Amateur Microscopy vs Astronomy

[dtsh]

Another interesting question - at least to me - is which hobby is more likely to "stick" and why? I know many families that have bought both cheap telescopes and cheap microscopes, used them a bit, and then stashed them away in a closet for decades or until a massive home cleaning. I'd think only exercise machines start with better intentions and end up being used less?

Another interesting phenomenon is how many people had a microscope as a kid, mostly abandoned it for decades, and then came back to it in older age.

I think the most likely answer to this is "the one that receives the most support". You can buy any number of tools and have fun with them, but without guidance and encouragement I think a lot of tools languish when the GeeWhizz(tm) factor wears off. I've seen and experienced it with musical instruments as well, without training and encouragement, the chance of learning diminishes greatly.

[Stomias]

Another interesting question - at least to me - is which hobby is more likely to "stick" and why? I know many families that have bought both cheap telescopes and cheap microscopes, used them a bit, and then stashed them away in a closet for decades or until a massive home cleaning. I'd think only exercise machines start with better intentions and end up being used less?

Another interesting phenomenon is how many people had a microscope as a kid, mostly abandoned it for decades, and then came back to it in older age.

I think the most likely answer to this is "the one that receives the most support". You can buy any number of tools and have fun with them, but without guidance and encouragement I think a lot of tools languish when the GeeWhizz(tm) factor wears off. I've seen and experienced it with musical instruments as well, without training and encouragement, the chance of learning diminishes greatly.

Bought new in 1970

https://photos.app.goo.gl/nq3ALaAA3bdTgFwW8

[Stomias]

Cheap optics always = hobby killer!

[Chas]

Having come back, after a 50 year gap, to having fun with a microscope I wonder if the some of the problem is to do with the design of modern microscope stages?
The 'Watson' I used as a child, apart from being a wonderful brass colour and having an excessive number of knobs, had flat topped x-y stage with CLIPS on top, so it was no problem to hold down a blade of grass pretty taught and move it around.
You could tilt the microscope and it wouldn't fall down the hole and you could breath without it blowing away
Most microscope stages, now, seem to be very glass-slide orientated and have sideways grabbers, this makes them pretty unfriendly things for a casual look-see.
You can't even put a petri dish on top because one of the flipppers is twisted upwards or has a raised knob and the dish tilts and drags around on the the fixed part of the stage...grrr.
You will not be surprised that the microscope I tend run to first is one with a metallurgical x-y stage.
I have found it tricky to come up with a simple overstage, as yet, and so I wonder if others might find it a bit too frustrating as well?

[PeteM]

With respect to stages and viewing things like a blade of grass. As I learn more about microscopes, I'm becoming more and more a fan of stereo microscopes.

Early on, I learned they were by far the best for kids, and useful for even the most experienced microscopost. And I'd used a stereo microscope for fiddly shop work for decades. More recently I'm discovering the really good ones, equipped with both reflected and transmitted illumination, can span a range from "wonderful low power magnification" to "provides surprisingly good views of things like plant cells. The research grade ones, even better.

[Gasman]

Very interesting question and speaking as someone who does (or rather did) both astronomy and microscopy. I was quite an active amateur astronomer with my own computerised observatory,apo scopes , ccd’s, spectroscopes the lot but become very disillusioned with the constant battle with the weather we had here in the UK and as member of the forum ‘Stargazers Lounge’ I found they had a subsection for members on microscopy and I gradually became more interested in the very small than the very big plus you have the added bonus of no clouds!. I still have my observatory locked up ready for the interest to kick in again.

[DonSchaeffer]

How many objects can you examine with a telescope? is it more than two dozen?

[Stomias]

Thousands.....There are galaxies, planetary nebulae, gaseous nebulae, double stars, open star clusters, globular star clusters, solar system objects, comets. Some types there are hundreds of each. Depends on how big your telescope is and how dark your observing site is...

[dtsh]

How many objects can you examine with a telescope? is it more than two dozen?

