[vsnet-const 29] re V449 Sco refs

[no name <crawl@zoom.co.uk>]

Dear All

A mail I sent earlier is garbaged on the vnet email archive pages,
however appears to have arrived intact at the astroarchive site.

I repeat it here, just in case the original was received by all in its
garbled form.

Just delete if you've already got it okay once... ...sorry for
probs!!!!!!!

> Dear Sebastian & t'others
> 
>              This email is in two parts. First is an assessment of the
>              reference
>              based circumstantial evidence so far for V449 Sco, the second
>              gives some
>              additional references. The main reason for this mail is due to
>              the
>              apparent non-existence of the original AN 264, 311 in libraries
>              [?half-inched due to coincident aticle on Hermes?].
> 
> 
>              Vo{^u}te & O'Connell
> 
>              The original AN 264, 311 article appears to have been by
>              Vo{^ut}e and
>              O'Connell.
> 
>              Investigations re these authors reveal that they may well have
>              worked
>              together at something called Riverview College Observatory.
>              Voute at
>              least worked at the Cape Observatory, South Africa, just prior
>              to that,
>              and I'm going to assume he stayed in South Africa.
> 
>              Now, the quoted range in the GCVS3 for V449 Sco is 7.0 to 7.6p.
>              The
>              1953 PASP paper quotes Voute as having detected the variability
>              and that
>              O'Connell confirmed this visually. Voute and O'Connel published
>              several
>              papers highlighting their work producing _photographic_ light
>              curves of
>              southern variable stars!
> 
>              So, my assumption based on this circumstantial evidence is that
>              Voute or
>              both of them stumbled across the [?apparent?] behaviour of V449
>              Sco on
>              photographic plates. The PASP 1953 papers suggests that
>              O'Connell went
>              on to confirm the variation visually.
> 
>              This photographic discovery would explain the low resolution of
>              the
>              period [ie 38.8 days]. Voute may have not had enough data to be
>              any more
>              accurate than that. People have posted stating that V449 Sco
>              has a 2 day
>              eclipse, which again may be more a reflection of insufficient
>              data from
>              the plates.
> 
>              We also have the problem of potential bias re O'Connell's
>              observations:
>              he was expecting a low visual amplitude long eclipse, and we
>              all know
>              about bias [although evidently these fellahs were experienced
>              astronomers].
> 
>              In light of a potential accidental discovery from photographic
>              plates,
>              I'll note that V449 Sco is just within a degree of BM Scorpii,
>              a well
>              known semiregular star thought to be associated with the
>              Galactic open
>              cluster M6. This could well have been the real star of interest
>              to
>              these two observers, who had examined Cepheids and eclipsing
>              plus other
>              variables of the Southern Hemisphere photographically.
> 
>              Finally, another contextual aspect concerns AN Vol. 264 itself.
>              The
>              NASA ADS provides a table of contents query for journals,
>              amongst other
>              things. The article on V449 Sco is _not_ included in the
>              contents table
>              for Vol 264. I am therefore going to make the assumption that
>              their
>              original reference was a simple note and/or letter to the AN,
>              rather
>              than a formal article. People more familiar with the AN of
>              those days
>              may well be able to say how suspected new variables were
>              normally
>              published in this journal.
> 
> 
>              OTHER REFERENCES.
> 
>              I also include the following extra references for this object,
>              as per
>              the BCVS part 1:
> 
>              1936 BOSS*GENERAL CATALOGUE*
>              1941 PRAGER*HARVARD ANN*111
>              1953 SAHADE*AS PACIFIC PUBL*65,383 (already mentioned in
>              earlier mail)
>              1955 FILATOV*ASTR TSIRK*163,14
>              1957 SCHNELLER*GUL*2.4
>              1957 SHAKHOVSKOJ*DUSHANBE BYULL*22-23.19
>              1964 JASCHEK ET AL.*LA PLATA SERIE ASTR*28.2
>              1972 ABT,BIGGS*BIBLIOGRAPHY OF STELLAR RAD VEL*
> 
>              I note from past postings to VSNET that both the GuL and Astr.
>              Tsirk.
>              often seem to (re)quote the original details of variables as
>              gleaned
>              from the AN. Even though the period is only given to one
>              decimal, any
>              mention of an epoch/date of eclipse in either of these papers
>              would be
>              moderately useful re an ephemeris.
> 
>              Most of these journals will not be online. Some people have
>              access to
>              GuL issues, and possibly Sebastian may well have access to
>              Jaschek et al
>              1964, though I suspect that'd probably only be a spectroscopy
>              article.
> 
>              Best of Luck
> 
>              Cheers
> 
>              John
> 
>              John Greaves
>              UK

VSNET Home Page

---

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