After rekindling my passion for both amateur and professional astronomy recently, I decided to look for a way to continue to keep sparking my interest. I figured that since I'm already running a few threads on JSF, why not? It will keep me posting every so often, and I'm sure there are plenty of people on JSF who share my interests.

So in the spirit of promoting discussion on topics in Astronomy, I open this thread to anyone with any level of knowledge or interest. Post questions, comments, experiences with observing or education, or even a list of the celestial objects that interest you.

Can't wait to meet some fellow Astronomers!

Since I have been up in Wawa, Ontario this weekend, I have had a chance to see what is up in the night sky this time of year. Mars is going through its retrograde cycle over the next months (where it appears to change the direction it moves in the sky), and it is very bright as well, making it a great sight to see. From my observations it looks like it rises around 11pm from due east, and right now it is located in the constellation Auriga. I actually confused it at first with the bright star Capella, located in Auriga.

Orion is coming back up north after hiding for the summer, and rises to the southeast after 11:30pm. Also, this is the prime time of year to view the andromeda galaxy, and it is up most of the night and near overhead.

I will add some photos later from my viewing in Wawa.

I love Astronomy and always have. Unfortunately, there's a lot of light pollution where I live, so it's hard to see anything but the major stuff (by San Jose, CA).

For many years I've been telling myself I'm going to take the time to learn how to pick out the constellations at night, but I never have. :p I mean I know Orion and the big dipper, but those are dead easy for anyone. There's one arrangment I've noticed that I'm sure is a constellation, but that I've been too lazy to look up. It goes something like this:



. .
. .
.
That's about all I can see of it where I live, due to all the light.

Lately I've been using this awesome program called Celestia (http://www.shatters.net/celestia/). It's really fascinating (I haven't reinstalled it yet though since I redid my operating system a few months back). It's very informative and interesting. I like being able to look up at Orion now and be able to say what each star's name is, roughly how far away it is, and be able to notice what color it is.

Nobody around me is into astronomy, so I'm usually alone and looking goofy standing outside looking straight up at seemingly nothing (to other people). :p

For many years I've been telling myself I'm going to take the time to learn how to pick out the constellations at night, but I never have. :p I mean I know Orion and the big dipper, but those are dead easy for anyone. There's one arrangment I've noticed that I'm sure is a constellation, but that I've been too lazy to look up. It goes something like this:



. .
. .
.
That's about all I can see of it where I live, due to all the light.
That looks like Cassiopeia. Does it "rotate" around Polaris (the North star)? If so, it's Cassiopeia. There are a couple of nice open clusters in there (M52 and M103).

I used to be massively into astronomy, and was a member of the Central Florida Astronomical Society. Over the years I've sort of let the hobby go, which is unfortunate. I still feel guilty whenever I look at my dust-covered Celestron telescope. :o

That looks like Cassiopeia. Does it "rotate" around the North star? If so, it's Cassiopeia. There are a couple of nice open clusters in there (M52 and M103).

Well doesn't everything technically rotate around the north star? ;)

I dunno, I'll give it a look every few hours tonight and see what it does. Orion started showing up again a month or two back, it's nice to see it again. It's such a really thing to see; it sort of leaps out and smacks you, it's so brilliant and prominent.

Well doesn't everything technically rotate around the north star? ;)
Technically? No.

What I meant, more specifically, does the constellation appear to be circumpolar from your vantage point?

Technically? No.

What I meant, more specifically, does the constellation appear to be circumpolar from your vantage point?

Well I meant for at least the northern hemisphere, given images like this (http://www.astropix.com/IMAGES/I_ASTROP/TRIPOD/TRAILS.JPG).

I do know what you meant though, I'll check it out tonight.

I have totally been into astronomy and astrophysics since I was very young. I have always wished to own a telescope from the meade etx series but there's too much light pollution in Toronto :(

Hey all,

Great to see people posting in this forum.

Ectomorphic: Yes what you are seeing is Cassiopeia, the 'M' or 'W' depending on how you see it. The constellation represents a mythological queen.

John: I do love the open clusters you mentioned as well as most of the other Messier objects (the ones I can find anyways). I know what you mean with the telescope. Once you put it away it's hard to dust it off and bring it back out. I always keep a pair of binoculars handy as they are easy to use, require no setup, and are very effective with large open clusters.

