Dec. 30, 2009
Is There Life on Mars?
From time to time, we all seem
to go through phases. Some phases of my life, like the “music
archiving phase” is still continuing to this day. What is that,
you ask? It stemmed from my resolution a few years ago to get
every single musical storage device I own onto a hard drive for
easy instant access.
Unfortunately, this phase
collided with my “music purchasing and back-catalog updating
phase” which seemed to result in the procurement of endless
amounts of used cds, tapes, records, 78s, and reels of tape that
look as though they may pre-date Edison’s
talking machine.
Meaning, for every one item I
finally archived, I bought 10 more, putting the completion date on
this phase to about 2017, if I’m lucky. The hard drive that I
bought is now precariously filling up, with not much room to
spare.
But there was one phase I went
through during the summer that was eye-opening to say the least.
We’ll call this my “telescope
acquiring phase.”
I’ve always wanted a really
good telescope, and, come to think of it, it’s possible that when
I was way younger, I believe we did have one. It was a huge white
tube, and the only recollection I have of it, is having it set up
in the back yard one night trying to look at the moon.
That’s it – I can’t remember
if we actually saw anything through the telescope. Isn’t that
funny?
Anyway, by the time my recent
Telescope Acquiring Phase was over, I had four or five telescopes
set up in the front room of the house, and of course maybe one or
two were actually complete with all the parts.
The main thing I learned here
was that the actual telescope is not the most expensive part.
What is expensive, depending
on how many you get, is the eyepiece.
You know, the eyepiece, the
small little lens that fits in the little hole at the end of the
scope – yes, the part that’s always missing from used telescopes.
Sometimes, during this phase, I would buy a telescope, not for the
actual telescope, but for the eyepieces that came with that
telescope. You should see how much these eyepieces go for ----
some can be hundreds of dollars.
And, of course, it’s
recommended that you get several sizes of eyepieces. 25mm. 9 mm. 4
mm. 2.5 mm. The list goes on and on.
This situation suddenly got
more complicated, when I happened upon a used telescope that was a
bit more professional than the ones I had.
So I bought it, only to
discover that the eyepiece was of a larger size (1.25”) than the
ones I already had.
Sigh. Fortunately, I found an
adapter ring online that allows use of the smaller eyepieces to be
used in the telescope with the larger eyepiece.
But, on the other hand, the
telescope with the larger eyepiece isn’t the most powerful scope I
have. And, using the smaller eyepieces in the larger eyepiece
telescope probably can degrade some of the image.
I’m starting to now see how
someone could spend a whole bunch of money on this hobby.
When you buy a telescope that
comes in it’s original box, there’s always photos on the box that
show you close-ups of the Horsehead-crab-nebula-system, distant
galaxies being sucked in by reverse-black holes, and details of
craters on Jupiter’s 17th moon (the one that is only
visible from the top of Mt. Everest not during typhoon season).
Unfortunately, these photos
were not taken by this particular telescope, but were digitally
enhanced by NASA with data originally obtained by Voyager III
during it’s flyby of the Orion asteroid belt in 1977.
The day finally came when I
could now take my used $75 60mm Meade ATX
“out in the field” (meaning – “Out in the driveway”) for some
serious skywatching. In lieu of the recommended tripod (which was
not included, and costs $200), I used a $3 plastic table. With my
eyepieces, adapter rings, and computerized control unit on my
scope, I was ready to go.
Oh, did I mention the
computerized celestial object finding system? Not to worry, it’s
all “built in.” Just press a couple of buttons, and we’re set to
go.
I peruse the instruction book,
just for fun.
According to the
“instructions,” what you see through your telescope will be
subject to the following variables: Current Length of Mean
Astronomical Year, Gravitational Rotation Polarity Coefficient,
Azimuth Declination Angle as related to YOUR Mean North Star
Calibration Point, The String Cheese Incident Factor, and the
difference between your Zodiac Sign and how many days your state
has not been subject Daylight Savings Time.
I decide to just Wing It. I’m
finally ready to program the first object into the telescope
computer database. I’ve set the inclination, the depreciation, my
GPS location on the North American Continent, my
ATM password, and my favorite color.
I should be looking at Mars in
no time.
The motor comes to life, and
the telescope slowly moves as it’s calibrating it’s location
between two stars I’ve never heard of – Caledonia IV and Rigel 6.
(isn’t Rigel 6 is from a Star Trek episode?).
The telescope finally moves
into position, and I peer into the eyepiece.
It’s dark. There’s kind of a
waving thing going on and something looks blurry. I can’t quite
focus on it.
I look in the direction of
where the telescope is pointing.
I have a perfect view of a big
overhead tree branch and some electrical lines.
I start to wonder if Galileo
had similar issues.
n
The Mars Retrieval Unit will be at the
River City Saloon on New Year’s Eve. Music starts at
9:30 p.m. and there is a $10 Cover Charge. 21 and over
only.
For an interview with Mars
Retrieval Unit, click
here:
|
