I How feasible is home radio astronomy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vanadium 50
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Homemade radio astronomy is technically feasible but not practical for most individuals due to the complexity and resources required. Technologies like software-defined radio (SDR) and satellite dishes can aid in building a radio telescope, but significant expertise in electronics and data processing is necessary. Observing sources like the Sun, Venus, and pulsars is possible, but achieving the sensitivity needed to detect faint signals is challenging. The discussion highlights that successful amateur radio astronomy often requires collaboration and a well-planned approach to target selection and equipment design. Overall, while DIY radio astronomy projects can be educational, they may not yield significant scientific results without substantial investment and expertise.
  • #31
Va50, let’s turn this discussion around. What would you like to observe? Once we know, we can talk about how to go about it (or if it is feasible).
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
First. we have a difference of opinion between experts on SDR. I'd like this explored so I can learn something.

As far as H1, I am curious why someone would find it interesting.

I am also working under the assumption - perhaps wrong - that the angular resolution isn't that great, so point sources are spread out and diffuse sources are even more diffuse.

I would like to see the Crab. This seems impossible.
  • It's not that bright in radio
  • The surrounding nebula is a radio source, and does not blink like the pulsar does.
  • You get the 30 Hz signal, but getting the phase right, well, you're on your own.
  • It's not that high in the sky.
 
  • #33
Vanadium 50 said:
I would like to see the Crab. This seems impossible.
You will need a radio quiet location, and a 15m diameter dish, covered in 1/2" chicken wire, that can track the source, while it is above the horizon.

Build for the hydrogen line, there is plenty of H1 about, and you can do other things with it later, like Doppler.
1420 MHz, λ = 21 cm, For 15 m dish; Beam Width = 57.3° * 0.21 m / 15 m = 0.8°
Make sure your tracking is better than that.

Build a two-channel, H&V polarised, low-noise receiver for the focus of the dish. Down-convert the two channels to IF, and send those signals for detection and recording in your shelter.

Find the exact rate of the crab pulsar now, then cyclically power spectrum accumulate into a circular buffer at that rate. The pulsar should climb out of the noise.

The difficulty is finding half a dozen voluntary assistants, with the skills and time needed to design and advance the hardware to the point where it will come together. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, you are now the first and only link.
 
  • #34
Radio astronomy is a difficult topic to tackle, regardless of your position, funds, and desires. RA hasn't been around long enough to be supported as well commercially for the amateur astronomer as much as it has been for the visual astronomy world. The barrier to entry requires knowledge of mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, programming, physics, EMF physics, etc.

The above is a great reason to start with HI and with SDR. SDR are finally cheap enough commercially, and "good enough" for their application. The construction of an antenna for HI is fairly straight forward (depending on your options) to the point anyone of enough gumption can build one with minimal assistance. HI is also easy to detect, giving you the quickest (nearly so) entry to RA to keep one interested in the craft.

With the wavelengths as large as they are, the physics get in your way of what's feasible to detect. It is capable of taking quite significant data though, you just have to tailor your equipment to your desires. I have associates who focus on masers using small dishes, between 6-12MHz. I have other associates with sub 1° resolution capabilities, but they have easily spent $50k on their equipment, and had to build it all themselves. We also have people detecting FRB with in-between equipment, and extensive knowledge.

The best use of RA at home is to enjoy it, learn something new. Add that data you get from RA to your visual images for a more complete understanding of your observations. What you learn from RA can be used to formulate ideas which can then turn into requests submitted to larger University or Professional observatories.

Vanadium 50 said:
First. we have a difference of opinion between experts on SDR. I'd like this explored so I can learn something.

As far as H1, I am curious why someone would find it interesting.

I am also working under the assumption - perhaps wrong - that the angular resolution isn't that great, so point sources are spread out and diffuse sources are even more diffuse.

