How can we make a telescope at home?

Telescope

• I have a tasco scope ,now i have the following lenses barlow 2.3x, 1.5 erecting lense, sr4mm , H12.5mm and a angled piece which combination of lenses would work to see jupiter clearly? Thank You Joe Hello Sir, I am Steffi Michael. I love watching the night sky too but I have done it only through naked eyes. I wish to own a telescope too but made by myself at home. You have made at least 7 telescopes Sir so can you please help me to make one at home for me which is handy and help to watch the night sky more clearly? Waiting for the answer.... Hi Tom, I have a question that I've been thinking about for years. The Hubble telescope has been bringing us pictures of far galexy's for years.So why can't we take pictures of all the Apollo missions moon landing sites and settle once and for all, that we were their? Thanks, Mark QUESTION: Dr. Stahl, Don't you think it would be worth while to put up another telescope in space that would be, say, 8.4 m (in diameter) like the Giant Magellan Telescope which, as you know, will be installed in Chile? Or, if that is over the top, then a 5 m telescope. ANSWER: Hello, It would definitely be worthwhile to put up another space telescope, but I myself would much prefer it to be dedicated to solar observing. We need to know much more about the Sun, especially in respect of the evolution of magnetically- stressed regions with a view to isolating the initial unstable flare volume. Right now, our instruments are operating at the limit of resolution to identify this initial unstable region. Twenty-five years ago the Solar Optical Telescope (SOT) was to act as our "eyes" on the Sun and advance many areas of solar research. I myself had pinned a number of aspects of my then research on it, since one of my model's predictions (for a flare trigger) was based on specifying the size and volume of the original instability location. Alas, the budget -funding for the SOT was cut, and the rest as they say, is history. So yes, another space-based telescope by all means - but solar directed. That is what is needed right now. ---------- FOLLOW-UP ---------- QUESTION: Well now is the time to contact President Obama about this. He is way more receptive to scientific endeavors than the last one was. He is listening to us at change.org. Thanks for you answer. What telescope would you recommend for an entry level/hobbyist that is both economical and easy to use? I would like to view the moon and some of the planets, possibly stars that are little further away. I have a basic Bushnell that is very difficult to get sighted in and is missing most of its accessories so does not work very well. Suggestions..?

• Answer:

