Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    WWPierre's Avatar
    WWPierre is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 64,445, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    10 Days registered3 Years + Achievement400+ Posts AchievementGhost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Squamish B.C.
    Posts
    6,948
    Points
    64,445
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    1,095
    Thanked 2,953x 1,808 Posts

    Default



    Steve, I am sorry that I did not get back to you as I has indicated I would. Shortly after I posted, my attention was drawn away by my own discoveries, albiet much more personal, and of infinitely less cosmic significance than yours.

    The strategy I suggested did work, though, with a delay of only 1 hour and fourteen minutes, thanks to Canon Pete.

    Like Gus, (admin) I hope you will stick around. You will not find any flame wars here. Heck, it's seldom anyone even gets prickly.
    Meade 16" LightBridge; Celestron G-8N Bird-Jones/motorized EQ5; Orion 127 Mak/go-to EQ5; Burgess 127f8 refractor; Sky-Watcher 5" F/5 collapsible dob; 90mm Mak/motorized EQ2; Royal Astro 76/910-GEM; Meade 60x700 refractor/alt/az; Zhumell 25x100 Coin Ops; GalilleoScope. Celestron 8mm-24mm zoom; lots of fixed EPs,some good, some..not so much. A small collection of surveying instruments; a forest of tripods; Canon Rebel Xti. Confirmed gadget junkie; Custodian of the Magnetic North Pole (Send $1.00 to Pierre each time you use a compass.)
    49-41-37.03N 123-09-29.61W Calculated magnetic declination: 17° 39' East

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

    We have been broadcasting our presence to the Universe for 100 years now. If there is a detachment of Galactic Pest Control within 100 light years, they are already on the way.

  2. #12
    carnevali's Avatar
    carnevali is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 19,320, Level: 96
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 380
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!First 1000 Experience PointsGot three Friends100+ Threads Achievement!Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    morehead, KY
    Posts
    2,563
    Points
    19,320
    Level
    96
    Thanks
    637
    Thanked 979x 732 Posts

    Default

    Thanks for posting this, Steve. I'll print out the finder charts and see if I can manage to find it. Much delayed congratulations on the discovery!

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    Antonino Carnevali

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    : Zhumell Z10; SpaceWalk 18"; Celestron First
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    (!)
    Altaz reflectors: Vixen R130SF, R150S
    Refractors: Vixen ED115S, ED80SF, A70L; SkyPod go-to mount
    Binoculars:
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    BT70 on VersaGo

  3. #13
    carnevali's Avatar
    carnevali is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 19,320, Level: 96
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 380
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!First 1000 Experience PointsGot three Friends100+ Threads Achievement!Ghost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    morehead, KY
    Posts
    2,563
    Points
    19,320
    Level
    96
    Thanks
    637
    Thanked 979x 732 Posts

    Default

    I've looked at the charts and I think I should be able to find it without much problem. I'll give it a go.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    Antonino Carnevali

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    : Zhumell Z10; SpaceWalk 18"; Celestron First
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    (!)
    Altaz reflectors: Vixen R130SF, R150S
    Refractors: Vixen ED115S, ED80SF, A70L; SkyPod go-to mount
    Binoculars:
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
    BT70 on VersaGo

  4. #14
    georgebiddleairy's Avatar
    georgebiddleairy is offline White Dwarf
    Points: 1,472, Level: 22
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose, CA.
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,472
    Level
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0x 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alsetalokin View Post
    I read your story of previous internet woes. I don't mean to put you off, but perhaps there is a tinge of paranoia in there....Earthlink sucks, but I don't really think you or your information or links are being selectively blocked. That would be going a bit far, and as a scientist, surely you would need "extraordinary evidence" to convince yourself that was really happening.
    I certainly did not mean to assert what you are perceiving. In my article about the discovery of the nebula, I answered the questions of several people who, last year, complained on forums that my websites had disappeared. Just today I received a letter from a very well known professional astronomer in S. California who was also having EXACTLY the same trouble on his home DSL service, from the same ISP--whose California service had 'died'. The tech support, located in Hyderabad, told him the same thing I was told; but he finally gave up and changed ISPs and his normal service quality was instantly resumed.

