"ATM demise" via CCD??

[Peter Abrahams <telscope@europa.com>]

Bill Cook writes, "I don't think big telescopes are going to hold their
mystique for the masses during the years to come.....the average ATM is not
going that route"......(but instead to).... "CCD technology."
I am as enthralled at CCD technology as anyone, especially for imaging &
spectroscopy, but also for visual use.  I agree that big scopes have big
problems, for the ATM and the user, and CCDs can use smaller scopes.  But I
don't see CCDs as a replacement for visual observation.  They will be an
increasingly important aspect of amateur astronomy.  But the image
delivered to my viewing screen by the camera could be replaced by an
electronic image from storage.  I am sure that the avid CCDer enjoys
knowing that he's captured the image 'right now', using 'that scope'.  But
I can go online & retrieve images of celestial objects taken by major
observatory telescopes, and perform the same visual inspection of the
image; and also the same scientific analysis, excepting the importance of
time of exposure.  There is no similar substitute for a visual image, and
for now the eyepiece image has a far wider field of view (try the 'Nagler
spacewalk' on your laptop screen) & far greater contrast (also far better
resolution & aberration control, but I know CCDs are catching up fast).  I
know I'm not the only one who enjoys the thought that those photons on my
retina left that distant object at a distant time.  We are not the 'Amateur
Telescope Mystics', so I won't do more than mention that the feelings at
looking through a scope are not the same as looking at a phosphor
screen.....just try the excellent 'I3' image intensifying eyepiece for a
comparison.
Finally, I personally do not see the construction of electronic equipment
in the same light as working with metal, wood, and glass; electronics are
without appeal to me, but that is even more subjective & personal.

Bill asked the list earlier if ATMJ should include CCD projects.  I think
it should not, even though it is very worthwhile work.  First, until ATMJ
can expand, CCD articles might force the removal of telescope articles.
Second, CCDs are an imaging accessory for the telescope (in this context),
and if they are included in ATMJ, then film cameras and all the other
peripherals have an equal claim.  I think it is better to limit the field
to optical work.  Third, and most important, articles on CCDs will be
obsolete & useless in a very short time.  By comparison, I think there is
very little in the Sci. Am. TM books, or in the TM magazines of 15 years
ago, that is useless (I know others disagree with this).
_______________________________________
Peter Abrahams   telscope@europa.com