I have also noticed some comments regarding light pollution. There are very few places near major cities that offer decent viewing, yet this is where most people live. However, light pollution doesn't make Astronomy impossible, just difficult. Whenever I am stuck in a city, I always look for more 'visible' phenomena, such as planets, aurora borealis (northern lights), or meteor showers. All are viewable in cities and can be located with a little bit of online research.

For those who are interested in astronomy but don't know much about it, try to find simple seasonal star charts, then get out on a clear night and start with the 'popular' consellations, mainly Orion / Ursa Major (commonly called the big dipper) in the winter, and Lyra/Cygnus/Aquila in the summer.

Here's a great start for new Astronomers:

www.skymaps.com

you can get monthly star charts here. Keep in mind the charts will not match the sky exactly depending on latitude and time of night, but once you identify part of the chart the rest falls into place.

Happy Hunting!

Well doesn't everything technically rotate around the north star? ;)

'Technically' the earth rotates to make shift our view of the sky. The stars appear to rotate around the northern and souther celestial poles. In the northern hemisphere, the star polaris is very very close to the north celestial pole.

That's my last post for tonight in this forum, I promise :D

Technically? No.


That made me laugh.

I've always looked but never known much about astronomy, maybe I'll take some classes on it.

Hey I just saw this thread. I recently got into astronomy and have lots to talk about! Sadly, I need to go to bed now, but I'll try to post in here again in the future. I just wanted to say this was a great idea.

'Technically' the earth rotates to make shift our view of the sky. The stars appear to rotate around the northern and souther celestial poles. In the northern hemisphere, the star polaris is very very close to the north celestial pole.

That's my last post for tonight in this forum, I promise :D

Yes guys, I am aware of this. I'm not that stupid :p I'm talking about a viewer, standing on earth a decent way into the northern hemisphere, looking up every few hours at the night sky. I thought that was an obvious implication. Do a google image search for star trails. That's what I'm talking about.


I have also noticed some comments regarding light pollution. There are very few places near major cities that offer decent viewing, yet this is where most people live. However, light pollution doesn't make Astronomy impossible, just difficult. Whenever I am stuck in a city, I always look for more 'visible' phenomena, such as planets, aurora borealis (northern lights), or meteor showers. All are viewable in cities and can be located with a little bit of online research.

Tell me more. I've read many times over the years about "with a good pair of binoculars, you should be able to see..." Well, what exactly can you see? I have a telescope (no idea on its brand/model/specs, long forgotten, but I think it's pretty low end), but it's long since been buried away in storage. If I could get ahold of a decent pair of binoculars and expand my viewing possibilities, that'd be grand.

For those who are interested in astronomy but don't know much about it, try to find simple seasonal star charts, then get out on a clear night and start with the 'popular' consellations, mainly Orion / Ursa Major (commonly called the big dipper) in the winter, and Lyra/Cygnus/Aquila in the summer.

Orion is a great place to start. One really shouldn't be able to miss it. It's really big and takes up a large portion of sky. The three stars lined up together in his belt are a dead giveaway. Orion's stars make a great starting point to find your way to other stars as well, such as Aldebaran, Sirius, Procyon and Pollux. I'm being ****blocked by clouds at the moment, so I can't go outside and look.

Hey Marcinr, have you ever used Celestia? I've found it to be very fun and highly informative. It's also fun to go-to other stars and see how the sky changes, and what stars become visible and which ones disappear.

Yes guys, I am aware of this. I'm not that stupid :p. I thought that was an obvious implication. Do a google image search for star trails. That's what I'm talking about.

We don't give you enough credit:lol: I do love star trail shots; taken a few myself.


Tell me more. I've read many times over the years about "with a good pair of binoculars, you should be able to see..." Well, what exactly can you see?

As far as what is considered a 'good' pair of binocs I think 7x40 is great. For the life of me I can't remember what those numbers mean but I think 7 is the magnification and 40 is the aperture in mm.

As for what to look at, basically binocs should fit right in between the unaided eye and a small telescope. I recommend the orion nebula, the pleiades and hyades clusters in Taurus, the andromeda galaxy (bit harder to locate), the Alcor-Mizar double star in ursa major (big dipper), the contrast in colours of the bright stars in orion (red betelgeuse and blue rigel), Mars at night in Auriga, Venus rising before the sun in the morning, and the various features on the moon (which look best around the first or last quarter). And thats just off the top of my head.:tu:

Hey Marcinr, have you ever used Celestia? I've found it to be very fun and highly informative. It's also fun to go-to other stars and see how the sky changes, and what stars become visible and which ones disappear.

