Image of the day

Captured by
Douglas Rollain

LBN 576 - The Garlic Nebula

About Astromart

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: Paul Kammueller

May 6, 2003 04:01 PM Forum: Off Topic Discussions

Stunt Kites?

Posted By Paul Kammueller
"I am curious as to whether anyone on these forums flies stunt kites for a hobby?"

"Stunt" kites?! Does one fly as a "passenger"?

May 6, 2003 04:49 PM Forum: Telescope Making

Centering of azimuth pivot

Posted By Paul Kammueller
I would think you want it centered on the alt pivots, because this is where the scope's center of mass will be. Otherwise slewing it in azimuth will feel kind of 'odd' and it will generally feel 'out of balance'.

May 7, 2003 09:33 PM Forum: Religion

Life's Basic Purpose

Posted By Paul Kammueller
Now intelligent life, of which we have one example, so far, appears to take this business of energy redirection and information accumulation to a fundamentally new level.

Non-intelligent life redirects energy and accumulates & modifies information on a very localized scale exclusively to serve the perpetuation of its particular species or that particular individual.

Intelligent life, on the other hand, redirects energy on a massive scale, in both constructive and destructive ways, not necessarily having anything to do with survival. Example: nuclear energy, manned moon missions. Moreover, intelligent life gathers and accumulates information about the Universe at large, not just localized to a particular organism or DNA print. We strive to know everything, things that have nothing to do with furthering our survival (though such argument is frequently used to try to secure funding).

I think that's very interesting. Just wanted to kick it around a bit.

May 9, 2003 03:11 AM Forum: Investment Discussions

Stock Market - latest trends

Posted By Paul Kammueller
'Trusted the "it will turn around quickly" thought!'

Don't feel bad Bill, you have plenty of company. Historically spectacular bull and bear moves can't occur without sucking in most of the population that has the means to invest. And just look at the swings on the way down. It would be hard to come up with a pattern that could more maximize the pain and make sure that so few escaped harm.

I bailed out of the market when things started going south in a big way back in March 2000. So I was one of the 'chicken' investors, LOL! Have periodically dipped my toe in from time to time since then. Have more managed to just not lose lots of money than actually make any sort of return, and I'm plenty happy with that result given the carnage that has taken place everywhere else.

May 9, 2003 12:27 PM Forum: Investment Discussions

The VIX! (Volatility Index) - 5-year chart

Posted By Paul Kammueller
Hmmm, actually I don't think the OJ trial caused much effect on the VIX. If it did it was awfully smalland brief because I can't see anything on the 10-year chart.

I believe the 1998 spike correlates to the collapse of Long Term Capital Management and the whole derivatives crisis. This actually was a pretty huge threat to the global financial system at the time, it didn't cause panic in the streets because the public at large didn't really understand it or grasp the seriousness of the situation. There's another spike in 1997 where there was I think either the Russian currency crisis or another eastern currency crisis, it was in one of these years that the eastern markets sort of collapsed.

One thing that is interesting is how much volatility itself has steadily trended upward over the last decade -- even well before the bear market started. The volatility 'runup' in 1996-97 is particularly noticeable, like volatility stepped up to a higher 'plateau' in those years.


May 9, 2003 03:59 PM Forum: Off Topic Discussions

Ok, I've had enough

Posted By Paul Kammueller
There is also a comma required after the word "mistake", because it uses a conjunction to separate two complete thoughts, much like this sentence does (although this sentence also contains a long and complex parenthetical phrase afterward, making it a bit of a run-on).

May 9, 2003 07:47 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

8 OR 10" DOB??

Posted By Paul Kammueller
8" f/6 gets my vote for these reasons: The 10" will have 25% better resolution and 56% brighter, but it'll be significantly bulkier and heavier without being THAT much better on planets.

Moreover, off the center of field coma starts to be a factor which is less severe at f/6 than it is at f/5. This is an issue with planetary-dob viewers (like me!) since, with manual tracking, your target is off the center of field the vast majority of the time.

May 10, 2003 04:25 AM Forum: Equipment Talk

An excellent paper of effect of seeing!

Posted By Paul Kammueller
"The more northerly US states toward the Canadian border often have poorer seeing due to the frequent presence of the Polar Jet stream."

Basically confirmed what I've suspected my whole observing life. Says the seeing's great in the south, east, southeast, southwest, basically everywhere except where I live. Greetings from Minnesota. :-(

May 13, 2003 08:35 PM Forum: Equipment Talk

spider vanes??

Posted By Paul Kammueller
There's a lot of debate on this. Basically curved vanes take the diffraction of spider vanes and smears them out evenly over the field so there's not a concentration of light in 'diffraction spikes'. It's like choosing a window that has dirt evenly distributed over the pane instead of a window with two big streaks of thick dirt on it. Actual effect on planetary contrast, etc. is also a subject of debate.

There's a spider to every taste, some possible scenarios:

3-vane straight: 6 diffraction spikes, intensity x1
4-vane straight: 4 diffraction spikes, intensity x2
3- or 4-vane curved: no spikes; though overall diffraction can be 20-50% more than same # straight-vane (depending on degree of curvature)

May 13, 2003 09:20 PM Forum: Telescope Making

Can I do it ?

Posted By Paul Kammueller
"What are my chances from 1-10 with 10 being the best chance ?"

Zero. You have no chance. You will fail. You're not an optician, you're just some poor schmuck.

There. Now you have to do it, just to rub it in my face. :-)

Funding Member

Sponsors


View all sponsors

Search