The Orion StarBlast 6i Intelliscope!

by admin

Specturm Scientifics now carries the Orion StarBlast 6i Intelliscope!

Starblast 6i

We’ve already discussed our addition of the regular StarBlast 6 which actually caught us a bit off guard with its sales. And now Orion has developed a computer guided version using its popular Intelliscope system!

The difference is that you get the Intelliscope computer guidance system, with a database of 14,000 celestial objects that will help you find those especially elusive objects!

We’ve often railed against low-cost computer controlled telescopes, and the reason we do is because of that second word: controlled. Many a cheap telescope with a simplistic computer system has been made on the cheap and the more often than not take away from the viewer’s experience. The controls don’t allow you the freedom of moving the telescope yourself and to aim the telescope you must use the computer systems. Not so with the Intelliscope. Here you are in charge of the telescope, with the computerized object finder assisting you in finding objects, but not trying to take control away from you nor finding everything for you. There are no motors to wear out, no gears to strip, no clutches to burn out. The only battery is in the controller so you won’t find yourself in the middle of a viewing session with motor batteries dying on you. The Intelliscope system keeps things simple and fun for the user, and if you don’t want to use it, don’t use it, save it for finding the more tricky objects instead!

The StarBlast 6i still comes with the same great features as its non-computerized cousin: 2 Plossl eyepieces, EZ Finder Reflex Finder, eyepiece rack, and more.

So come on and get some compact and portable computer guided computer joy today!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

What Happened to Pluto? - The short version

by admin

Frequently, when we are discussing astronomy with customers (it comes with the territory when you sell telescopes) the subject of Pluto comes up and the customer usually asks us: “So, what happened to Pluto? All of a sudden they decide it isn’t a planet? What do you think of that?!”. A lot of these folks are somewhat upset about not. Not very upset mind you, because it isn’t like the Astronomers who downgraded Pluto slashed their tires or anything, but there is some concern in their voice.

Pluto

Maybe it is because Pluto was the only ‘planet’ to be discovered by an American, maybe it is a love of the Disney dog with the same name, maybe it is because the mnemonic devices for remembering the planets they learned as a child are now defunct (Mother Very Thought Made a Jelly Sandwich Under No Protest, i.e.), most likely it is just a disruption of what many considered to be an orderly solar system without real reason. After all, if some scientists can just waltz in and say Pluto isn’t a planet they can do it to any of our favorite planets! It seemed unprecedented and without cause.

But the fact of the matter is: there were very good reasons for the re-classification, and things like this have actually happened before.

So where do we start in discussing Pluto? How about where it lives: The Kuiper Belt.

Kuiper Belt

The Kuiper Belt was theorized back in the 1930 with the discovery of Pluto. It seemed to many an Astronomer that it didn’t make sense that Pluto was the only planet beyond Neptune. Add to that its smaller size and composition seemed to indicate that Pluto might be just one of many. For a long time, the Kuiper belt was mostly a theory, but with many elements that made sense (especially with regards to other Solar System objects such as comets), the theory changed a lot over the decades, and nothing could really be proven as technology was not up to finding more objects past Pluto. Even the best astrophotograph of Pluto by the Hubble Space Telescope was mostly a pixelated mess.

There’s a new kid in town

The problems started with the discovery of a new object past Pluto: Eris (at first nicknamed ‘Xena’ after the TV show character). Eris was larger than Pluto, and it became apparent that there might easily be more planets, so it didn’t seem correct to call Eris the 10th Planet just yet. There was much hemming and hawing, but mostly the issue was put on the backburner. The question was deliberately avoided and you would be hard pressed to find any posters printed that show Eris in place as the 10th planet. But soon things came to a head.


Enter the World’s Sexiest AstroPhysicist

The issue came to a head when Neil Degrasse Tyson, Director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York had his Planetarium make a exhibit on the planets of our solar system.

Neil

The Planetarium’s display idea was simple: put planets in the categories they fit in rather than their orbit order. It was easy enough: rocky planets like Mercury, Venus, Mars, Earth, and Gassy planets like Neptune, Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus.

Trouble was, Pluto didn’t fit into either of those categories. It certainly wasn’t a gas giant, and it wasn’t rocky like the inner planets. In fact, its composition was more in common with comets than planets! In fact, if Pluto decided to wander closer into out solar system it would actually grow a tail like comets do from the solar winds. It was obvious this wasn’t going to fit anywhere. So Pluto had no display at the Hayden. Soon the media got wind of Pluto’s absence and things started to cascade. In the meantime, a few more objects had been discovered in the Kuiper belt, so astronomers couldn’t ignore the issue anymore.