No actually I have never heard of Celestia, so I think its time I look it up and give it a run through. My personal fave thus far has been Starry Night Pro. It takes care of the basics in giving detailed star charts and positions of objects, and tailors to the experienced with detailed images of faint objects and visible comet positions that can be updated online.

I am very pleased to have so many people posting with an interest in astronomy. So in the spirit of generating interest, here is a pic of Orion I took a few days ago. A 20 sec exposure with a digital SLR camera set at F2.8 and 800 ISO. The hyades cluster is located at the centre near the top of the image for those interested.

I love Astronomy and always have. Unfortunately, there's a lot of light pollution where I live, so it's hard to see anything but the major stuff (by San Jose, CA). ...

You can get above a lot of it if you drive up in the hills. I think the hills by Milpitas go high enough or the Alum Rock area.

Have you been up to the Mt. Hamilton observatory?

Great thread. I'm pretty much a newb at astronomy, but it's something I'd love to learn more about. I'm always out in the backyard at night when anything is supposed to happen.

No actually I have never heard of Celestia, so I think its time I look it up and give it a run through. My personal fave thus far has been Starry Night Pro. It takes care of the basics in giving detailed star charts and positions of objects, and tailors to the experienced with detailed images of faint objects and visible comet positions that can be updated online.

Damn son, having just looked up Starry Night, I'd say Celestia seems to be the Chevy Cavalier to your BMW M5 :p Celestia does have being free going for it though, with nice add-ons from the community.

You can get above a lot of it if you drive up in the hills. I think the hills by Milpitas go high enough or the Alum Rock area.

Have you been up to the Mt. Hamilton observatory?

Now there's an idea. No, I've never been there. I've always known it was there, but it never ocurred to me to actually go there. You know what they say, sometimes the easiest and most obvious solutions are frequently the ones most overlooked. Looking at Mt. Hamilton's website right now.

...Celestia seems to be the Chevy Cavalier to your BMW M5 :p Celestia does have being free going for it though, with nice add-ons from the community.

haha and boy do I love my M5! I really have to try Celestia though, the price fits my budget completely:D

Here's a question to generate some discussion and see what you guys know:

What is the 'summer triangle'?

have fun!

Ok so no activity in the last few days, here's the answer to the question from my last post: What is the summer triangle?

The summer triangle is a term to describe three bright stars prominent in the northern hemisphere during the summer months. The main stars are Vega of the constellation Lyra (the lyre), Deneb of the constellation Cygnus (the swan), and Altair of Aquila (the eagle). All three stars are alpha stars of fairly prominent constellations and are stepping stones for finding most of the other objects in the summer sky.

The summer triangle itself is defined as an asterism: A pattern of celestial objects given a name that is not a constellation. Thats a loose definition, but as an example the big dipper is an asterism, it is actually part of the constellation ursa major (the great bear).

cheers!

Well I couldn't have answered without cheating and using Google and Wikipedia, so I didn't bother. Because then it'd be cheating and what's the point!

I did know the Winter equivalent a few months back. I've forgotten most of the particulars, but I do still remember a few of the stars that are in it, and that it's to the left of Orion (from where I am).

Well I couldn't have answered without cheating and using Google and Wikipedia, so I didn't bother. Because then it'd be cheating and what's the point!

Haha s'all good! I encourage a bit of research anyways, I wouldn't know anything without some interest and a good book.

btw I never have heard of a winter triangle, but now i'm curious. Off of Orion huh? I gotta check it out!

Haha s'all good! I encourage a bit of research anyways, I wouldn't know anything without some interest and a good book.

btw I never have heard of a winter triangle, but now i'm curious. Off of Orion huh? I gotta check it out!

I think it's actually more of a hexagon than triangle, but the triangle is there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_Triangle

Hmmm k. Question here :D

Do any of you know how far the nearest extra solar planet is? (out of the list of those that have been so far discovered) :nod:

I'm certainly no astronomy buff, but I know what I like.
Best place I have ever been to see the stars was in the middle of the ocean on a boat... absolutely no light pollution....

You can see the milky way in all its glory!

