Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Some crude photometry has now been done. For comparisons 100 stars within 2 arcminutes of 2022qmx were searched in Gaia EDR3; their positions, G magnitudes and errors therein were saved. These and 2022qmx were analyzed with APT 2.8.2
The magnitude at JD 2459817.361, aka 2022-08-25 20:40 UT, is reported as 20.02 (0.02).
Crude, because my images were unfiltered but have been shown to be a decent match to Gaia G by and large.
And here is mine. About an hour in total unfiltered. Extremely crude stacking. I am sure a much better image will become available.
Attachments:
Still there. Imaging it right now. Eyeball guess is about 19.0 mag but there is a chance that I may have confused the star with a neighboring EDR3 entry of similar magnitude. Precise measurement should clear it up tomorrow.
Pictures to follow.
Paul
Thanks. I have the GIMP and have used it in the past for minor image manipulation but never thought of using it for making animated GIFs.
I will give it a try but find its complexity and learning curve intimidating. 8-(
Paul,
I think that PIPP, designed for lucky imaging crowd, can do animated gifs. The creator says it can be enjoyed with WINE.
https://sites.google.com/site/astropipp/
David
Thank you, I will check it out.
The reason for my request is now public at https://britastro.org/observations/observation.php?id=20220819_140838_474d0d65ddd59b61
Paul
The “blue belt” is also known as the “Earth shadow”. It can be very impressive at times.
The “belt of Venus” corresponds to the red shades seen towards the opposite direction in the sky. It comes from back scattered red light.Looks like it came down near Borneo.
If so, I hope the local authorities issue the Chinese with a fine for littering.
Please keep up observing and the pattern matching.
It seems very likely to me that outbursts are somewhat predictable, it is just that we don’t yet know how to predict them with much reliability.
Implementation: extra mass, cost, complexity and failure modes all have to be weighed against the benefits of adding them.
Not worth it, in other words.
Oh no, not again. You can not be Sirius!
Get your popcorn ready. This should be entertaining when the other astrophysicists start laying into it. (Though the claimed 5.1σ is interesting.)
I found that but haven’t reported it. Earlier today I found some broken image links, which I have reported. You may wish to check the links in your own pages.
TLDR:
Oh my God! It’s full of galaxies!
Water, water every where but nor any drop to drink.
An elliptical galaxy is almost invisible because it doesn’t have any dust.
Two stars in a ring nebula: you can not be Sirius!
Galaxies sneak into the zone of avoidance when they though no-one was looking.Now to track down the Patent number …
I have not yet found the patent in the WIPO database but this link turned up
Looks like my telescope may well be from the Royal Navy. If so, it would be nice to find out which ship to which it was fitted.
Hi Paul & Alan,
I will be restoring it though it may take me some time to clean and remount it.
There are a few inscriptions, the easiest to read being “TURN TO CHANGE POWER” and “TURN TO FOCUS”. Part of the latter is visible in the image above. Neither of these give much clue to the provenance.
You are quite correct at suggesting Ottway & Co. however, It is fairly easy to read, though the black paint needs renovation, “GUNSIGHTING PATENT V.P. <illegible> W. OTTWAY & CO. LTD EALING 1912”. Another inscription is “PATT. G328Y” and a series of numbers “5 7 9 11 13 15” which are undoubtedly the magnifications available. The only other inscription is “W A/T” where the W is twice the height of the A and the T, which themselves are spaced vertically with a horizontal bar.
It is possible than <illegible> may become readable with some careful photography under oblique lighting and with image processing of the result.
Now to track down the Patent number …
It is possible some prefer not being left logged in permanently
On some fora I frequent it is possible to remain log in and and also possible to tell the browser not to save the credentials. That would appear to satisfy both camps.
Sorry, always have something more to say after I hit the “Send” button (and there’s no “Edit” anymore for some reason).
Yes, this is something else I would like to see. It is possible to edit for a short while after submission but quite a few times the edit functionality times out to early for my liking. It would appear I am not alone.
Could the period be extended to, say, 24 hours?