Just What is it?

The problem, at the core, is that there had never been a real definition of what a planet is. Planet simply means ‘wanderer’ in greek and they were called that because the visible planets meandered independently of the stars. But that was hardly an ironclad definition. In fact this lack of definition had caused trouble before: Ceres.

Ceres

Ceres was discovered in 1801, and was almost immediately declared to be a new planet. Textbooks and other materials of that era actually would list Ceres as being a planet between Mars and Jupiter. For over 50 years it stayed that way. But soon more and more objects were being found in what is now known as the Asteroid Belt. These objects were soon reclassified as asteroids and Ceres was no longer considered to be a planet, but and asteroid. Like Pluto, it received a demotion.

Define Your Terms

So the international astronomy community started to work on new definitions for what a planet actually is. At first they stumbled, badly. In an effort to not lose Pluto as a planet it was first decided that a planet was pretty much anything in the solar system that was large enough to have a spherical shape and wasn’t a satellite of another planet. This, of course, was a failure of a definition as not only did it mean that all the new Kuiper belt objects were now planets, but Ceres was also a planet again! This obviously was not going to work.

So a new definition was worked on, this time it was decided to not only define a planet, but also develop a new definition for what Pluto et. al. were as well. It was decided that a planet was:

a) Large enough to be spherical from its own mass

b) Has sufficiently clear its orbital path of other large objects.

And that was that. Pluto had the first part, but didn’t even come close on the second. And so Pluto was demoted for not cleaning its room.

For objects that were round but didn’t meet the other qualification, a new term was invented “Dwarf Planet“. The definition of a dwarf planet was that it simple be massive enough to be spherical (larger objects become spherical because of the mass of the gravitational pull on themselves overcomes other factors). So Pluto, Eris, Ixion, Orcus, and even Ceres. Yes, little Ceres got promoted by this new definition. The only dwarf planet not in the Kuiper Belt.

And so is the story of how Pluto became a planet. This actually was the short version, you can imagine how long the full tale was.

Oh, and for a bit of trivia, Mike Brown, the guy who discovered Eris, which might have been the tenth planet but instead triggered the de-planeting of Pluto? Well, he now twitters under the name plutokiller.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Totally Irresponsible Science - The Book, The Video

by admin

We’ve already discussed our best selling science experiment book - The Book of Totally Irresponsible Science.

Book!

But did you know that the publisher made a cool promotional video to go along with it? Watch it and some of the cool experiments that are described in the book!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Pocket Nature Guides

by admin

The print world is rife with all kinds of nature guides. Most of them have a big disadvantage right from the get-to: They are heavy, thick books. This means that they are usually well packed with info, and are sized smaller than most books. But just because a book is reduced to the size of a paperback novel does not make it ‘pocket sized’, especially when it is over1 inch thick!

So along come Waterford press Pocket Nature Guides:

Pocket Nature Guide

While the size - 8.25″ x 3.5″ may not seem very pocket-sized, these books manage to be some of the most portable nature guides on the market! When folded up they measure under 1/8″ thick! Yet they are packed with pictures and information! Each Guide has from 80-140 images with critical details.

Their easy-on-the-wallet pricing (each one is only $5.95) means you can pick up several and have them available for hikes or camping trips without breaking your back or your budget! The Guides are printed on laminated paper so they are durable enough to handle your hiking trip. The guides that are easy to carry are the guides that get used.

Topics cover a variety of fields: from Medicial or Edible plants, to Trees, Geology, Weather and Astronomy.

On Nature trips one might find Animal Tracks or Dangerous Animals guides to be useful.

Guide

Pick up a few of these compact and affordable guides today! Over 20 guides to choose from!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Mini-Centrifuge - The Video

by admin

We’ve been trying to get more videos of our lab products online. Here is one of our mini centrifuge

This video gives a good sense of the compact size & power of this little lab machine. It is an excellent choice for labs where space is at a premium or where larger, more expensive models are not called for.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Kepler finds planets! Adopt one!

by admin

We’ve already posted about how you can ‘adopt’ a star in the stellar region the Kepler Mission is examining for planetary bodies via the Pale Blue Dot Project.

Well it is 2010 and already Kepler seems to have found some new planets!. The best part is that many of these stars have not been adopted, so you can adopt one for just $100!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

A brief tour of telescope eyepieces.

by admin

A telescope’s eyepieces are often one of the most underrated parts of the optical system. Many folks get caught up with aperture fever or drool over high-end apochromatic refractors while neglecting the fact that the eyepiece is almost 1/2 the optical system!