Well, the Messier list, compiled by Charles Messier in the late 18th century contains 110 objects; that's not counting any stars. As the years went by and polished metal mirrors were replaced by silvered, aluminized, etc and the size of instruments tended to increase, the number of visible objects grew as well. For objects visible to the average amateur, I would guess a couple thousand easily; again not counting stars (not discounting stars, there are lot of interesting stars too). For those with larger instruments or darker than average skies, that number could easily be 10-fold more.

[D0c]

I'm 12 short of the full messier list so I've seen 98 off them. But there are many hundreds even thousands of galaxies, clusters, nebulas, and binary stars that can be seen with a telescope. Off course the bigger your scope the more light gathering ability it will have to see these fainter objects.

[JGardner]

In addition to the Messier list of 110 objects, there's the New General Catalog (NGC), which contains 7,840 objects, most of which are visible in moderately sized amateur telescopes. There are many other lists of objects as well, including Herschel's list, the IC, etc.

[PeteM]

One issue for many is light pollution. It might be the geographic equivalent of microscope objectives afflicted with oil intrusion or in need of serious cleaning? More and more of us are living near urban areas - that's where many of the best jobs have been. By one estimate 55% of the world's population lives in urban areas and that number is expected to grow to near 70% in the next generation.

One of my telescopes went to my niece's family - but they're up in Seattle and complain of cloudy nights. Neither the two microscopes nor the telescope sent their way have proven a "hit" with the kids - perhaps because they have so many other more compelling toys and pursuits. As others have suggested, it's likely best if some interested parent, mentor, or pal is part of the equation.

I used to regularly speak at an engineering software conference held each year in Scottsdale, Arizona. One of the attractions was often a trip into the desert, with large telescopes set up for spectacular views. Not so easy to do that here, despite a relatively rural neighborhood within sight of the Pacific Ocean.

[Stomias]

Used to do community outreach astronomy. Light pollution is horrible https://www.darksky.org/ Dark sky is a MUST! Yellowstone https://photos.app.goo.gl/uKqGMegkLWwCoohP8

[DonSchaeffer]

How many objects can you examine with a telescope? is it more than two dozen?

Well, the Messier list, compiled by Charles Messier in the late 18th century contains 110 objects; that's not counting any stars. As the years went by and polished metal mirrors were replaced by silvered, aluminized, etc and the size of instruments tended to increase, the number of visible objects grew as well. For objects visible to the average amateur, I would guess a couple thousand easily; again not counting stars (not discounting stars, there are lot of interesting stars too). For those with larger instruments or darker than average skies, that number could easily be 10-fold more.

I stand straightened out. Thanks.

[JGardner]

Dark sky is a MUST! Yellowstone

I've been to Yellowstone several times in the last few years and the night sky there is amazing! It's one of the darkest places in America. It's so dark there city dwellers have a hard time recognizing familiar constellations because there are so many stars visible that they can't see in the city.

[Scarodactyl]

Dark sky is a MUST! Yellowstone

Bwahahahaha yes! YES! Only when the yellowstone supervolcano casts the night sky into darkness will microscopy claim final vict---
Oh, yes, national parks are wonderful for getting away from city lights. That is what I meant to say.

[PeteM]

. . .
Bwahahahaha yes! . . .

Now, that got a grin.

[Stomias]

You microscopists are a funny bunch

[dtsh]

Used to do community outreach astronomy. Light pollution is horrible https://www.darksky.org/ Dark sky is a MUST! Yellowstone https://photos.app.goo.gl/uKqGMegkLWwCoohP8

While I wholeheartedly agree that dark skies add a whole new level to astronomy, I kept myself entertained and engaged a great many other people while living in the heart of Chicago. Deep sky objects such as nebulae were effectively out of the question, at least visually, but the planets, their moons, our Moon, and many star clusters were readily visible. While I greatly enjoy viewing DSOs (Deep Sky Objects), the objects here within our own solar system can provide excellent opportunities for those who don't have access to dark skies.

One other aspect of astronomy that works in the cities is that the best view, and in a major metropolis often the *only* view, is straight up.

[Stomias]

Chicago!!!!!! I'm freezing there right now