[vsnet-chat 2929] Re: VSNET "constitution" : [for VSCHAT] (Greaves)

[Taichi Kato <tkato>]

Re: VSNET "constitution" : [for VSCHAT] (Greaves)

Dear Dr. Greaves,

> >More specifically, is there any point, for instance, in Danie
> >Overbeek diligently checking scores of dwarf novae each night if no
> >physical observations are ever made of any outbursting object he finds?
> 
> it should be remembered that the vast majority of visual observers observe
> for observing's sake, and may only consider any professional &/or
> scientific spin off as a bonus.

   Regarding the Patrick's comment on Danie's observation, I understand
both of them well understand the importance of each outburst.  Such
experienced observer like Danie must be aware that FO Aql bursts more than
once each month.  It may be natural Patrick may have thought that such
an expert should better discriminate which outburst is more important
than others.  Though it may sound ironically, Danie indeed reported
pre-discovery details of the first-ever recurrence (since the discovery)
of the suspected WZ Sge-type object, WX Cet in 1989 (cf. IAUC 4793).
This, and more data, were used in the subsequent paper by O'Donoghue et al.
(MNRAS 250, 363).  I can't find significant difference between Schmeer's
and Overbeek's announcements of pre-discovery observations.  The only
difference between them is the observing modalities.

   Speaking of history, before the internet era, there was a phone-based
bulletin board on which world-wide observers can post alerts (just as we
do in vsnet-alert).  At that time, Patrick asked Japanese observers to
report as many outbursts as possible.  We asked "even SS Cyg?" and Patrick
replied, "Yes, even SS Cyg".

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

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