[vsnet-chat 267] Re: New variable stars, etc.

[Tonny Vanmunster <tvanmuns@innet.be>]

At 12:15 24/04/97 +0900, Taichi Kato wrote:

>   This situation may be, however, unique to Japan, where amateur hunters
>have been traditionally requested by professionals not to disseminate their
>discovery reports by their own judgements, but to consult some agent
>(Tokyo Astronomical Observatory formally took this position).  Considering
>how the VSOLJ bulletin is functioning, it looks difficult to change the
>present situation merely by reviewing or adding options to the current ways
>of publication.  Probably Kiyota-san could play a role in conveying what
>are requested to both amateur and professional sides.  I also look forward
>to hearing from world-wide amateurs on their thoughts.  I remember I was
>once consulted by T. Vanmunster on future media of publication or circulation
>of excellent works of VVS Belgium -- probably he could also comment on
>his motivation.

Let me shortly comment on the above paragraph, before making a general remark on
the issue of announcing variable star discoveries.

It was not me, but Paul Van Cauteren (former president of the Belgian
Variable Star
Section), who once consulted Taichi Kato -and others- on future media for
circulating
variable star information. This happened at a moment when VSNET didn't exist
yet, and 
when Internet wasn't as widespread as it is nowadays. 
Paul's suggestion was to start a monthly (?) journal on CV's, aimed at
discussing
interesting outburst discoveries, presenting light curves, drawing first
conclusions from 
CCD photometry data, etc. At the moment this idea was launched, we were
discussing 
electronic means for circulating it. A few months later VSNET arrived, and
we thought 
this would cover most of our original objectives, so we gave up the entire idea.

Now, on the subject of announcing variable star discoveries :

In the case of a possible detection of a new variable star, I believe it is
of *utmost*
importance that someone (or some association) is doing a careful independent
analysis of
the detection, to see if the claimed object is present and/or showing
variability the way the 
discoverer announces it.

Only after such a positive confirmation, the discovery should be announced
formally on 
electronic networks and email exploders (like VSNET). I know the UK-based
organisation "The Astronomer" is doing this for novae and supernovae and
they are quite successful in this. 
But a lot of individuals are providing this kind of service informally too.
I'm frequently 
contacted by inexperienced observers (and on rare occasions even by
experienced ones), who 
claim they have discovered some rare outburst of a dwarf nova, or even a
nova. In most cases
-almost all !!-, this turns out to be a false alarm. We should be extremely
careful NOT
to distribute all these false alerts, but to check them first. If not,
everyone will loose confidence and eventually it may take days before
someone will try to confirm a serious announcement.

Apart from this, I don't care very much about the channel through which the
discovery 
announcement is made. The IBVS certainly is a good means for this, provided
that the 
announcement doesn't require an instantaneous reply. It certainly is an
ideal publication
to write down detailed information about new objects (photometry data,
period determinations,
cycle length, etc.). 
For "urgent" matters, VSNET could play a role in this, provided that this is
done in a formal
way (e.g., to make sure no false alerts are spread, that some common
template is used for
announcements, that official bodies -like IAUC- are informed when required,
etc.). This
certainly isn't an easy matter. I can image a lot of discoverers will feel
reluctant to
announce a possible discovery and ask for confirmation, if there's no formal
organisation
involved in this ...

Kind regards,
Tonny Vanmunster

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp