Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated - Requiem for Relativity
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Astrophysics
 Gravity & Relativity
 Requiem for Relativity
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author  Topic Next Topic
Page: of 72

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 10 Mar 2008 :  22:14:36  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I'd like to get prospective photos of Barbarossa and Frey on film. CCD imaging has many advantages, but the spurious images that can arise on film probably are fewer and better understood.

Likely, Barbarossa and Frey are red. I've found them on all five Red and Optical Infrared sky surveys (scans of photographic plates), but not on the one Blue sky survey. They are dimmer than expected, so either are unexpectedly small, are surrounded by dust (which would redden them), or have unexpectedly low albedo, consistent with a strong color. Distant solar system objects typically are red (see above post).

For distant solar system objects, Tegler & Romanishin found B-V up to 1.24 and V-R up to 0.78. Consulting original sources, I find that Johnson & Morgan (ApJ 117:313, 1953, Table 3) found B-V = 1.16 and 1.48 for the standard K2III star betaOph and the standard K4III star betaCnc, resp. Kron, White & Gascoigne (ApJ 118:502, 1953, Table 4) found R magnitudes giving V-R = 0.54 and 0.76 for these stars, resp. So, the reddest common distant solar system objects, have about the B-V of a K2III star and the V-R of a K4III star. That is, they crudely resemble a K3III star. Straizys, "Multicolor Stellar Photometry", p. 51 and Figs. 11 & 12, gives 6000 & 8300 Angstrom for the smoothed spectral peak for K0III & K5III, resp. This interpolates to 7380 A for K3III. MS Bessel's abovementioned article in PASP, Fig. 1, shows that Red sky survey plates (R59F) cut off at 7000 A above, while the Optical Infrared sky survey plates (IsubN) cut off at 7000 below. Either plate would miss about half the radiation from Barbarossa or Frey, if these resemble the reddest objects cataloged by Tegler & Romanishin.

Two especially good advanced books on astrophotography are Covington's 1999 "Astrophotography for the Amateur" 2nd ed., and Wallis & Provin's 1988 "Manual of Advanced Celestial Photography". Covington's Table 10.1 lists "Kodak Ektachrome Professional E200" as in a 7-way tie for first place among 26 un-hypered films, for good reciprocity. It's in third place for sensitivity at (simulated alpha-hydrogen line, 6563 A) 6600 A. Neither of the two films besting it for red sensitivity, had very good un-hypered reciprocity.

Covington warns that a film's characteristics might change over the years due to changes in manufacture, or even change randomly from roll to roll. He also says that the designation "Professional" and the requirement that "Professional" film be refrigerated, have mainly to do with maintaining uniform color balance through consistent storage and aging procedures (for the sake of the portrait photographer) and little to do with qualities that are of interest to most astronomers.

Kodak's website (use the onsite search window) still lists "Kodak Professional Ektachrome E200". I'd suggest this film for photographing Barbarossa.

Infrared films have poor reciprocity, though this can be improved by hypering, particularly by distilled water hypering (Wallis & Provin). Two prime choices might be Konica IR750 (peak sensitivity 7500 A) and (if available) Agfa APX 200S (peak 7250 A). Kodak Technical Pan 2415 (it's B&W) hasn't been manufactured since several years prior to 2004, though has good far red sensitivity (with hypering) and reportedly stores well even for a decade without refrigeration.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 12 Mar 2008 :  17:35:35  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In Covington's Oct. 2003 online revision of information in his 1999 2nd ed. text, he says:

"Kodak Elite Chrome 200 and Kodak Professional Ektachrome E200 Film are my favorites. (These two films are the same emulsion with slightly different aging.)

"This film has unusually good reciprocity characteristics (holds its speed well in long exposures) and unusually good response to emission nebulae (which come out bright cherry-red)."

Local photo shops only stock "Professional Elite Chrome 200". I bought two rolls, so I'll be ready to go.

