Poke The Bear

The following is a speculative piece that is the result of the so-called personal revolution that the Mallincam AG-c and DS2.3+ has triggered in the last couple of months.  I could be wrong or right, or I will touch a nerve.  Either way, I hope it generates discussion. The prime argument for the revolution was the ability to actually do observing in heavily light polluted skies.  A recent article suggests that, despite our technology, best intentions and awareness, light pollution has actually gotten worse.  This is bad news.  Bad news indeed.  But this isn’t primarily what I’m on about here.

The Issue

Pick up any beginners guide to or a book about astronomy.  You’ll notice a particular pattern.  The reader is enticed by beautiful pictures of the night sky and lavish ads (if a periodical) and images of equipment.  The text goes on extolling the virtues of backyard astronomy in lavish terms like “this is the greatest hobby out there”.  THIS is who you want to be in astronomy.  Then as predicted, comes the big let-down, the anti-climax, the scary phrase “you won’t see things like in the photographs”.  Then comes the deflection of “this is a cerebral journey” and “you have to imagine these objects like in the pictures”.  The journey is indeed cerebral, but putting it like this makes it look like a bait and switch.  Why did we entice them with pictures in the first place and then dodge the issue with such statements?  I’m not sure this is an honest thing to do.  There is a possible solution to this big let down…

Let them actually see stuff!

The whole idea is to see something.  If you are content with seeing faint smudges, and limited to observing very rarely because the drive is too much or you don’t have time, then so be it.  But this is where the Mallincam came through for me.  The ability to see things, in light polluted skies and in colour and with detail.  The very thing that most beginner’s guides say CANNOT happen.  Sure, it’s not the same as intense DSLR or CCD imaging, but it’s getting closer to it and I feel it’s a whole lot easier to do.  And there are those who argue that staring at a monitor is not aesthetically pleasing.  There could be some truth in that especially for the planets or those Milky Way vistas in binoculars.  But for the deep sky, and I mean “deep”, I have moved on.

A Mallincam with every beginner scope?

That’s a bold statement.  Certainly the computer savvy beginner shouldn’t have much of a problem using the most basic Mallincam.  Some might argue that the cost is prohibitive for the more advanced Mallincam cameras, but think about how much a couple of decent wide field eyepieces are.  Currently gas prices are almost a 1.23 per litre so some might hesitate to travel 60-90 minutes to a dark sky.  Even worse, what could happen is user frustration and a golden opportunity to explore is lost because the view simply wasn’t there.  The scope then ends up on Kijiji and it’s over.  So yes, I could advocate that a Mallincam is most certainly worth with a beginner telescope.  Why not?  If it tracks (computerized or not), go for it!

The Curmudgeon Astronomer

The old Refractor.  The only difference is the addition of the DS2.3+ and the laptop.  Some people think this is overly complicated for some reason...or is not considered "real" observing...or something...   

It’s easy to think the good old days are long gone.  That this generation is a lazy and entitled lot that’s only interested in self-gratification and lot really learning.  But I think that’s too much of a stretch.  And if we continue to think that this hobby must be done a certain way and only that way (whatever that may be), don’t be surprised if your club membership starts to decline.  That your observing sites remain unused and empty because it’s just not practical to travel the distance.  Why does the gratification and technology scare people?  Why are we afraid of progress and change?



What Rock said

"Live video observations is about understanding thescience of the object you are looking at. Studying its structures and doingresearch on what you are observing is important as a education to you andothers around you.”
^^He’s right you know. And if it starts with instant gratification and progresses to awe and wonderment, then I say that’s a big win.

Knocking on Abell’s door

“And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee."  Nietzchse said it best although it had nothing to do with astronomy.  It’s all about accessibility.  The DS2.3+ has opened the door to faint objects well beyond 12^th magnitude with current equipment.  That means faint galaxies and more so, galaxy clusters!  This is most impressive.  This is not currently accessible for those on modest equipment budgets or restricted by storage space or time and worse, stuck in crummy skies.  A modest Nexstar 6SE becomes a powerful tool of observing when linked with a Mallincam.  Suddenly galaxy morphology becomes a big thing if so inclined.  The abyss is calling.  The Uranometria is no longer an atlas of disappointment.   

Do we need to rethink our approach?

I think so.  Beginner guides need to be upfront and honest.  They also need to provide solutions that don’t use scare tactics or curmudgeon attitudes toward progressive technology by simply saying that “this is what we did 40 years ago and you better follow”.  Sure, one might think I have thought the unthinkable, spoke the unspeakable, but hell, if Lord Voldemort used a Mallincam, I’d do astronomy with him.