SadSadSatellite

Kick ass spooky unicorn pidgeons

Where did they get this article, 1993?

Between 35 and 51.if we assume a reasonable stacking technique for stability, every box not on top can be supported on 3 sides at 40.

We also don’t know that every box is the same size. With that format screw it could be as low as 21.

This is why mechanical diagrams include an isometric view and xray lines.

Edit: I see now it specifies cubes, so the number couldn’t be 21, but it could still be less than 35. I’m not figuring that one out.

Also why can’t you see the trailer in the top view when it protrudes on the sides?

A damn fine roast you threw together there

Ah, got it. I’m pretty focused on lenses just due to my day to day.

Polycarbonate has one of the lowest ABBE values of any of the optically used plastics, so it scatters light pretty badly the thicker it is. As compared to eyeglasses, telescope lenses are really thick, so the poor light transmission would ruin the clarity. On top of that, poly expands a lot under heat, and so any coatings on the lenses will eventually start to craze and delaminate. Glasses don’t need to last more than 5 years before being replaced, so it’s not as big of a deal. If your telescope became unusable in that time, you’d be furious.

Poly, while being impact resistant, is not nearly as scratch resistant as glass, and is nowhere near as chemically stable. Didn’t realize there was dirt on your cleaning cloth? Ruined scope. Cleaned it with regular window cleaner? Ruined scope.

There are other resins that would be better, but nothing nearly as simple and durable as glass comes close to the optical clarity.

Eyeglasses would still be made from glass if they weren’t so heavy and potentially dangerous, Not to ignore that nobody wants to wait two months for custom lenses to be made.

Source: I’m an advanced optician running three offices and a lens lab.