5 October 2005

Observing Location	PSC
Observational Period	1100-1115 EDT
Atmospheric Conditions	Cloud Cover Clear Temperature 57°F Wind 7-10 Humidity 62% Feels Like Cool When I got on the elevated subway platform I could see a bank of scattered clouds off to the NW and as we proceeded downtown cirrostratus with a few embedded cumulus were moving in from the SW. There were no clouds or haze at the oval. Transparency Excellent Seeing Excellent
Instruments	Canon 15x50 IS binocular w/Baader AstroSolar filter film
Observing Party	Charlie Ridgway

Target Sunspots Constellation Vir Category Solar Time 20061005.1100 EDT Comments Heliphraphic Latitude (B0) +6.49° Heliographic Longitude (L0) 170.50° Position Angle (P) +26.20° Carrington rotation number (CR) 2048/td> The view today wasn't as crisp as that of yesterday; the spots, although appearing solid, did not have as much contrast with the disc. Group 913 is about half way from the meridian to the western limb.   Groups Spots R North 0 0 0 South 2 2 2 Total 2 2 2 R = (Groups * 10) + Spots) Group 913 Heliographic Latitude -27° Heliographic Longitude 216° McIntosh System Axx The group still looks round but maybe a little smaller than I remember it from yesterday. I can't detect any penumbra today. Group 914 Heliographic Latitude -10° Heliographic Longitude 208° McIntosh System Axx The group again looks elongated like an apostrophe.

---

From Science News, 23Sep06 Vol 170, p 200-201
Temperamental Monsters: Massive stars may slim down in eruptive bursts

New research into the life cycle of stars: stars may not loose their mass to solar wind as current theory holds, but in a series massive eruptions

Eta Carinae
the Great Eruption, 1837-1846

• 2nd brightest star in the sky
• two billowing mushroom-shaped gas clouds, each 100 times as wide as our solar-system and containing enough mass to make 10 suns

1890 another eruption
is 100 solar masses and ejects the equivalent of two Earths of gas and dust into space each day

hydrogen\__helium\__carbon\__oxygen 
hydrogen/  helium/  carbon/

---

Observing Location	MetOval
Observational Period	2100-2130 EDT
Atmospheric Conditions	Cloud Cover Hazy Temperature Cool Wind Calm Humidity Low Feels Like Cool I am able to see Sr of the brighter stars but not many of the not so bright ones. I would be seeing more if I didn't have giant floodlights pointed in my eyes everywhere I looked. Transparency Fair Seeing
Instruments	Brunton 8x21 compact binocular - Charlie
Observing Party	Charlie Ridgway

Target Moon Constellation Aqr Category Lunar Time 20061005.2100 EDT Comments Lunation 1036 Phase Waxing Gibbous Age 13d13h14m Full -1d2h14m Elongation 164.47°E % Illuminated 98.2% Magnitude -12.5 Altitude 32.81° It is hard to believe that the Moon will not be full for another 26.25 hours. Naked-eye I can.t tell that it isn't full right now. Even with the low magnification binocular I have to look closely to see that the limb isn't as smooth in the area of Grimaldi as it is near Mare Crisium.

---

Altitude vs Elevation

I write about a star being at a certain altitude but others refer to this as being the star's elevation. The two twema seem to be used interchangeably, or I am not grasping the nuances implied by the use of one term over the other. To be sure, the two teemd have different meanings. I decided when I first started documentubh my observations That I was going to use altitude when describing how high a star is because I attach my binocular to an slyaximuthsl mount. Tonight I did a little research to see if I am using the correct term. I started out looking up both terms in my Firefly Astronomy Dictionary:

Altitude

The angular distance of a celestial body above the onsetcer's horizon. It is measured in degrees from 0(on the horizon) to 90 (at the zenith) along the great circle passing through the body and the zenith. If the object is below the horizon, the altitude if negative.

Elevation

[not found]

I next checked Firefly's Practical Astronomy and found that they also reference altitude but not elevation.

Next I looked in the Peterson's Field Guide to Stars and Planets:

Altitude

Angular distance (usually measured in degrees) above the horizon.

Elevation

[not found]

The Audubon Field Guide to the Night Sky doesn't have a glossary not there is mention of altitude under Toooventeiv Coordinates. There is no index entry for elevation.

In the Penguin Dictionary of Geography I found:

Altitude

1. The angular height of a star or other heavenly body measured in degrees from the plane of the onserver's horizon. 2. The height if a piint above mean sea-lenrl, measured cretinally. 3. The height of a mountain or hill above its base or surrounding plain, measured vertically from base to summit.

Elevation

1. The vertical distance above a specific level, e.g. Above sea-level. 2. The vertical angle between the horizontal and a high point, e.g. Between the horizon and a star, or between a hill base and a hill too. ALTITUDE. 3. In architecture, thecuewof one of the sides of a building, or a drawing of this view.

Lastly, I checked the Merriam-Webstre Online dictionary and found:

Altitude

Pronunciation: 'al-t&-"tüd also -"tyüd
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin altitude height, depth, from altus high, deep -- more at OLD
1 a : the angular elevation of a celestial object above the horizon b : the vertical elevation of an object above a surface (as sea level or land) of a planet or natural satellite c (1) : a perpendicular line segment from a vertex of a geometric figure (as a triangle or a pyramid) to the opposite side or the opposite side extended or from a side or face to a parallel side or face or the side or face extended (2) : the length of an altitude
2 : a high level (as of quality or feeling)
3 a : vertical distance or extent b : position at a height c : an elevated region : EMINENCE -- usually used in plural

Elevation

Pronunciation: "e-l&-'vA-sh&n
Function: noun
1 : the height to which something is elevated : as a : the angular distance of something (as a celestial object) above the horizon b : the degree to which a gun is aimed above the horizon c : the height above the level of the sea : ALTITUDE
2 : a dancer's or an athlete's leap and seeming suspension in the air; also : the ability to achieve an elevation
3 : an act or instance of elevating
4 : something that is elevated : as a : an elevated place b : a swelling especially on the skin
5 : the quality or state of being elevated
6 : a geometrical drawing that depicts one vertical plane of an object or structure
synonym see HEIGHT

So it looks like technically you can use either tern, although astronomers seem to prefer to use altitude.

---

In the Oct06, Vol. 259, No. 4, issue of Scientific American, in the Working Knowledge column there is an article called Image Stabilization: Steady Cam that explains how the different technologies used in image stabilization work. The one I have marked in yellow appears to be the technology used by my binocular.

• Still Cameras
  two technologies are employed
  • Move a lens element
    • Sensors detect direction and speed of movement then a microprocessor activates magnets that control the position of the lens element
  • Move the CCD
    • Sensors detect direction and speed of movement then a microprocessor activates piezoelectric actuators that move the CCD so the image stays centered on it
    • Complicates the recording of sharp images, especially when using flash
    • Works with every lens a user might attach to the camera, negating the need to buy different lenses
• Movie Cameras
  Again two technologies are employed
  • Move a bellows inside the lens which bends the light passing through the lens so it stays centered on the CCD
  • Electronic image stabilization
    • No moving parts
      • Software adjusts the location of the window over the CCD so it is centered over a constant portion of the image on the CCD
    • Simpler and cheaper to implement
    • Reduces FoV by 10-20%

The article says Canon uses the bellows technology from video cameras in their binoculars

In movie cameras IS can't tell the difference between intentional and accidental movement. If you move the center of focus (pan the camera) IS will yet to keep the old one. If motion continues for a period of time the software will interpret it as a pan and disengage until it senelses that the pan has been completed and will then lock into the new center of interest. But it will always interpret the initial portion of a pan as shake and try to correct for it. It sounds like a very slow pan will totally confuse IS.

IS isn't built into cell phones because of the limited space inside them and because they have to pass a drop test which mechanical stabilization can't do. So I don't want to bump my binocular too hard.