Hmmm k. Question here :D

Do any of you know how far the nearest extra solar planet is? (out of the list of those that have been so far discovered) :nod:

Not far from here. It's a [so far theorized] earth-like planet, possibly capable of supporting life, around a red dwarf just a handful of lightyears from here. They found it earlier this year, or so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_581_c

Ok, upon review, actually I don't think that's the closest. I was thinking "closest earth-like planet."

The most interesting thing I find about exosolar planets is that when the first were discovered in 1995, noone expected them to be gigantic jupiter-like planets baking due to proximity to a star. Most models of planet formation at the time thought it impossible for large planets to form so closely to a star like that.

The other cool thing is that we are now starting to find terrestrial planets in the 'habitable zone' of a star, basically the radial distance from a star where the temperature is such for water to be a liquid. Liquid water gives a great likelyhood for life, although extremophiles show us that so do volcanoes and sub-zero temperatures.

fun to think about the possibilities.

fun to think about the possibilities.

Yeah it is. People seem to think that the only possible version of "life" is what you find here on the surface of the Earth, as if there is only one way for life to form and exist. When the reality is we are always finding all kinds of bizzare thingamabobs and whatchamacallits at the deeper parts of the ocean and most unlikliest of places.

Who ever proved life could only exist in one form? Life finds a way.

What makes me optimistic about a lot of things in astronomy is that they always find things that turn their theories upside down. As you said, they didn't think planets the size of Jupiter or bigger could hang out so close to a star. They also recently found a non-galactic-center black hole that was way bigger than their theoretical limit for a star collapsing into a black hole.


Astronomy makes me :jumping:!

My friend was telling me about a big comet event from the last couple oif weeks: Comet holmes.

Although it passes by earth every few years (short period comet), this year a part of it blew up and created a halo of light bigger than the sun. Its brightness increased by a factor of a million. I haven't had a chance to see it yet but the next clear night I get i'm going to take a look.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2896442.ece

happy comet hunting!

Once the James Webb Telscope is launched, we'll discover many more extra solar rocky earth like planets. That and when we learn how to measure gravitational waves. :nod:

I want us to find more Earth-sized planets in habitable zones around stars. That's going to be awesome.

I know there's life out there. I really don't see how there can't be. There's what, billions of galaxies? And billions of stars in each one? Multiply them together? Seriously, what do the odds have to be that there isn't life elsewhere but here? Finding a way to detect more and better planets than Gliese 581 c is the first step.

I think I read about the Webb telescope. I read about a telescope going up to replace the Hubble, but that it wouldn't be able to take awesome images like the Hubble? I hope that isn't the case.

The James Webb telescope is a replacement for hubble. NASA had plans to have a separate dedicated array of space telescopes to search for extra-sol planets. But I think that project either got scrapped or delayed due to budget issues :no:

NASA had plans to have a separate dedicated array of space telescopes to search for extra-sol planets.

I can't remember what that is called but the plan was to have an array 2x the diameter of earth by carefully placing telescopes in orbit. This technique is called interferometry, and dish arrays like the VLA (very large array) use this principle to find remote radio wave sources.

Ectomorph, have you ever heard of the drake equation? Frank Drake, the founder of SETI (search for extraterrestrial intelligence) came up with an equation. check the link out, but it basically gives an estimate of how many habitable planets exist in the universe.

http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/SETI/drake_equation.html

Also, here's a cool analogy for the number of stars in the universe; it's very impressive. If we represent a star by a grain of sand, and we fill dumptrucks with sand. We take the dumptrucks and place them on train cars. To represent all the stars in the universe like this one train car would have to pass by every second for 3 years. Thats a fun one!

Hey marc, about the drake equation, there is one thing that scientists are uncertain about. The number of civilizations that destroy themselves once they reach our level of technology. If most do no then according to the drake equation the universe should be teeming with life and if they do then there might be relatively few very advanced civilizations throughout the universe.

On another note has anyone seen Cosmos by Carl Sagan? He was an awesome physicist and author :nod:

It also seems to assume that they are at the right level of technology at the same time we are, or that they were more advanced than we are now at some previous stage in our history. And depending on where these people are technologically, and how far away in the galaxy they are, it could take what, thousands of years for a signal to reach us? Neat equation and personally I prefer to be more optimistic with it, but I think some of the doubters aren't being creative enough with it.

Who says all intelligent life started at the same time? Maybe we're ahead of the curve as far as technological capacity goes. :D

Who says all intelligent life started at the same time? Maybe we're ahead of the curve as far as technological capacity goes. :D

Or perhaps we are so far behind that relatively few races use primitive radio/em signals anymore for long distance communications anymore :whistle:

If you guys are interested, and up really early for some reason, Venus is high and bright right now in the morning sky.

Life-Forming Chemicals Found in Distant Galaxy (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/01/17/galaxy-amino-acid.html).

Radio astronomers collecting data from a galaxy about 250 million light-years from Earth recently stumbled upon something intriguing: building blocks for life.

...

What they found, however, was totally unexpected: methanimine and hydrogen cyanide.

The discovery, which was unveiled at the American Astronomical Society conference in Austin, Texas, last week, is significant because methanimine and hydrogen cyanide are building blocks for amino acids, the foundation of life.


Awesome. So this begs the question: In the 250 million years since the radio waves left that galaxy, have those chemicals hooked up and formed an amino acid? Has life developed? 250 million years is a decently long time in evolution. I wonder what's happening over there right now, in the present time?

That's amazing ecto! I like to think that there are many other intelligent civilizations out there. For me there are just too many possibilities. I hope that someday humanity can develop the technology to travel to new worlds, so that we really can see the developments of the last 250 million years!

However, for all we know, in that amount of time life could have sprung up, become intelligent, and died off ten times over.

I have an astronomy course this term, so I'll just be posting weekly events:

the Moon: New Moon Feb. 7
Venus: visible low in east before sunrise; brightest “morning” star
Mars: is visible all night, rises at sunset
Jupiter: low in east before sunrise
Saturn: rises at 8pm
Annular Solar Eclipse visible in far South (Antarctica) Feb. 7
NOTE: lunar eclipse on Feb. 21 in the evening

lunar eclipse on Feb. 21 in the evening

Um, depends on where you are. Anyone in the US, which is most of this board, will see this the night of Feb. 20.

well the eclipse is the same time for everyone...it starts on the 20th and ends a few mins after midnight, which is technically the 21st.

btw in September I'm starting my masters in Astronomy!:D

well the eclipse is the same time for everyone...it starts on the 20th and ends a few mins after midnight, which is technically the 21st.

Again, that's not quite true, depending upon one's interpretation of your post. The eclipse occurs at a certain time relative to the Moon's orbit about Earth, so when it starts it will appear to start at the same time all over the world.

But that time needs to be adjusted for your time zone. So I'm in Mountain Standard Time, so the eclipse starts for me at 5:39 PM and ends well before midnight. On the East coast, it will start at 7:39 PM.

I just wanted to clarify this because I would hate for people to miss it because they got the wrong time zone.

btw in September I'm starting my masters in Astronomy!:D

That rocks!! I'm getting my bachelors in engineering, but I'm thinking about a minor in physics and masters in astronomy or something....

That rocks!! I'm getting my bachelors in engineering, but I'm thinking about a minor in physics and masters in astronomy or something....

That'll be interesting on the resume.

BS - Engineering; minor in physics
MS - Astronomy

"Wait, what?" says the employer. :p

I love astronomy. It's one of my favorite interests and I had about three classes in college, but, I'm not sure what sort of living can be had from it other than working at an observatory or teaching or something?

I just wanted to clarify this because I would hate for people to miss it because they got the wrong time zone.

Thanks for clarifying. In the spirit of the new total eclipse I brought out some old photos I took from Hamilton, ON of the total lunar eclipse on Oct 27, 2004:

btw to get these I basically put a digital camera up to the eyepiece of a 3 inch refracting telescope, so nothing fancy on a student's finances:p

...I'm not sure what sort of living can be had from it other than working at an observatory or teaching or something?

me neither actually! but my ultimate goal is to do both of those things at some point. I like to think that with every degree, if you can be creative, there are tons of jobs you can do.

I'm not sure what sort of living can be had from it other than working at an observatory or teaching or something?

me neither actually! but my ultimate goal is to do both of those things at some point. I like to think that with every degree, if you can be creative, there are tons of jobs you can do.


Lots of things. Just depends upon how far you go and what you want to do. Classically, the route is Ph.D. in grad school, then 1-2 post-docs, then a tenure-track faculty position at a research institution where your income is mainly grants but supplemented by teaching 1-2 classes a semester.

