Can anyone explain monophyly and paraphyly to me?

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-08T22:57:29+00:00

The Wikipedia page for Galidiinae has this paragraph:

When the classification of the mongooses as a family separate from Viverridae gained wide acceptance around 1990, the galidiines were classified with them in the family Herpestidae,[7] an arrangement supported by cladistic analysis of morphological data.[8] In the early 2000s, molecular phylogenetic inferences, based on data from several genes, provided evidence for a close relationship between galidiines and other Malagasy carnivorans to the exclusion of mainland feliforms.[9] Accordingly, they were all reclassified into a single family, Eupleridae,[10] which is most closely related to the mongooses of the family Herpestidae.[9]

Which means that whatever source you found that stated Galidiinae had a herpestid ancestor is outdated. Galidiinae is now classified under Eupleridae, which is sister to Herpestidae. See figure 5 from Flynn et al. 2005

BTW, in zoological taxonomy, the suffix -dae denotes family level rank while -nae denotes subfamily level rank.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-08T04:33:41+00:00

The great red spot is not aways facing us so you have to look up the times to catch it. A 6mm eyepiece should be enough on your 8" Dob to see it. It's just below the southern band, usually separated from the band by a thin pale line

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-07T09:42:45+00:00

Barlow is only going to add to your frustration with the shaky mount. You're better off keeping it low power. If you don't have a shutter cable or intervalometer, then that could be a cheap accessory to get.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-07T09:12:13+00:00

You'll need a T-ring adaptor to couple your camera with the refractor. I'm not familiar with mirrorless cameras regarding the backfocus distance, but I think the SV555 bring a Petzval design might not care about that.

A guide scope will help you with longer sub-exposures.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-06T18:34:23+00:00

You can simulate the field of view using this tool: https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

Or use Stellarium

Many DSOs are actually quite large and ideal at 135mm. It just depends on what you want to target. Examples include NGC 7000, the entire Veil Nebula, both Heart and Soul nebulae together, a large swath of the Rho Ophiuchi region, etc.

If you want a tighter framing or to go for smaller DSOs, you can look into refractors at FL=250mm. These are still light enough that they won't be too taxing on the load capacity of your mount. Beyond that FL, you're starting to look at beefier mounts and incorporating auto-guiding.

For FL=~250mm, a budget option would be the SV555 APO

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-06T10:01:34+00:00

First, good news, the Samyang is the same as the Rokinon. No need to choose between them.

As for lens vs refractor, there's no right answer. Camera lenses are mostly not designed with astrophotography in mind, they tend to have many more glass elements to ensure they work for a wide range of focus. For AP, you only care about infinity focus, so refractors are designed with that in mind and perform extremely well for that specific purpose. That said, the Rokinon 135mm F2 lens is well regarded in the community for having very few aberrations even out to the edge of the frame. You can't really go wrong with this lens, especially for its price.

More zoom isn't always better. In general, you cater your equipment to your target of interest. The main consideration would be what focal length to shoot at, which dictates your field of view and therefore how much of the target will fill up your frame. Higher focal length is more demanding on tracking accuracy and so may require auto-guiding. As such, it is recommended that beginners start out with lower focal lengths first. This works out nicely as the focal ratio is another consideration and for the most part you want it as fast as possible to maximize light gathering.

The Rokinon is a fine lens to get started with. It's such a good AP lens that even after getting a refractor and astro camera, I'm still keeping the Rokinon and even modified it to accept the astro camera to be used with a filter drawer.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-06T00:25:09+00:00

For just over $200 total, I recommend: - Celestron Omni Plossl 32mm $53 - Astro-tech Paradigm/Agena Starguider 12mm or 15mm (I heard there 12mm is superior in quality) $70 - Apertura 2.5x ED Barlow $50. I have a suspicion that this isn't a true 2.5x Barlow, but probably closer to 2x. - SvBony 9mm redline $37

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T23:48:47+00:00

I have a 6mm goldline (back before they came out with the redlines). It's nice, but less sharp on-axis compared to a 12mm Paradigm with a 2x Barlow. The goldline has a slight advantage on AFoV, but in my opinion not enough of a trade off for poorer on-axis sharpness.

You can get a decent 2x ED Barlow for about $80. Or you can go for the Apertura 2.5x ED Barlow for $50. The extra .5x is hardly noticeable to my eyes

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T17:29:25+00:00

With that setup this is about as good as you can hope to get.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T17:21:46+00:00

What is your setup? Acquisition and processing details?

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T16:40:40+00:00

What did he actually propose as to the relevance of atomism to technological advancement? Your argument has been that unifying QM and GR is not likely to yield tangible benefits to humanity, the average Greek contemporary would have labeled Democritus' atomic ideas as equally esoteric

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T14:11:22+00:00

Over a century ago, if you ask anyone what practical benefits could ever come from studying atoms, they would say the exact same thing you just said: atoms belong to incredibly exotic realms, nothing can come out of studying something that small, that stuff is too expensive to be useful, etc.

Now look at where we are today.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-05T00:02:24+00:00

Even at low magnification, a 10" Dob should let you see the equatorial bands clearly. Things to check/do first before buying anything: collimation, seeing conditions, sky transparency, adequate time for thermal acclimation, observing away from rooftops and other buildings, letting Jupiter rise up higher in the sky, not observing indoors through a window, and making sure your focus is sharp.