Most telescopes include 1 or 2 eyepieces. Depending on the model and the manufacturer these might be junky, perfunctory eyepieces or decent lines like Plossls or Kellners. We’ll go over the various features of some of these “common named” lines as well as more modern designs. But first a bit about the eyepiece’s size and features:

Size

Eyepieces come in three sizes, .965″ Diameter, 1.25″ Diameter, and 2″ Diameter. Of these, the .965″ size is not really made much anymore, but some older models may pop from time to time. This size was an old standard used on small Japanese imports but it has been phased out for the most part.

1.25″ Diameter eyepieces are by far the most common size. All the telescopes Spectrum Scientifics sells use this size, and an eyepiece from one telescope will almost certainly fit another one these days.

2″ Diameter eyepieces usually only work in larger telescopes. These eyepieces provide very comfortable viewing as the eyepiece has a nice, large piece of glass to look into. The disadvantage of 2″ eyepieces is that they are low powered. So you can’t take advantage of the comfortable viewing and crank up the magnification.

Deepview

All telescope eyepieces should have threads in their base to accept filters. There are some exceptions, but they should be rare.

For looking at various optical designs, we will look at the “Named” eyepiece designs first. These have been around for a long time and are named after the scientist who developed them.

Ramsden and Huygenian . These are very old eyepiece designs that date back as far as the 17th century. They use a minimum number of glass elements and these days are considered very cheap designs. If you eyepiece has a latter ‘H’ or ‘R’ before the number it is one of these old designs.

Kellner eyepieces have at least three glass elements and are a vast improvement over the older designs. These make good ‘economy’ eyepieces and work well with small, beginner telescopes. A good example of Kellner designs would be the Orion Explorer II line

Explorer II eyepieces

Plossl Eyepieces are a step up from the Kellner line, having four glass elements: two achromats (two pieces of glass cemented together to improve optics) are placed facing each other and give excellent images. Most intermediate or advanced telescopes include Plossl eyepieces. A good example of Plossl would be the Orion HighLight Line:

Highlight Plossl

New Optical Eyepiece Designs

These are more modern optical designs, without common names but rather brand names. These eyepieces are so numerous these days that we will describe them by their major features rather than by any names. New eyepiece designs are usually more expensive than the traditional designs as they involve more design and more glass elements.

Long Eye Relief Eypieces are great for eyeglass wearers or for folks who don’t want to look through a pinhole for high magnifications. Eye relief is the point past the glass where the image forms. Short eye relief means that your eye must be very, very close to the eyepiece glass, which can be frustrating for eyeglass wearers. These designs of eyepieces reduce those problems by using multiple elements and often special glass in one or more of those elements. In addition to the long eye relief the viewer can also benefit from a wide open end to the eyepiece even at high powers (traditional designs mean one is looking through a pinhole at high magnification). The trade off is that there is a lot of glass in the optical systems of these eyepieces, so there is more than a little bit of light loss, even with decent optical coatings. Also, using a barlow with these multi-element eyepieces is not good for the light path.

A good example of Long Eye Relief eyepieces would be the Orion Epic series

Epic Eyepieces

Ultrawide or Wide Field-Of-View Eyepieces
are designed to provide the wider field of view at the same magnifications as traditional eyepieces. This means you see more of the sky in the eyepiece than you would with a Plossl or Kellner without sacrificing magnification. A good example of these would be the Orion Expanse Eyepieces.

Expanse Eyepieces

These are just a couple of examples of many other designs out there.

The more modern designs will invariably be more costly than the traditional eyepieces. As to which eyepiece to use, that depends on what you want to do. If you are on a budget, stick to Kellner & Plossl designs. If you must wear eyeglasses when you view, consider the long-eye relief designs, if you want to set up your telescope for public viewing consider an easy-to-look-through 2″ diameter eyepiece (if your telescope can take them). If you are looking at wide deep-sky objects, consider the wide-field eyepieces. People’s needs will vary from person to person, so there is no one ‘perfect’ eyepiece.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Color Finger Lights

by admin

Frankly, you just aren’t going to have this kind of fun for just $3.99. That’s less than $1 per colorful finger light!

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Galilean Revolution: 400 years ago today.

by admin

400 years ago today Galileo observed the moons of Jupiter. Thus beginning one of the most important events in science/astronomy history. Frankly, I don’t have the words to describe this event and its importance, especially when there are those who do it so much better. I am speaking of Phil Plaitt, the Bad Astronomer:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/01/07/the-galilean-revolution-400-years-later/

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Microscopes: Why you should never buy them at a Department Store.

by admin

A friend of the store sent us this picture of a ‘microscope kit’ he found at a drug store during the holidays. This same kit could have been found in a department store or general toy store:

Junk Microscope

You see these things pop up in big stores, especially around the holidays. They are bought at a low price and then discounted a bit more. But no matter what you paid for it, it is going to be junk. The box is probably the most durable part of it. Now, when it comes to telescopes, many an amateur astronomer has written pages and pages describing the flaws in junky department store telescopes, but the flaws in junk microscopes is more limited. What is wrong with you may ask? Well let’s break it down:

Magnification Claims

OK, the box proudly displays “900X” twice, with the other magnifications being 400X and 100X. This already screams ‘junk’ from the get-go. Most compound microscopes, at least decently built ones, have magnifications of 40x, 100x and 400x. More advanced models may have a 1000x objective. But this doesn’t mean you can just crank up your microscope without a care. No, most high-powered telescopes require using a drop of immersion oil between the object being viewed and the objective lens. This is why most microscopes with high-powered lenses use higher-quality DIN objectives which are an effective international standard. Now look at that little plastic…thing..and tell us that it is going to be able to come within 100x of the high magnification of a biological microscope without any special work? Please.

Another problem is that the lowest magnification on this microscope is 100x. Better built compounds start at 40x for a reason: It has a wider viewing field and lets you find the object you want to view, and it has an easier time focusing. When you start at 100x you are assured that you are going to probably focus on scratches on the coverslip.

Box Pictures

In the lower left corner several bright, colorful pictures are shown, promising the view such vivid images will be open to them when the use this microscope. This seems unlikely, a blurry, distorted version of these images is more like it. Putting images like this on a microscope is like putting planets shots from the Voyager Space Probe on a plastic telescope’s box. It is misleading.

The Packaging

Look at how the microscope is presented. The microscope itself is actually only a portion of the box, maybe a little more than a third of the packaging. The rest is a box with special sectioning for the all tools they include as if this were an amazing deal. The box copy even emphasizes this by calling it a microscope ’set’ and boasts of the ‘28 pieces’. What are the 27 other pieces? Let’s look at a picture of this item out of the box:

Junk Microscope out of the box

So we have 4 plastic tools of dubious use, a plastic petri dish (why? Are you really going to grow bacteria), some slides and coverslips (might be useful if this microscope wasn’t junk), a four ’sample’ tubes (with stale brine shrimp eggs and some fibers) and a couple of other parts. None of this is really worthy of the space it takes up. Any decent quality beginner microscope will probably have a pack like this, but the manufacturer doesn’t make a huge-space-taking deal out of it. They are instead packaged simply with the microscope without excess fanfare.

The Microscope Itself

Well do this in two parts, the first just from what we can observe in the box and from reviews online.

First thing you may notice is that this microscope has an almost ‘retro’ frame angle tilt to it. Why does it have this? I don’t know. Most microscopes do not have angled bodies these days.

Straight frame microscope

Why? Because most microscopes these days have built in illumination. The angle in microscopes bodies was so that you could use a built-in tilting mirror to reflect light up into the condenser lens and thus the slide. The angle made it easier to catch light from a decent light source. But these days it is just old-school design as even this junky model has an illuminator (albeit a poor one). It might mean that the factory simply has not seen fit to upgrade it’s design over the past few decades. That might seem economical but really it is just sloppy as angled microscope plates can mean trouble moving the slide into the position you want, especially with young hands.

The Objectives are almost a joke. I’ve already discussed the magnification issues, but a basic examination of the objectives shows stubby little things that are thinner than a child’s pinky. We can’t examine the optics, but the mechanics (focuser, objective ring, etc) certainly have a cheap look to them.

An examination of reviews online seems to confirm this: there are complains about the focuser flaking off in kid’s hands, and the focuser sticking, parts breaking off, light bulbs burning out quickly, etc. There are also some positive reviews, but one must take them with a grain of salt - some folks are going to give a positive review to anything they buy because their kids plays with it, and some folks just don’t know how much better they could have done.

This microscope sells from anywhere from $24 to $40, and at any price it is a waste of money. If you don’t want to spend a lot of money get a magnifier and perhaps a pocket microscope. These would be much better choices for that kind of money.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!