| |
Main
Date: 01 Aug 2007 03:01:49
From: ukastronomy
Subject: New double star and binary star site
|
http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
|
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 17:46:20
From: Dr J R Stockton
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
In sci.astro.amateur message <857a4$46b376cf$4212a552$24734@TULAROSA.NET
>, Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:41:36, Greg Crinklaw
<theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > posted:
>Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>> In sci.astro.amateur message <1186076075.624426.92040@i38g2000prf.google
>> groups.com>, Thu, 2 Aug 2007 10:34:35, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichols
>> on@yahoo.co.uk> posted:
>>
>>> I should also have pointed out that the name of the star gives a
>>>clear
>>> indication of the position.
>>>
>>> J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
>> Only of where it was. An honest vendor would
>> (a) state the Proper Motion of the star,
>> (b) keep track of it, so as not to sell it twice,
>> (c) Adjust for changes of Epoch and coordinates.
>> What's a typical Proper Motion for a saleable star, per year?
>
>Nobody said anything about selling stars.
Oh yes they did. though it may have been in another thread or group.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ > - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 15:20:52
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> In sci.astro.amateur message <857a4$46b376cf$4212a552$24734@TULAROSA.NET
>> , Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:41:36, Greg Crinklaw
> <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com> posted:
>> Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>>> In sci.astro.amateur message <1186076075.624426.92040@i38g2000prf.google
>>> groups.com>, Thu, 2 Aug 2007 10:34:35, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichols
>>> on@yahoo.co.uk> posted:
>>>
>>>> I should also have pointed out that the name of the star gives a
>>>> clear
>>>> indication of the position.
>>>>
>>>> J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
>>> Only of where it was. An honest vendor would
>>> (a) state the Proper Motion of the star,
>>> (b) keep track of it, so as not to sell it twice,
>>> (c) Adjust for changes of Epoch and coordinates.
>>> What's a typical Proper Motion for a saleable star, per year?
>> Nobody said anything about selling stars.
>
> Oh yes they did. though it may have been in another thread or group.
How weak. Can't you do better than that? Of course, I'm sure it was an
American (all of whom you hate vehemently) who mentioned it.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 01:54:21
From: ukastronomy
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
You can find all the magnitudes at
http://martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.xls
On Aug 3, 11:18 pm, alliso...@IGNmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 3, 11:02 am, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Visually as in unaided naked eye - no.
>
> Sorry, I meant telescopically - are any brighter than say, magnitude
> 13.0V?
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 15:18:06
From:
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
On Aug 3, 11:02 am, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@yahoo.co.uk >
wrote:
> Visually as in unaided naked eye - no.
Sorry, I meant telescopically - are any brighter than say, magnitude
13.0V?
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 19:20:01
From: Dr J R Stockton
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
In sci.astro.amateur message <1186076075.624426.92040@i38g2000prf.google
groups.com >, Thu, 2 Aug 2007 10:34:35, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichols
on@yahoo.co.uk > posted:
>I should also have pointed out that the name of the star gives a clear
>indication of the position.
>
>J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
Only of where it was. An honest vendor would
(a) state the Proper Motion of the star,
(b) keep track of it, so as not to sell it twice,
(c) Adjust for changes of Epoch and coordinates.
What's a typical Proper Motion for a saleable star, per year?
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ > - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
|
| | |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 12:41:36
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> In sci.astro.amateur message <1186076075.624426.92040@i38g2000prf.google
> groups.com>, Thu, 2 Aug 2007 10:34:35, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichols
> on@yahoo.co.uk> posted:
>
>> I should also have pointed out that the name of the star gives a clear
>> indication of the position.
>>
>> J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
>
> Only of where it was. An honest vendor would
> (a) state the Proper Motion of the star,
> (b) keep track of it, so as not to sell it twice,
> (c) Adjust for changes of Epoch and coordinates.
>
> What's a typical Proper Motion for a saleable star, per year?
Nobody said anything about selling stars. The "J011251.46+141957.6"
form of designation is commonly used in research astronomy for small
faint objects with high-precision positions. The "J" indicates a J2000
ecliptic reference frame. This scheme follows the recommendations of
the IAU and is often erroneously called an IAU designation. It is single
epoch and often used for distant objects such as quasars with little or
no proper motion. The SDSS project is designed to primarily study
extragalactic objects, thus this scheme is usually sufficient for their
needs.
The problem with using it as coordinates to enter into a software tool
or web site is that one must typically insert a number of spaces at
strategic locations in order for the coordinates to be recognized.
Again to my primary point: a number without units is meaningless, unless
there is a standard convention for that unit. In the case of Right
Ascension the standard unit is hours. If one is going to publish Right
Ascensions in a different unit (even on a web site) it is incumbent upon
them to indicate the unit being used to avoid confusion.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 08:02:52
From: ukastronomy
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
Visually as in unaided naked eye - no.
On Aug 3, 1:40 pm, alliso...@IGNmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 1, 6:01 am, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
>
> Are any of those pairs bright enough to be observed visually?