    I did not feel "my" stuff was being selectively blocked. As I explained, something seems to have gone wrong with the DNS servers. So any of the home pages on that ISP's domain came back with a 404 error (and, as I also explained, in part, this affected a friend who had such a homepage as mine, on the same 'home' domain of that company--he was 500 miles away, in Los Angeles.) So never have I felt that *I* was singled out. I can apologize for the complexity of the article so on first read maybe one does not get all the details and understand precisely what I was saying. The only reason for mentioning that I had taken my old webpages off the net was to explain WHY my 2007 report wasn't still online.

    Here's the problem: if you want to assert any kind of 'new' independent discovery, you HAVE to provide details, or you are just going to open yourself up for complete DOUBT. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". A gentleman of a well deserved reputation has told me, just after I published our new 2010 picture and a full article on our discoveries, that HE had found the nebula back in 2005--but had said nothing about it, anywhere.

    So, I decided to give 'work product' and a full, detailed account of the work that Waldee, Howard, and Saloranta have done in the past nearly three years on this object. And I found links, via the Wayback Machine and Google's newsgroup archive, that are accessible by ANYBODY, now, that show that I had started posting about this object just about three days after I first saw it in July 2007. That was, indeed, approximately five months BEFORE the other gentleman had assembled a private list of anomalous things that he and his collaborators had seen on POSS plates. The reason I've gone into this level of detail -- including the 'saga' of my own woes with an ISP and its affect on my old webpages -- is to provide ALL that I know about this nebula, so that others can do their own independent verification: looking at it, checking the POSS plates THEIR way, referring to the work of the "DSH" group on its Yahoo tech group, and reading my old posts to forums from 2007 in which I talked about trying techniques to view the nebula--before I had any real confirmation, except things that I personally had intuited.

    It's really difficult to establish a perfect balance between succinctness, and detail. My article about the 4 Cygni nebula is very recent. It will be revised and probably some of the subordinate stuff -- about my change of ISP which caused removal of my lengthy ORIGINAL reports from 2007 -- will be moved to a secondary page of backup detail. Then it will not interrupt the narrative to such an extent.

    I put that article together quickly in response to remarks posted on the Yahoo group Amastro. When I merely announced that I now had confirmation, and independent images and the opinions of a highly respected professional astronomer, I received some of the expected skepticism that is valuable for any scientific investigation. I do not resent it, nor do I feel in any way abused--have NO trace of 'paranoia' (your term) about it or anything else related to my previous problems with an ISP. No two people have exactly the same experiences in life and your understandable reaction is evidence of this, for I failed, somehow, to explain myself clearly.

    And, once again: I have had to go into rather appalling detail to clear up THOSE details. It never ends...one is not necessarily right but after we have a number of extensive arguments, other parties may read them all and make their judgments. That of course is required by any kind of scientific invesigation--even an amateur, low key, one such as I'm attempting to do.

    Needless to say, a peer reviewed article in a professional journal about such a thing would NEVER go into this exact proportion of detail. By the time such an article is accepted for publication, much is stipulated and accepted and needs no explanation.

    But, "who are Waldee and Howard"? Why would anybody give either person the slightest credit for having any level of competence, experience, or ability to make a reasonable judgment that another amateur could build from? And, furthermore, WHEN was this first actually published -- in a public form, accessible by ANYBODY? These are questions I've tried to answer, based on some quite valid, understandable reactions.

    Finally: here is one more attempt at including some links:

    My original article is found here:

    4 Cygni Nebula: Discovery & Investigation by Stephen Waldee & Al Howard

    Dr. David Malin has written to me to suggest some interesting parallels, reflection nebulae that HE has been the first to photograph, the sky N and S of Cen A

    Deep image of NGC 5128 (Centaurus A)
    and
    Deep image of NGC 45
    Deep image of NGC 6684A
    Deep image of NGC 1313

    Thanks for your indulgence! I blush to think that I've just gone into the very heavy amount of (irrelevant?) detail that prompted your reasonable objection; hope I haven't caused yet more confusion. I'd better stop here!

    Yours sincerely,
    Steve Waldee

  5. #15
    alsetalokin's Avatar
    alsetalokin is offline HYPER GIANT
    Points: 36,116, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    200+ Posts Achievement!First 1000 Experience PointsGhost Achievement! Averaging 5+ posts a day!Got three Friends20+ Friends Achievement!
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,506
    Points
    36,116
    Level
    100
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 633x 441 Posts

    Default

    Why, then, didn't you simply change ISPs and put your blog and whatever information back up? In the article you referenced at first, you go on at some length about your internet woes and cite them as the reason that your blog isn't up anymore. It seemed to me that you were blaming the ISP, which may be correct, but it doesn't explain why you simply didn't switch ISPs. Was Earthlink the only one available to you at that time? Is it still ?
    Regardless, internet problems affect us all from time to time, and it's frustrating in the extreme when it happens. But at least you are now able to post your links...finally...on this forum.

    Do you think that an improvised coronagraph might be able to block out the main image of the star and reveal the nebulosity better? I'd like to try to photograph it, but I know that with my skies and equipment the star will wash out the subtle nebula detail. However, I have a technical bent, and if you think it might be worth the effort, I might be able to kluge up a mask that might be able to block out the star's light and allow the nebula to shine through.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

    ETX125AT guiding WO Megrez 90 Apo/CGEM mount w/ polar scope
    WO Multiple Reticle Red Dot finder, Celestron SkyMaster 8x56 binos
    26mm SP, 12.4 mm SP, 8.8 mm UWA, 12 mm MA illuminated reticle, 2x Barlow, 3.5mm and 31mm Hyperions, TV 2008
    Meade DSI Pro II monochrome CCD; Meade LPI; Celestron NexImage; Canon EOS RebelXTi
    EQ-1 mount (emergency use only!)

  6. #16
    georgebiddleairy's Avatar
    georgebiddleairy is offline White Dwarf
    Points: 1,472, Level: 22
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose, CA.
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,472
    Level
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0x 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alsetalokin View Post
    Why, then, didn't you simply change ISPs and put your blog and whatever information back up? ...

    Do you think that an improvised coronagraph might be able to block out the main image of the star and reveal the nebulosity better? I'd like to try to photograph it, but I know that with my skies and equipment the star will wash out the subtle nebula detail. However, I have a technical bent, and if you think it might be worth the effort, I might be able to kluge up a mask that might be able to block out the star's light and allow the nebula to shine through.
    I am actually a bit embarrassed at the length of my previous reply to you and am resisting the temptation -- chuckle -- to continue in that level of detail. I do believe that I have already answered what you pose in your question, in my original web article. We could, indeed, go on further. With all due respect, I will take your objections into consideration in my future revisions and reorganizations of the article, and I very much appreciate getting your perspective.

    I am not sure of what a home made coronagraph could do but if you have a practical working one, then why not?! I have absolutely no experience doing such advanced astrophotography and my collaborator, Al Howard, has not done anything comparable, for he normally takes either monochrome broadband, or RGB color composite, wide field deep sky images of galaxy clusters and beatiful nebulae. The field around 4 Cygni is pretty bleak, which probably explains why I had been able to interest no other amateur astrophotographer.

    I might not be able to reply for a while, for I am now off to some great very dark and high elevation sites here in California! I just got an email from, shall we say, "an editor of a famous astronomy magazine published on the east coast" who lives in the NW. This editor, too, was concerned that the local sky conditions are not generally what one experiences in the dry, high altitude American west. We really don't know, at this point, how many other people will get visual observations or satisfactory photos. We've got OURS which have satisfied a professional expert. Maybe others will turn up--or maybe, as happened in 2007 when I first mentioned this several times on Net forums-- it won't yield any results at all...which will be, in a way, useful. It will demonstrate that the object is obscure, of very little interest and significance, and somewhat challenging. Most of the really interesting reports of observations of such things that I find by Americans tend to emanate from certain favored locations. There are some excellent places near where the terrible hurricane is raging right now (oops--that kills them for 4 Cygni verifications at this moment!) There are good places, apparently, further down south near the east coast--but often they have humidity. And the high deserts of Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, and parts of California (the last almost always impacted by some light pollution) yield some cutting edge stuff.

    We shall see if sooner or later, somebody else picks up something of this 4 Cygni nebula.

    Steve Waldee

  7. #17
    georgebiddleairy's Avatar
    georgebiddleairy is offline White Dwarf
    Points: 1,472, Level: 22
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    First 1000 Experience Points365 Days+ Registered Achievement!750 Days+ Registered Achievement!2 Posts Achievement1000 Days+ Registered Achievement!
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose, CA.
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,472
    Level
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0x 0 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alsetalokin View Post
    It seemed to me that you were blaming the ISP...
    I find that I have one more short tidbit to reply to this, and I hope you understand that by no means am I attempting to rebut you or have 'the final word'. Apologies; not intended~

    I just received an email from a professional astronomer who went thru my article in order to provide some independent fact checking. I hadn't thought -- as I received his letter before your criticism -- to ask his permission to publish this along with his full name, title, and organization. I'd rather not, actually, trouble him now about that. But let me say that he's been doing sophisticated work with computers since the old mainframe days; so troubleshooting a home ISP modem and interconnectivity problems are not difficult for him.

    He says, "We had the same trouble with [the same ISP], but earlier than you did. Our service with them had never been particularly good, but got noticeably worse through the summer of 2008. Just as with you, complaining to the Indian crew did no good. We finally packed it in with them in Sept 2008, got [-----] at half the price and three times the speed, and have -- aside from their cheap modems -- been quite pleased ever since."

    If you do some kind of Googling of interconnectivity complaints and erratic service of formerly available web pages as related to the ISP that caused me that trouble in summer 2009, I am sure you will quickly obtain numerous similar trouble reports and complaints by annoyed subscribers (as you may also find as related to any number of ISP's.) It is not that uncommon; sometimes the troubles just cannot be fixed without getting very high level service, which companies are often not willing to provide.

    So: in sum, two users had, a year apart, the same identical snafu: loss of websites that formerly worked, and even loss of access of some entire domains. Tech support would not, or could not, solve the problem.

    The only point in my mentioning, in my article, that I was forced by ftp server problems and difficulties accessing Google blogger, in the summer of 2009, was to explain (and to anticipate objections about existence of a paper trail of web articles) that I had previously published them; they were in fact online continuously for 2 years and 2 months; and that though offline now, parts of them are accessible by the Wayback Machine (and verifiable via existing post and forum archives.) The inclusion of this labored explanation was an anticipation that people might have, wanting to try to fix a concrete date of my discovery to the time I asserted. I found those fixed links, still available for independent verification.

    Numerous posts were made on forums, right after my pages were taken off, saying 'where's Waldo'---err, Waldee! At that time I was still waiting to get online again. By the time I did, by the end of October 2009, I decided ... but, as I said, that was fully explained in my original article!

    I really would prefer, in future, to talk about the nebula.

    Thanks very much,
    Steve W.

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. The Gamma Cygni Nebula – A big image from a small telescope
    By ukastronomy in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-17-2008, 06:38 AM
  2. The Gamma Cygni Nebula – A big image from a small telescope
    By ukastronomy in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-17-2008, 06:37 AM
  3. Big Images from Small Telescopes - The Gamma Cygni Nebula
    By ukastronomy in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-11-2007, 04:00 PM
  4. Big Images from Small Telescopes - The Gamma Cygni Nebula
    By ukastronomy in forum UK Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-11-2007, 11:27 AM
  5. Two Cosmic Explorers Named 'Best of What's New' (GALEX & SIRTF)
    By Ron Baalke in forum General Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-07-2003, 04:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:52 AM.