Re: ATM 3.5" Secondary Sources?

["Jim Miller" <jim@jtmiller.com>]

I remember reading somewhere that since the secondary is significantly
closer to the focal plane wavefront disturbances due to the secondary are
reduced in effect.  The reduction is approximately the ratio of the
primary/secondary distance to the focal plane.

This would imply that the secondary could in fact be substantially less
accurate.

Seems plausible.  Any raytracers out there?

jtm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Marriott" <btk@pacbell.net>
To: <atm@shore.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: ATM 3.5" Secondary Sources?



Bill wrote
> there is no way you want that wave front bouncing off a > piece of glass
that is less flat than your primary,

I mean, that is less 'accurate' than your primary

> Bill
> --
> Bill Marriott
> http://www.starlightoptical.com
> telescope/optical stuff