I do find separate online Kodak technical data sheets, both dated 2005, for "Professional Ektachrome E200" and for "Professional Elite Chrome 200". The former data sheet has a section on push processing but the latter doesn't.

So, I would prefer "Professional Ektachrome E200". Covington says that of the two films, this is the one he has used the most; also, Covington's 1999 book says that push processing to 640 substantially increases its red response, while the data sheet on "Professional Elite Chrome 200" doesn't see fit to mention push processing at all.

Here's a Kodak expert quoted on a photography messageboard. He enthusiastically advocates push processing for Professional Ektachrome E200, but for the other film he is silent on the subject. On the other hand, he seems to imply that push processing would be superfluous, for Professional Elite Chrome 200:

(Aug. 2003)

"Here's the official response from Kodak:

'No, these two Kodak Films [Professional Ektachrome E200 vs. Elite Chrome 200] are very different. Kodak Elite Chrome 200 Film is inherently higher in color saturation and contrast, while Kodak Professional Ektachrome E200 Film, shot at EI 200, is pretty flat. However, the E200 pushed even 1-stop to EI 320, nicely increases in color saturation and contrast without adversely impacting color accuracy or grain. You can actually shoot this film all the way out to EI 1000 with excellent results. ...

-Peter V.
Kodak Information and Technical Support
Kodak Professional
Ph. 800-242-2424 ext. 19 ' "

The two leading photo shops in Des Moines each told me on the phone today that they have a few rolls of Professional Ektachrome E200 in stock. I might call them again to confirm that their statement is accurate and that they still have it, before I drive to Des Moines.

Update June 23: I've visited two of the three leading photo shops in this area. All three had just told me by phone that they had Professional Ektachrome E200. Neither of the two shops I actually visited, really had it. Both told me, or behaved as if I would assume, that Elite Chrome 200 is identical. According to Kodak, it most definitely isn't (see above). I bought some anyway at one of the shops, because it might be the best I can do, considering time limits.

This incident reminds me of the college student sitting next to me in the computer lab who told someone on his cell phone, "I have to hang up now, I have another call." Then, not caring that I and two other witnesses were learning that he was an habitual liar, he resumed working at the computer. There was no other call.

So a company that manufactures cell phones, maybe his cell phone, fired their safety officer, an epidemiologist who confirmed the cell phone - brain cancer link and refused to whitewash it. The college student tells little lies to his friends, the photo shop salesmen tell bigger lies to me, the cell phone manufacturer tells yet bigger lies to both of them. The big fish eat the little fish. Should we live like fish?

When lying becomes too widespread, speech becomes valueless. The statement of something, ceases to have any correlation with the likelihood that it is true. One knows no more after hearing a statement, than one did before. The speaker might as well not speak at all.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 12 Mar 2008 :  19:53:20  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Infrared and Extended-Red Films Banned by Homeland Security?

Stanford-trained journalist Linda Howe says, that a Midwestern U.S. college photography professor told her, that the big New York photography stores told him, that U.S. Homeland Security has banned the sale of infrared cameras. The professor speculated that this ban extends to infrared film. I don't know about the cameras, but the film seems to be available despite the general contraction of the film market.

Earlier this year Kodak discontinued its IR film, which was called "HIE". I saw one seller on eBay, but the price was "gouging": $47/roll including shipping. This film has about the same IR range as standard astronomical "optical IR" plates. (I saw another discontinued film of interest, Kodak Technical Pan 2415, on eBay with three sellers, for, e.g., $15/roll incl. shipping: not gouging prices.)

Maco IR820c (range - not peak - to 8200 A, and spectral response rather flat from ~4500 to ~8100 A; not as deep IR as Kodak HIE, but closer to it than any rival, though slower) seems to have disappeared from the market too. I checked the websites of New York and Chicago dealers which the current Cachet Co. website lists as carrying their Maco infrared film. None of them now lists it. Maybe this is only a failure to update Cachet's website. The Freestyle Co. in Hollywood sells Efke IR820, which is advertised as the same thing as the Maco but by a different manufacturer, so, I ordered some.

