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

2008 WY94 large amplitude fast rotator

Expand Messages
  • Robert McNaught
    E12 doesn t have particularly accurate photometry, but visually on the screen, this object has a dramatic lightcurve. Probably over a magnitude amplitude
    Message 1 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      E12 doesn't have particularly accurate photometry, but visually on
      the screen, this object has a dramatic lightcurve. Probably over a
      magnitude amplitude tonight and similar last night. Period or half
      period is ~~ten minutes, but very rough. This H=25 object is
      also a VI.
      Cheers, Rob

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Robert H. McNaught
      Uppsala Telescope/Siding Spring Survey
      Australian National University
      Siding Spring Observatory
      Coonabarabran, NSW 2357
      Australia

      P: +61 2 6842 6260
      F: +61 2 6842 6240

      SSS Webpage: http://msowww.anu.edu.au/~rmn/
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    • Tomasz Kwiatkowski
      ... Hi Rob, thanks for the news. This guy is well positioned for SALT (B31) so we will try to observe it photometrically tonight if we manage to get into the
      Message 2 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Robert McNaught wrote:

        > E12 doesn't have particularly accurate photometry, but visually on
        > the screen, this object has a dramatic lightcurve. Probably over a
        > magnitude amplitude tonight and similar last night. Period or half
        > period is ~~ten minutes, but very rough. This H=25 object is
        > also a VI.
        > Cheers, Rob

        Hi Rob,

        thanks for the news. This guy is well positioned for SALT (B31) so we will
        try to observe it photometrically tonight if we manage to get into the queue
        on short notice.

        Cheers,

        Tomek

        --
        -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Tomasz Kwiatkowski Poznan Observatory, A.Mickiewicz University
        -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      • Alan W Harris
        ... VI = very interesting ? Six ? I have trouble understanding my kids text messages, too. What does an Internet-geek mean by VI ? sorry, I had to ask
        Message 3 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          At 03:23 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
          > This H=25 object is also a VI.

          VI = "very interesting"? "Six"? I have trouble understanding my kids'
          text messages, too. What does an Internet-geek mean by "VI"? sorry, I had
          to ask for "LOL" too, a while ago.

          Cheers,

          Alan

          *******************************************************************
          Alan W. Harris
          Senior Research Scientist
          Space Science Institute
          4603 Orange Knoll Ave. Phone: 818-790-8291
          La Canada, CA 91011-3364 email: awharris@...
          *******************************************************************
        • Robert McNaught
          ... Sorry, VI = Virtual Impactor
          Message 4 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            > At 03:23 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
            >> This H=25 object is also a VI.

            Sorry, VI = Virtual Impactor
          • Alan W Harris
            ... OK, there seems to be general agreement that virtual impactor was intended by Rob and the MPC, but searching both the MPC site and NEODyS, I find no
            Message 5 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              At 08:25 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
              > > At 03:23 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
              > >> This H=25 object is also a VI.
              >
              >Sorry, VI = Virtual Impactor


              At 08:32 AM 12/1/2008, John Mahony wrote:
              >A few lines selected from the MPES report for this object suggest it means
              >"virtual impactor":
              >
              >------------------------------------------------------
              >2008 WY94
              >...
              >Object is flagged as a Virtual Impactor by SENTRY (JPL) and by CLOMON2
              >(NEODyS).

              At 09:17 AM 12/1/2008, Fabrizio Bernardi wrote:
              >It's a virtual impactor, as you can see on NEODyS
              >http://newton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/neodys/neoibo?riskpage:0;main

              OK, there seems to be general agreement that "virtual impactor" was
              intended by Rob and the MPC, but searching both the MPC site and NEODyS, I
              find no exact definition of the intended meaning of "virtual impactor". I
              gather, but am not certain, that the current intent of the term "VI" is the
              same as "PHA" but without the restriction of H < 22, that is, a NEA with
              MOID < 0.05 but no restriction on size. Or maybe not, I can't find any
              specific definition anywhere. I hasten to point out that was not the
              original intention of the term, as discussed in detail in the following
              paper where the term was first used:

              Virtual Impactors: Search and Destroy
              Andrea Milani, Steven R. Chesley, Andrea Boattini, and Giovanni B. Valsecchi
              Icarus, 145, 12-24, 2000.

              Briefly, what Milani et al. described was doing a Monte Carlo integration
              of many "virtual" objects filling the orbital uncertainty space of an NEA
              to identify the "virtual impactors" in the cloud, the ones whose orbits
              actually hit the Earth. One can then run an ephemeris of these "virtual
              impactors" and with that in hand go out and search specific spots in the
              sky (by radar, or optical) to see if the real asteroid is there. If so,
              the "virtual" asteroid becomes a real, recovered one -- also an impactor;
              if not, then we know that the lost asteroid, wherever it is, will not hit
              the Earth. This technique has been used a couple times to certify that
              specific lost PHAs are not on a collision course, without actually
              recovering them. So, when the term was originally coined, it had a much
              more specific meaning than just any asteroid with a MOID <
              0.05. Apparently the term has been adopted for other service. I'll only
              add that I think it is a poor adoption -- there is nothing virtual about a
              real rock sitting out there for all to see.

              Cheers,

              Alan

              *******************************************************************
              Alan W. Harris
              Senior Research Scientist
              Space Science Institute
              4603 Orange Knoll Ave. Phone: 818-790-8291
              La Canada, CA 91011-3364 email: awharris@...
              *******************************************************************
            • Alan W Harris
              ... ******************************************************************* Alan W. Harris Senior Research Scientist Space Science Institute 4603 Orange Knoll Ave.
              Message 6 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                At 08:25 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
                > > At 03:23 AM 12/1/2008, Robert McNaught wrote:
                > >> This H=25 object is also a VI.
                >
                >Sorry, VI = Virtual Impactor

                *******************************************************************
                Alan W. Harris
                Senior Research Scientist
                Space Science Institute
                4603 Orange Knoll Ave. Phone: 818-790-8291
                La Canada, CA 91011-3364 email: awharris@...
                *******************************************************************
              • Dave Tholen
                ... It s simpler than that. If an impact solution exists, such that it gets listed on the NeoDys and/or Sentry risk pages, then it s considered a VI. Not
                Message 7 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  > OK, there seems to be general agreement that "virtual impactor" was
                  > intended by Rob and the MPC, but searching both the MPC site and NEODyS, I
                  > find no exact definition of the intended meaning of "virtual impactor". I
                  > gather, but am not certain, that the current intent of the term "VI" is the
                  > same as "PHA" but without the restriction of H < 22, that is, a NEA with
                  > MOID < 0.05 but no restriction on size.

                  It's simpler than that. If an impact solution exists, such that it gets
                  listed on the NeoDys and/or Sentry risk pages, then it's considered a VI.
                  Not quite the same as a PHA, as there are lots of PHAs for which there are
                  currently no impact solutions, thus they are not VIs.
                • Alan W Harris
                  ... Thanks. It would be nice if the MPC, JPL and DEODyS would put a definition somewhere in their FAQs page on the web. But before they set it in stone,
                  Message 8 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 01:03 PM 12/1/2008, Dave Tholen wrote:

                    >It's simpler than that. If an impact solution exists, such that it gets
                    >listed on the NeoDys and/or Sentry risk pages, then it's considered a VI.
                    >Not quite the same as a PHA, as there are lots of PHAs for which there are
                    >currently no impact solutions, thus they are not VIs.

                    Thanks. It would be nice if the MPC, JPL and DEODyS would put a definition
                    somewhere in their FAQs page on the web. But before they set it in stone,
                    might I suggest "PI", for "potential impactor", instead of "VI". PI is
                    more accurately descriptive of what the term is intended to mean.


                    *******************************************************************
                    Alan W. Harris
                    Senior Research Scientist
                    Space Science Institute
                    4603 Orange Knoll Ave. Phone: 818-790-8291
                    La Canada, CA 91011-3364 email: awharris@...
                    *******************************************************************
                  • Tomasz Kwiatkowski
                    Hello, we were just about to start observations of 2008 WY94 when the intrumental problems appeared (exactly at the hour, when the asteroid was in the
                    Message 9 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hello,

                      we were just about to start observations of 2008 WY94 when the intrumental
                      problems appeared (exactly at the hour, when the asteroid was in the
                      observing window, sigh). Still, we can give it a try tomorrow if someone
                      sends new astrometry to the MPC and the ephemeris gets recomputed.

                      The asteroid is approaching the Moon, which is growing in size, so I expect
                      tomorrow may be the last night to make some photometry of it.

