[vsnet-newvar 692] Re: IDs of Collins variables

[Taichi Kato <tkato>]

Re: IDs of Collins variables

   Guy M Hurst wrote:

> The 'Q' numbers are NOT designations but merely a catalogue of all
> suspects of comets, asteroids, variables, supernovae, novae etc reported
> to 'The Astronomer'. This system has been in use for over 25 years.
> 
> I would not recommend data on objects logged with 'Q' be stored as they
> have not yet been investigated fully.

   There have been a number of cases when new variable stars reported
by our colleagues (i.e. Japanese observers) were incidentally found to
be identified with these 'Q' designations.  Some observers have reported
their observations using 'Q' designations, instead of assigning their
own new codes.  Does your explanation mean this treatment should be
avoided?  Indeed these identifications are very incomplete (because of
the lack of the complete 'Q' list available), and there is always a chance
some 'Q'-designated objects are called with thses names and sometimes not
just simply depending whether I happen to know the particular 'Q' designation.
Admitted we should abondon using these 'Q'-based designations, the majority
of ambiguity vanishes.

> Clearly once a name list is issued, all previously temporary
> designations such as 'TASV' or 'TAV' are retained as cross references
> only but observers with older charts often do not always notice the
> change! 

   This doesn't seem to be true.  Some examples in Collins' list include
many examples like TASV 0358+57 (Q1990/95), TASV 0524+15 (Q1991/11),
TASV 0534+10 (Q1990/92), TAV 0559+06 (Q1991/9) and many, many...
We sometimes wonder whether these suspected variables are rejected as
"suspected variables" by the GCVS team.  They can remain unidentified for
most people who are not familiar with Collins' list, but with name lists.

> I think an incorrect assumption has been made that all TA variables have
> been found by Mike Collins and should be on his list. This is not the case
> although Mike has found the vast majority!

   No such an assumption was involved, but then, how many additional lists
should we consult other than Collins' list, in order to properly identify
all the TA-originated variables?

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

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