[vsnet-id 324] Re: 'Q' numbers of 'The Astronomer'

[Seiichi Yoshida <comet@aerith.net>]

Dear colleagues,

I am Seiichi Yoshida working on the MISAO Project.

John Greaves wrote:
> It is interesting to note, for example, that the MISAO project uses
> internal identifications for pending/unconfirmed objects.  This enables
> objects of all astronomic flavours to be checked for "newness", and when
> shown to be new, they are designated by an appropriate prefix.

Thanks, John. 

That is the "MPRE" number. The MPRE numbers are applied for any kinds
"remarkable" objects including possible variable stars, comets,
asteroids, sometimes already designated ones, and even meteor trails,
noises, false alarms of the system, if the "objects" are used in the
MISAO Project private communication. The MPRE number will never 
appear in the public issue. So when one discover the variability of
a star which was already MPRE-numbered in the MISAO Project, it must
be the person's new variable star, not the MISAO Project's one.

The Q-number sounds very similar to the MPRE number. And now the
managers of the Q-numbers appeal that we should not use the numbers.
So I will not add the Q-numbers in the MISAO Project database for
photometry. When we discover the variability of the Q-numbered
objects, we will announce them as MisV objects.

The exception is the case of the Mike Collins's variable stars. They
are announced as "new variable stars" by Mike. I will add them in the
MISAO Project database, as same as the GCVS stars, NSVs, TmzV, HadV,
and so on. Therefore, the magntiude data of them will be measured.
They should be reported to the VSNET. Then, because Mike does not
apply special numbers to his objects, what designations should we use?
Mike recorded the Q-number in his list. So I think he would like us to 
use the Q number when to report the magnitude. 

That is not only the problem in the Mike's list. I will add almost all 
possible variable stars reported to the vsnet-chat or vsnet-newvar
list. Some of them are designated like TmzV???, HadV???, etc. But
others are not. 

Some may propose to use the GSC, USNO-A2.0, or IRAS numbers. But if a
star are recorded in all of those catalogs, what number should we use?
When the MISAO Project report a star using the GSC number and others
report it using the IRAS number, it makes a confusion and
inconvenience. In case not recorded in any catalogs, we cannot
determine the name.

Some may propose to use the R.A and Decl., like J123456.78+123456.7. 
But when several people reported their own astrometry reports, which
position should we use?

Anyway, now I am about to re-build to make the MISAO Project database
for the PIXY System 2. The work will be in January or February. After
that, we will report magnitude of any kinds of "possible" stars
reported to the VSNET mailing lists. The name is the big problem.

Maybe we can report such possible objects in any names. When several 
people reports the magnitude of the same object using the different
names, VSNET managers may show us one name and lead us to use it, or
automatically merge them.

Best regards,

--
Seiichi Yoshida
comet@aerith.net
http://vsnet.aerith.net/

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

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