I would like to see the Crab. This seems impossible.
  • It's not that bright in radio
  • The surrounding nebula is a radio source, and does not blink like the pulsar does.
  • You get the 30 Hz signal, but getting the phase right, well, you're on your own.
  • It's not that high in the sky
 
  • #35
Baluncore said:
You will need a 15m diameter dish
I don't buy that. Or any single parameter number. In principle, I can trade dish size for exposure time.

Bigger is better, sure. But in principle, I can see very weak sources if I integrate long enough. And one of the advantage of the SDR/record everything ecosystem is while I am looking at other things I an still collecting Crab data, Maybe it takes a year. So what?

The real problem with the Crab is that there is one number to pull it out of the background - 30 Hz. In North America, power is 60 Hz so you have 30 Hz broadband noise.
 
  • #37
Paul Colby said:
The 21cm hydrogen line may seem dull to some but the data collected with this antenna looks nice.

https://16767887561855875192.google...4KkP3VIrWM-hyjb60s4fTizyPxL-6alSQSNOSTjUb1Nns
Wow!

1729639061313.png
 
  • #38
Vanadium 50 said:
I would like to see the Crab. This seems impossible.
It does seem impossible, but it can be possible. You will need to balance your resource investment in several dimensions if you are to stand a chance. My recommendations are for a minimum cost, minimum time entry into Crab pulsar RA.

Vanadium 50 said:
I don't buy that. Or any single parameter number. In principle, I can trade dish size for exposure time.
I have already pushed that trade in my estimate of how to cross the impossible to possible boundary. I have put together a list of waypoints that can get you that 30 Hz accumulated result. You can reduce the dish, but it will make the signal processing significantly longer and more difficult. It is easiest to start with a dish that is low-cost and possible, something that an amateur could make, that would not be redundant tomorrow.

Dish area is important because that is really the lowest cost investment that will get you ahead in s/n ratio. Why a 15 metre dish? Because anything beyond that is too difficult to construct. 15 m can be built a little sloppy and still work. 15 m can be aimed without too much trouble. Building a smaller dish will take a similar amount of management and number of components, but the square law says, go on adding another 1 metre annulus, until it is too floppy, or will be damaged by strong winds, even with the lower windage of a chicken wire mesh surface. More on a dish at the end.

You will want to avoid the expense of developing and running cryogenic receivers at the focus, so will benefit from a stack of Peltier effect coolers for chilling the LNA front-end, through to the first down-converting mixer and IF line driver. Peltier is now the lowest cost cooling for the maximum advantage.

The advantage of an SDR is that it provides a channel that is highly flexible and dynamic in frequency. That never happens with RA, where you are restricted, by interference, to operate in quiet bands specifically reserved, allocated to RA. You should use the full bandwidth available in the band, to gather the maximum energy. You do not need a DC to daylight SDR to do RA, it is too hot and too noisy.

By using crossed dipoles at the focus, you get more energy from the same dish aperture. H & V polarisation requires a two channel (synchronous) receiver, with a single 1st LO, which can then also produce LH & RH signals. That cannot be done with an off-the-shelf SDR, which will generate too much heat for the cooling system at the focus.

OK, so pulsars produce more energy down in the 608 to 614 MHz RA band than at 1420 MHz, but you must aim for a 1420 MHz dish initially, because you can't go backwards to build another dish later for 1420 MHz. What you start to invest in, will be a long-term constraint on your RA.

How to build a low-cost and safe 15 m dish?
I would build an offset fed dish, that was hinged on an edge, close to the ground on a wide circular turntable. It would approximate a triangle, with three circular corners and three straight edges, for which the magic number is; 10=32+1. In polar coordinates, the aperture would be;
Radius = 7.5 + Sin(3*theta) * 7.5 / 10.
That beam pattern is indistinguishable from a circular aperture.
It could be built safely, flat on a concrete slab, as an open octet truss, NOT as a heavy hub on a post with petals. All measurements would be vertical, from the flat concrete slab into the structure, using a stepladder where needed, with the critical key points painted onto the slab first.
The focus would descend to about 1 m above the ground when the dish was declined below the horizon, so you could work on the supports and receivers safely, without a cherry picker.
It would be excellent for tracking slow and steady targets creeping along near the horizon, but not good for targets that pass directly overhead, which would require high speed motors on the turntable.
Such a dish also has amateur radio applications.
 
  • #39
The word-based arguments in this thread could go on all day, so I offer some numbers to tell us the true story. To wit, let's put together a rough link budget.
1. General Link Budget
The power spectral flux density L of an astronomical radio source is measured in Jansky's, where 1 Jy = 10^(-26) watts/Hz/square meter. The signal power at the antenna feed is ##P_s=\eta LAB##, where ##A=\frac{\pi D^2}{4}## is the aperture area, B is the bandwidth and η is the antenna efficiency (around 0.8 for an antenna design with optimal balance between beam taper loss and feed spillover loss). Noise power ##P_n = kT_{sys}B##, where Tsys is the receiver system noise temperature. The SNR is $$SNR=\frac {LAB\eta}{kT_{sys}B}=\frac {\pi \eta LD^2}{4kT_{sys}}$$Note that bandwidth drops out of the equation. Now we fill in values.

2. Source: The Crab Nebula power spectral flux density at 21 cm (1.420 GHz) is 930 Jy [Matveenko] and the pulsar (NP0532) amplitude is 3 orders of magnitude lower, if I'm reading Fig. 58 of [Apparo] correctly. We'll work the link for the bright nebula and then subtract 30 dB to get the SNR for the pulsar.

3. Receiver Noise Temperature: It's not too hard to design a single-transistor LNA at L band with a 0.5 dB noise figure (NF) at room temperature with no cooling, and, say, 12 dB of gain. (You can probably buy them off the shelf, too, since this is within the 950 - 2150 MHz band used by commercial satellite TV receivers.) The LNA is mounted on the dish feed horn to keep the feed loss low. Let's allocate 0.25 dB to that. (You'd have to add another .3 or .5 dB for a connectorized commercial preamp, but we'll assume a home brew LNA with a short microstrip feed line.) Put another amplifier right after to drive the coax from the antenna into your house. A commercial sat TV line driver might have a 4 dB NF with 20 dB gain; 50 feet of plain-Jane RG-8 style cable (Belden 9913) has about 2 dB of loss. and your SDR might have a noise figure of 2 dB. Using the noise figure cascade formula $$F=F_1 + \frac{F_2 - 1}{G_1} + \frac{F_3- 1}{G_1G_2} + ... $$ where noise factor is F=10^(NF/10), gives a total noise figure of NF=1.09 dB, or a system noise temperature of Tsys=290(F-1)=83K. That's not great and we could do better with a more sophisticated design, shorter cable, etc., but it's representative of an easy-to-build system. We assume that the galactic background noise is small and may be ignored.

4. SNR: With Tsys in hand, we can compute SNR. For dish diameters of D=[5 10 15] meters, the SNR=[-15.0 -8.9 -5.4] dB. The nebula signal is well below the noise floor and the pulsar signal is about 30 dB lower, so there's no chance of seeing the pulsar's 30 Hz variation in real time on an oscilloscope. Let's see what kind of signal processing might reveal the signal if we use Baluncore's 15 m dish which gives an SNR of -35 dB.

4. Signal Processing:
The best chance of measuring the pulsar's rotation period is to record a long data string and perform an autocorrelation, that is, the string is convolved against itself with a variety of time offsets (lags). The lag corresponding to the first peak is the estimate of the period. This period can be used to accurately chop the record into discrete periods that can be averaged to reveal the time-domain shape of the pulse. The SNR for this time-domain process is proportional to the number of periods averaged, N1; to achieve SNR_out=15 dB, say, we need to average N1 = 50 dB or 100,000 periods, requiring a (reasonable) data record of ~1 hour duration. How many periods N are needed for the autocorrelation? We need an SNR out of the convolution of at least 10 dB and preferably more. The output SNR of an autocorrelation is $$SNR_{out}= N \frac {SNR^2} {1+2SNR}$$Note that the output is proportional to the input SNR when SNR>>1 but to SNR^2 when SNR<<1. The Crab signal in our notional system lies in the latter regime, unfortunately.

