Showing posts with label eyepiece. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eyepiece. Show all posts

20170325

Physics midterm problem: extending telescope length

Physics 205B Midterm 1, spring semester 2017
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Two converging lenses, with focal lengths of +40.0 cm (for the objective lens) and +2.5 cm (for the eyepiece) are used to make a telescope. The length of the telescope (measured from lens-to-lens) is adjusted by sliding cardboard tubes in or out. Starting with the telescope used to look at an object very far away (essentially at infinity), determine how much the length must be extended in order to look at a closer object 10 m away. Show your work and explain your reasoning by using ray tracings and/or thin lens equations, properties of lenses, images, and magnification.


[*] Alan M. MacRobert, "Astronomy with a $5 Telescope," Sky & Telescope, vol. 79 no. 4 (April 1990), p. 384.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    The eyepiece must be moved back by approximately 2 cm because:
    1. the object at do1 = +∞ for the objective creates a real image at di1 = f1 = +40.0 cm, which becomes the object at a distance do2 = f2 = +2.5 cm for the eyepiece, thus the telescope length (lens-to-lens distance) is 40.0 cm + 2.5 cm = 42.5 cm;
    2. the object at do1 = +10 m for the objective creates a real image at a slightly farther distance of di1 = +41.7 cm, which becomes the object at the same distance do2 = f2 = +2.5 cm for the eyepiece, thus the telescope length (lens-to-lens distance) is now slightly longer: 41.7 cm + 2.5 cm = 44.2 cm;
    3. thus the slight increase (approximately 2 cm) in the objective image distance di1 requires the eyepiece to be moved back by the same amount in order for this image to be placed at its front focal point.
  • r:
    As (p), but argument indirectly, weakly, or only by definition supports the statement to be proven, or has minor inconsistencies or loopholes.
  • t:
    Nearly correct, but approach has conceptual errors, and/or major/compounded math errors. At least understands that the telescope length is f1 + f2 when focused at ∞, and some attempt at finding the telescope length di1 + f2 when focused at a finite do1.
  • v:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Some garbled attempt at ray tracings and/or thin lens equations, the properties of lenses, images, and magnifications. May have used microscope magnification equation to find length between lenses.
  • x:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. No clear attempt at applying ray tracings and/or thin lens equations, the properties of lenses, images, and magnifications.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Sections 30882, 30883
Exam code: midterm01AhC4
p: 5 students
r: 0 students
t: 7 students
v: 17 students
x: 1 student
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 1412):

20151012

Astronomy midterm question: telescope to see small details on the moon?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, fall semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

An astronomy question on an online discussion board[*] was asked and answered:
??: Because the moon is already bright, is it not necessary to get a telescope with a wide diameter to be able to see small details on the moon?
Clv: Yes, so what you want is more magnification, and for that you need a lens or mirror with a longer focal length.
Discuss why this response is incorrect. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes and telescope powers.

[*] answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150925202048AAO1s8p

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    Correct. Discusses how focal length of a telescope's primary mirror or lens (along with the focal length of the eyepiece) determines the magnification, but is only important of "small details" are already able to be seen due to the resolving power of the telescope, which depends on the diameter of the primary mirror/lens. Also discusses how light-gathering power depends on the area of the primary mirror/lens (which by itself is less important due to the brightness of the moon).
  • r:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. Correct and complete discussion of two of the three telescope parameters and powers.
  • t:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Problems with either diagram or discussion. Discussion of only one of the three telescope parameters and powers is correct and complete.
  • v:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner.
  • x:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Misconceptions or non-relevant concepts.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm01sF1A
p: 22 students
r: 15 students
t: 3 students
v: 1 student
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 1 student

A sample "p" response (from student 4338):

Astronomy midterm question: purchasing a wider or longer telescope?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, fall semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

An astronomy question on an online discussion board[*] was asked and answered:
??: To replace my telescope with a better one, should I buy one with a tube longer than the one I already have, or one with a diameter wider than the one I already have?
GG: First priority would be to buy a wider diameter telescope instead of one that is longer.
Discuss why this response is correct. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes and telescope powers.

[*] answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20150925205424AARw53Z

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    Correct. Discusses how area and diameter of a telescope's primary mirror or lens respectively determines the light-gathering power and resolving power, such that a "wider" diameter telescope would be better to make fainter objects brighter, and allow finer details to be seen; and while the "longer" telescope would have a longer primary mirror/lens focal length and thus better magnification, but this would be a lower priority after improving a telescope's ability to make faint objects with fine details visible.
  • r:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. Correct and complete discussion of two of the three telescope parameters and powers.
  • t:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Problems with either diagram or discussion. Discussion of only one of the three telescope parameters and powers is correct and complete.
  • v:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner.
  • x:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Misconceptions or non-relevant concepts.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 70160
Exam code: midterm01nW6b
p: 3 students
r: 2 students
t: 15 students
v: 9 students
x: 1 student
y: 1 student
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 4338):

20140316

Astronomy midterm question: SOFIA vs. James Webb Space Telescope

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, spring semester 2014
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

The primary mirror diameters and locations of two different near infrared telescopes are shown at right. Discuss which telescope will produce better images, and specifically explain why. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes, telescope powers, and the effects of Earth's atmosphere.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    Correct. Discusses at least one each of the following effects of telescope parameters, and location: (1) how diameter of primary mirror determines both light-gathering power and resolving power, such that a larger diameter mirror of the James Webb Space Telescope would result in making fainter objects brighter, and allowing finer details to be seen; and (2) how the opacity and turbulence of the atmosphere blocks near infrared light (affecting light-gathering power), and distorts images (affecting resolving power), such that the James Webb Space Telescope would be affected less by opacity and turbulence.
  • r:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. One of the two points (1)-(2) correct, other is problematic/incomplete.
  • t:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Problems with either diagram or discussion. Both points (1)-(2) problematic/incomplete, or one point correct while other is missing.
  • v:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion of telescope parameters and atmosphere effects is garbled.
  • x:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion not related to telescope parameters or atmosphere effects.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 30674
Exam code: midterm01n3vE
p: 14 students
r: 3 students
t: 8 students
v: 3 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 1 student

Section 30676
Exam code: midterm01SuN7
p: 28 students
r: 1 student
t: 13 students
v: 3 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 2 students

A sample "p" response (from student 1357) discussing light-gathering power, resolving power, and seeing conditions:

Another sample "p" response (from student 3158) also discussing light-gathering power and resolving power, but instead refers to lack of atmosphere opacity:

20131012

Astronomy midterm question: telescope advantage comparison

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, fall semester 2013
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

The primary mirror diameters and tube lengths of two different telescopes are measured, and their telescope powers are discussed by two astronomy students. Both telescopes use the same eyepieces.
Student 1: The Newtonian reflector is better at producing images with finer details.
Student 2: The Schmidt-Cassegrain reflector is better at looking at faint objects.
Discuss which of these students you disagree with, and why. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes and telescope powers.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    Discusses how diameter of primary mirror determines both light-gathering power and resolving power, such that a larger diameter mirror of the Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope would result in making fainter objects brighter, and allowing finer details to be seen, thus the first student's statement is incorrect.
  • r:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
  • t: Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors.
  • v:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion of telescope parameters and telescope powers is garbled.
  • x:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Does not discuss connection between telescope parameters and telescope powers.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm1s73W
p: 19 students
r: 7 students
t: 12 students
v: 8 students
x: 4 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 70160
Exam code: midterm1N1t3
p: 11 students
r: 1 student
t: 11 students
v: 5 students
x: 1 student
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 4846):
Another sample "p" response (from student 6683):

20130323

Physics midterm problem: microscope construction

Physics 205B Midterm 1, spring semester 2013
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Cf. Giambattista/Richardson/Richardson, Physics, 2/e, Problem 24.42

The converging lenses available from a commercial optics supplier have focal lengths f = +0.30 cm and f = +0.45 cm, respectively[*]. A Physics 205B student would like to use these two lenses to construct a microscope with a "tube length" L (the distance from focal point to focal point) of 5.0 cm, where the f = +0.30 cm lens is used as the objective. Solve for (a) the angular magnification of this microscope, and (b) the distance from the object to the objective lens. (The near point of the Physics 205B student is 25.0 cm.) Show your work and explain your reasoning.

