Julian Parks Feb 27, 2007
----- Original Message -----
From: "arne" <arne@...>
To: "Robert J. Modic" <rjmodic@...>
Cc: "AAVSO-Discussion" <aavso-discussion@...>
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [AAVSO-DIS] T Leo renaming
> Robert J. Modic wrote:
>> Last year, a number of variables that are located close
>> to constellation boundaries were renamed. These variables
>> were discovered before the adoption of modern constellation
>> boundaries and they wound up being located in adjacent
>> constellations. The problem is that many of these stars,
>> T Leo being a prime example, have been observed for a long
>> time with many papers published using the original
>> designations. The history of variable star nomenclature is
>> complicated enough without confusing the issue further. I
>> have heard very little discussion about this renaming.
>> What was the justification for this decision? What is the
>> AAVSO's position on this? Is there a way to appeal this?
>>
> Nicolai Samus (head of GCVS) announced the name changes in
> Astronomy Letters (2006, vol32n4, pp263-273): "Electronic
> Version of the Third Volume of the General Catalogue of
> Variable Stars with Improved Coordinates." The GCVS team
> spent a number of years, pouring over the 3rd edition, looking
> up photos and identifications (including asking Martha Hazen
> for a lot of the Harvard Variables, which is why she and
> David Williams, our President, are coauthors of this paper).
> They also relied on other sources, such as ASAS, to ensure
> the correct variable with proper type and period was identified.
> They were largely successful, and this was an enormous effort,
> with about 40,000 stars being examined.
>
> Once they had the variables properly identified, they used UCAC
> and 2MASS to get accurate coordinates. For a couple of hundred
> stars, they were unable to find the star, and they can be
> considered "lost".
>
> This paper is fun to read, especially the "Comments on some of
> the problem stars of the electronic version."
>
> However, what is relevant to this topic is that they included
> Table 3, a list of GCVS stars in wrong constellations. About
> 38 stars were incorrectly assigned to a constellation; most
> because the submitted coordinates were so poor that the GCVS
> staff made the wrong assignment. Some are more than 10 degrees
> from their proper position (lots of fun identifying those variables,
> I bet!). T Leo is one of those stars with poor coordinates.
> In fact, it is the most widely known of the list since most of the
> rest were so badly positioned that no one observed them.
>
> In 1930, the IAU took the opposite approach: they changed the
> constellation
> boundaries so that 6 variables remained within the constellations they
> were
> originally named for! It would be very hard to do that today.
>
> Samus' position is that, if he was going to correct 37 other stars,
> he didn't want to make an exception for T Leo. The 78th Name-List
> of Variable Stars (IBVS 5721, 8 August 2006) repeated this list
> as its Table 2. In addition, Samus' powerpoint presentation makes
> the point that, while the stars have been given new names, their
> old names have been removed from circulation and will not be
> reassigned. This means you are not prevented from using the old
> name, just that the new name is preferred for all new publications.
>
> My position, presented to Samus in email and at the IAU meeting,
> is that a name is just that - a name. Constellations are large,
> and there will always be a few cases of misidentification. I'd rather
> leave the names as-is rather than assigning a new name and creating
> a new paper trail. Samus was unswayed, and since his group gets
> to assign names, he wins. However, a new working group of the IAU
> has been started to look into naming conventions and especially to
> resolve the proliferation of classification names, so perhaps some
> resolution of the issues will take place before the next IAU meeting
> in 2009.
> Arne
> _______________________________________________
>
> Aavso-discussion mailing list
> Aavso-discussion@...
> http://mira.aavso.org/mailman/listinfo/aavso-discussion
>