Thanks, Brian. I thought that F8 was a strange spectral classification for a
dwarf, but that was the information that Guide 7 gave me. I appreciate your
additional information. Amastro is a wonderful resource for someone like me who
was born to be peering through a 100-foot-long refractor back in 1670.

IOTA is on the case and has told me what to do next.

Thanks,

Alan

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, Brian Skiff <bas@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 01:10 -0800, alan whitman wrote:
> >
> > On November 17, 2009 I discovered a previously unknown double star by
> > means of an asteroid occultation. That is, the star TYC 4677-00696-1
> > is not shown as a binary in my Guide 7 software. This is a dwarf star
> > with a total luminosity of 0.08 +/- 0.10 that of the Sun. The primary
> > star's spectral classification is F8.
>
>      This is HD 5667, which Nancy Houk classified as F5V.
> That would make the star about a factor of 3 more luminous than
> the Sun, instead of 0.08 its luminosity.  In any case, a very
> ordinary star.  The star is faint enough that its angular size is
> small compared to even a relatively faint asteroid, so the odds
> of a partial occultation of the star are nil.  So the double-star
> explanation is likely, and is a common occurance with these types
> of observations.
>      There is no SDSS image coverage in this part of the sky,
> but the best available images (from 2MASS) do suggest the star
> is elongated a bit NE-SW.  Sometimes this can result simply from
> image-motion during the exposures, so this is only a "maybe",
> with the separation something like 1".  Perhaps someone on the
> list who is farther south can have a look at the star to see if
> it's resolvable.  Come to think of it, I'm on duty with the
> Lowell Clark refractor tonight, so if I can fit in it, I'll give
> it a try.
>      I'm David Dunham and gang are experienced in dealing with
> such cases, so it should get reported through the proper channels.
> Have you tried to estimate the separation/position-angle from the
> rate of motion of the asteroid?
>
>
> \Brian
>

On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 01:10 -0800, alan whitman wrote:
>
> On November 17, 2009 I discovered a previously unknown double star by
> means of an asteroid occultation. That is, the star TYC 4677-00696-1
> is not shown as a binary in my Guide 7 software. This is a dwarf star
> with a total luminosity of 0.08 +/- 0.10 that of the Sun. The primary
> star's spectral classification is F8.

      This is HD 5667, which Nancy Houk classified as F5V.
That would make the star about a factor of 3 more luminous than
the Sun, instead of 0.08 its luminosity.  In any case, a very
ordinary star.  The star is faint enough that its angular size is
small compared to even a relatively faint asteroid, so the odds
of a partial occultation of the star are nil.  So the double-star
explanation is likely, and is a common occurance with these types
of observations.
      There is no SDSS image coverage in this part of the sky,
but the best available images (from 2MASS) do suggest the star
is elongated a bit NE-SW.  Sometimes this can result simply from
image-motion during the exposures, so this is only a "maybe",
with the separation something like 1".  Perhaps someone on the
list who is farther south can have a look at the star to see if
it's resolvable.  Come to think of it, I'm on duty with the
Lowell Clark refractor tonight, so if I can fit in it, I'll give
it a try.
      I'm David Dunham and gang are experienced in dealing with
such cases, so it should get reported through the proper channels.
Have you tried to estimate the separation/position-angle from the
rate of motion of the asteroid?


\Brian

On November 17, 2009 I discovered a previously unknown double star by means of
an asteroid occultation. That is, the star TYC 4677-00696-1 is not shown as a
binary in my Guide 7 software. This is a dwarf star with a total luminosity of
0.08 +/- 0.10 that of the Sun. The primary star's spectral classification is F8.


With my 16-inch Newtonian equatorial I observed the occultation by the magnitude
14.8 asteroid (1048) Feodosia of the magnitude 10.1 star TYC 4677-00696-1 in
Cetus at RA 0h 58.26'  Dec - 4d 52.8' (J2000). The occultation was thus
predicted to have a magnitude drop of 4.7 magnitudes. The duration was predicted
to be up to 6.5 seconds. I used ultra low power, only 45x, to dim the target
star enough that there should be a clear cut disappearance, not just a dimming.
The event was forecast to occur at my location south of Penticton, BC at
04:28:06 UT on November 18, 2009 (2028 PST on Nov 17th). I was located north of
the predicted path, 111km north of the centreline of what was expected to be a
80km wide path. Thus IOTA gave me only a 10 percent chance of experiencing an
occultation.

At 04:28:01.0 the magnitude 10.1 target star TYC 4677-00696-1 crisply faded but
did NOT disappear. It remained at least as bright as magnitude 12.9 GSC 4677-806
located 1.7' northeast. This failure to dim the predicted 4.7 magnitudes
completely surprised me and resulted in a very long reaction time that I
estimated to be 0.75 seconds. (This estimate is on the tape, a couple of minutes
after the event.) I recovered from my surprise enough to make a conscious effort
to compare the magnitudes of the two stars during the brief occultation.
Reappearance was at 04:28:04.9, after correction for the much better reaction
time of 0.25 seconds at the crisp, unmistakeable reappearance. [These event
times may be slightly changed when I check my digital watch against the National
Research Council 10am time signal on CBC radio. I cannot receive WWV in this
mountain valley.]

Transparency was excellent and the seeing was fair since the 1.8” double star
Alpha Psc was only occasionally split at 366x. Nevertheless, the stars looked
crisp at the ultra low power used to monitor the asteroid occultation.

I observed the asteroid 54 minutes after the event, when it had moved 18” away
from the target star, and the asteroid was barely visible with direct vision at
366x. So the asteroid was as faint as it should be. The asteroid could not have
been seen with the ultra low power of only 45x used during the occultation.
Therefore the object which was at least magnitude 12.9 during the asteroid
occultation must have been a companion star.

The asteroid occultation has thus revealed that TYC 4677-00696-1 is a previously
unknown double star.

Alan Whitman
Whirlpool Observatory


________________________________
From: Tony George <triastro@...>
To: irwinsound@...; Dave Gamble IOTA Northwest
<trailspublishing@...>; alan whitman <alandwhitman@...>; Allan Morton
IOTA Northwest <scutum63@...>; Dan Collier <ve7des@...>;
lesdisher@...; Jeremy Tatum <jtatum@...>; David Trowbridge IOTA
Northwest <David@...>
Cc: Steve Preston <stevepr@...>
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 10:25:05 PM
Subject: (1048) Feodosia occults 10.1 magnitude TYC 4677-00696-1 on 18 Nov;
04:27:57 UT (17 Nov; 20:27:57) for 7 sec with a 4.7 mag drop


This is a bit ‘last  minute’ notice, but I don’t see anyone signed up for
this event and it looks quite promising both from the ease of viewing such a
bright star, relatively long duration, and from the prospect of some clear skies
for many observers.
 
Here is the link to Steve Preston’s website for the event:
http://www.asteroidoccultation.com/2009_11/1118_1048_18155.htm
 
The event is listed on OccultWatcher.  Anyone who intends to observe this event
should register their site on OccultWatcher or send me they site coordinates and
I can list the site for them.
 
Good luck if you try this event.
 
Tony George
IOTA West North America Coordinator
Umatilla, Oregon
 
 
Occultation of TYC 4677-00696-1 by 1048 Feodosia on 2009 Nov 18
 
Distance from center of occultation path - in km
Distances are positive to the right, referenced to the direction of motion along
the path
 
Uncertainty in time = +/- 5 secs
 
        d Proba- 
Location                          Longitude
Latitude   alt      U.T.     Sepn   Alt  Sun
     km  
bility                                     \
  o   '    o   '      m    h  m  s     "      
o    o
    210 -    0%   ** Path limit plus 3-Sigma **  
    161 N    2%   Guy Mackie, Kelowna, BC           -119
25.   49 55.    485    4 28  5   -0.071   35  -41
    160 N    2%   Jim Failes, Kelowna, B.C., Canad  -119 25.   49
55.    373    4 28  6   -0.071   35  -41
    153 -    2%   ** Path limit plus 2-Sigma **  
    133 N    5%   Bill Irwin, Lillooet, BC          -122
15.   50 55.    174    4 28 25   -0.059   33  -39
 
    124 N    7%   Dave Gamble, Summerland, BC       -119 45.  
49 35.    485    4 28  7   -0.055   35  -41
    111 N   10%   Alan Whitman, Penticton, BC       -119 35.   49
25.    400    4 28  6   -0.049   35  -41
     97 -   15%   ** Path limit plus 1-Sigma **  
     40 -   42%   ***  Path limit  ***           
      0 -   52%   **** Centre Line    ****       
 
    -40 S   42%   Allan Mortan, Rexburg, ID         -111 45.  
43 45.    700    4 26 57    0.018   41  -48
    -40 -   42%   ***  Path limit  ***           
    -49 S   38%   Dan Collier, Vancouver, BC        -123  5.  
49 15.     50    4 28 29    0.021   35  -39
    -84 S   21%   Les Disher, Campbell R, BC        -124 55.  
49 45.     14    4 28 42    0.037   34  -38
    -97 -   15%   ** Path limit plus 1-Sigma **  
 
   -130 S    6%   Jeremy Tatum, Climenhaga Obs, BC  -123 15.   48
25.     74    4 28 30    0.057   36  -39
   -134 S    5%   David Trowbridge, Whidby Is, WA   -122 35.   48 
5.    100    4 28 24    0.059   36  -39
   -150 S    3%   CBC Moore Observatory, Pasco, WA  -119  5.   46
15.    150    4 27 57    0.066   38  -42
   -153 -    2%   ** Path limit plus 2-Sigma **  
   -154 S    2%   Steve Dart, Pasco, WA             -119
15.   46 15.    150    4 27 58    0.068   38  -42
 
   -159 S    2%   Joe Garlitz, Elgin, OR            -117
55.   45 35.    600    4 27 47    0.070   39  -43
   -159 S    2%   Art Stithem, Pasco, WA            -119
15.   46 15.    163    4 27 58    0.070   38  -42
   -159 S    2%   Steve Preston, Medina, WA         -122 15.  
47 35.     30    4 28 21    0.070   37  -40
   -164 S    2%   Robert Eramia, Seattle, WA        -122 25.  
47 35.     60    4 28 23    0.072   36  -40
   -171 S    1%   Dale Gombert, Seattle, WA         -122 25.  
47 35.    100    4 28 22    0.076   37  -40
 
   -179 S    1%   Dale Ireland, Silverdale, WA      -122 45.   47
45.     30    4 28 25    0.079   36  -39
   -189 S    0%   Tony George, Umatilla, OR         -119 15.  
45 55.    142    4 27 58    0.083   39  -42
   -210 -    0%   ** Path limit plus 3-Sigma **  
 
Prediction of 2009 Nov 15.1


       __________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your
favourite sites. Download it now
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

A few of my observations are posted online at my flickr account: 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/watchingthesky/

Not many are posted so far.  Most of what I post are images taken remotely of
supernovae as that is my primary passion.

The set "Images from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey" are of some interesting
galaxies I've found while verifying my observations.  Along with each image I
include my observing notes.  Many more could be posted, but would be
overwhelming to do so.

Stan Howerton

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, "watchingthesky2003" <watchingthesky2003@...>
wrote:
>
> Though my observation notes pale in comparison to many on this board, I have
gathered all my notes and put them in book form.  This is a task I have been
working on for about six years.  The books are arranged in chronological form.
>
> Volume 1 of my "Astronomical Observations of a Lifetime" is now available
through lulu.com
http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/astronomical-observations-of-a-lifeti\
me-volume-1/687089
>
> Volumes 2 and 3 are undergoing extensive revision as there are now data
available for a number of anonymous galaxies as well as correcting identities of
other objects through NED, SIMBAD, NGC/IC Project, and other online sources.  I
hope Volume 2 will be ready in a few months.
>
> Volume 4 is a work in progress.  Once it is done I plan a supplement which
will list every deep-sky object and double/multiple star described in the 4
volumes.
>
> Stan Howerton
>

On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 15:57 +0000, mllrgrnt wrote:
> It is interesting to note that apparently the approaching Leonids are not
considered a substantial threat to the Shuttle while launching into orbit or
chasing down the ISS.
>
> Grant Miller
> Warrensburg Missouri


      I don't know the numbers, but it seems the increase in the
number of meteoritic particles percentage-wise during a shower
is probably rather modest compared to the perennial background
of them --- not to mention the weak meteor streams we are completely
unaware of.  And in the case of low-Earth-orbit heights the Shuttle
can reach, probably the main source of danger is space junk
rather than the natural background.