[*] edmundoptics.com/optics/optical-lenses/double-convex-dcx-spherical-singlet-lenses/uncoated-double-convex-dcx-lenses/1748.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p:
    Correct. Determines (a) angular magnification to be –930×, and (b) the object must be placed 0.32 cm in front of the objective lens.
  • r:
    Nearly correct, but includes minor math errors. Determines angular magnification, but does not explicitly solve for the distance for the object in front of the objective lens, but instead understands that it must be held very near outside the focal point (0.30 cm) of the objective lens.
  • t:
    Nearly correct, but approach has conceptual errors, and/or major/compounded math errors. At least has magnification, and some attempt in finding the distance for the object in front of the objective lens
  • :
    Implementation of right ideas, but in an inconsistent, incomplete, or unorganized manner.
  • x:
    Implementation of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit.
  • y:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Sections 30882
Exam code: midterm01p0C4
p: 19 students
r: 2 students
t: 4 students
v: 6 students
x: 2 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 1224):

20130316

Astronomy midterm question: best kind of telescope for a beginner?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, spring semester 2013
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

[20 points.] An astronomy question on an online discussion board(*) was asked and answered:
Kasey: What is the best kind of telescope for a beginner? I want something you can see a lot of things with.
Larry454: You mentioned that you want to be able to see a lot of things. Most astronomical targets are not hard to see because they are too small, they are hard to see because they are too dim. So this means you want a large diameter telescope.
Discuss why this telescope purchasing advice is correct, and the criteria used in your decision. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes and telescope powers.

*Adapted from: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101126084506AAu2hxx.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p = 20/20:
    Correct. Discusses how diameter of primary mirror determines the light-gathering power, such that a large diameter mirror would result in making dimmer objects brighter. May also discuss other powers as well (resolving power, magnyfing power).
  • r = 16/20:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
  • t = 12/20:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors.
  • v = 8/20:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner.
  • x = 4/20:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit.
  • y = 2/20:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z = 0/20:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 30674
Exam code: midterm01n4sT
p: 29 students
r: 1 student
t: 1 student
v: 0 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 30676
Exam code: midterm01sAb1
p: 44 students
r: 1 student
t: 1 student
v: 0 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 1934):

Another sample "p" response (from student 3792):

20130115

Presentation: optical instruments

Look at them. Just look at them. Old school optical instruments: microscopes and telescopes.


Make sure you get a chance to look through them in class--use the pocket microscopes to look at laptop and smartphone screens, and the telescopes to look at the posters across the room. (Focus the microscopes using the ridged wheels, and focus the telescopes by sliding the eyepiece tube in or out.)

First, the similarities between microscopes and telescopes.

A microscope consists of a (short) tube that holds two lenses apart from each other: an objective lens in the front, and the eyepiece in the back.

Similarly, telescope consists of a (long) tube that holds two lenses apart from each other: an objective lens in the front, and the eyepiece in the back.

Let's look at the two-lens model of a microscope, where the objective is lens 1, and the eyepiece is lens 2. The objective takes the light from object, and creates a real image 1 (how do you know that this would be a real image?). This real image 1 then becomes the object 2 for the eyepiece.

Now let's look at the two-lens model of a telescope, where the objective is lens 1, and the eyepiece is lens 2. The objective takes the light from object, and creates a real image 1 (how do you know that this would be a real image?). This real image 1 then becomes the object 2 for the eyepiece.

Second, differences between microscopes and telescopes. (You may have started to notice some of them already.)

For the microscope ray tracing, the object 1 is placed just outside of the focal point of the objective, which makes a greatly enlarged real image 1. (Which ray tracing(s) ((1)-(10)) best match(es) this?)

Then this image 1 becomes the object 2 for the eyepiece, where it is placed on the focal point of the eyepiece to maximize its angular magnification. (Which ray tracing(s) ((1)-(10)) best match(es) this?)

(Strangely enough, the "tube length" for microscopes is defined as the distance measured between the objective and eyepiece focal points. Compare this definition to the "barrel length" for telescopes, below.)

Then for the telescope ray tracing, the object 1 is extremely distant, such that its rays are essentially parallel. The objective lens then focuses these parallel light rays onto an image 1 located at its focal point. (Which ray tracing(s) ((1)-(10)) best match(es) this?)

Then this image 1 becomes the object 2 for the eyepiece, where it is placed on the focal point of the eyepiece to maximize its angular magnification. (Which ray tracing(s) ((1)-(10)) best match(es) this?)

Where are the ray tracings for microscopes and telescopes most similar? Where do they differ?

