Chris

> As an astronomer, you don't have to know the
> names or location of a phony grouping of stars.
> Just know the RA and Dec of the object you want to find.
> IMHO using constellation names is akin to "Astrology"
> not "Astronomy". Forget constellations, they are the
> superstitions of the ancients.

You're entitled to your opinion, but..

The "ancient" constellations are part of the history of astronomy, and they
provide a bridge from the common man to the astronomer by providing a common
reference point. Ask most anyone to find the Big Dipper and they'll probably
be able to find it - some may even know that it's part of Ursa Major, and if
not, _you_ can point that out to them. It's that link that can draw anyone
into sharing views of the night sky, to appreciate the wonders that we see
up there. And there's a certain romance to the constellations - the lore of
their origins, how they've been shared under different names by different
cultures, and how they've evolved over the millennia.

On a more practical point, they provide an easy reference point for general
conveyance of location - most people would roll their eyes if you said "I
was looking at a globular cluster at RA: 17h 27m 42.0s Dec: -05° 05'00"
last night and it was awesome!" Even the professional astronomer might be
hard pressed to know that this was NGC 6366 in Ophiuchus.

Abandon the constellations if you want, but I'll keep them thank you.

-Doug

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: [M]: Bob Knobs / Collimation HELL!!!, Mike Simone
Next message: Re: [M]: LX200s and Kendrick Dew Removers, advice..., Doug Groesbeck
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: Celestial Star Maps, peter erdman
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: Celestial Star Maps, Ray Kilburn