Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Sky6 Pro map of comets plus Machholz orbit

Expand Messages
  • Charles Bell
    I used the Sky6 Pro to generate a 3D like map of all the current comets out to about Jupiter plus show the orbit of Macholz at:
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 15, 2005
      I used the Sky6 Pro to generate a 3D like map of all
      the current comets out to about Jupiter plus show the
      orbit of Macholz at:

      http://www.quantumhyperspace.com/Astronomy/images/C2004Q2-01152004.JPG



      =====
      Charles Bell
      Vicksburg, Mississippi USA
      32� 15' 56" N 90� 51' 20" W
      http://www.quantumhyperspace.com/

      The sky proclaims God's glory, the vault of heaven, the hand of him who made it.
    • gvnn64
      Hello, it seems that also with small-size instruments is now possible to recognize some cometary activity in comet 9P/Tempel 1: no more a star- like object,
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 16, 2005
        Hello,
        it seems that also with small-size instruments is now possible to
        recognize some cometary activity in comet 9P/Tempel 1: no more a star-
        like object, but a small elongated coma and/or fanned tail almost
        0.5' long in PA 285deg. Total magnitude is now increased to 16.1 in
        Cousins R-band, while the dust-production proxy ("Afrho" parameter)
        gives an amount close to 40cm (very modest, but typical of the comet
        at this solar distance). Later I will link an image.
        Cheers,
        Giovanni Sostero (Remanzacco Observatory, CARA)
      • Josef Mueller
        Hello Giovanni, Comet 9P/Tempel 1; P/Tempel; P/Tempel (9P), Comet Tempel 1; Is this always the same object? 2005-01-15 at 02h to 02:16h MEZ I took 30 x 30s
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 17, 2005
          Hello Giovanni,

          Comet 9P/Tempel 1; P/Tempel; P/Tempel (9P), Comet Tempel 1;
          Is this always the same object?
          2005-01-15 at 02h to 02:16h MEZ I took 30 x 30s picture. The comet is very
          faint.
          With blinking in Astrometrica I could find him (about 16 mag).
          Moving PA: 274 deg.
          short tail PA: 281deg.
          Tomorrow I will give you the link to see the picture (12" Newton, f/5; SXV H9)
          A demain
          Josef Mueller
          ----------------------


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "gvnn64" <gvnn64@...>
          To: <comets-ml@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 3:41 PM
          Subject: [comets-ml] Comet 9P/Tempel 1 update


          >
          >
          > Hello,
          > it seems that also with small-size instruments is now possible to
          > recognize some cometary activity in comet 9P/Tempel 1: no more a star-
          > like object, but a small elongated coma and/or fanned tail almost
          > 0.5' long in PA 285deg. Total magnitude is now increased to 16.1 in
          > Cousins R-band, while the dust-production proxy ("Afrho" parameter)
          > gives an amount close to 40cm (very modest, but typical of the comet
          > at this solar distance). Later I will link an image.
          > Cheers,
          > Giovanni Sostero (Remanzacco Observatory, CARA)
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > NOTICE: Material quoted or re-posted from the Comets Mailing List should be
          indicated by:
          >
          > Comets Mailing List [date]
          > http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/comets-ml
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • gvnn64@libero.it
          ... Hello Josef, as far as I know, they are all and the same object, except perhaps the nomenclature referring to P/Tempel , because it could be misleading,
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 18, 2005
            > Comet 9P/Tempel 1; P/Tempel; P/Tempel (9P), Comet Tempel 1;
            > Is this always the same object?


            Hello Josef,
            as far as I know, they are all and the same object, except perhaps the nomenclature referring to "P/Tempel", because it could be misleading, given that there is more then one comet P/Tempel.

            Which one is to be considered the correct nomenclature? Well, I had a discussion with Reiner about it: the ICQ suggest to drop the progressive number suffix (i.e. 9P/Tempel 1 shold be rended as 9P/Tempel) because it is considered to be redundant. Hovever I think that the official statement of the IAU Small Body Nomenclature still comprises it. So the offical name should be 9P/Tempel 1, I think. I hope thatsomeone else in this m-l could provide an opinion about it.

            > Tomorrow I will give you the link to see the picture (12" Newton, f/5; SXV H9)

            Wonderful: it would be very helpful to compare the images. I know that Herman Mikuz from Crni Vrh Observatory (Slo) has imaged it with a 0.6m reflector, and the small tail is visible also in his images.

            Cheers,
            Giovanni



            ____________________________________________________________
            Libero ADSL: 3 mesi gratis e navighi a 1.2 Mega. E poi hai l'Adsl senza limiti a meno di 1 euro al giorno.
            Abbonati subito senza costi di attivazione su http://www.libero.it
          • Maik Meyer
            Hi all, ... From http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/icq/cometnames.html The IAU adopted a policy of *optionally* including or excluding suffixed numerals to comet
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 18, 2005
              Hi all,

              >>Comet 9P/Tempel 1; P/Tempel; P/Tempel (9P), Comet Tempel 1;
              >>Is this always the same object?
              > as far as I know, they are all and the same object, except perhaps the nomenclature referring to "P/Tempel", because it could be misleading, given that there is more then one comet P/Tempel.
              >
              > Which one is to be considered the correct nomenclature? Well, I had a discussion with Reiner about it: the ICQ suggest to drop the progressive number suffix (i.e. 9P/Tempel 1 shold be rended as 9P/Tempel) because it is considered to be redundant. Hovever I think that the official statement of the IAU Small Body Nomenclature still comprises it. So the offical name should be 9P/Tempel 1, I think. I hope thatsomeone else in this m-l could provide an opinion about it.

