Porrima image

From: Pete Lawrence (pete.lawrence_at_nospam.co.uk)
Date: 03/10/05 

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:29:09 +0000

Ok - I'm not claiming anything here and I will not be happy until I
have taken one or more confirmation shots and got reproducible
results. However... the images are compelling to say the least. I
determined an accurate estimate for the PA of the system without
knowing the official version (obviously you only have my word for this
;-) ) which may say something about the veracity of the PA result.

I can't work out the separation accurately because I have no rulers to
guide me with which I have any confidence. However, Dave Randell
confirms that the spurious disk vs the apparent separation of the
peanut lobes is consistent with current separation estimates.

I'm bothered by the extra star that appears in the enhanced 1/90s
exposure. In trying to identify this star, I've come across some odd
inconsistencies with several star chart programs too. SkyMap Pro
shows there to be two GSC stars close to Gamma - GSC-4949-1113 mag.
+2.9 (!) and GSC-4949-1112 mag. +3.7 (also !). StarryNight shows
there to be a mag +12 star next to Gamma called, ahem, Gamma and Guide
shows nothing in the general vicinity.

Well, if my observational image is wrong (and there's every chance it
is seeing as it was taken with a 4" APO!) then it's in good company
;-)

Here's the result...

http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/doubles/Porrima_pa_estimate_20050307_800.jpg

I'll carry out a second imaging session asap and post the results -
whatever they may be. My gut feeling is that the elongation is
correct but the peanut 1/90s result is not. 

-- 
Pete
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Porrima image
    ... > I can't work out the separation accurately because I have no rulers to ... > peanut lobes is consistent with current separation estimates. ... In trying to identify this star, ... > there to be a mag +12 star next to Gamma called, ahem, Gamma and Guide ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Magnification needed to split tight doubles
    ... his apparent separation limit was about 135" which is similar ... If the secondary is brighter than mag 9, apply magnification ... Schaeffer's improved telescopic limiting magnitude algorithm were built ... Traditionally this is done at 550nm, but if the star is predominately ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: A Ballistic photon theory
    ... |>|>| component of the orbital motion. ... If a single star is wobbling within the envelope, ... |>This implies the separation is greater than 4.56. ... but that reduces the observed eclipse angle to less than ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: ETX-125 and M43
    ... At 2' separation between ... But I do find that the M42 patch is obviously non-stellar in the same ... skies it is for me obviously diffuse around the star. ... > small instruments, at low magnifications, and and in instruments ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: A Ballistic photon theory
    ... >| Paul is very persistent about this even though I have already given him ... I have shown how a single star rotating around a dark companion can appear to ... >What nTaul totally failed to address is my analysis of the period of Algol, ... >This implies the separation is greater than 4.56. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading