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

259Re: [vsx-dis] MISAO

Expand Messages
  • Arne Henden
    Sep 2 1:24 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Obviously, I'm a little confused here. For example, #52 may have few
      data points,
      but it has nearly 2 magnitudes variation, and the images are pretty clear as to
      which star is variable and by how much. They are even from the same observer.
      Are you saying this is not a variable? Or are you saying that you
      want a minimum
      amount of information, such as a complete light curve and period
      analysis, before
      any star is considered variable? It certainly meets your amplitude > 2-3 sigma
      criteria. So what do you mean by very questionable? I'm not debating with you,
      just trying to understand your concern. 64 is similar, and is linked
      to V1174 Sco.
      I didn't look further into your list.

      On 9/2/06, martin_piers_nicholson <martin_piers_nicholson@...> wrote:
      > As a way to greatly speed the process.
      > Ask the experts to generate a list of the MISAO variables not
      > currently linked to a GCVS entry.
      > Better still do this concentrating on those south of -30.
      > You will find most, if not all, of these are very questionable.
      > MISAO 50-100 but not in GCVS
      > Very questionable
      > 52
      > 56
      > 59
      > 64
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic