Posts Made By: Robert Howe

Les Chambers said:

I am sure what you write is technically correct Doctor. However, the consensus IS that US IMR are climbing in comparison with other developed nations.

If what I say is technically correct, then it is correct. On to the next point...

The same is true with life-spans. In the US the average (M/F) lifespan is 78 yrs. This is lower than Germany (79), Greece (79.4), Norway (79.7) UK (78.7) and France (79.7)

Are these differences statistically significant? Are they predicted using the same methods and data analysis, by the same demographers? Do they tell us that Germany, Greece and France are better countries in which to live, or do they tell us that a more homogenous population lives longer? Perhaps not counting those 22 week premature fetuses who had a life span of 7 hours plays a role in these numbers...

The EU also lacks the rampant drug addiction rates and the problems they cause AND it lacks the large segments of population that you suggest should not be counted because they have been marginalized out of the system by welfare.

Here we agree. The people who "have been marginalized out of the system by welfare" have been so marginalized by their removal from the free economy, from the need to be responsible for oneself and to look after one's family. Our welfare system has long encouraged men to leave their pregnant lovers, thus ensuring a steady stream of young, single women raising children without adequate family help. I see women of all races coming in pregnant or for help with fertility, single, no means of support, expecting to live happily ever after on a welfare check. What a sham. The government makes a terrrrible set of parents.

I'm a single parent too, with deep respect for single moms of limited means. Fortunately, I have education to spare and a hell of a work ethic, which I am delighted to see in all of my children. It is very unlikely that any of my kids will end up smoking crack.

Regarding education levels, again your figures may be correct,

They are, so there is no need for further argument.

Thanks, Les, for buttressing my arguments. I won't be visiting this topic again, it's too remote from astronomy. But I always get annoyed by the misleading infant mortality data, so I felt compelled to write this book.

Ciao

Robert

Don Barar said:


Besides, Bob eats cheese made from human breast milk.

Actually, it's pretty good. I think the mice have some in their valise!

RH

True but...as a former altruistic scientist who spent years toiling in more than one lab, I tell you that no one does medical research for profit. It's done for the love of the quest, of understanding, of learning more about an interesting system. Useful basic research is rarely a direct result of studying the disease of the day. The data that let us understand the connection between breast cancer and estrogen, for example, came from studies of hormonal influences on uterine growth in rats.

Don is right on when he hails capitalism as the force bringing new discoveries into use, that is to say, to the market. No government agency is able to understand the needs of millions of patients and their physicians. But the market, it will respond to them.

The best arguments against nationalizing health care are the examples of what has happened elsewhere. Canada and Great Britain and New Zealand have laughable health care, in my small town practice of gynecology I regularly get patients from these countries who are on infinite surgical waiting lists for disabling conditions, who come to me for a quick, out of pocket treatment.

Don't forget the status and condition of the medical world in the Soviet Union. Physicians were treated as second or third tier professionals, waiting lines were long, care was deplorable, and meaningful research was absent.

Don't break the finest medical care system ever seen in the world--ours!!

Robert Howe, MD

Hey friends, after five years finishing a music degree, falling in love and remarrying, I am back into doing astronomy regularly.  Skies have gone to hell where I live with lots of new construction and streetlights.  Most of my observing is from a roll off with three refractors, these being a TEC 180 f/7, a AP 130 f/8.35 and an AP Traveler (105 f/5.8).  I've never been an EP hound, after recovering from a nearly-lethal case of aperture fever a few years ago I settled on TeleVues: Panoptic 35, Pan 24, Nagler 22, Ethos 21, Pan 19, Ethos 13, Nagler 13, Nagler 9, Ethos 8 and Nagler 7.

Due to the skies I am doing more and more planetary and moon observing.  Most of the high magnification work is with the Ethos 13, 8 and Nagler 7.  I am happy with the quality of my views but wonder if there is room for improvement.

My question, are there other EPs that will give crisper views than these?  I recall some lovely views with a friend's Pentax eyepieces a few years ago.

Thanks for your answers.

Hi All

I am trying to recall the name of, and thus find the website of, a company that used to make very long achromat doublets telescopes, I think in Pennsylvania.  Their website made a big deal about their QC and they sold all sorts of accessories.  They made up to 8 inch lenses, if I recall, at up to f/15. 

Any ideas?

Thanks

Robert Howe

I found it!  D&G.  Thanks anyways.

Hi, I'm a longtime Amart supporter who got side tracked away from astronomy by illness, a new wife, two changes of jobs in a year.  I'm getting back into the hobby but all of my old pals in this area have moved away.  So I'm looking for someone with a nice Dob or Cat to invite me over a couple of times in the next month to observe Mars at high powers.  I can squeeze 300x out of my TEC 180 but darnittall, the planet is so low in the sky that the scope is partially blocked by the walls of my observatory, I can only get about 90% of the planet in a view.  So my fancy apos are handicapped.

I live near Springfield MA, am happy to drive an hour to your home.  I'm also happy to bring some fine beers, Cuban cigars, Televue eyepieces and/or a lovely AP Traveler to complement your big scope.

Cheers and Clear Skies!


Robert Howe
Wilbraham MA

TEC is now making a run of 200 mm f/8 apos.  These retail for $29,600
D&G offers a 200 mm f/12 achromat for $3695.

I understand the need for more expensive glasses in the TEC; I have one of their 180s and it is an awesome scope.
But how can the price difference between an achromat and an apochromat be $25,905?  That's six and a half times the cost of the entire D&G telescope!  Is the apo's glass really THAT expensive, or is the time required to make an apo 100 fold that needed for an achromat, or what?

Enlightenment will be appreciated.  Thanks.

Hello all,
After many years of serious observing my eyes are rheumy and my interests are changing.  One of my prizes is a Ceravolo HD 216 MakNewt, a wonderful scope which has been in storage in my sun room for a decade.  I would like to have it evaluated and adjusted by an expert.  The maker is not interested.  Is there a telescope maker or technician in the country who might be able to inspect and restore this magnificent instrument?
Thanks very much,
Robert Howe

After years in its case I have re-mounted my Ceravolo 216 f/6 Mak-Newt.  Fabulous scope.  I want to hang my TV80 on top of it, as I did in 2006, but on a dovetail not a fixed attachment. That way I can swap with a small solar scope. Can anyone point me to a dovetail which will accept the 4 #20 screws that are on the rings of my Ceravolo?  See photos.

Here's the rods in question