\Brian

It is interesting to note that apparently the approaching Leonids are not
considered a substantial threat to the Shuttle while launching into orbit or
chasing down the ISS.

Grant Miller
Warrensburg Missouri

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, Brian Skiff <bas@...> wrote:
>
>      A CBET issued a few minutes ago contains some last-minute
> details about the Leonids.  It looks as though the main action
> will be later on the 17th UT, and thus the favored longitudes
> are in east/mid Asia.
>
> LEONID METEORS 2009
>      P. Jenniskens, SETI Institute, reports that the earth is
> predicted to encounter the 1466 and 1533 dust ejecta of comet
> 55P/Tempel-Tuttle on 2009 Nov. 17d21h43m-50m UT.  This may result
> in a brief (about 1 hr) duration outburst of Leonid meteors with
> peak Zenith Hourly Rate, ZHR, > 100 meteors per hour.  The best
> viewing will be from sites in mid-Asia, including China,
> Indochina, India, Nepal, Mongolia, and Indonesia.  Initial peak-rate
> predictions of ZHR = 5000 meteors per hour (Jenniskens 2006,
> "Meteor Showers and Their Parent Comets", Cambridge Univ. Press,
> p. 631) have since been adjusted downward.....
>
> ...According to Vaubaillon, weaker activity may occur from the
> 1567 trail (Nov. 17d07h27m UT) at ZHR around 25 meteors/hr and
> from the 1102 trail (Nov. 18d03h29m UT) at ZHR = 10-50 meteors/hr.
> Maslov predicts the peak of the filament around Nov. 17d09h UT,
> with peak rates of ZHR = 25-30 meteors/hr.
>
>
>
> \Brian
>

Well, since I posted this (it takes so long for any message to appear here!) I
was able to find the abstract of the original study that concluded this object
is 5-6 MLY across:

"A mosaic of images shows the extended structure of the cD galaxy that resides
at the center of the rich cluster of galaxies Abell 2029. After correcting for
the scattered light of nearby stars and galaxies, the faint halo of this giant
can be traced out to a distance of more than 1 megaparsec, making it one of the
largest and most luminous galaxies known. The smoothness of this halo suggests
that it was formed early in the history of the cluster."

So what if anyone can actually access articles from the journal Science, this is
available at: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/250/4980/539

Anyway, I'm guessing here, but from reading the abstract, it seems they are
saying that are using a very loose definition of a galaxy to make their claim of
IC 1101 being 5-6 MLY across.  There seem to be alot of stars that have been
ripped out of other galaxies floating around in Abell 2029 and that are orbiting
around the center of the cluster- where IC 1101 and dozens of other galaxies
lie.  The problem is, there are literally DOZENS of galaxies orbiting WITHIN
this stellar halo, so occasionally, those galaxies are going to be of a much
greater gravitational influence on these stars than IC 1101, and are going to be
flinging them around, capturing them, flinging them out of the cluster maybe,
and definately stiring them up. Secondly, these stars are not bounded to IC 1101
exactly, they are bounded to the center of mass of the galaxy cluster, which
includes IC 1101 and dozens of other galaxies. I've never heard of the
definition of a galaxy being this broad!  By these astronomer's definition of
galaxy, we might as well call the WHOLE cluster a single galaxy.  We've detected
free, unbounded stars within the Virgo cluster, and we don't consider THAT a
single galaxy.  Since this is a question the general public might ask, the
overwhelming convention in casual astronomy literature is to give galaxy
diameters by the diameter of their main stellar disk or largest visible extent. 
So to say that IC 1101 is 5-6 MLY across not only breaks this convention, it,
IMO, stretching the definition of what a galaxy is as far as I see it.  However,
someone with a more astronomical background is needed to clarify how much this
breaks the definition of galaxy, if at all.

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, "John" <tatarjj@...> wrote:
>
> Well, if you google "Largest galaxy in the universe" you'll get IC 1101 in ACO
2029 that is supposedly "5-6 million light years across". Too bad it's not!
Measuring IC 1101's angular diameter with the ruler tool in SIMBAD, it's a
little over 1.3' across. That's ((1.3/60)/360)*2*pi = 0.00038 radians. Using the
small angle approximation, and knowing the distance to IC 1101 is approximately
1 billion light years, that means its diameter is 0.00038*1e9 = 380,000 light
years.
>
> So how large angularly would it be if it WERE 5-6 MLY across?  Well, it would
subtend an angle of (assuming 5.5 MLY diameter) [(5.5/1000)/(2*pi)] * 360*60 =
19', or almost TWO THIRDS the diameter of the moon. As can be seen by any image
of this object, this object surely can't span any more than 2', and I like my
number of 1.3'.
>
> The math is overwhelming. Based on trignometry, you'd expect this object to be
almost two thirds the diameter of the full moon, yet, on the POSS, it's clearly
no more than 2'. So it looks like this object is NOT 5-6 MLY across.
>
> Yet, some could argue "well, maybe it's got a really big outer halo..." To bad
this arguement is incorrect as well. As can be seen by looking at a POSS image,
THE ENTIRE CLUSTER is on the order of 20' across, and dozens of galaxies within
ACO 2029 lie within a 10' radius of IC 1101. So IC 1101 cannot have an extended
halo 5-6 MLY across simply because the other galaxies in the cluster would have
to lie INSIDE this halo and would instantly capture, consume, or scatter it. 
Simply put, no matter how you shake it, the literature MUST be wrong and IC 1101
cannot be 5-6 MLY across.
>
> It would be interesting tracking down how this absurdity got started. Even
this website from Cornell University 
(http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=412)says it's 5-6 MLY
across! I'd edit the Wikipedia on this object, but I don't think that my
measurements would count as an official and citable data source. Did someone
just accidentially add an extra zero? Or does 5-6 MLY refer to the size of the
cluster and then someone thought they were talking just about the central galaxy
IC 1101?  I wonder how deep this error goes?  Hopefully only as deep as
Wikipedia.
>
> John
>

I John,

I don't know where the number 5-6 MLY comes from, but IC 1101 is a cD galaxy
which generally tend to be very large. A quick literature research via CDS
yielded the following paper:
J. P. Uson et al., Diffuse light in dense clusters of galaxies. I - R-band
observations of Abell 2029; bibcode 1991ApJ...369...46U

... where the extent of IC 1101 has been determined by differential photometry
which reveals structures that are much fainter than what can be seen on the DSS.
According to their results, the diameter of the galaxy is _at least_ 850 kpc,
i.e. close to 3 MLY. This is still a factor of 2 below the Wikipedia value, but
maybe there was another, even more sensitive study of the galaxy/cluster since
the article of Uson et al. was published.

CS,
Matthias

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, "John" <tatarjj@...> wrote:
>
> Well, if you google "Largest galaxy in the universe" you'll get IC 1101 in ACO
2029 that is supposedly "5-6 million light years across". Too bad it's not!
Measuring IC 1101's angular diameter with the ruler tool in SIMBAD, it's a
little over 1.3' across. That's ((1.3/60)/360)*2*pi = 0.00038 radians. Using the
small angle approximation, and knowing the distance to IC 1101 is approximately
1 billion light years, that means its diameter is 0.00038*1e9 = 380,000 light
years.
>
> So how large angularly would it be if it WERE 5-6 MLY across?  Well, it would
subtend an angle of (assuming 5.5 MLY diameter) [(5.5/1000)/(2*pi)] * 360*60 =
19', or almost TWO THIRDS the diameter of the moon. As can be seen by any image
of this object, this object surely can't span any more than 2', and I like my
number of 1.3'.
>
> The math is overwhelming. Based on trignometry, you'd expect this object to be
almost two thirds the diameter of the full moon, yet, on the POSS, it's clearly
no more than 2'. So it looks like this object is NOT 5-6 MLY across.
>
> Yet, some could argue "well, maybe it's got a really big outer halo..." To bad
this arguement is incorrect as well. As can be seen by looking at a POSS image,
THE ENTIRE CLUSTER is on the order of 20' across, and dozens of galaxies within
ACO 2029 lie within a 10' radius of IC 1101. So IC 1101 cannot have an extended
halo 5-6 MLY across simply because the other galaxies in the cluster would have
to lie INSIDE this halo and would instantly capture, consume, or scatter it. 
Simply put, no matter how you shake it, the literature MUST be wrong and IC 1101
cannot be 5-6 MLY across.
>
> It would be interesting tracking down how this absurdity got started. Even
this website from Cornell University 
(http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=412)says it's 5-6 MLY
across! I'd edit the Wikipedia on this object, but I don't think that my
measurements would count as an official and citable data source. Did someone
just accidentially add an extra zero? Or does 5-6 MLY refer to the size of the
cluster and then someone thought they were talking just about the central galaxy
IC 1101?  I wonder how deep this error goes?  Hopefully only as deep as
Wikipedia.
>
> John
>

Very interesting. On March 14, 1987 our local newspaper reported ( following
a report in
*Science*) that the galaxy Markarian 348 = UGC 499 = NGC 262 is/was the biggest
yet found. Its
diameter was reported as 1.3 million lightyears, and lying at a distance of
300million ly. The
claimed diameter is 13 times that of the Milky Way.
      How does Markarian 348 stand now?  Has its status been confirmed?
Regards,
Mati Morel
Variable  Stars South
mmorel7@...
----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <tatarjj@...>
To: <amastro@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:53 PM
Subject: [amastro] IC 1101 cannot be 5-6 MLY across


> Well, if you google "Largest galaxy in the universe" you'll get IC 1101 in ACO
2029 that is
> supposedly "5-6 million light years across". Too bad it's not! Measuring IC
1101's angular
> diameter with the ruler tool in SIMBAD, it's a little over 1.3' across. That's
((1.3/60)/360)*2*pi
> = 0.00038 radians. Using the small angle approximation, and knowing the
distance to IC 1101 is
> approximately 1 billion light years, that means its diameter is 0.00038*1e9 =
380,000 light years.
>
> So how large angularly would it be if it WERE 5-6 MLY across?  Well, it would
subtend an angle of
> (assuming 5.5 MLY diameter) [(5.5/1000)/(2*pi)] * 360*60 = 19', or almost TWO
THIRDS the diameter
> of the moon. As can be seen by any image of this object, this object surely
can't span any more
> than 2', and I like my number of 1.3'.
>
> The math is overwhelming. Based on trignometry, you'd expect this object to be
almost two thirds
> the diameter of the full moon, yet, on the POSS, it's clearly no more than 2'.
So it looks like
> this object is NOT 5-6 MLY across.
>
> Yet, some could argue "well, maybe it's got a really big outer halo..." To bad
this arguement is
> incorrect as well. As can be seen by looking at a POSS image, THE ENTIRE
CLUSTER is on the order
> of 20' across, and dozens of galaxies within ACO 2029 lie within a 10' radius
of IC 1101. So IC
> 1101 cannot have an extended halo 5-6 MLY across simply because the other
galaxies in the cluster
> would have to lie INSIDE this halo and would instantly capture, consume, or
scatter it.  Simply
> put, no matter how you shake it, the literature MUST be wrong and IC 1101
cannot be 5-6 MLY
> across.
>
> It would be interesting tracking down how this absurdity got started. Even
this website from
> Cornell University 
(http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=412)says it's 5-6 MLY
> across! I'd edit the Wikipedia on this object, but I don't think that my
measurements would count
> as an official and citable data source. Did someone just accidentially add an
extra zero? Or does
> 5-6 MLY refer to the size of the cluster and then someone thought they were
talking just about the
> central galaxy IC 1101?  I wonder how deep this error goes?  Hopefully only as
deep as Wikipedia.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> This message is from the AmAstro mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a blank
e-mail to
> amastro-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>
>

Well, if you google "Largest galaxy in the universe" you'll get IC 1101 in ACO
2029 that is supposedly "5-6 million light years across". Too bad it's not!
Measuring IC 1101's angular diameter with the ruler tool in SIMBAD, it's a
little over 1.3' across. That's ((1.3/60)/360)*2*pi = 0.00038 radians. Using the
small angle approximation, and knowing the distance to IC 1101 is approximately
1 billion light years, that means its diameter is 0.00038*1e9 = 380,000 light
years.

So how large angularly would it be if it WERE 5-6 MLY across?  Well, it would
subtend an angle of (assuming 5.5 MLY diameter) [(5.5/1000)/(2*pi)] * 360*60 =
19', or almost TWO THIRDS the diameter of the moon. As can be seen by any image
of this object, this object surely can't span any more than 2', and I like my
number of 1.3'.

The math is overwhelming. Based on trignometry, you'd expect this object to be
almost two thirds the diameter of the full moon, yet, on the POSS, it's clearly
no more than 2'. So it looks like this object is NOT 5-6 MLY across.

Yet, some could argue "well, maybe it's got a really big outer halo..." To bad
this arguement is incorrect as well. As can be seen by looking at a POSS image,
THE ENTIRE CLUSTER is on the order of 20' across, and dozens of galaxies within
ACO 2029 lie within a 10' radius of IC 1101. So IC 1101 cannot have an extended
halo 5-6 MLY across simply because the other galaxies in the cluster would have
to lie INSIDE this halo and would instantly capture, consume, or scatter it. 
Simply put, no matter how you shake it, the literature MUST be wrong and IC 1101
cannot be 5-6 MLY across.

It would be interesting tracking down how this absurdity got started. Even this
website from Cornell University 
(http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=412)says it's 5-6 MLY
across! I'd edit the Wikipedia on this object, but I don't think that my
measurements would count as an official and citable data source. Did someone
just accidentially add an extra zero? Or does 5-6 MLY refer to the size of the
cluster and then someone thought they were talking just about the central galaxy
IC 1101?  I wonder how deep this error goes?  Hopefully only as deep as
Wikipedia.

John

I viewed Teutsch 11 this AM with the 48 " reflector.

The transparency was great! 9 out of 10, seeing was 5 out 0f 10.

At first With my finder eyepiece (288X) I could not see anything,I verified the
field with my finder chart, and bumped up the power to (489X), with AV a rather
large diffuse glow appeared at the right location.I was a little surprised at
how big it was! like most really dim objects the longer I looked the easier it
was to see!

I tried several filters( OIII UHC and deep sky ) but the best view was with out
a filter!

I then tried 814X to see if I could see the central star. The seeing was not
good enough to support this much power on this night I will try again on a
better night!

This object was a tough one at the edge of seeing with the 48 on this night,I
was surprised at how dim it was, it looks a lot brighter in images

Clear Skies
Jimi Lowrey
Fort Davis Texas

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

A CBET issued a few minutes ago contains some last-minute
details about the Leonids.  It looks as though the main action
will be later on the 17th UT, and thus the favored longitudes
are in east/mid Asia.

LEONID METEORS 2009
      P. Jenniskens, SETI Institute, reports that the earth is
predicted to encounter the 1466 and 1533 dust ejecta of comet
55P/Tempel-Tuttle on 2009 Nov. 17d21h43m-50m UT.  This may result
in a brief (about 1 hr) duration outburst of Leonid meteors with
peak Zenith Hourly Rate, ZHR, > 100 meteors per hour.  The best
viewing will be from sites in mid-Asia, including China,
Indochina, India, Nepal, Mongolia, and Indonesia.  Initial peak-rate
predictions of ZHR = 5000 meteors per hour (Jenniskens 2006,
"Meteor Showers and Their Parent Comets", Cambridge Univ. Press,
p. 631) have since been adjusted downward.....

...According to Vaubaillon, weaker activity may occur from the
1567 trail (Nov. 17d07h27m UT) at ZHR around 25 meteors/hr and
from the 1102 trail (Nov. 18d03h29m UT) at ZHR = 10-50 meteors/hr.
Maslov predicts the peak of the filament around Nov. 17d09h UT,
with peak rates of ZHR = 25-30 meteors/hr.



\Brian

A few days ago, I posted here about entering my observing notes into a
spreadsheet.  This led to all sorts of sorting and plotting.  I was
interested in how many objects I observed in each constallation, and
knowing the area, what would be the number of objects per square degree.
The result fell out of the spreadsheet pretty easily, and the table
appears at the end of the message.  I am not responsible for drunken
margins.

I knew there might be a problem with small constellations that contain
an interesting feature being over-represented.  Dorado leads the way
because the LMC is rich with tiny clusters and nebulae.  Fornax is high
because of a galaxy cluster, and Scutum contains a rich star cloud.
Otherwise, the list is a good representation of which constellations are
interesting or not.

This information is more visually pleasing when plotted on an all-sky
chart.  Binning the number of objects per square degree in Roy G Biv
style (actually five bins) produces this map of the sky.

http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/observation_density.jpg

The galactic equator is overlaid, and naturally, constellations such as
Monoceros, Cassiopeia, and Scorpius are orange or red.  Also colored in
red are Coma, Virgo, and Leo, where we look into the nearby galaxies of
the Local Supercluster.  The blue and green zones are typically looking
away from the Milky Way and into deep space away from nearby galaxies.
While I expected Bootes to be blue, I was surprised to see such a low
density for Hercules, which we associate with several popular targets.
Despite the superior view of the Milky Way and the Magellanic Clouds,
the southern constellations away from these regions are rather bland for
deep-sky observing.