With the Ph.D., you could also go for a 4-year college (Trinity in Texas, for example (no, it's not a religious school)) where you can usually by-pass the post-docs but you're expected to teach more like 3 classes a semester and it's smiled upon if you get your own grants.

If you just want the M.S., then you can work at observatories, planetariums, museums, community colleges, etc.

The B.S. won't get you much other than a telescope operator job.

To put some context here, I'll have my M.S. this Spring, Ph.D. aiming for around 2011, and I plan on going the "classical" route. My B.S. was Astronomy with double minors in Physics and Geology.


Here's a montage of my eclipse photos from August. Full-size and -resolution, the montage is in 16-bit color at 80"x120" @ 72 dpi, suitable for printing at up to 40"x60" (though that's pushing it slightly). I also have written a manual on photographing eclipses (http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/stu/me/photos/files/Guide_Lunar_Eclipse_Photos.pdf) with normal digital cameras.

http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/stu/me/photos/images/moon_eclipse_200708_big.jpg

Inches? As in, the full image is 12 feet across?

Inches? As in, the full image is 12 feet across?

Yes, inches. But 120" = 10', not 12' :). But that's at 72 pixels per inch. Reasonable print resolution is 150 ppi, good print resolution is considered 288-300+ ppi. That would then be 20"x30" (1.67'x2.5').

Each moon was originally shot at about 2000 px across and then shrunk to 720 px for the montage.

So I'm back to JSF....yeah took a 6th month-ish break and had a great summer, changed my life around. I'm now doing my masters degree in Astronomy (survived undergrad!:claphigh:) in London, Ontario at the University of Western Ontario.

I thought now would be a good time to renew this discussion topic, as I have a lot more to bring to the table then I used to. I am doing weekly group talks at the observatory, many of which are free public talks, so I'm much more immersed in the subject then ever before.

So for this post there are two HUGE events that I can comment on:

1. NASA's 50th anniversary is this month! Celebrating the associations 50 years of exciting discovery, exploration, and 'giant leaps for mankind'.

2. 2009 is officially the 'International year of Astronomy', with the entire world celebrating the 400th anniversary of Galileo pointing the first telescope up to the heavens. There will be many events going on throughout the year, and the goal is to have 100 million people throughout the world look through a telescope next year. Check it out at http://www.astronomy2009.org/

The opening ceremonies for Canada are on January 10th, 2009, and a couple weeks later for the rest of the world.

Let's keep this thread (and interest in space) going!

marcinr I was curious what exactly do most astronomy courses talk about? Is it black Holes, stars, How planets forum(i covered this in Geology). And what kind of math would you need is Calculus?

I have recently found about APOD (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/) and i am absolutely in love with All these pictures. Got me interested in a Astromony Major, which is all good cause i have not picked a major yet.

marcinr I was curious what exactly do most astronomy courses talk about? And what kind of math would you need is Calculus?

Well it usually varies from school to school, but my undergrad was more physics based. I took 4 astronomy courses in undergrad. 1st year was a general intro course which covered everything from the solar system to structure of the universe. 2nd year was planetary astronomy, which covered planet formation, orbital mechanics, cratering, and asteroids/comets/meteors. 3rd year is when it got a bit more heavy. I had a course that talked about advanced topics, from the interstellar medium, to collapse of clouds to form stars, to stars and their evolution (which covers pulsars, quasars, neutron stars, and black holes too), and some star cluster properties. Finally 4th year was a project course where I did a globular cluster simulation and presented the results, but it mainly focused on stars.

As far as math goes you will take different math courses every year. Calculus is definitely the big one, because you need to be able to solve big integrals and do vector calculus stuff. Differential equations is also very useful, because planetary orbits are solvable diff equations. The other big one is algebra, though I find I haven't used it much since undergrad as it is used mainly in Quantum Mechanics (which is used by physicists more than astronomers).

If you want to get into the simulation side in Astronomy, I would recommend numerical analysis. And if you're interested in cosmology (black holes and large scale structure of the universe), you'll need a surface geometry course (which isn't easy) to give you a head start in General Relativity.

Other than that, I suggest that over the course of your degree you learn to program in FORTRAN. It's a great language for everything you'll need to do in undergrad and beyond....I still use it occasionally.

Hope this helps you, good luck choosing a major!