To get SNR_out=10 dB, we need N=10 dB - 2*(-35 dB) = 80 dB or N=10^8 periods, corresponding to 3.3e6 seconds or nearly 1 year of integration. This illustrates a maxim that I try to impress upon young scientists and engineers: an ounce of effort to increase signal strength in an experiment is worth a pound (or a ton) of effort to recover it in post-processing. We need more signal.

In fact, this integration time is actually an under-estimate because the noise is continuous but the signal pulse is short, so the time-averaged or effective SNR into the autocorrelation is even lower. This is looking really bad! We find some confirmation of its correctness in [Richards], where Fig. 8 plots SNR vs. antenna size at a range of frequencies. The SNR of the hydrogen line is off the bottom of the chart, even for a 300 m antenna! It seems that we might be correct, so what can we do?

Richards notes that the maximum signal emission occurs at much lower frequencies, around 100 - 200 MHz.

"The conclusion I want to draw is this: at Arecibo we have been able to see the pulsar at a frequency of 430 MHz with about a 20-minute integration time with reasonable signal-to-noise. At lower frequencies, down to about 100 MHz, the signal-to-noise ratio is much better, and it should be possible to observe the pulsar with antennas much smaller than ours, in fact, even with a 25-meter dish. This is the case because, over a wide range of frequency and collecting area, the Crab nebula continuum flux completely dominates the other factors and therefore determines signal-to-noise. As the most interesting of all pulsars, NP 0532 deserves the attention of many observatories."

Extrapolating within their plot suggests that a 15 m dish with 20 minutes of integration at 150 MHz is sufficient to recover the signal with reasonable SNR. Electronics becomes easier and cable loss lower at VHF, so this is a win all around.

5. Conclusion
Measuring the Crab pulsar NP 0532 with home-built equipment seems infeasible at the 21 cm hydrogen line, but feasible (though challenging) at 150 MHz with a large antenna.

I invite corrections, comments and rotten tomatoes :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, Baluncore, Tom.G and 1 other person
  • #40
marcusl said:
Extrapolating within their plot suggests that a 15 m dish with 20 minutes of integration at 150 MHz is sufficient to recover the signal with reasonable SNR.
marcusl said:
This illustrates a maxim that I try to impress upon young scientists and engineers: an ounce of effort to increase signal strength in an experiment is worth a pound (or a ton) of effort to recover it in post-processing. We need more signal.
I cannot see how skilled amateur radio-astronomers, could regularly build bigger steerable dishes, than about 15 m diameter. Beyond 15 m, everything becomes more difficult. Think teamwork, building approval and engineering requirements, low-visibility, finance, safety, hours of labour, accuracy, durability, and the probability of project completion.

There was a 14 m diameter dish, with a chicken wire surface and warm LNAs, that recorded the brightest pulsar (Vela; 0833,-45°) for many years, looking for glitches. Last I heard, it was badly damaged by a windstorm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pleasant_Radio_Observatory#Equipment
 
  • #41
Note that S400 (the flux at 400 MHz in mJ) of the Crab pulsar is 11% of Vela. The 14-metre dish can see single pulses from Vela, so power accumulation should extract the Crab pulsar without too much trouble.
PSR B0329+54 might be a better target in the Northern Hemisphere, although you cannot hear such a low audio frequency.
Here is a list of the 7 brightest pulsars.
Code:
PSR cat     RA            Dec         T sec     F Hz      S400  S1420 mJ
B0833-45    08:35:20.61  -45:10:34.8  0.089328  11.19464  5000   1050  Vela
B0329+54    03:32:59.40  +54:34:43.3  0.714519  1.399541  1500   203
B1749-28    17:52:58.68  -28:06:37.3  0.562557  1.777595  1100   48
J0437-4715  04:37:16.04  -47:15:10.0  0.005757  173.6879  550    150.2
B0531+21    05:34:31.93  +22:00:52.1  0.033392  29.94692  550    14    Crab
B0950+08    09:53:09.30  +07:55:35.7  0.253065  3.951551  400    100
B1641-45    16:44:49.27  -45:59:09.7  0.455078  2.197424  375    300
 
  • #42
Baluncore said:
I cannot see how skilled amateur radio-astronomers, could regularly build bigger steerable dishes, than about 15 m diameter. Beyond 15 m, everything becomes more difficult. Think teamwork, building approval and engineering requirements, low-visibility, finance, safety, hours of labour, accuracy, durability, and the probability of project completion.
Agreed. My point just was that signal processing isn't always a cure-all. In this case, larger signals are available at a lower frequency or, as you point out in your next post, from other sources. BTW, in reading some more of the papers out there, I learned that the Crab nebula throws out occasional pulses that are 3 orders of magnitude stronger than usual at both 430 MHz [Apparo] and at 1.4 GHz [Baht, 2008]. These occur relatively infrequently, however.
 
  • #43
Vela is in the south, so for most of the population (including me) there is a planet in the way. The Crab has the same problem if you live in Argentina.

I should also mention that you don't get 12 months of observation of the Crab per year. Maybe 8 if you are lucky. It's in Taurus, and the sun passes through Taurus yearly. If it were in, say, Ursa Minor, things would be different.

You win as roughly the cube of dish size. You get two powers of R in light collection, and 1 in signal significance from better pointing. Note that the last power can be achieved by phasing multiple dishes, but that won't help with the first two.

I admit I am shocked that moving down in frequency helps.
  1. The pulsar is the hottest thing in the nebula and in fact, is heating everything else. That suggests to go up in frequency.
  2. Angular resolution and this S/B improves with frequency/
A year of data collection does not scare me. I do this all the time at work. The problem isn't that its a year - it's ensuring that you understand what is going on well enough to combine it.
 
  • #44
There is a hidden energy advantage in detecting pulsars in noise. Where is it specified, if the flux in mJy of a pulsar, is quoted as the integral of the flux over full cycles, or the flux at the peak of the average pulse?

marcusl said:
My point just was that signal processing isn't always a cure-all.
And I agree.
Bigger antenna reflectors, or arrays of elements, are critical to capturing more energy, to getting a narrower beam, with higher s/n. My interest, two decades ago, was in lowering the cost of antennas, that can produce worthy results for radio astronomy amateurs.

Looking back at the history of RA, the "Sea Interferometer" involved an antenna high on a sea cliff, facing a rising radio source. As the source rises through the interference pattern, (generated by the antenna and its reflection from the sea surface), the interference pattern appears in the recorded data.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_interferometry
That is a minimum antenna requirement for RA. It is a learning exercise, but it is also an unfortunate end to investment in that line of research.
 
  • #45
Vanadium 50 said:
Vela is in the south, so for most of the population (including me) there is a planet in the way. The Crab has the same problem if you live in Argentina.
Why look at it as a double problem, when it is really a double solution?
In the south, we can watch Vela, PSR B0833-45.
In the north, you can watch PSR B0329+54. (Maybe continuously).

If you are up for it, watch the Crab, PSR B0531+21. For most of the 11-year solar cycle, the Sun is surprisingly quiet at UHF frequencies.

You can tell from your latitude, what declination objects will always be above the horizon, for 24 hours per day, 365 days of the year.

Vanadium 50 said:
A year of data collection does not scare me.
Why collect and combine a year, when it can all be done in 12 hours?

There are now, 3748 pulsars in the ATNF catalogue.
https://www.atnf.csiro.au/research/pulsar/psrcat/
If you only want a list of the 99 pulsars, brighter than 10% of Vela, I attach an extract of the above catalogue, sorted by flux at 400 MHz, S400.

Depending on your latitude, and using a 15-metre amateur built dish, you should be able to see them with less than 12 hours of accumulation. You will not see them if you never look.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • #46
Vanadium 50 said:
[...]

You win as roughly the cube of dish size. You get two powers of R in light collection, and 1 in signal significance from better pointing. Note that the last power can be achieved by phasing multiple dishes, but that won't help with the first two.

I admit I am shocked that moving down in frequency helps.
[[...]

I think you're mostly on the right track.

My understanding, without breaking out my old textbooks, is the reason that free-space path loss is a function of frequency is that antenna size is (to some extent) baked into the path-loss equation.

A separate parameter in the link budget is the antenna efficiency. This parameter modifies a theoretical, unity gain antenna. But the thing is, a unity gain antenna tuned to 400 MHz, is just naturally bigger than a different unity gain antenna tuned to 1.4 GHz. However, the antenna efficiency doesn't account for the different antenna sizes.

So, this last difference in antenna size (separate from the antenna's area) gets folded into the free space path loss function.

So in summary,
  • Free space does not attenuate RF signal strength as a function of frequency; it follows the inverse square law regardless of frequency.
  • Other parameters in the link budget assume a unity gain antenna, and the unity gain antenna is a function of frequency. And that difference gets folded into the free space path-loss function, and that's why the free space path-loss function is a function of frequency.
  • So this frequency dependency on free space path-loss is sort of like a unit conversion of sorts; it doesn't have any physical significance besides keeping track of assumptions put in separate parameters within the link budget.

On top of that, there may be some atmospheric attenuation involved that's frequency dependent, but I didn't discuss any of that here.
 
Last edited:
  • #47
Vanadium 50 said:
You win as roughly the cube of dish size. You get two powers of R in light collection, and 1 in signal significance from better pointing. Note that the last power can be achieved by phasing multiple dishes, but that won't help with the first two.
Would you explain "signal significance," please?
 
  • #48
Signal over square root of background,
 
  • #49
marcusl said:
where noise factor is F=10^(NF/10), gives a total noise figure of NF=1.09 dB, or a system noise temperature of Tsys=290(F-1)=83K. That's not great and we could do better with a more sophisticated design, shorter cable, etc., but it's representative of an easy-to-build system. We assume that the galactic background noise is small and may be ignored.
One aspect of cheap SDRs and LNAs is one can afford to buy more than one. Using more than one signal path, one could potentially use correlation techniques to improve SNR by reducing system temperature. The thought is, while the random system noise in each signal path is large, they are uncorrelated while the random noise from the nebula, is correlated between paths.

Buy using two smaller HOA friendly telescopes can one gain on system temperature faster than one loses on light collection? I’ve done some experiments with SDRs and random noise sources. There a lots of gotchas but I’ve gotten limited success with two SDRplay slaved to a common clock.
 
  • #50
Baluncore said:
Why collect and combine a year, when it can all be done in 12 hours?
Because a 15m disk is awkward, expensive and will make my neighbors sad.
 
  • #51
Vanadium 50 said:
will make my neighbors sad.
Or mad. Do they already have their own Tiki Torches...?
 
  • #52
Baluncore said:
Why collect and combine a year, when it can all be done in 12 hours?
Vanadium 50 said:
Because a 15m disk is awkward, expensive and will make my neighbors sad.
It will certainly be more interesting, Doppler adjusting the pulse rate, then accumulating the time shifted pulses through the different seasons.
 
  • #53
Vanadium 50 said:
TL;DR Summary: Is a homemade radio telescope realistic?

Is a homemade radio telescope realistic?

There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs.

Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is noticeably more snow and static than when pointing it away from the sun (i.e. lines up with it). But I am looking to see what else can be done.

