Telescopes
jay2422
Member Posts: 2
I'm just saying Brathlen in the Temple of Gond's mind would truly be blown if he would ever just walk across the street to Ragefast's house...
Unfortunately I can't figure out if there is way t post screen shots here.
Unfortunately I can't figure out if there is way t post screen shots here.
5
Comments
click on "attach a file" under the text box;
Browse the path to your image;
Hover the mouse on the thumbnail that will appear;
Click on "insert image": a precompiled tag will appear in the text box;
Click on "delete" to get rid lf the thumbnail.
@jay2422
Thanks! This is what I was referring to:
Lol...
Ragefast's device is a giant James Bond-killing Laser. You can't see it because it's not in use, but the chair has metal straps to keep 00 agents from escaping.
Obviously.
I'd rather have that than a giant refractor with a tiny field of view in the middle of sooty Baldur's Gate...
Priest of Gond: "Do you expect me to talk?"
Ragefast: "No Priest of Gond....I expect you to die!"
There are two basic types of telescopes, refractors and reflectors. The part of the telescope that gathers the light, called the objective, determines the type of telescope. A refractor telescope uses a glass lens as its objective. The glass lens is at the front of the telescope and light is bent (refracted) as it passes through the lens. A reflector telescope uses a mirror as its objective. The mirror is close to the rear of the telescope and light is bounced off (reflected) as it strikes the mirror.
The telescope you steal is a refractor telescope. They are a mean piece of kit! Refractor telescope uses a lens to gather and focus light. The small telescopes sold in department stores are refractors, as well as, those used for rifle scopes.
Refractor telescopes are rugged. After the initial alignment, their optical system is more resistant to misalignment than the reflector telescopes.
The glass surface inside the tube is sealed from the atmosphere so it rarely needs cleaning.
Since the tube is closed off from the outside, air currents and effects due to changing temperatures are eliminated. This means that the images are steadier and sharper than those from a reflector telescope of the same size.
For a reflector, you just need mirrors and a tube. Cardboard would do. But it needs to be big as it needs to reflect a large area into a small one to create magnification. You also need to use a stable surface as a slight misalignment of a mirror will reduce effectiveness. So you can't take this type of telescope on a ship for instance (or even carry it) However, if you have room for it and can build it high above low level atmospheric disturbances, like Ragfast, they make the best telescopes as the magnification does not suffer from colour disambiguation. Which is important if your trying to work out the redshift of a star...
So. Two completely different techniques for magnification. Two completely different technologies. And the priest of Gond probably does know about it...
And @DreadKhan ... Judge me on my size do you?
There are also two types of refractors, achromatic and apochromatic. Achros are subject to false color, while true apochromatics are not. However, apos cost 5-10x more than achros.
Both of the telescopes in Baldur's Gate are refractors. You can tell by the placement of the eyepiece.
Newtonian reflectors are actually more portable than a refractor of the same size, especially so when they are larger than 4". This is the type of telescope I use. It's a 10" Dob that fits in my passenger car. Try doing that with a 10" refractor
It is inherently color free, but the eyepieces may introduce some false color depending on quality.
They do need collimation much more often than refractors, but it is also much easier to accomplish. I align the mirrors every time I move my telescope.
One flaw of the reflector design is coma. As you observe further away from the center of the field, stars develop comet like tails. This gets more obvious as the focal ratio decreases. Some people are more bothered by it than others. I have grown to live with it, but it is always there.
Each telescope design has its pros and cons. Astronomy forums have much more heated arguments than any I have seen here. The overall civility of this forum continues to impress me.
Also shape. It is bigass one end. Tiny the other. Reflector.
Refractors stay the classic captain cook spyglass shape. Only one end slightly bigger than ta other.
Personally. If I was a wizard. I would point my reflector telescope at another wizards tower and blast spells through it...
A traditional reflector does not have the eyepiece behind the mirror like Ragfast's. Schmidt-Cassegrains and refractors do. Reflectors place the eyepiece out the side of the tube or the observer peers down through the tube from the top.
The eyepiece on this scope is pointed directly at the seat. It would indeed be very uncomfortable as you approach the zenith. That is why most people with refractors have 90 degree diagonals. I would suggest that Ragfast invent one.
Not sure what you mean about the shape? Reflectors rely on the primary mirror seated at the end of the scope to gather the light. These designs tend to be pretty straight, and certainly would not be tiny at the end with the primary mirror. Refractors often require a dew shield at the objective, giving them a more irregular shape.
Cassegrains do have an eyepiece at the end of the tube, through a hole in the primary mirror. It relies on a corrector plate or convex mirror at the other end to return the light path back to the eyepiece. These designs tend to be more compact in shape. So, I don't think that Ragfast's is a Cassegrain, but who knows.