I'm planning to have a T-shirt printed that shows only the all-sky
color-coded map.  The caption will read, "I'm not explaining it, so
don't ask."



===========================

   Con    Obs./sq. deg.

   Dor        0.290
   Sct        0.275
   Com        0.199
   Vir        0.171
   CVn        0.135
   Sco        0.129
   For        0.123
   Leo        0.105
   Gru        0.104
   Sgr        0.101
   Sge        0.100
   Tri        0.099
   UMa        0.098
   Ant        0.092
   Cas        0.090
   LMI        0.082
   Ori        0.081
   Mon        0.079
   Tuc        0.078
   Aql        0.075
   Crv        0.071
   CMa        0.068
   Men        0.065
   Pup        0.064
   Cep        0.063
   Nor        0.060
   Scl        0.059
   Cru        0.058
   Hya        0.058
   Car        0.057
   Eri        0.056
   Vul        0.056
   Ret        0.053
   Lyr        0.052
   Hor        0.052
   Mus        0.051
   Cet        0.050
   Cnc        0.049
   LIB        0.048
   Per        0.047
   Cen        0.047
   Oph        0.046
   Lac        0.045
   Cyg        0.045
   Lep        0.041
   PSA        0.041
   Lyn        0.039
   Sex        0.038
   Mic        0.038
   Aur        0.038
   Ser        0.038
   Gem        0.037
   Dra        0.037
   Pyx        0.036
   Cam        0.036
   Psc        0.034
   Vel        0.030
   Ara        0.030
   Peg        0.029
   And        0.029
   Vol        0.028
   TrA        0.027
   Ind        0.027
   Ari        0.027
   Del        0.027
   Pav        0.026
   Tau        0.025
   Aqr        0.024
   Cae        0.024
   Tel        0.024
   CrA        0.023
   Boo        0.023
   Col        0.022
   Cir        0.021
   Oct        0.021
   Lup        0.018
   Cap        0.017
   Her        0.016
   Aps        0.015
   Phe        0.013
   UMi        0.012
   CMi        0.011
   Pic        0.008
   Cha        0.008
   Crt        0.007
   Hyi        0.004
   CrB        0.000
   Equ        0.000


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

15480 Empire Rd.
Benson, AZ 85602
hm ph: 520-586-2244
Good advice, Tom, although 50 years too late for me... Whatever notes and
observing projects I had planned were destroyed in my house fire ten years ago.
Thanks for getting your material online, that's probably the safest place for
irreplaceable documentation.

Clear skies,
Wayne (aka Mr. Galaxy)


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Tom Polakis <tpolakis@...>
To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [amastro] My Observing Notes On-line
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 9:57:56 -0500

   For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database. At the
end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique objects,
and took notes on 406 nights. I saved the observations in no-frills html files,
and published them at this site.

http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm

Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.

I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn such
facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major. I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.

If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise. Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.

Tom


____________________________________________________________
Doctorate Degrees Online
Boost your career with an online doctoral degree. Enroll today!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=xmfGfyQiApyF5qp0JrPUYgAAJ1CbDQU2U6\
aBApl_6Cy5GOpNAAQAAAAFAAAAADckGj8AAAMlAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAyOQAAAAA=

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tom, that's very impressive, neat and organized. I started keeping notes
electronically in 2001 and you're right saying beginners should start electronic
notekeeping now.

My earliest handwritten notes dates back to 1962. I lived in a mid-size city
near the downtown section of Norfolk, VA. One of my early entries reads, "It's
so clear tonight I could see the Milky Way." Now, how long ago has it been one
could see the Milky Way under such conditions? It's great keeping notes because
I would have never believed that!

Kent Blacwkwell

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, Tom Polakis <tpolakis@...> wrote:
>
> For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database.  At
the end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique
objects, and took notes on 406 nights.  I saved the observations in no-frills
html files, and published them at this site.
>
> http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm
>
> Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.
>
> I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn
such facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major.  I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.
>
> If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise.  Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.
>
> Tom
>

Thanks Brian I will try that next time I look at it.

Jimi
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Brian Skiff
   To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:50 PM
   Subject: Re: [amastro] PN in Taurus




   > IPHAS J052531.2+281946
   >
   > 05 25 31.1 +28 19 48 (NCPN)
   >
   > MAG ? CSM ? SIZE 7 CON Tau SKY 05 URA 077-097 MILL 0136
   >
   > No other names.

   It is reasonably well recorded in the various catalogues based
   on Schmidt plate-scans. Probably best is:

   GSC2.3 N9TZ033008: 5 25 31.18 +28 19 46.4 (J2000)

   >
   > I would guess that it was 16+ MAG.

   If you happen to view it again, look for the faint star
   on the east edge. If you can estimate the PN's brightness relative
   to that star (no filters), that'll give a handle on the magnitude.

   \Brian





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for the info Kent!

I would think that you could see this with a 20"on a good night! the UHC helped
a lot.

Thanks
Jimi
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Kent Wallace
   To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:31 PM
   Subject: Re: [amastro] PN in Taurus



   Hi Jimi,

   Here is what I have on this object from my manuscript.

   IPHAS J052531.2+281946

   05 25 31.1 +28 19 48 (NCPN)

   MAG ? CSM ? SIZE 7 CON Tau SKY 05 URA 077-097 MILL 0136

   No other names.

   Discovered by A. Mampaso et al. This object was first published as a poster by
A. Mampaso et al at the "Planetary Nebula as Astronomical Tools" conference in
Gdansk, Poland in June 2005.

   Attempted to observe this object at the California Star Party at Lake San
Antonio, California, on 09/21/06 with the 20" f/5.0 reflector but had no luck.
The field was identified in the AP finder chart.

   NOTES: This object appears as a very small, relatively bright nebula on the
SuperCOSMOS blue and red images, which is invisible on the infrared image.