I imagine getting a couple of DishTV dishes, and mounting them in the corners of my house or yard,. This gives the directionality of a house or yard sized dish, but of course not the sensitivity. Ballpark a few degree resolution for the array (more like 30 for one dish) It is likely easier to point with phase than with motors. Use SDR as receivers, record every night to disk and "stack" days or weeks of exposure together. Because its SDR you can look, e.g. on and off the 21 cm peak and map out hydrogen.
FWIW, the EDGES 21cm radio-telescope, which has gotten very serious academic and scientific attention, was very basic and could have been done as a home astronomy project. A picture of it is at their website:

Screenshot 2024-10-30 at 3.03.47 PM.png


Of course, part of this boils down to where your home is. A critical feature of this radio-telescope is that it is located in "a radio-quiet zone in western Australia". The EDGES group is building a sister radio-telescope in "radio-quiet—Devon Island in Nunavut, Canada".

So, if you live in the middle of nowhere, this can work. If you live in the East Village of Manhattan, on the other hand, don't bother. The local radio background noise will dwarf anything interesting you can pick up from space aside from the Sun.
 
Last edited:
  • #54
ohwilleke said:
So, if you live in the middle of nowhere, this can work. If you live in the East Village of Manhattan, on the other hand, don't bother. The local radio background noise will dwarf anything interesting you can pick up from space aside from the Sun.
That is one experimental antenna element being evaluated. I believe there will be two in the array, separated by 150 metres. That makes it an interferometer for low-band VHF. While the elements are low-profile, the array is ten times larger than a 15-metre dish.
 
  • #55
I found this forum and clicked on the item.
I was sad to see that some people were so negative about receiving radio astronomy signals.
See below picture of a minimal bucket antenna in the backyard of a house in a city in the Netherlands.
Also a result plot is given.
This can also be a setup for a school project.
I do not know if it is allowed to post links, so I wait and see
 

Attachments

  • bucket-antenna.webp
    bucket-antenna.webp
    130 KB · Views: 7
  • drift scan detail1.webp
    drift scan detail1.webp
    85.5 KB · Views: 4
  • #57
the admin just posted a link to me

https://public.nrao.edu/ask/galacti...s-with-a-software-defined-radio-sdr-receiver/

In this link there is again the denying of the possibility to receive neutral hydrogen 21cm signals when not using big parabolic dishes.

This is false.

The consequence is that interested persons are blown away by the "experts" like Jeff Mangum and people give up any experiment.
On that site comments are not possible so this lie is there forever.

This is contradicting the principle of science; idea, test, adjust, etc.

Here is a (short) list of maser frequencies which can be persued to probe the forming and death of stars (and the forging of the elements we are made of).
You can see that the lower frequencies are also possible to capture with a standard low cost SDR.
more info on
www.parac.eu
molecule list 03.webp

Ps; Hi Marcus, how are your projects going.
 
  • #58
parac-EU said:
In this link there is again the denying of the possibility to receive neutral hydrogen 21cm signals when not using big parabolic dishes.

This is false.
parac-EU said:
You can see that the lower frequencies are also possible to capture with a standard low cost SDR.
more info on
www.parac.eu
In your link, they use a "9.3 meter solid surface satellite dish"...
 
  • #59
Ha, another one,
this is what I said:
"In this link there is again the denying of the possibility to receive neutral hydrogen 21cm signals when not using parabolic dishes.
This is simply false."
 
  • #60
parac-EU said:
Ha, another one,
this is what I said:
"In this link there is again the denying of the possibility to receive neutral hydrogen 21cm signals when not using parabolic dishes.
This is simply false."
No, what you actually said was:
parac-EU said:
In this link there is again the denying of the possibility to receive neutral hydrogen 21cm signals when not using big parabolic dishes.
(Emphasis added.)
So please clarify: how big must must a parabolic dish be to receive astronomical 21cm signals?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
20K