|
It's a very interesting debate. Old posts on Cloudy Nights could never sort the argument either. Although Don Pensack was a very strong supporter of the standard SQM and I tend to agree with his points.
James, I think our views are aligned on this one and you may have helped make my choice.
Glen, I want a way to rank sites in their order of darkness as a way of determining the best places to observe. If you point an "L" at the zenith at Lostock and Bretti you are going to get the same reading. Someone who has never been to those sites will conclude they are equally as dark. But the light dome in the SE from Newcastle affects the darkness at Lostock. So a standard SQM will reveal the difference between the 2 sites. I guess this is what I want an SQM to do for me. Your argument about using the "L" version in suburbia is a good one. But the SQM will only read down to about 40 or 50 degrees above the horizon, so won't directly sample ground lights. Anyway, thanks for your input.
|