  Hi Joe I would start with the 12.5 eyepiece. That should give you about 50X or so...and that will easily show the moons and some of the cloud bands on Jupiter. IF the air is really clear, you might try to add in the Barlow in front of the 12.5--but unless the air is really clear and steady, that may make the image bigger, but not clearer. Be sure that you are not looking at Jupiter over the tops of houses or other structures that can create heat waves in the air---that will degrade the image. And wait until Jupiter is well up in the sky, so that you have less atmosphere to degrade the image. I think you will find that the 4mm eyepiece is really hard to use---you will have to get your eye really close to the lens, and that makes observing difficult. Paul Wagner Hi steffi I can certainly give you some advice about making telescopes. The first questions you will have to ask yourself are: 1. How big a telescope do you want to make? The bigger the telescope, the more expensive it is, and the harder it is to move around. But bigger telescopes also help you see more interesting stuff in the sky, so it's a difficult question to answer. My first telescope was 6 inches in diamter, and about five feet long. And it weighed about 60 pounds. 2. You also need to decide if you are going to make a reflector or a refractor telescope. The first type uses mirrors, and is generally preferred by amateur telescope makers. The second kind uses lenses. I would strongly suggest that your first step should be to contact a local community college or astronomy society so that you can go to one of their star parties--where a few amateurs have their telescopes on display, and allow you to look through them. Once you get an idea of what you want to make, I can point you in the right direction for materials and instructions. Paul Wagner Hi Mark, It's a question of resolution. While those distant galaxies are billions of lightyears distant, they are also upwards of 100,000 lightyears in DIAMETER (one ly = about 6 trillion miles)...do you see any individual planets around any of the stars of those galaxies? Of course not. That's the kind of resolution from Earth to the Moon that you (or others) are asking for. {In angular terms, those galaxies are small diameter at 0.1 - 0.9 arc-second across, BUT for the resolution you're asking for, it's down around 0.00005 arc-second diameter as seen from the Earth!} So on the surface of the moon, in linear terms...you're asking for 5 feet resolution at 238,000 miles, and for that kind of resolution, it might take a telescope mirror that's 5 miles in diameter to resolve that small angle from the Earth, or Earth orbit. Not to fret though, we will soon have a high resolution camera in orbit around the moon at less than 40 miles above the surface, the Lunar Recon Orbiter, (which I believe launches tomorrow, June 18) and eventually it will pass over and photograph those items you (or others) desire to see. For me, I don't have to see them as I lived at that time frame, so I have no questions about it. It's only the younger generation that didn't think their parents and grandparents were smart enough to pull that trick off...but that's another story. (your word "their" should be spelled "there"...as a for instance, in your initial question. But with all the watered down courses of today, compared to our days of the fifties and sixties, are they really smarter, or do they just think that they are smarter? Hmmmm.....I really wonder. The students of today can't even do basic simple arithmetic in their heads, as we were taught to do. Just ask for correct change at some 'fast-food' restaurant without the aid of a computer or calculator, and you'll see an eye-opener for our students' "abilities"...or lack of them! And don't even bother to bring up square roots to them...they just stare at you like you are some kind of alien...who's he? He must be a teacher to know all that stuff, they say. But everyone in our day was taught square roots, and even how to find a square root by longhand- not with a calculator! Yes, there is a way to do it. {Of course, don't forget that even when we do have lunar orbiter equipment to take those pictures, the 'conspirators' can still say... FAKE PICTURES. Yeah, of course...all SIX lunar landing missions! Fake me out once or twice, but SIX times? And, for what purpose? That would border on...insanity.} (Did YOU even know that we went - 6 times, not counting Apollo 13 that had to abort enroute?) Oh, another side problem is....Hubble's camera detectors are set up to record extremely dim celestial objects, probably dimmer than 10 th magnitude. The sunlit lunar surface would be blindingly bright at -9th magnitude, and would probably swamp (and possibly destroy) Hubble's detector equipment. It's not worth the risk to such a sensitive piece of equipment. Hope this helps, Clear Skies, Tom Whiting Erie PA Hello, Actually, in the current parlous economic environment, I believe that any SOT-type project (costing tens of billions) would be FAR down the priority list of President Obama. He has much bigger fish to fry including getting credit flowing again, and making targeted cuts for a federal budget already facing a deficit predicted to reach $11 trillion very soon. I am 100% certain his OMB director (Pete Orszag) will not smile with beneficence on adding $22 billion (or more) to the already tight budget for a solar optical telescope when there are thousands more pressing needs at an "earthier level". Yes, the new administration will be open to more scientific endeavors, but these will revolve around mitigating greenhouse gases, and alternative energy (e.g. solar, wind etc.) projects - not launching a new telescope into the skies, which will have only limited value to most citizens. It is a nice thought though, and one to keep in mind as the primary economic problems and recession eventually get solved! (One hopes!) Hi Ben, As you see with your experience with the cheap Bushnell, you have learned a valuable lesson about observational astronomy.... There is no such thing as a cheap and easy, goodworking telescope. Ours is a hobby or activity that you either go first class right off the bat, or you don't go at all...until you have the money saved up. Sorry, but it's in the laws of optics; as all optical surfaces of a telescope have to be ground and figured to a minimum of 5 millionths of an inch (called 1/4 Wave meaning 1/4 wavelength of light) for an "average" image. For high quality images you need 1/10 wave, or 2 millionths of an inch figure. (You'll pay an extra premium for 1/20 wave, or 1 millionth of an inch from perfection)...and all this time and work and figuring takes money, and that's why the initial relatively high costs involved. It's called resolution, bringing all the light (not just part of it) all to a common point focus. The better the figure, the more light rays arrive at that common point. Grinds worse than 1/4 wave, then less than 50% of the light arrives at the common focal point, so you have a horribly resolved image. (So, why even bother....?) We currently recommend to our newest club members a Discovery, Orion, or Antares 6 or 8 inch basic Newtonian DOB reflector for a "starter" scope. I see currently that Orion has a 20% off sale.... their basic 6 inch scope is $250 and their basic 8 inch is $330.http://www.oriontelescopes.com If you don't need all that computerized finding stuff (if you know your night sky) you can save big bucks and put that extra money into a still bigger mirror (their 10 inch is now $500) for seeing still better and more objects. Sorry, but that's the way it works in observational astronomy, and the eyepieces are exactly the same way....you want to go first class, or not at all. You can scrimp on your observational clothing, star charts, finder scopes, other things, but NOT the telescope. With the telescope, you have to plunge in deep, with no scrimping on the costs. Suggest, if you're fairly new to our hobby, that you take the time to read about it at our club websitehttp://www.velocity.net/~bwhitingand punch on Tom Whiting's Sound Advice for the Novice Observer. Hope this helps, Clear Skies, Tom Whiting Erie, PA