Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin
From: wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin )
Newsgroups: net.astro
Subject: Occultations, conjunctions, and the like
Message-ID: <2195@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 16-Oct-85 14:40:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.2195
Posted: Wed Oct 16 14:40:11 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Oct-85 21:06:54 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: USAMC ALMSA, St. Louis, MO
Lines: 73

Let me preceed this by saying I am NOT trying to put down astronomy
buffs, the good people who write and post StarDate, the virtues of amateur
astronomy, etc. -- this is really something I find hard to understand,
so I thought I'd post this. I'm sure there will be flames, anyway, but
net-life is like that...

Why does there seem to be so much interest among astronomy popularizers or
amateur skygazers regarding the common and inevitable patterns that
appear to us on the Earth's surface from the various positions of
astronomical bodies? The fact that for some days Venus and Mars will
appear to almost touch, or that the moon will obscure our view of this
or that star, seem to me to be as exciting as the fact that I can walk
across the street and see both my house and the streetlight in front of
it at the same time (which I can't when I stand between the two, and
this is based on the same physical principles). 

I realize that occultations and transits have value in that detailed
observations using the proper equipment at those times can tell us
things about the astronomical bodies in question (atmosphere or rings of
a planet causing fluctuations in the light-curve, etc.). So such things
can be of immense interest to those researching and gathering data in
these areas. But what is "exciting" about a couple dots of light in the
sky being closer together or farther apart today than they were
yesterday? After all, this is as near to inevitable as anything else we
know of -- it isn't a surprise, or a mystery, but simply the logical
result of bodies obeying physical laws. If they DIDN'T do what they were
expected to do, now *that* would be exciting!

Maybe I am ill-affected by watching this PBS popular-astronomy TV
program called "Star Hustler", which is a little 5-minute show aired
just before sign-off by our local PBS station -- it originates in
Florida, and is hosted by a guy named "Jack Horkheimer", who is the
director of some planetarium or the like. I see it after Dr. Who on
Sunday nights. This host is so offensive in his delivery and enthusiasm
about what usually seem to be trivialities that I cannot explain why I
continue to watch it (I think it is because I am up and awake anyhow,
and I always hope that it might alter and present something worthwhile).

StarDate is not like this -- it is sensible and presents the information
in a much better manner (maybe the natural superiority of radio over
TV?); yet I sometimes get the impression that the StarDate people have
nothing to say, and are killing time by discussing constellations or
these sorts of planetary movements. To me, the interest of astronomy has
more to do with space travel in the short term and cosmology in the
long term. There seems to be plenty to look at, discuss, and explain in
discussing gravity waves, the microwave background radiation, stellar
evolution, or any of a thousand topics that cry out for clear
explanations in non-technical terms, instead of making a big to-do over
the fact that, this particular day, the line-of-sight from the surface
of this dustball happens to pass close to two other dustballs in the
same planetary system. 

If somone wants to discuss the relative positions of planets, I would
find it more interesting to do so in the contexts of travel between
them, say by discussing why today is a better day to launch a flight to
Mars from Earth than yesterday was, or tomorrow will be (plug in other
criteria or planets as you wish).

I know that someone is going to say that the masses cannot understand
such esoterica, and that we have to talk simplistically to catch their
interest. To that I say "bull!". That level of people don't pay
attention to ANY astronomical discussion, and wouldn't know an orbit
from an asteroid. Besides, most Americans now live under such light
pollution that they cannot *see* the night sky any more, so talk of
constellations and occultations are moot! Better to talk about stuff you
cannot see anyway, rather than stuff a tiny fraction has the opportunity
to see.

Am I the only one that feels this way?  (I'm used to that... :-)

Will Martin

UUCP/USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin   or   ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA