Image of the day

From the
ATWB Customer Gallery

Paying attention

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: William Paolini

February 21, 2007 01:48 PM Forum: Eyepieces

Re: TeleVue Radians

Posted By William Paolini

I agree with Fred, there should be a price break for an entire set. But $900 seems a bit too much of a discount. If you target $185 each for single sales, then $900 for the bunch is like buy 5 get 1 free.

If I was in the market, and all were excellent and optics pristine, then I'd say $1000 + shipping for all six would be a good deal. Of course, if some had "issues" like dings on the housings, heavy set screw marks, or any optics problems, then maybe the $900 or a tad less would be more in order.

ps - I am not in the market for these either 8O

March 15, 2007 10:15 AM Forum: Eyepieces

16 Nagler vs 15 Pan

Posted By William Paolini

Has anyone done a side-by-side between the 16mm Nagler and the 15mm Panoptic?

Forgetting about the afov issue and any rectilinear distortion issues, how do these two compare against each other solely relative to:
1. Light Throughput
2. Contrast
3. Sharpness - in particular rendering the finest star points

May 31, 2007 09:59 AM Forum: Refractors

8" Liquid Lens Refractor

Posted By William Paolini

In the tradition of Herbert Highstone, here's another historic refractor. Peter Barlow (namesake of the barlow lens) came up with this design as in his day getting good quality flint in large sizes was difficult, so he substituted flint with a hollow glass lens filled with carbon-disulphide! He built it in 1831.

An interesting read...

May 5, 2008 04:14 PM Forum: Refractors

TV102 Competition

Posted By William Paolini

About ready to get a TV102 refractor. Before I do, wanted to get some feedback from folks who have or viewed thru one of these and ask what refractor in the same aperture class they think is a tad better optically and also one they think is just a tad worse optically. And if you can, how the one that is better excels over the TV102 and how the one that is worse falls short.

Please only compare other refractors of appox 4" in you list.


July 17, 2008 08:18 AM Forum: Eyepieces

Re: Baader Hyperions

Posted By William Paolini

Since the Hyperions are a 68 deg afov EP, they compare best with either the Panoptic line or the Pentax XW line.

* The Panoptic line gives up available focal lengths to the Hyperions and XWs as there are no short focal length offerings.

* The Pentax XW line gives up nothing IMO to the Hyperions and is a clear notch above both optically and in availability of focal lengths.

* Both Pentax XW and Panotics give up the ability to change the focal length of the eyepiece which the Hyperions accomplish through their fine tuning ring concept.

* Both PentaxXW and Panotics give up the modular concepts which the Hyperions are built around in attaching cameras, etc (see the Hyperion system chart).

* The Panoptics give up rectilinear distortion control to the Hyperions and XWs which both control it much better.

* The Hyperions give up fov darkness uniformity to both the Pentax XWs and Panoptics as you can see a general lightening in the fov about 20% from the field stop.

* The Hyperions give up off-axis sharpness and lateral color control to both the Pentax XW and Panotics which substantially do not have these issues.

* The Pentax XWs and Panotics give up bang-for-buck when compared to the Hyperions as the Hyperions cost much less.

* The Hyperions give up build quality in compared to the Panoptics or Pentax XWs. They are still good but not at the premium level we see in the other two lines.

* The Hyperions and Panoptics give up interior "dust control" to the Pentax XWs which are sealed eyepieces so theoretically over time air/dust particles will not work their way in.

I find the Hyperions all work excellently in my 102 f/8 APO and I enjoy them very much in that instrument. On-axis sharpness and transmission are on-par with any other wide field IMO. Coloration I would put somewhere between the Panoptic and the XW, with the Panoptic being the warmest. I would characterize them as "very good" eyepieces. The "great" characterization I would say is more appropriate to the XWs and Naglers and Ethos for wide fields IMO. Panoptics, for me, don't quite make the "great" category, but only because there is too much rectilinear distortion for my tastes.

November 20, 2009 01:44 PM Forum: Religion

My World vs The World

Posted By William Paolini

Subjective mythology...everyone has and follows one....everyone (religious, aetheist, agnostic, scientist, etc). Interesting video.

Off topic note (from same site) - developments in computer interfaces on the horizon...

July 15, 2010 11:13 AM Forum: Religion

Why do Atheists...

Posted By William Paolini

Today I decided to visit an atheist website. So I went to to see what they talk about there. There are about 34 hyperlinks in the central frame of the from page of various current topics. To my surprise, a clear majority of those link were related in some way to religious activities.

So my question is, why do atheists spend so much time concerned with what non-atheist groups are doing? When I go to a Buddhist site or a Catholic site the vast majority of their front pages are dealing with topics related to what they are doing and not what non-Buddhist or non-Catholic groups are doing. I was expecting to find the band of atheists discussing and promoting their views, instead was more concerned with counterpoint to organizations or peoples of opposing viewpoints.

Always sends up a red flag for me when I see organizations doing mostly couterpointing of opposing views as it usually exhibits a level of extremism operating freely within the group. Is it because atheists have no views they hold in common except anti-views? This is a sincere question as I'm just not understanding why a group of people would organize as a lifestyle against something. Seems more productive to stress a lifestyle that is unique, has its own redeming attributes, something to be proud about and attract others instead of being so negative and anti this or that.

Disclaimer - I've not reviewed a bunch of sites out there and am going off of behaviors I see in this forum space and some major websites. I did note that some major websites had less anti-theist stuff (although still a lot), like, but just seemed to me that if the organization had the word atheist in its title it tended to have lots of religion counterpoint as its focus. If the organization did not highlight atheist in its title, like the Freethought Association of Canada or the European Humanist Federation, then these were more of what I expected, little religion counterpoint and expressing more of their own unique attributes instead. Anyway, found it curious.

July 22, 2010 12:59 PM Forum: Religion

Do you believe in zestykistirism?

Posted By William Paolini

Just came across this person. Quite an incredibly varied person. Anyway, he has an interesting perspective on God, which I think all the atheists and agnostics here will very much like, and perhaps a small subset of the theists. I find it intriguing...makes one think of God in possibly a very different way.

He has volumes to read, and most surveying a variety of theories by scientists, but related to God best to scroll down about 40% of the way to the bolded topic called: "A Word on Miracles" and read to the end. At the bottom of page just hit the Index button to see all the chapters available -- quite a prolific individual. You'll get why I titled this thread as I did once you get to the bolded section called "Not an epilogue."

August 13, 2010 06:21 AM Forum: Religion

Ethics for synthetic life?

Posted By William Paolini

What should be the ethical guidelines for synthetic life?

The following link,, relates the reporting of the first synthetically created DNA which was implanted into a cell. They even went so far as to put watermarks in the gene as well as encoded messages for fun (giving proof of the creator).

Of course, it's the good old oil companies who funded this as they want to create proprietary bacteria to eat CO2 and make fuel as a by product (there goes the environment if it spirals out of control causing global cooling?).

Anyway, we just made a leap forward in creating, synthesizing, one celled life which can replicate and inevitably mutate. What do you think should be the ethics guidelines for activities like this? Lower order life forms of course would be different than higher order ones. Going to be interesting is we ever figure out how to jump start consciuosness in a synthetic.

August 21, 2010 03:25 PM Forum: Religion

If humans became omnipotent...

Posted By William Paolini

Took a road trip to Chicago (12 hrs) last week. On the return drive my son was asked do I think that if a human attained power over creation, basically omnipotent, how I thought they would be. So the question was if I thought they would become like God is portrayed as loving and caring and their interest was in helping humans, or not? He was reading a graphic novel called the Watchmen and in it a person attains omnipotence basically and can control all time/matter/space.

So how would you have answered (this was after a discussion on scientology of all things)?