That was my “eureka” moment this morning as I got reacquainted with M10, M12, M5, M3, M13, and M92 in that order. I felt real good about it too – until I came in and started rereading Stephen O’Meara’s descriptions in “The Messier Objects” and realized how much I didn’t see 🙂
But in another thread Bob was talking about “getting your mind around what you see” and that’s just about always my main goal and this morning I started by comparing M10 and M12 as they appeared in the C8 at 154X (13mm Nagler). I was noticing some details, such as the small triangle of brighter stars that partially engulfs M12 and how the layer of resolved stars over its core was greater in M10. Suddenly a description I had read popped into my head – one of these globulars was likened to a “gumball machine.” The author was referring to the colors of the resolved stars – only which one was she talking about? At this point I thought it was something Sue French had written, but I couldn’t remember if she was talking about M10 or M12, so I set out to determine which it was that looked more like a gumball machine.
The more I compared the two, the more I appreciated their individuality – but I was darned if I could detect much evidence of color in either. Still, i decided she must have been talking about M10. And that’s when I had the “aha” moment that lasted and lasted . . . Suddenly my mind’s eyes was turning the different layers of stars into one of those snow globes you shake – or maybe more a series of crystal celestial spheres like those woodcuts from the MIddle Ages show. Whatever it was, the gumball metaphor has caused a break through and each globular now looked like what I knew it was – a three dimensional globe of hundreds of thousands of stars. Of course we can’t see 3-D at these distances and with one eye – but the impression was overwhelming and I tried to hold it like you do a dream, knowing if you look too closely it will vanish.
I love to tour the globulars available at this sidereal hour (c. 15h) and so I set out northward for M5. It was a “wow” making M10 and M12 look pale in comparison. And the 3-D magic was, if anything, enhanced. I moved on to M3, one I have visited many times in recent months as it was rising on winter mornings. Hmmmm… not as nice as I remembered. I mean cool – but M5 seemed to blow it away. OK, how about the “Great Pumpkin” – the one everyone knows, M13? it was just about at the zenith and at this point the C8 corrector was collecting a little dew ( probably had something to do with the performance of M3, though I’m not sure.) It was quickly dispersed with the hair dryer and I warmed up my hands a bit in the process. OK – M13 deserves its rep. I know some observers think M5 is better, but I have to go with M13 – not only because it gets higher in our sky ( which helps) but because with the same scope and eyepiece you resolve so many more stars and the 3-D impact was overwhelming. I wanted to look for the galaxy that’s near it, but I couldn’t remember exactly where it was and I didn’t want to break the spell by checking my charts. I was on a roll 😉
So where next? M92, of course, the most under-rated globular in our sky. M92 makes you appreciate that small can be beautiful too. If M13 is the Great Pumpklin, then M92 is an apple – hard, crisp and bright like a Red Delicious! The 3-D vision held. Hope I can regain it another night!
When I got in I immediately checked Sue’s book to see if the gumball machine was M10 or M12. Ooops – she doesn’t use that metaphor. So i went to Stephen O’Meara. Yep. There it was – and he was talking about M12, not M10 as I thought. But no matter – the remembered phrase triggered that wonderful sensation of a third dimension. And rereading his description I know I have to slow down and spend a lot more time with these old friends over the next few months, for there’s so much more to see in each of them.
I’d started the session, btw, by checking on Porrima and for the first time getting a clean split with the C8 at 286X – but I was disappointed. This pair so bright and the C8 so sloppy ( I probably still don’t have it as well collimated as it should be) that there just was a lot of light in the diffraction rings – far too much. At this point I really missed not having something like a 120 or 127mm apochromatic. The split just isn’t wide enough yet for the 80 to handle – maybe next year.
Oh – and my other revelation of the night? I can’t reheat my tea with the hairdryer! Well, not in 10 seconds, anyway. Another brilliant idea proven dumb 🙄
Leave a comment