              From http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/icq/cometnames.html

              "The IAU adopted a policy of *optionally* including or excluding suffixed numerals
              to comet names when it approved the new set of comet-naming guidelines in March
              2003. Thus, the Minor Planet Center and the Central Bureau for Astronomical
              Telegrams also no longer use comet-name suffixed numerals."

              The CSBN page with the 2003 comet-naming guidelines (seems to be currently down)

              http://www.ss.astro.umd.edu/IAU/csbn/cnames.shtml

              "5.5 Also in the stated interest of simplicity, comet names will not
              be changed by adding numerals after names (where multiple comets
              carry the same discoverers' names), as was done during much
              of the twentieth century, as this merely complicates matters.
              Officially, there is no need to retain numerals on short-period
              comets that have routinely carried them in the past, because the
              robust designation system obviates their necessity and because
              the historical facts belie any logic associated with using numerals
              (different numerals were used in different places, and there are
              gaps in the numerals used even recently)."

              The argument of history is really not valid for keeping the numerals because these
              numerals or whole designations changed throughout history before reaching a
              somehow fixed state that lasted until 1995, when the new designation scheme came
              into effect.

              Also, I would ask the list not again to discuss this topic at length. The
              current designation system is into effect, it works fine and is logical (any name
              discussions set aside) and there is no point in debating it here once again.

              Cheers, Maik
              --
              If they give you ruled paper, write the other way. * Juan Ramon Jimenez
              ________________________________________________________________________
              maik@... http://www.comethunter.de
              German Comet Section http://www.fg-kometen.de
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/comets-ml
            • Johnson, Carey S. AT1
              So the comet that the probe is going to that the news is calling Tempel 1 is 9P, not the one that I saw on my star program this weekend labeled 10P/Tempel that
              Message 6 of 7 , Jan 18, 2005
                So the comet that the probe is going to that the news is calling Tempel
                1 is 9P, not the one that I saw on my star program this weekend labeled
                10P/Tempel that is near the Sun? Do they call that one Tempel 2?

                Carey

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Maik Meyer [mailto:maik@...]
                Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 1:57 AM
                To: comets-ml@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [comets-ml] Comet 9P/Tempel 1 update


                Hi all,

                >>Comet 9P/Tempel 1; P/Tempel; P/Tempel (9P), Comet Tempel 1;
                >>Is this always the same object?
                > as far as I know, they are all and the same object, except perhaps the
                nomenclature referring to "P/Tempel", because it could be misleading,
                given that there is more then one comet P/Tempel.
                >
                > Which one is to be considered the correct nomenclature? Well, I had a
                discussion with Reiner about it: the ICQ suggest to drop the progressive
                number suffix (i.e. 9P/Tempel 1 shold be rended as 9P/Tempel) because it
                is considered to be redundant. Hovever I think that the official
                statement of the IAU Small Body Nomenclature still comprises it. So the
                offical name should be 9P/Tempel 1, I think. I hope thatsomeone else in
                this m-l could provide an opinion about it.

                From http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/icq/cometnames.html

                "The IAU adopted a policy of *optionally* including or excluding
                suffixed numerals
                to comet names when it approved the new set of comet-naming guidelines
                in March
                2003. Thus, the Minor Planet Center and the Central Bureau for
                Astronomical
                Telegrams also no longer use comet-name suffixed numerals."

                The CSBN page with the 2003 comet-naming guidelines (seems to be
                currently down)

                http://www.ss.astro.umd.edu/IAU/csbn/cnames.shtml

                "5.5 Also in the stated interest of simplicity, comet names will not
                be changed by adding numerals after names (where multiple comets
                carry the same discoverers' names), as was done during much
                of the twentieth century, as this merely complicates matters.
                Officially, there is no need to retain numerals on short-period
                comets that have routinely carried them in the past, because the
                robust designation system obviates their necessity and because
                the historical facts belie any logic associated with using
                numerals
                (different numerals were used in different places, and there are
                gaps in the numerals used even recently)."

                The argument of history is really not valid for keeping the numerals
                because these
                numerals or whole designations changed throughout history before
                reaching a
                somehow fixed state that lasted until 1995, when the new designation
                scheme came
                into effect.

                Also, I would ask the list not again to discuss this topic at length.
                The
                current designation system is into effect, it works fine and is logical
                (any name
                discussions set aside) and there is no point in debating it here once
                again.

                Cheers, Maik
              • Maik Meyer
                Carey, ... exactly. Cheers, Maik -- If they give you ruled paper, write the other way. * Juan Ramon Jimenez
                Message 7 of 7 , Jan 18, 2005
                  Carey,

                  > So the comet that the probe is going to that the news is calling Tempel
                  > 1 is 9P, not the one that I saw on my star program this weekend labeled
                  > 10P/Tempel that is near the Sun? Do they call that one Tempel 2?

                  exactly.

                  Cheers, Maik
                  --
                  If they give you ruled paper, write the other way. * Juan Ramon Jimenez
                  ________________________________________________________________________
                  maik@... http://www.comethunter.de
                  German Comet Section http://www.fg-kometen.de
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/comets-ml
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.