                      Cheers,

                      Tomek

                      --
                      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Tomasz Kwiatkowski Poznan Observatory, A.Mickiewicz University
                      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    • Alain Maury
                      Hello all, So VI is not an internet geek word like Alan suspected, it is an asteroid geek word :) Now, let s see PHA : perfectly harmless asteroid, it means
                      Message 10 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hello all,
                        So VI is not an internet geek word like Alan suspected, it is an asteroid
                        geek word :)
                        Now, let's see PHA : perfectly harmless asteroid, it means that such an
                        asteroid, through perturbations and more perturbations could eventually hit
                        the earth in the next millions of years. Will very likely not. Come on,
                        there are about 1000 asteroids already classified as PHAs, how many of these
                        will really hit the earth in the coming million of years ? less than a
                        handful, if we are unlucky. That's really an awfully long time. How many in
                        the next century, none. Unless we are very very very unlucky. We have much
                        more probability of getting hit by a very small, yet undiscovered asteroid
                        than by any of these already cataloged PHAs. And that probability is already
                        very small. I do believe that in all optimistic scenario we have a much
                        higher probability of destroying us alone before an asteroid falls here, and
                        nobody is making such fuss about it :).
                        VI : virtually innocent. Once the orbit has a good quality, might become a
                        PHA, or just another NEO. The definition David gives does not take at all
                        any information on the quality of the orbit. I think this is a MAJOR flaw.
                        If you take just one position of an asteroid and a motion vector, I am
                        pretty sure you can find a solution to get the thing to impact the Earth
                        when you want it. So one point no good. But then, 3 or 10 points over a few
                        nights, are they any better ? What about using the U parameter in the orbit,
                        and get rid all together of these "virtual impactors" while the orbit is not
                        known correctly. These words are only good in the Hollywood scenarios, or
                        the ones made just a little bit more to the east of Hollywood (Pasadena ?).
                        I have tried over and over to convey the idea that it is time to get serious
                        about all these things, and stop living in a fantasy world where we believe
                        a dangerous asteroid will hit us anytime soon. It may give you a reason to
                        live if you are really a geek and have nothing else in your world, but for a
                        normal, educated person ?
                        It is a strange subculture, where you create all the vocabulary for non
                        existing situations or situations which exist only in your tired brain.
                        Get your feet on the ground.
                        So contrarily to Alan I would just scratch the word of any web page, and not
                        talk about impacts or any word related to impacts where and while there are
                        none determined, mathematically, with a high degree of confidence. Let's
                        find words for objects for which a temporary, ultra low probability impact
                        solution exist, so that people can follow them on, knowing that to a very
                        high degree of confidence such objects do not hit us, let's just remove the
                        word PHA, we already have NEOs. Or call NEOs the current PHA and put the
                        current NEOs in the "asteroid" category. Cataloging an Amor, with a q of 1.3
                        a "near earth" asteroid is already overdoing it. Near, because in the best
                        cases it can get to 45 millions of kilometers from the Earth... Some people
                        really ought to read a bit about very low probability, their perception in
                        the public, etc... there are mathematicians who have worked on this.
                        Alain


                        > -----Original Message-----
                        > From: mpml@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpml@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
                        > Dave Tholen
                        > Sent: lundi 1 decembre 2008 18:03
                        > To: mpml@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: Re: {MPML} 2008 WY94 large amplitude fast rotator
                        >
                        >
                        > > OK, there seems to be general agreement that "virtual impactor" was
                        > > intended by Rob and the MPC, but searching both the MPC site
                        > and NEODyS, I
                        > > find no exact definition of the intended meaning of "virtual
                        > impactor". I
                        > > gather, but am not certain, that the current intent of the term
                        > "VI" is the
                        > > same as "PHA" but without the restriction of H < 22, that is, a NEA with
                        > > MOID < 0.05 but no restriction on size.
                        >
                        > It's simpler than that. If an impact solution exists, such that it gets
                        > listed on the NeoDys and/or Sentry risk pages, then it's considered a VI.
                        > Not quite the same as a PHA, as there are lots of PHAs for which there are
                        > currently no impact solutions, thus they are not VIs.
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                        >
                        > Posts to this list or information found within may be freely
                        > used, with the stipulation that MPML and the originating author
                        > are cited as the source of the information.Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • Robert McNaught
                        ... Indeed, my use of VI was probably a bit sloppy. The term refers to an orbit, not an object, so this is an object with VI orbital solutions... at least it
                        Message 11 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Alan W Harris wrote:

                          > Thanks. It would be nice if the MPC, JPL and DEODyS would put
                          > a definition somewhere in their FAQs page on the web. But before
                          > they set it in stone, might I suggest "PI", for "potential
                          > impactor", instead of "VI". PI is more accurately descriptive
                          > of what the term is intended to mean.

                          Indeed, my use of VI was probably a bit sloppy. The term refers to an
                          orbit, not an object, so this is an object with VI orbital solutions...
                          at least it has today. I reported a few hours of astrometry from last
                          night, so tomorrow may have no VI solutions.

                          Cheers, Rob
                        • Robert McNaught
                          I see now where I picked up the usage of VI as meaning the object rather than orbital solutions. Entering the object name in the MPC s Minor Planet and Comet
                          Message 12 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I see now where I picked up the usage of VI as meaning the object
                            rather than orbital solutions. Entering the object name in the MPC's
                            Minor Planet and Comet Ephemeris Service gives

                            Object is flagged as a Virtual Impactor by SENTRY (JPL) and by
                            CLOMON2 (NEODyS).

                            Cheers, Rob

                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            Robert H. McNaught
                            Uppsala Telescope/Siding Spring Survey
                            Australian National University
                            Siding Spring Observatory
                            Coonabarabran, NSW 2357
                            Australia

                            P: +61 2 6842 6260
                            F: +61 2 6842 6240

                            SSS Webpage: http://msowww.anu.edu.au/~rmn/
                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                          • whrevr
                            *preliminary* curve at http:/www.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08w94y/k08w94y.jpg period ~ 21-22 min likely through thin cirrus with more clouds
                            Message 13 of 17 , Dec 1, 2008
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              *preliminary* curve at

                              http:/www.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08w94y/k08w94y.jpg

                              period ~ 21-22 min

                              likely through thin cirrus with more clouds predicted tomorrow.
                              Therefore, Tomek (or anyone else), this could definitely use more
                              observations. However, this period info might be useful for your
                              queue scheduling.

                              - Bill Ryan
                            • Tomasz Kwiatkowski
                              ... Hi Bill, thanks for sharing. It s good you managed to get it. The lightcurve amplitude is impressive, reminds me of 1620 Geographos. It would be good to
                              Message 14 of 17 , Dec 2, 2008
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, whrevr wrote:

                                > *preliminary* curve at
                                >
                                > http:/www.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08w94y/k08w94y.jpg
                                >
                                > period ~ 21-22 min
                                >
                                > likely through thin cirrus with more clouds predicted tomorrow.
                                > Therefore, Tomek (or anyone else), this could definitely use more
                                > observations. However, this period info might be useful for your
                                > queue scheduling.

                                Hi Bill,

                                thanks for sharing. It's good you managed to get it. The lightcurve
                                amplitude is impressive, reminds me of 1620 Geographos. It would be good to
                                confirm the points at the minima which define the amplitude but are subject
                                to larger uncertainties.

                                I have the object scheduled for tonight, the weather forecast is not
                                optimistic, though.

                                Cheers,

                                Tomek

                                --
                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Tomasz Kwiatkowski Poznan Observatory, A.Mickiewicz University
                                tkastr@... http://www.astro.amu.edu.pl/Staff/Tkastr/
                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. A. Einstein
                                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                              • Fabrizio Bernardi
                                From Online Etymology Dictionary virtual Look up virtual at Dictionary.com
                                Message 15 of 17 , Dec 2, 2008
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  From "Online Etymology Dictionary"
                                  virtual <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=virtual> Look up
                                  virtual at Dictionary.com <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=virtual>
                                  1398, "influencing by physical virtues or capabilities," from M.L.
                                  virtualis, from L. virtus "excellence, potency, efficacy," lit.
                                  "manliness, manhood" (see virtue
                                  <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=virtue>). The meaning of
                                  "being something in essence or fact, though not in name" is first
                                  recorded 1654, probably via sense of "capable of producing a certain
                                  effect" (1432). Computer sense of "not physically existing but made
                                  to appear by software" is attested from 1959. ...

                                  It looks to me a pertinent wording, but in fact "potential" looks like
                                  having a similar meaning.
                                  The acronym PI, instead, could be confused with PI as Principal
                                  Investigator.
                                  For my personal opinion virtual seems less scary than potential! :-)

                                  Fabrizio Bernardi


                                  Alan W Harris wrote:
                                  >
                                  > At 01:03 PM 12/1/2008, Dave Tholen wrote:
                                  >
                                  > >It's simpler than that. If an impact solution exists, such that it gets
                                  > >listed on the NeoDys and/or Sentry risk pages, then it's considered a VI.
                                  > >Not quite the same as a PHA, as there are lots of PHAs for which
                                  > there are
                                  > >currently no impact solutions, thus they are not VIs.
                                  >
                                  > Thanks. It would be nice if the MPC, JPL and DEODyS would put a
                                  > definition
                                  > somewhere in their FAQs page on the web. But before they set it in stone,
                                  > might I suggest "PI", for "potential impactor", instead of "VI". PI is
                                  > more accurately descriptive of what the term is intended to mean.
                                  >
                                  > *******************************************************************
                                  > Alan W. Harris
                                  > Senior Research Scientist
                                  > Space Science Institute
                                  > 4603 Orange Knoll Ave. Phone: 818-790-8291
                                  > La Canada, CA 91011-3364 email: awharris@...
                                  > <mailto:awharris%40SpaceScience.org>
                                  > *******************************************************************
                                  >
                                  >
                                • whrevr
                                  Hi Tomek -- Bummer . . I m not optimistic either about our weather tomorrow night. Hopefully it will clear at SALT for you. I jumped on this tonight after
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Dec 2, 2008
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Hi Tomek --

                                    Bummer . . I'm not optimistic either about our weather tomorrow
                                    night. Hopefully it will clear at SALT for you. I jumped on this
                                    tonight after reading your message that you couldn't observe it.
                                    However, as indicated in my previous message, it wasn;t really a good
                                    photometry night since I know that there were cirrus around. I'm
                                    still observing so I haven't gotten a chance to
                                    look carefully at my comp stars to see how bad the sky really was.

                                    Yes - the amplitude is impressive, but it is also at a pretty large
                                    phase angle.

                                    Good luck tomorrow night!!

                                    - Bill

                                    --- In mpml@yahoogroups.com, Tomasz Kwiatkowski <tkastr@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, whrevr wrote:
                                    >
                                    > > *preliminary* curve at
                                    > >
                                    > > http:/www.nmt.edu/~bryan/research/work/mro_images/k08w94y/k08w94y.jpg
                                    > >
                                    > > period ~ 21-22 min
                                    > >
                                    > > likely through thin cirrus with more clouds predicted tomorrow.
                                    > > Therefore, Tomek (or anyone else), this could definitely use more
                                    > > observations. However, this period info might be useful for your
                                    > > queue scheduling.
                                    >
                                    > Hi Bill,
                                    >
                                    > thanks for sharing. It's good you managed to get it. The lightcurve
                                    > amplitude is impressive, reminds me of 1620 Geographos. It would be
                                    good to
                                    > confirm the points at the minima which define the amplitude but are
                                    subject
                                    > to larger uncertainties.
                                    >
                                    > I have the object scheduled for tonight, the weather forecast is not
                                    > optimistic, though.
                                    >
                                    > Cheers,
                                    >
                                    > Tomek
                                    >
                                    > --
                                    > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    > Tomasz Kwiatkowski Poznan Observatory, A.Mickiewicz University
                                    > tkastr@... http://www.astro.amu.edu.pl/Staff/Tkastr/
                                    > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    > A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. A. Einstein
                                    > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    >
                                  • Brian D. Warner
                                    Bill, Nice curve. It will be important to confirm the amplitude (and period - of course), which appears to be about 1.8 mag. This would make it among the
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Dec 2, 2008
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Bill,

                                      Nice curve.

                                      It will be important to confirm the amplitude (and period - of course),
                                      which appears to be about 1.8 mag. This would make it among the largest
                                      amplitudes in the Asteroid Lightcurve Database

                                      <http://www.minorplanetobserver.com/astlc/LCLIST_PUB_NOV2008.zip>


                                      Here's a listing of those objects with a maximum amplitude > 1.5 mag.


                                      NUMBER NAME AMPMAX
                                      ---------------------------------
                                      2006 BQ6 1.6
                                      3102 Krok 1.6
                                      2000 EB14 1.7
                                      163732 2003 KP2 1.7
                                      1995 HM 2.
                                      2003 NZ6 2.
                                      2005 WC1 2.
                                      2002 TD60 2.0
                                      2005 UE1 2.0
                                      1620 Geographos 2.03
                                      1865 Cerberus 2.10


                                      It will also be nice to see this published sometime (hint! hint! <g>)


                                      Clear Skies,
                                      Brian D. Warner
                                      Palmer Divide Observatory
                                      http://www.MinorPlanetObserver.com

                                      Collaborative Asteroid Lightcurve Link (CALL)
                                      http://www.MinorPlanetObserver.com/astlc/default.htm
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.