Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
dougspeterson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1041
Loc: Murrieta, CA
|
|
On the ATM forum, John is referring to being "nit-picked", but the critique is very fundamantal and educational, and a lesson in optical engineering for those following this thread. All of us would like to come up with something revolutionary, but you have to do your homework. (I point specifically to the error that introducing a compresssor lens somehow supresses color, when in fact all it does shorten the focal length and the color spread by exactly the same amount. By now he, and interested observers, must understand this.)
I think this analysis by several experts with OSLO and Zemax software is healthy criticism in the spirit of scientific and engineering peer review.
--------------------
18" Dob
12" SCT
8" TMB F6 + Chromacor
6" F6 APM/LZOS Fluorite triplet, 32", 32lbs
2ea. 6mm singlets, one blind
"--Granted, that's a worse case scenario. The destruction might in fact be ... limited to our own galaxy."
Edited by dougspeterson (09/14/09 09:51 AM)
|
sludlinger
journeyman
Reged: 05/29/08
Posts: 5
|
|
Before I made my first post I modeled an f/5 binocular objective in Zemax and then put a single lens in front of it. Keeping all the perameters for the objective locked I then moved the single lens around and optimized it as best I could. In a word, it stunk. Essentially you take an objective that will in and of itself generate large amounts of secondary spectrum and then have it attempt to reduce even more secondary spectrum without having any real compensating ability. There is nothing here.
After I made that Zemax anaysis I felt foolish but I do not like to make posts without being thorough.
|
Crayfordjon
Inventor
Reged: 06/17/09
Posts: 372
Loc: UK
|
|
It is an ugly child, I know more than you that it is not a viably serious telescope, and nothing more than an interesting idea, but I was at pains to explain all this in the article, but you all ignored that because you scanned through the article and overreacted in a most ridiculous fashion, I had the temerity to milk a sacred cow, tough!, you dont like it, Tough! next time take something like this less seriousy for what it is. I have tested these scopes on stars at a power of X24 and the stars look white, and are tiny pin pricks, first mag stars are coloured but are still pinpricks, and look like diamonds scintillating. Jupiter is a white disk, the satellites are very tiny points of white light. The proof is in the pudding folks, here we have the theory boys pontificating like Greeks theorising about the nature of the world without trying the experiments. I love the ugly child! its mine, warts and all, and I ask, how many of you have come up with a really original break away idea, I suspect none. As for the Zerochromat, it has been vetted by a top optical scientist in the UK,it has been thoroughly analysed and brought to a very high apochromatic correction by my colleage who is a professional telescope maker and vendor, it will in due course be going on the market.
|
dougspeterson
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/01/04
Posts: 1041
Loc: Murrieta, CA
|
|
Indeed Peter Wise's computer-optimised Zerochromat, subaperture-corrector newtonians, and the Evolution scope are all thinking outside of the box and attempts to address fundamental limitations that most engineers had given up on--ingenuity similar to Valery/Aries Chromacor.
--------------------
18" Dob
12" SCT
8" TMB F6 + Chromacor
6" F6 APM/LZOS Fluorite triplet, 32", 32lbs
2ea. 6mm singlets, one blind
"--Granted, that's a worse case scenario. The destruction might in fact be ... limited to our own galaxy."
Edited by dougspeterson (09/23/09 04:59 AM)
|
|
0 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: spaceydee
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1463
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