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 05:40:20
From:
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
On Aug 1, 6:01 am, ukastronomy <martin_piers_nichol...@yahoo.co.uk >
wrote:
> http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
Are any of those pairs bright enough to be observed visually?
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 10:34:35
From: ukastronomy
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
I should also have pointed out that the name of the star gives a clear
indication of the position.
J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
On Aug 1, 6:47 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>
> [sni[]
>
> > think those could be in the conventional units (not that I don't care if
> > it's decimals or not).
>
> That should read "note that I don't care if it's decimals or not)."
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing:http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
>
> To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 08:33:16
From: ianhillsmith@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
On Aug 1, 6:19 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> ukastronomy wrote:
> > I take your point but since SDSS uses decimal degrees for all their
> > work so do I when I use their material.
>
> So you expect anyone reading your site to do the necessary conversions
> for themselves? I'm not speaking of the SDSS data itself, but for the
> snippets of data you display on your site for specific stars. I would
> think those could be in the conventional units (not that I don't care if
> it's decimals or not).
>
> At the very least you should state clearly that the units of RA are not
> what most people expect. I entered the first star on your list and it
> was not apparent why I could not find it until I looked further down and
> saw "celestial longitudes" > 24. Come to think of it I don't think it's
> even proper to call them Right Ascension if not in specified hours.
>
> Thanks for your consideration.
>
> Greg
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing:http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
>
> To reply take out your eye
Actually the name of the star tells you where it is
J011251.46+141957.6 = 01h 12m 51.46s +14d 19m 57.6s
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 08:22:26
From: ukastronomy
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
On Aug 1, 6:19 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> ukastronomy wrote:
> > I take your point but since SDSS uses decimal degrees for all their
> > work so do I when I use their material.
>
> So you expect anyone reading your site to do the necessary conversions
> for themselves? I'm not speaking of the SDSS data itself, but for the
> snippets of data you display on your site for specific stars. I would
> think those could be in the conventional units (not that I don't care if
> it's decimals or not).
>
> At the very least you should state clearly that the units of RA are not
> what most people expect. I entered the first star on your list and it
> was not apparent why I could not find it until I looked further down and
> saw "celestial longitudes" > 24. Come to think of it I don't think it's
> even proper to call them Right Ascension if not in specified hours.
>
> Thanks for your consideration.
>
> Greg
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing:http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
>
> To reply take out your eye
When I was a school I was taught the conventional units of length
were:
12 inches = 1 foot
3 feet = 1 yard
22 yards = 1 chain
10 chains = 1 furlong
8 furlongs = 1 mile
Five different bases to work with!
Now people use Km and m - conventions change.
|
| | |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 13:33:55
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
ukastronomy wrote:
>
> When I was a school I was taught the conventional units of length
> were:
>
> 12 inches = 1 foot
> 3 feet = 1 yard
> 22 yards = 1 chain
> 10 chains = 1 furlong
> 8 furlongs = 1 mile
>
> Five different bases to work with!
>
> Now people use Km and m - conventions change.
There is no reason to change this particular convention, sir. Doing so
only causes trouble, particularly when numbers are inappropriately
presented without their units--in that case it is essential to adhere to
the convention.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 02 Aug 2007 01:11:31
From: KLM
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
beautiful - thanks.
ukastronomy wrote:
> http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 20:25:57
From: jo Flay-Sho
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
outrageously kewl!
"ukastronomy" <martin_piers_nicholson@yahoo.co.uk > wrote in message
news:1185962509.318513.23510@b79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
>
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 10:11:52
From: ukastronomy
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
I take your point but since SDSS uses decimal degrees for all their
work so do I when I use their material.
On Aug 1, 5:52 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ukastronomy wrote:
> >http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
>
> That's really cool! But please consider using conventional units for
> right ascension (hours). Using degrees makes it unnecessarily difficult
> to enter the coordinates into software and web sites that adhere to the
> normal astronomical conventions.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing:http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
>
> To reply take out your eye
|
| | |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 11:19:38
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
ukastronomy wrote:
> I take your point but since SDSS uses decimal degrees for all their
> work so do I when I use their material.
So you expect anyone reading your site to do the necessary conversions
for themselves? I'm not speaking of the SDSS data itself, but for the
snippets of data you display on your site for specific stars. I would
think those could be in the conventional units (not that I don't care if
it's decimals or not).
At the very least you should state clearly that the units of RA are not
what most people expect. I entered the first star on your list and it
was not apparent why I could not find it until I looked further down and
saw "celestial longitudes" > 24. Come to think of it I don't think it's
even proper to call them Right Ascension if not in specified hours.
Thanks for your consideration.
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 11:47:42
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
[sni[]
> think those could be in the conventional units (not that I don't care if
> it's decimals or not).
That should read "note that I don't care if it's decimals or not)."
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 10:52:03
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: New double star and binary star site
|
Hi,
ukastronomy wrote:
> http://www.martin-nicholson.info/twins/twins.htm
That's really cool! But please consider using conventional units for
right ascension (hours). Using degrees makes it unnecessarily difficult
to enter the coordinates into software and web sites that adhere to the
normal astronomical conventions.
Thanks,
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
|