(Note how the "barrel length" for telescopes is defined as the distance measured between the objective to the eyepiece lenses, which is the same as the sum of their focal points. Compare this definition to the "tube length" for microscopes, above.)

For the microscope equation, 'L' is the distance between the objective and eyepiece lenses, and 'N' refers to the near point, which is assumed to be the nominal 25 cm value.
Notice the negative sign in the angular magnification equations for microscopes and telescopes--what does this mean for the orientation of the final image seen through the eyepiece? Did you notice this for both the microscope and telescope?

What type of focal lengths would you want for the objective lens of a microscope? Telescope? What type of focal lengths would you want for the eyepiece lens of a microscope? Telescope?

The telescope angular magnification equation does not explicitly refer to the distance between the objective lens and the eyepiece lens. How is this distance related to the focal lengths fo and fe of the objective and eyepiece?

20121013

Astronomy midterm question: better telescope choice

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, fall semester 2012
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

[20 points.] An astronomy question on an online discussion board(*) was asked and answered:
Mr. Dingo: Which [telescope] has [the brightest image], best detail, [and] magnification?

     FunScope™ [Tabletop] Reflector

          [76 mm diameter mirror, 300 mm long tube, f = 10 mm eyepiece]
     Orion™ SkyScanner® Reflector

          [100 mm diameter mirror, 400 mm long tube, f = 20 mm eyepiece]
Mark H: ...the answer is the [SkyScanner®].
Discuss whether you agree or disagree with this answer, and the criteria used in your decision. Support your answer using the properties of telescopes and telescope powers.

*Source: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100516131920AAPZR2i.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p = 20/20:
    Correct. Discusses how diameter of primary mirror determines the light-gathering power and resolving power, such that the larger diameter mirror of the Orion™ SkyScanner® would result in brighter, more finely resolved images. Also discusses how the primary focal length and eyepiece supplied with this telescope would result in lower magnification than the primary focal length and eyepiece supplied with the FunScope™, although this is a less important consideration in purchasing a telescope than the light-gathering and resolving power.
  • r = 16/20:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. As (p), but two of three telescope powers is correct, while discussion of third telescope power is problematic.
  • t = 12/20:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Problematic discussion of two telescope powers, while third is complete/correct; or complete/correct discussion of two telescope powers, while discussion of third telescope power is omitted.
  • v = 8/20:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. At least discusses some connection between telescope parameters and telescope power.
  • x = 4/20:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Does not discuss connection between telescope parameters and telescope powers.
  • y = 2/20:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z = 0/20:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm01sLa6
p: 6 students
r: 13 students
t: 16 students
v: 2 students
x: 2 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Grading distribution:
Section 70160
Exam code: midterm01n4rN
p: 9 students
r: 7 students
t: 0 students
v: 11 students
x: 3 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 8669):

20120310

Astronomy midterm question: "good beginner telescope" size

Astronomy 210 Midterm 1, spring semester 2012
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

[20 points.] An astronomy question on an online discussion board(*) was asked and answered:
ahriik: What is a good telescope for a beginner? I want to get into astronomy, so I believe a telescope is essential.
eri:[F]or a good beginner telescope; the most important factor is the size of the primary mirror... There's not much point in investing in a telescope if the primary mirror diameter is less than 4.5", and the bigger the better...
Discuss reasons why "there's not much point in investing" in a small diameter telescope. Support your answer using the properties of telescope parameters and telescope powers.

*Source: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArVtg7r0DwT2ZpjF5GpF2_sjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20100520162052AASAINW.

Solution and grading rubric:
  • p = 20/20:
    Correct. Discusses how diameter of primary lens/mirror determines the light-gathering power and resolving power, such that a large diameter lens/mirror would result in bright, finely resolved images worth magnifying.
  • r = 16/20:
    Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. Discusses how diameter affects either light-gathering power or resolving power, other diameter/power discussion incomplete.
  • t = 12/20:
    Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Problematic discussion of how diameter is related to either light-gathering power or resolving power.
  • v = 8/20:
    Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. At least discusses some connection between telescope parameters and telescope power.
  • x = 4/20:
    Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Does not discuss connection between telescope parameters and telescope powers.
  • y = 2/20:
    Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
  • z = 0/20:
    Blank.
Grading distribution:
Section 30674
Exam code: midterm01neE7
p: 18 students
r: 14 students
t: 0 students
v: 1 student
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 30676
Exam code: midterm01s0Be
p: 21 students
r: 15 students
t: 1 student
v: 3 students
x: 1 student
y: 1 student
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 4490):
Another sample "p" response (from student 0010):

20100201

Found physics: simple magnifier


100130-1140785
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/4317202635/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

Wire cutters brought closer to enlarge its angular size, but much closer than the near point of the camera lens (focused at infinity to simulate a relaxed eye). A magnifying glass is then placed in front of the camera lens to project a virtual image of this wire cutters out at infinity, which subsequently becomes an object for the camera lens to be able to focus on. Photo by Cuesta College Physical Science instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.