My internet search indicates that the abovementioned "extended-red" (basically, semi-IR) B&W films, Konica IR750 (peak at 7500 A) and Agfa APX 200S (peak at 7250 A), can't be found anywhere by anyone. A Des Moines photo shop told me Agfa is defunct. The New York office of Konica told me Konica quit making film.

Another extended-red B&W film, Ilford SFX200 (peak at 7200 A, flat to ~7300 A) has resumed production and is available from Freestyle too. I ordered some, though it's said that this film has especially bad reciprocity failure. Freestyle sells yet another extended-red B&W film, Rollei 400iso (flat to ~7000 A), which I also ordered.


Update Apr. 1, 2008. I got this email today from a major U.S. vendor of IR cameras:

"In regards to the ban of IR cameras, I have not heard anything about this and believe this just may be a rumor. We do have products that are export restricted but IR cameras are definitely not banned by DHS. Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards, Paul Neak
Rental Program Manager
FLIR Systems, Inc.
978-901-820 "

(Also, restrictions on the sale of IR cameras, might be part of the U.S. Army's "owning the night" strategy in Iraq & Afghanistan. IR cameras sold in the U.S. might find their way to the enemy.)
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 19 Mar 2008 :  05:44:35  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Joe, I got the new image from the Bradford but it bounced back when I tried to send it to you. I think that hotmail has a limit to attachment files. Anyway it said your mailbox was full. The zipped file is about 8 meg. Message me with an e mail address.
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 20 Mar 2008 :  09:37:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Joe, thought you'd want the times of these two images, they're probably in the headers but I've not looked. 00:10 on Sunday 1 April 2007 (00:10:10 UTC)
01:44 on Wednesday 19 March 2008 (01:44:57 UTC)

That second one is about as close to the equinox as it gets, must bode well. No pun intended with the mention of Bode.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 23 Mar 2008 :  20:05:39  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
A Rapidly Precessing Orbit for Frey Around Barbarossa

The six pairs of Barbarossa/Frey data points conform well to an orbit whose apsides precess retrograde about 60 degrees per sidereal "month", on average. There are 17 numerical data: 2 celestial coordinates x 6, plus (6 minus 1) time intervals. The model contains only 10 adjustable parameters: the orientation of the orbital plane (2 parameters), the dimensions of the orbital ellipse (2 params.), the initial point on that ellipse (1), the initial orientation of the apses (1), the mean rate of precession of the apses (1), and that rate's sinusoidal variation (3). Here's how I estimate this orbit by elementary methods:

1. Graph all six presumed Freys relative to their Barbarossas, on the same sheet with all the Barbarossas at the origin. (Multiply RA degrees by cos(Decl).) Note that A2A (i.e., the line from A2, the 1954 Barbarossa, to A, the 1954 Frey) is the longest apparent radius, that CC9 is second longest apparent, and that these are (anti)parallel. Guess that Frey's orbital plane around Barbarossa, is tilted to our line of sight, about the axis A2A. JGSR (i.e., the line from Genebriera's 2007 Barbarossa, to Riley's 2007 Frey, only a few days later) is perpendicular to A2A, and JGSR is longer than B3B or D3D (the other radii which are roughly perpendicular to A2A). So, guess the orbital plane's tilt angle as arcsin(JGSR/A2A) = 37.5 deg, from edge-on to our line of sight (or following binary star convention, we could say 90-37.5 = 52.5 from face-on). The Barbarossa/Frey orbital plane also is inclined 22 deg to Barbarossa's path around the sun, for a total inclination, to the Barbarossa/sun orbital plane, of 43.5 deg.

2. Now calculate all the actual lengths and angles in the orbital plane. Assume a highly elliptical orbit whose plane is invariant but whose apsides precess retrograde, rapidly. For a first approximation, let's use the position vector itself as an estimate of the line of apsides. For the fairly long times C9E4 (i.e., the time from C9 to E4) and E4SR, we then can estimate the rates of precession, 15.4 & 27.1 deg/yr, resp.

3. Let's approximate Frey's orbit as a precessing ellipse. For e = 0.6, Frey would spend ~2/3 of its time beyond the semimajor axis distance. The two shortest of the six actual radii are those of B and C9, and these are almost equal. So, adjust them to exact equality, and assume they equal the semimajor axis (which is then 0.50 AU). Using the apsis precession rate C9E4 (estimated in #2, as 15.4 deg/yr) subtract the amount of apsis precession, from the actual angle between B & C9. Plot the ellipse. The eccentricity is e = 0.7393. Frey's Keplerian sidereal month, with this major axis, would be 3.736 Julian yr.

4. Assume that an outer moon, Freya, in a larger orbit nearly perpendicular to Frey's, and edge-on to our line of sight (maybe somehow forced to be nearly perpendicular to Barbarossa's nearly-circular orbital path, like a submerged pan dragged through water), causes Frey's apsis precession. Suppose Freya's mass equals Frey's and that there is no other mass in the Barbarossa system. That is, the total mass is 0.0103 solar masses (determined from Neptune precession resonance), and the masses Barbarossa:Frey:Freya = 0.8771:0.1229:0.1229 = 7:1:1. If Freya & Frey have 2:1 orbital resonance, then Freya's major axis is 0.83 AU (including the additional centripetal force, exerted on Freya, by Frey).

5. Consider the effect of apsis precession rate, on the shape of the precessing ellipse, for the case of very small eccentricity. If a turntable's frame of reference is to have the same forces as are exerted on Frey, there will have to be additional special forces in the turntable's surrounding fixed frame, to cancel Coriolis force and the apparent force due to change in the turntable's speed. Conservation of angular momentum in the turntable frame, and equality of centripetal and centrifugal forces, afford two algebraic equations in r, Omega (the ellipse, or rather circle, orbital frequency in the fixed frame) and omega (the turntable frequency), from which r is elimated to give Omega as a function of omega. Also, the effect of turntable acceleration, delta(omega), on the eccentricity and line of apsides, is estimated and considered.

6. Assume B & D are inbound; A, C9, E4 & SR outbound. Considering the relation between Freya's perturbation force on Frey, and Frey's on Freya, gives the cycle of Freya's apsis precession, as about 36 yr if Frey's cycle of apsis precession is 22 yr; this 36 yr also should be the period of variation of Frey's apsis precession rate. I performed one or two steps of a rapidly converging computation in which a more accurate description of the precessing ellipses, leads to a more accurate determination of the apses and of the sinusoidally varying precession rates, and in turn to an even more accurate description of the ellipses. Frey's precession rate varies approximately sinusoidally from almost zero, to about 36 deg/yr, almost the highest rate for which the nearly-circular case has a solution balancing forces and conserving angular momentum (see #5). The average precession rate is 16.4 deg/yr, i.e. 53 deg/ actual average sidereal month. The parameters of the sinusoidal variation of precession rate (mean, amplitude, frequency, and phase) are determined by the five apsis positions 1986-2007 (1986 & 1987 both are used up in determining the ellipse plus one apsis position), but as a test, the position at A (1954) conforms to the model, if the mean precession rate is reduced to 15.0 deg/yr. The six final calculated accurate ellipses have eccentricities from 0.637 to 0.683.

7. The time estimates for the motions BC9, C9E4, E4D, and E4SR all are too high, by 11.7%, 24.0%, 31.6%, and 20.7%, resp. Also, the model overestimates the time A2A-B3B by 20.7% (if 11+ orbits are assumed). The estimates C9E4 & E4SR should be most accurate, because these time intervals are nearly several whole anomalistic months. Roughly, BC9 is, timewise, the inner 1/3 of the ellipse and E4D the outer 2/3; weighting these by time, 1/3::2/3, gives 25.0%. These three numbers, 24.0%, 20.7%, and 25.0%, are so close that surely they tell us the amount by which the major axis of Frey originally has been overestimated; they correspond to an adjustment from 0.50, to 0.435 AU.

