Sponsored By:

[index] [month] [prev] [next] [thead-prev] [thread-next]

Subject: Re: [M]: RE: Meade 7" APO, opinions???
From: Bill Arnett
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Mon Nov 10 00:05:04 1997

At 7:52 PM -0800 11/9/97, RA wrote:
>.... The
>definatin webster claims is" Corrected for chromatic and spherical
>aberations." I didnt find "correcting for all", just correcting....

Using dictionary definitions is inappropriate in this context. For
example, my American Heritage says "Refracting light without spectral color
separation" for "achromatic"; if you take that at face value it is better
than apochromatic! Fortunately, there are careful, technical definitions
of these terms. They are the ONLY ones that are meaningful in this
context.

---
Bill Arnett billa@znet.com
temporarily at 32 N 116 W




View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: RE: [M]: DSC, Michael Hart
Next message: Re: [M]: Big Dobs in the City..., Bill Arnett
Next message in thread: Re: [M]: RE: Meade 7" APO, opinions???, Geoff Gaherty
Previous message in thread: Re: [M]: RE: Meade 7" APO, opinions???, RA