20090729

Galileoscope vs. Project STAR telescope: first quarter Moon

090728-1100467
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3767707229/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

Project STAR telescope (upper, sciencefirst.com/vw_prdct_mdl.asp?mdl_cd=6540000) and Galileoscope (lower, www.galileoscope.org), both aimed at the first quarter Moon at dusk, for a direct comparison of light-gathering, resolving, and magnification powers of their respective images.


090728-1100449
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3768505836/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

FOV (inverted) through the Galileoscope (www.galileoscope.org) of the first quarter Moon (25x) at dusk.


090728-1100444
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3767704455/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

FOV (inverted) through the Project STAR telescope (sciencefirst.com/vw_prdct_mdl.asp?mdl_cd=6540000) of the first quarter Moon (approximately 15x) at dusk. Image is actually sharper than this, but adequate prime focus photography is difficult due to extremely poor eye relief.

Photos by Cuesta College Physical Sciences Division instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.

20090726

Galileoscope: waxing crescent Moon, 25x magnification eyepiece

090726-1100347
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3763092693/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

FOV through the International Year of Astronomy 2009 Galileoscope (www.galileoscope.org) of the waxing crescent Moon (25x) at dusk. Original inverted image. Photo by Cuesta College Physical Sciences Division instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.

20090725

Project STAR telescope: cutaway view and makeshift mount

090718-1100301
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3734670236/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

Cutaway of the Project STAR telescope (www.sciencefirst.com/vw_prdct_mdl.asp?mdl_cd=6540000), showing the plastic primary lens (with circular aperture to block out spherical aberrations) and foam-mounted eyepiece. Photo by Cuesta College Physical Sciences Division instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.


DSC01774
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3734615178/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

Cuesta College Astronomy 210L student Jason looks through a Project STAR telescope, with a floor lamp used as an ad hoc mount. Photo by J. McFarland (Cuesta College Astrophoto Pool).

20090722

Astronomy laboratory: Project STAR vs. Galileoscope telescope powers

Astronomy 210L Lab 05 v.09.07.18, Fall Semester 2009
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

"Telescope Powers" laboratory worksheet for introductory astronomy laboratory. Students compare the light-gathering, resolving, and magnifying powers of two reproductions of 17th century telescopes, the Project STAR telescope (www.starlab.com/psprod.html#Anchor-Refracting-11481), and the International Year of Astronomy 2009 Galileoscope(TM) (www.galileoscope.org).

Note that for the purposes of this lab activity, the two rubber rings that hold the outer shell of the Galileoscope(TM) (www.flickr.com/photos/carolune/3742841214/) are unused, such that only the eyepiece assembly, and the front and back caps need to be removed/replaced for disassembly/reassembly.







20090721

Galileoscope: 25x magnification eyepiece focal point

090721-1100333
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3744253607/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

Using a ballpoint pen to identify the focal point of the 25x magnification eyepiece of the International Year of Astronomy 2009 Galileoscope (www.galileoscope.org).


090717-1100296
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3734666664/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

View through the Galileoscope 25x eyepiece, showing the ballpoint pen tip used to identify its focal point.

Photo and video by Cuesta College Physical Sciences Division instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.

20090718

Galileoscope: first light, 25x magnification eyepiece

090716-1100281
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3726661383/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

FOV through the International Year of Astronomy 2009 Galileoscope (www.galileoscope.org) of the waning crescent Moon (25x). Original inverted image.


090716-1100285
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3727476008/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

View through the Galileoscope of the waning crescent Moon (25x). Original inverted image has been rotated erect.


090716-1100286
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waiferx/3726678297/
Originally uploaded by Waifer X

View along the Galileoscope, with waning crescent Moon.

Photos by Cuesta College Physical Sciences Division instructor Dr. Patrick M. Len.