Comments on: 22″ Binocular telescope

By: shams

shams — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:05:21 +0000

Absolutely fantastic mind blowing thing

By: hmmmm

hmmmm — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 03:36:07 +0000

binocular death ray coming to a town near you!!!!

yea im joking this is a cool sulotion to 1 eye strain caused by llong term star gazing

By: MattieShoes

MattieShoes — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:16:38 +0000

a 30″ mirror would be good too, but the cost of mirrors ramps up quickly with size. Not just the cost of the mirror itself but the cost of the heavier duty components required to mount it and so forth. Two smaller mirrors probably makes for easier setup and breakdown too, though you’d have to collimate both mirrors… That should only take a few minutes each though.

By: Sheep #3

Sheep #3 — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:55:29 +0000

*Being molested by a New Zealander*

BAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

By: Ethan

Ethan — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:08:44 +0000

I believe when using a splitter, you don’t necessarily get a 50% decrease in brightness since if I remember correctly (don’t have a source) you can resolve dimmer objects if you’re using both eyes. I want to say it made the image effectively 75% of the original brightness, but that may be wildly wrong.

By: BruceJ

BruceJ — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:58:55 +0000

This is WAY smaller than the 'worlds largest binocular telescope', the Large Binocular Telescope with twin 8.4 METER mirrors holds that record. The design does hold significant advantages. With the proper imaging and software control the telescope above can resolve to the equivalent of about a 50" mirror.

By: sheep #2

sheep #2 — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:25:46 +0000

*munches grass* baaaa

By: sheep

sheep — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:10:40 +0000

baaaa

By: Sam

Sam — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:54:34 +0000

The reason that binocular telescopes are useful is that they allow for more precise error correction than a monocular telescope does.

When light passes through Earth’s atmosphere it is altered (atmospheric distortion). A binocular telescope is better at removing this distortion because it uses two separate parallel sources of light. Computer algorithms adjust the shapes of the mirrors and use the images produced by both to obtain a clearer image (with less distortion).

Obviously, the Hubble space telescope was designed to avoid the problem altogether – it does not have Earth’s atmosphere to contend with.

One can only assume that the producer of the telescope pictured in this article gains some of the benefits of the reduction of atmospheric distortion that these kinds of telescopes provide. It has nothing to do with our eyes.

Here’s a BBC article on large binocular telescopes: http://tinyurl.com/639g2b

By: dnny

dnny — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:57:50 +0000

there are a huge binocular telescope “the large binocular telescope”
(LBT)
in mount graham in the pinaleno mountains of southeastern arizona.
The two 8.4 meter (331 inch) diameter primary mirrors are mounted with a 14.4 meter center-center separation.

http://medusa.as.arizona.edu/lbto/telescope.htm

By: philspanks

philspanks — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:16:50 +0000

In response to fartface, I highly doubt that to be true. Both eyes are receiving pretty much the same image. The distance to planets etc is so so large compared to the separation of your eyes or the two telescopes that the distance can only ever appear to be two dimensional. When you’re looking at a sheep on a hill several miles away, you would be unable to tell the difference between a 3d sheep and a high quality 2d model of a sheep.

By: fartface

fartface — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:00:45 +0000

Huge Binocs like this also gives you a VERY real 3d effect. Planets and LEO’s pop out big time to you compared to a single telescope.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:52:54 +0000

AFAIK, the “more detail” does not have to do with using two eyes but that this setup resolves like a larger mirror (though with lower brightness).

By: Mark VandeWettering

Mark VandeWettering — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:38:31 +0000

Binocular telescopes are a bit cool, but also kind of silly, at least when they are constructed by this design. It is certainly true that using both eyes results in higher visual acuity. But the acuity is just as great if the resulting light beam is split and fed equally to both eyes by a beam splitter than if two separate mirrors are fed to your eyes. Yes, there is a 50% (actually slightly more, due to losses) decrease in light intensity, but that’s only a difference of about 0.75 magnitude. You could gain that back by building a 30″ telescope instead of a 22″ scope, and you’d get better resolving power and a simpler optical path as a result.

Binocular telescopes, while cool, are kind of a stunt.

By: mike

mike — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:10:50 +0000

Those are cool. I got a chance to use a binocular telescope at a star party last summer. They were made with 10 inch meade lightbridge telescopes, so not quite as big as this one.