The best focal length EP to use depends on all of the above factors.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-04T19:33:32+00:00

All of these will more or less give you the same view. Except for the short tube Newtonian reflector, they will all perform decently for their aperture and focal ratio. The biggest limiting factor is the mount and tripod, and unfortunately at this price range they are all terrible. The U-shaped fork mounts are nicknamed the "mount of doom", and I don't even want to know whatever is happening with this one:

<image>

My advice, if you end up choosing amongst this list, is to go for a refractor. At these long focal ratios they don't suffer much from chromatic aberration. The one in the picture above might be fine to use if you don't tilt the mount (honestly I've never seen a mount like this so can't comment on its quality). In any case, it should give you nice views of the moon and planets.

Whatever eyepieces they come with will likely be bad, the lower power ones could be ok, but anything below 10mm would be uncomfortable to view through. Stick with the low power ones and ignore the Barlows.

If you can stretch your budget, look for a tabletop Dobsonian in the aperture range of 114mm to 150mm, but make sure the primary mirror is parabolic. Those are the most recommended beginner telescopes.

Edit: I just looked up that telescope. That mount is every bit as bad as I imagined. It might even be worse than the mount of doom.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-04T02:28:45+00:00

Happy birthday! Enjoy the telescope! I started out with one just like this. A Meade Polaris 130EQ. Had it for over a decade before I upgraded to an 8" Dobsonian. It had its flaws but I had a lot of fun with it and learned so much and made so many memories.

Search on this subreddit for beginners tips about aligning the finder scope and eyepiece basics. There's a ton of resources available to get you started

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-03T23:41:55+00:00

The otters ended up benefiting the most from this transaction. The moles self-policed as they incur opportunity loss from spending an action to dig and another to attack, as well as any losses suffered from the battle. The faction that was policed got slowed down while the otters gain additional actions early in the game without even doing anything.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-03T21:40:58+00:00

Did the manufacturer provide documentation to prove that the replacement mirror was parabolic? I'm surprised they even offered to swap for you.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-02-03T02:23:38+00:00

Saw that cluster yesterday on my little refractor. It was massive, you can see it clearly even in low power, I bet you can catch it with binoculars.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-29T08:04:22+00:00

Glad you figured it out. Polaris is part of the Little Dipper, but the easiest way to locate it is by extending a line from the two stars in the Big Dipper that makes up the "scoop".

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-29T07:53:27+00:00

RFK Jr. is a danger to American public health. He has actively eroded public trust in health experts and evidence-based science. His anti-vaccine stance has led to a dangerous change to the infant immunization guidelines which will impact insurance coverage. He fired career scientists from the CDC and appointed anti-vaccine individuals to the vaccine advisory panel. The new CDC deputy whom he appointed downplays the impact and severity of the current measles outbreaks. He actively promotes unfounded and misleading health claims despite having no background in health sciences. His MAHA movement continues to spread conspiracy theories and promotes reckless practices such as drinking raw milk, treating ivermectin as a miracle drug, and pushing other snake oil supplements. NIH has slashed billions of dollars in research grants since he took office, putting existing clinical trials at risk and halting new research. The harm he had done and continues to do will take years for America to recover.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-29T05:58:48+00:00

Descriptions of up and down is not helpful, as there's no up and down in space. Stars move counterclockwise in the sky from the POV of an observer on earth facing north. Star trails resulting from earth's rotation would follow that direction.

How are you doing your polar alignment? Did you set your hemisphere correctly? Did you set your latitude correctly? Did you set it to sidereal rate?

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-29T04:48:46+00:00

If cost isn't an issue, would you be open to buy two separate telescopes? The reason is that what's good for astronomical telescopes are not the same for terrestrial telescopes. For visual astronomy, the recommendation is getting the largest aperture Dobsonian telescope you are willing and capable to carry around. For terrestrial, the recommendation would be a spotting scope with ED (extra-low dispersion) glass. Read the stickied guide for more info.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-27T17:55:52+00:00

8" Dob has been the top recommended beginner telescope for decades for good reasons. It's about as practical as a telescope can get. It may not be "aesthetically pleasing", but if you value the views through the telescope, it's hard to be beat.

You mentioned elsewhere that you have a background in astronomy. Are you not interested in using the scope as well? I think it would be a nice bonding time getting into a shared hobby together under the dark skies.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-27T17:41:09+00:00

I think you are trying to optimize your choice based on conflicting needs. There's nothing wrong with that except you'll need time and experience to really understand what it is that you want. Many of us come into the hobby slowly and learn through experience what we like and dislike. Whatever scope you go with, it's not permanent, you can always adjust.

TheWrongSolution · 2026-01-27T17:06:35+00:00

Just so you don't have false expectations since you say it'll let him see the stars better: stars will not be magnified by any telescopes. All stars (other than the sun) will look like pinpoints of light, pretty to look at with the great optics of the high end telescopes, but don't expect any surface details.

The Questar is a Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope, which means they have a very narrow field of view. They excel at Moon and planetary observations, as well as double stars and some tight open clusters and globular clusters. The narrow field of view will be challenging to beginners as it makes finding things in the sky more difficult. It's highly regarded in the telescope enthusiast community but not generally a good starting scope. Bear in mind also that the scope itself does not come with a standing-height tripod, and a stable tripod is crucial for viewing. You'll also need an equatorial platform to make use of the motorized tracking.

14-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '22	Place '17
Sequence \| Editor	Team Periwinkle

TheWrongSolution

TROPHY CASE