Stargazing 'for dummies'

Level 1 (unaided eye):

The real quick and easy way would be to go out on a clear night sky with a laptop and run the excellent freeware Stellarium.

One can easily spend an hour in this manner identifying the planets, the stars, and the constellations. Tracing the Milky Way (the horizontal band of 'cloud', top image above) can likewise be both an intellectual and a visceral exercise.

If using a laptop is impractical, then using a Celestron SkyScout would even be a better option. This superb gadget was reviewed here.

Level 2 (fun with a binocs):

One need not jump into the telescope category to enjoy the night sky's finer details.

Getting a good binoculars can be the intermediate step.

Observing our moon [Luna] and four of Jupiter's 63 moons [bottom image, above] are just some of the fun things one can do.

Some of the good guides can be found here and here.

Technorati Tags: amateur astronomy, astronomy, Callisto, Celestron Skymaster, Celestron SkyScout, Europa, Ganymede, Io, Jovian moons, Jupiter, stargazing, stellarium

Comments

[Mike Godfrey]

Hi CC,
thanks for the link previously to Brian Greenes 'Elegant universe' I have been enjoying it.
Regarding string theory I wondered what your thoughts are on its status as Science?
As it seems that it will never be open to empirical verivication?
Also I may of asked you this before, but from a Christian POV doesn't string theory make the cosmological argument from design redundant ?
Also thanks for the link to stellarium Im downloading it now-hope it works on vista(not very open source I know).
cheers for the always intertesting blog ,
Mike

[CC]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the comments.

On String Theory's classification as science, strictly speaking I think it shouldn't be (given that it cannot be verified, being beyond observation at the moment).

Just the same, I'm sure you've heard of ST's advocates saying that indirectly, ST is falsifiable, thus can be legitimately classified as science.

On the other hand, ST's critics (even non-Christians) have maintained that ST as of the moment should be classified as a philosophy for the reason earlier cited.

On ST making the design argument redundant, can you pls elaborate on this query some more?

On Vista, well good luck. I finally saw the light earlier and so switched to a Mac :)

Regards,

CC

PS - Like your site, too. I've added it in my blog list (left hand side :)

[Mike Godfrey]

Hi CC,
thanks for adding my blog,yours is on my blogroll,I also mentioned your site at:
http://stargazerslounge.com/index.php?topic=13519.0

Regarding string theory and its implications for intelligent design,I was under the impression that String theory predicts many universes,if so then that would make the fine tuning argument null and void.
Regarding Vista It works like a dream.
Thanks,
Mike

[Todd K]

I just started using Stellarium myself - a truly great app, and free to boot! I wish it could print star charts...having a hard time finding that for free on a Mac.

Thanks for the great blog - I've added you to my links!

Todd
http://rookiestargazer.blogspot.com/

[CC]

Todd, thanks for the note.

Mike, thanks for the feedback on Vista. Makes me look forward to using Windows again one of these days.

On string theory's prediction of a multiverse and its (effect of) invalidating the design argument, I share the opinion of apologists who invoke Ockham's razor as one of the answers.

If I recall correctly (somebody correct me if I'm wrong), the number of baby universes being predicted by string theory is way above than the number of atoms in our own universe.

Hence, it would appear to me that the multiverse hypothesis is offerring a cure that is worse than the (perceived) 'problem'.