   Owen Brazell announced the existence of this object to the amastro group in an
e-mail on August 04, 2005.

   This object is not currently in SIMBAD.

   Looks like you have the first known visual sighting of this object.
Congratulations!

   Kent Wallace

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Jimi Lowrey
   To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 1:44 PM
   Subject: [amastro] PN in Taurus

   Hi All

   I came across this planetary in Taurus on the SDSS images. it is near the star
Alnath.

   RA 05 25 31.19

   DEC +28 19 44.71

   Has anyone seen it?

   Last night I looked at it with the 48 inch reflector, it looked Stellar
unfiltered,The best view came with the UHC filter with AV it looked like a small
disk. I would guess that it was 16+ MAG.

   Does anyone know of this object?

   Clear Skies & Dark Nights
   Jimi Lowrey
   Fort Davis Texas

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In the "me too" department, I've gone ahead and copied all
of the visual observations I have that are keyed-in to the Lowell
ftp area starting at:

ftp://ftp.lowell.edu/pub/bas/visobs

The flat-text files are arranged by constellation, with names
like 'visobs.and' for Andromeda.  The LMC and SMC are under the
old-fashioned '.nma' and '.nmi' (Nubecula Major, Minor) endings.
As Tom mentions, they are mostly in cryptic deep-sky-ese.
I'll be pleased to provide "translations" in to proper English
for small samples if desired for quoting in publication.
N.B.  there is a 'ReadMe' file that contains a lot of background
including a long list of the abbreviations.
      The files include the raw notes that Chris Luginbuhl and I made
for our book starting about 1970, plus many follow-up
remarks from the literature.  This portion of the material is
far from complete.  Most of the stuff I did with my 15cm refractor,
including both Chile trips, and with the 7cm Pronto, should be in
there, but it too is incomplete for the earlier 15cm stuff.
      Along with material that ended up in Luginbuhl & Skiff,
a fair bit of the later observations were published in the
Webb Society Quarterly Journal or their observation section reports
that were led by Steve Hynes and Steve Gottlieb.  A lot of the
descriptions were also worked into many 'Deep Sky' magazine
articles back then as well --- much as with Steve G and others of us
who were active during those days 20+ years ago.


\Brian

Tom,

Excellent resource.  That is the way of the future.  Books may be on their way
out, but I'm biased after working about seventeen years in the book printing
industry.  I've put my observations in book form to somehow save for posterity
as I have no other legacy.  Just the process of creating books is very rewarding
and fulfilling.

Thus far I have made some 11,000 observations.  I would guess that just under
half are of unique objects, with over 3000 being galaxies.  I don't know the
galaxy count because my galaxy database went bad a couple of years ago and my
backup was corrupted. Volume 2 is nearly revised and thus far between Volumes 1
and 2 have 1888 galaxies and 483 other deep-sky objects.  That doesn't include
double and multiple stars, comets, supernovae, and a handful of asteroids.

I recommend logging observations.  When you get older (I turned 48 today), it
gives you a sense of pride and a sense of accomplishment as you look back
through the years.  When you observe a particular deep-sky object through a
telescope, only your eyes are capturing those photons that had been travelling
anywhere from a few tens of years to perhaps a few billions of years.  At that
instant you may even be the only human whose eyes and brain are recording that
particular object.

Stan Howerton

--- In amastro@yahoogroups.com, Tom Polakis <tpolakis@...> wrote:
>
> For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database.  At
the end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique
objects, and took notes on 406 nights.  I saved the observations in no-frills
html files, and published them at this site.
>
> http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm
>
> Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.
>
> I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn
such facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major.  I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.
>
> If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise.  Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.
>
> Tom
>

> IPHAS J052531.2+281946
>
> 05 25 31.1 +28 19 48 (NCPN)
>
> MAG ? CSM ? SIZE 7 CON Tau SKY 05 URA 077-097 MILL 0136
>
> No other names.

      It is reasonably well recorded in the various catalogues based
on Schmidt plate-scans.  Probably best is:

GSC2.3 N9TZ033008:  5 25 31.18 +28 19 46.4  (J2000)

>
>    I would guess that it was 16+ MAG.


      If you happen to view it again, look for the faint star
on the east edge.  If you can estimate the PN's brightness relative
to that star (no filters), that'll give a handle on the magnitude.


\Brian

Hi Jimi,

Here is what I have on this object from my manuscript.

IPHAS J052531.2+281946

05 25 31.1 +28 19 48 (NCPN)

MAG ? CSM ? SIZE 7 CON Tau SKY 05 URA 077-097 MILL 0136

No other names.

Discovered by A. Mampaso et al.  This object was first published as a poster by
A. Mampaso et al at the "Planetary Nebula as Astronomical Tools" conference in
Gdansk, Poland in June 2005.

Attempted to observe this object at the California Star Party at Lake San
Antonio, California, on 09/21/06 with the 20" f/5.0 reflector but had no luck. 
The field was identified in the AP finder chart.

NOTES: This object appears as a very small, relatively bright nebula on the
SuperCOSMOS blue and red images, which is invisible on the infrared image.

Owen Brazell announced the existence of this object to the amastro group in an
e-mail on August 04, 2005.

This object is not currently in SIMBAD.



Looks like you have the first known visual sighting of this object. 
Congratulations!



Kent Wallace

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Jimi Lowrey
   To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 1:44 PM
   Subject: [amastro] PN in Taurus



   Hi All

   I came across this planetary in Taurus on the SDSS images. it is near the star
Alnath.

   RA 05 25 31.19

   DEC +28 19 44.71

   Has anyone seen it?

   Last night I looked at it with the 48 inch reflector, it looked Stellar
unfiltered,The best view came with the UHC filter with AV it looked like a small
disk. I would guess that it was 16+ MAG.

   Does anyone know of this object?

   Clear Skies & Dark Nights
   Jimi Lowrey
   Fort Davis Texas

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi All

I came across this planetary in Taurus on the SDSS images. it is near the star
Alnath.

RA 05 25 31.19

DEC +28 19 44.71

Has anyone seen it?

Last night I looked at it with the 48 inch reflector, it looked Stellar
unfiltered,The best view came with the UHC filter with AV it looked like a small
disk. I would guess that it was 16+ MAG.

Does anyone know of this object?

Clear Skies & Dark Nights
Jimi Lowrey
Fort Davis Texas





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tom,

Thanks for making your observations available for all of us.  That is a whole
lot of great observations and a lot of good work.

Thanks again,

Kent
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Tom Polakis
   To: amastro@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 6:57 AM
   Subject: [amastro] My Observing Notes On-line



   For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database. At the
end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique objects,
and took notes on 406 nights. I saved the observations in no-frills html files,
and published them at this site.

   http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm

   Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.

   I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn
such facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major. I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.

   If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise. Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.

   Tom




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tom,


That's very impressive. I've read some of the notes you made and they
will be a valuable resource to any observer. Congratulations!


Wouter

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 09:57:56AM -0500, Tom Polakis wrote:
> For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database.  At
the end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique
objects, and took notes on 406 nights.  I saved the observations in no-frills
html files, and published them at this site.
>
> http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm
>
> Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.
>
> I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn
such facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major.  I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.
>
> If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise.  Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.
>
> Tom
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> This message is from the AmAstro mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a blank
e-mail to amastro-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>
>
--
Oh the sisters of mercy, they are not departed or gone.
They were waiting for me when I thought that I just can't go on.
And they brought me their comfort and later they brought me this song.
Oh I hope you run into them, you who've been travelling so long.
[Leonard Cohen - The Sisters Of Mercy]

Skype: wvreeven
Facebook: wvreeven
Twitter: wvreeven

For the past six weeks, I have been spending too much time on the computer
entering my observing notes from as early as 1979 into a single database.  At
the end of all this, I learned that I have 3881 observations of 2349 unique
objects, and took notes on 406 nights.  I saved the observations in no-frills
html files, and published them at this site.

http://members.cox.net/polakis/deepsky/obsnotes.htm

Disclaimer: much of it is written in abbreviated, deep-sky-ese language, and
there are likely errors galore, but what you see comes directly from my
notebooks.

I entered the notes into spreadsheet software, which made it easy to learn such
facts as: 76% of the objects I observed are in the NGC, 61% of them are
galaxies, and 15% of all the objects are in Virgo and Ursa Major.  I have zero
notes for the constellations Equuleus and Corona Borealis, despite looking at
the CrB galaxy cluster (Abell 2065) a number of times.

If you are new to observing, don't do what I did, waiting 30 years to do a
torturous data entry exercise.  Get those observations in electronic form, and
back the file up.

Tom

To add some more datails to the open cluster..

> > I have what you describe as Teutsch 11 on a DSS image, & wanted to get a
magnitude estimate to see if I might have a shot at it. However, SIMBAD pulls it
up as an 'aka' for DSH J0625.4+1351, an "Open (galactic) Cluster" a considerable
distance away at 06:25:24.4 +13:51:59, near the Orion border with Gemini.
>
> Right, the above SIMBAD-entry is correct and refers to the open cluster I
discovered in 1989, published in our 2006-paper (see previous mails on the
topic)

The 2006 paper can be found here:

http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0511/0511021v1.pdf

(it can be found on page 7, table 3d)

There should be a good number of objects within visual reach for enterprising
observers, I guess. The open cluster Teutsch 11 is certainly one of them, and
interestingly, it forms a 16' pair with open cluster Teutsch 12 at 06 25 40.3
+13 36 25 diam 4.2'.

Anyone give it a visual try this season?

CS,
Phil

> I have what you describe as Teutsch 11 on a DSS image, & wanted to get a
magnitude estimate to see if I might have a shot at it. However, SIMBAD pulls it
up as an 'aka' for DSH J0625.4+1351, an "Open (galactic) Cluster" a considerable
distance away at 06:25:24.4 +13:51:59, near the Orion border with Gemini.

Right, the above SIMBAD-entry is correct and refers to the open cluster I
discovered in 1989, published in our 2006-paper (see previous mails on the
topic)

>Is this an error?

No, the object you are referring to is a different entity, it is the planetary
nebula candidate published just recently, and to have its name unambiguos, just
call it "PN Te 11"

CS,
Phil

Although a bit off topic, those on Amastro offer opinions that I value.

Can anyone suggest a quality and reliable vendor to send my 25" mirror for
re-coating? Just to keep unnecessary chatter down you can email me offline. On
can't post email address per se on Yahoo Groups but mine is:

kent at exis.net

Thank you.

Kent Blackwell

I have what you describe as Teutsch 11 on a DSS image, & wanted to get a
magnitude estimate to see if I might have a shot at it. However, SIMBAD pulls it
up as an 'aka' for DSH J0625.4+1351, an "Open (galactic) Cluster" a considerable
distance away at 06:25:24.4 +13:51:59, near the Orion border with Gemini. Is
this an error? Several other Googled hits seem to agree, tho I found one that
says only "Odd Low Excitation PN or ?"

And while I'm at it, anyone have that magnitude for it handy?

Thanx!
~S*H
________________________________________________________________
"Perhaps I'll never touch a star, but at least let me reach."

Though my observation notes pale in comparison to many on this board, I have
gathered all my notes and put them in book form.  This is a task I have been
working on for about six years.  The books are arranged in chronological form.

Volume 1 of my "Astronomical Observations of a Lifetime" is now available
through lulu.com
http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/astronomical-observations-of-a-lifeti\
me-volume-1/687089

Volumes 2 and 3 are undergoing extensive revision as there are now data
available for a number of anonymous galaxies as well as correcting identities of
other objects through NED, SIMBAD, NGC/IC Project, and other online sources.  I
hope Volume 2 will be ready in a few months.

Volume 4 is a work in progress.  Once it is done I plan a supplement which will
list every deep-sky object and double/multiple star described in the 4 volumes.

Stan Howerton