8. Averaging from 1986 to 2007, Frey's anomalistic month is 2.86 Julian yr, and its sidereal month 3.23 Julian yr. From #7, the Keplerian sidereal month (what the month would be if Freya disappeared) is 3.03 Julian yr (this needn't exactly equal the actual average sidereal month). Frey's apsis precession varies from 0 to 100 deg per (Frey) sidereal month (ave. 53 deg). By contrast, Luna's apsis precession is 3.0 deg per sidereal lunar month. A particular neutron star reportedly exhibits presumed relativistic apsis precession of 38 deg / cycle. However, published numerical computations confirm that Frey's rapid precession is roughly consistent with Freya's mass and orbit.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 24 Mar 2008 :  11:44:42  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Freya's Orbit

"...Orbits rotate within the plane in the same sense as satellite motion when inclination is less than ~63.4 degrees, and in the opposite sense at higher inclinations. Edit: In exact terms, the cutoff occurs when inclination = arcsin(sqrt(4/5))."

- Grant Hutchison, Senior Member, "Bad Astronomy" forum, Feb. 27, 2008

[This famous fact appears, inter alia, on the first page of the first article published in Celestial Mechanics vol. 1, no. 1, p. 6, June 1969. It is important in placing high-latitude communications satellites. - JK]


Frey's retrograde apsis precession would imply that Freya's orbit is roughly perpendicular to Frey's, thus roughly perpendicular to Earth's ecliptic also. This improves the chance that Freya's orbit is not only perpendicular to Earth's ecliptic, but also seen edge-on. This displacement of Freya, perpendicular to the ecliptic, could explain the displacement of the centers of mass of CC9, E3E4, and D3D.

The maximum displacement of the Barbarossa-Frey c.o.m. was 190" (1997). Because in the previous post, everything seemed consistent with Freya having 1/9 of the total mass, this implies Freya's displacement was about 8 * 190" = 25.3' = 0.4222 deg, which gives a lower bound for the apoapsis of Freya's (highly eccentric, if Frey's varying apsis precession rate is to be explained) orbit about the c.o.m.; the corresponding lower bound for the apoapsis from Freya to Barbarossa (or more accurately to the Barbarossa-Frey c.o.m.), is about 0.4222 * 9/8 = 0.4750 deg. Frey's apoapsis finally was estimated (midrange) 0.243 * 0.435/0.50 = 0.211 deg. If these moons have equal eccentricity, then their period ratio is greater than (0.4750/0.211)^1.5 * sqrt(7/8)(because of Frey's pull on Freya) = 3.16.

Without contradicting other calculations, the discepancy between 3.16 and 2, is difficult to explain completely, simply by increasing Freya's mass and eccentricity. Recall that I originally calculated the mass ratio Barbarossa:Frey by requiring that the c.o.m. path around the sun, A2A-B3B-JGSR, be straight. If the real mass ratio were known, it would be found that the c.o.m. B3B is deflected laterally also, as are CC9 (until now, said to have -1 quantum of deflection), D3D ( -2 quanta) and E3E4 ( +1 quantum). The true deflections are best estimated as +0.5, -0.5, -1.5, and +1.5 quanta, resp., so they have mean zero. Here D3D's deflection becomes -1.5 quanta instead of -2, so the lower bound of the Freya:Frey period ratio becomes 3.16*(1.5/2)^1.5 = 2.05 ~ 2.

If Freya's eccentricity is 0.65 (i.e., the same as Frey's) then the fast half of its orbit, giving displacement of Freya, equal to the width of its ellipse, i.e. 1.50*a, takes 6.46 * 29.3% = 1.89 yr. The difference in lateral displacement of Barbarossa's orbital path, between B(1986) and C(1987) requires only 0.5/1.5*2 = 2/3 of the maximum possible single displacement of Freya, 1.65*a; this 1.10*a can be achieved in 0.88 yr, if Freya is near periapsis.

On the other hand, 2.03 yr might be enough for Freya's displacement by 1.50*a, but the displacement can't be more than about 2*a (because Freya's orbit doesn't precess greatly in 2 yr); the difference in lateral displacement between E(1995) and D(1997) would seem to require 1.65*a*2 = 3.3*a ("a" denotes the semimajor axis). Furthermore, E4D occurs 9.5 yr ( = 1.5 Freya orbits) later than BC9, so would be near Freya's apoapsis and slowest motion; and, Freya's direction would be wrong (D3D is beneath E3E4; CC9 is also beneath B3B).

A possible amendment is to let most of the displacement be caused by a third, outer, moon, "Lowell", near Freya's orbital plane. Freya could help the displacement E4D by an amount equivalent to 0.9*a, and perhaps make no contribution to the displacement BC9. Then "Lowell" could be in a 3:2 resonant (T=9.5 yr) orbit with the same eccentricity as Freya, near periapsis in both 1986.5 and 1996, with as little as half Freya's mass.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 24 Mar 2008 :  19:21:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hsuan & Mardling, Astrophys Space Sci 304:243246, 2006, report their computation, that a 0.00096 solar-mass planet (Jupiter mass), in a near-perpendicular orbit with semimajor axis 0.80 AU, would cause 0.01 deg/yr retrograde apsis precession of the DI Herculis binary star system (semimajor axis 0.50 AU, e = 0.2), yet negligible change in the binary's orbital plane. This binary has 9.67 solar mass total and a mass ratio nearly 1:1.

Barbarossa + Frey have 1/1000 this mass; their mass ratio is 7:1; their eccentricity seems to be 0.65, rather than 0.2; but their semimajor axis was estimated roughly 0.14675deg * pi/180 * 196.8 AU = 0.50 AU, the same as DI Herculis. For 2:1 orbital resonance, Freya's semimajor axis would be 0.50 * ( 2 * sqrt(8/7))^(2/3) = 0.83 AU, close enough to Hsuan & Mardling's hypothetical 0.80. Then I refined my estimate: all distances were divided by 1.232 (which would speed the precession by 1.232^1.5). Freya likely has 1/8 the combined mass of Barbarossa & Frey. If the rate of Hsuan & Mardling's computed apsis precession, is proportional to the mass of the third body, then Freya should cause 0.01 * 9.67/0.00096 / 8 * 1.232^1.5 = 17.2 deg/yr (vs. 16.4 observed).
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 25 Mar 2008 :  04:15:16  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Deleted; due to idiocy on my part
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 25 Mar 2008 :  05:36:29  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Oh! What was I thinking If it's on the second one, it won't be on the first one at all.

Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 02 Apr 2008 :  04:54:11  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The first image is the newest one. The planet cannot be on both plates as they are only about 18 seconds across. The only "star" that I've found; just a quick scan, there might be more; that's on the first image but not the second, is the only green dot. Bottom left quadrant.


Go to Top of Page

nemesis

84 Posts

Posted - 03 Apr 2008 :  12:29:07  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Stoat, is the green dot the one just left of the two bright stars of about equal brightness in the lower left corner of the picture? Is this possibly Barbarossa then? How could such a massive object be so dim?
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 03 Apr 2008 :  15:31:49  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Arnold's (1988) object: evidence for an unknown optical surface surrounding Earth

HJP Arnold (Hampshire, England), Astrophotography, 2003 (foreword by Prof. David Malin, Anglo-Australian Observatory) Fig. 12.7, p. 163, shows an unidentified object (near Omega Tauri; more exactly, between 51 & 53 Tauri) which is at only, as well as I could measure, ecliptic lat. +0 deg 1.5' (Arnold's text doesn't remark this). Jupiter at the same time was nearby, but at about ecliptic lat. -1.0 deg. Such bodies, lacking any special relationship to Earth, would at best be distributed around Jupiter's orbit. With Jupiter in this position, the chance of being so close to the ecliptic would be less than (1.5'*2)/(60'*2)=2.5% (much less, for any mathematically or empirically likely distribution of inclinations)(Saturn's orbit, and the principal plane of the solar system, are even farther from the ecliptic here.) So, this object is so close to the ecliptic, that likely it is proprietary to the sun-Earth system. It is about the color of Aldebaran. Its magnitude is about midway between Aldebaran's (+0.9) and that of Epsilon Tauri (~ +4.0), thus about +2.5.

Arnold found this object on four successive photos reqiring at least four minutes of time total. The date was Nov. 2, 1988 (presumably evening, not morning, because of moonrise).

A mirror-like phenomenon arising on a perfect sphere of influence around Earth, would make images of the sun, on the ecliptic opposite the sun. A distorted sphere retaining symmetry about the ecliptic, could produce an image almost 30 deg displaced from opposition (as this is) yet still on the ecliptic. Presumably such an object wouldn't be much farther from the sun than Earth is, so a 100% albedo patch of this apparent magnitude would have small enough angular size to seem starlike in Arnold's photo. Also, the image would shift relative to the stars, only 1 deg/day = 1' / 24 minutes = 10" / four minutes. If Arnold delayed a few minutes between these frames, the movement might be barely discernible.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 03 Apr 2008 :  19:39:33  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The scarcity of stars and galaxies near the (+) CMB dipole (i.e., near my computed position for Barbarossa) is further evidence that a mini-solar system is there, with concomitant dust, extinction and reddening. (This also helps explain the unexpected faintness of the objects of the Barbarossa system itself.)

The Millenium Star Atlas says that its smallest number of cataloged stars (these go down to 11th mag) per square degree, average for any constellation, is 10; this is for Coma Berenices, which is, basically, the neighborhood of the N Galactic pole. Barbarossa's recent track (since 1954)(average galactic colatitude almost 45 deg from the N galactic pole) contains only slightly more stars than Coma Berenices, per square degree, averaging fewer than expected (expected would be 40% more than Coma). Few pages of the Millenium Catalog are as sparse in stars as the bottom half of p. 801, vol. 2 (the neighborhood of Barbarossa's track). So, Barbarossa's track is sparser in bright (mag < +11.5) stars than expected for its galactic latitude.

Despite its favorable position, far from the galactic equator, Barbarossa's track doesn't exceed the average, for cataloged galaxies. The aforesaid half-page contains four small galaxies, all near the margin of the page in cut-off degree squares that also are found on neighboring pages; so maybe they should be counted half, i.e., as two. The Millenium Catalog contains over 8000 galaxies and has 1548 chart pages, for an average of over five galaxies per page, or 2.5 per half-page.

With such small numbers, it would be better to compare parallax distances to spectroscopic distances, that is, to estimate absolute magnitude spectroscopically, and distance, from Hipparcos, then check for extinction that is unusual in amount or kind. A named 6th mag star, SV Crateris (HD 98088), a triple star with a 5.9-day eclipsing binary component, has been within 35' (2.0 AU) of Barbarossa's heliocentric track during recent decades. Study of this star might reveal the amount of extinction and reddening in that direction, and whether those are changing due to Barbarossa's motion.
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 04 Apr 2008 :  04:00:06  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Nemesis, if you download those images and open them as separate layers in photoshop, you can reduce the transparency of the top one and then slide the layer upwards until the stars line up. You'll find that they don't exactly. You'll have something that looks like a double exposure. Now this has to be down to the lens effect of the Earths atmosphere, these images are taken a year apart.

There should be a central point, so add a layer and then draw some lines between close pairs of stars and extend them. That should give you that central point. The only trouble is, it's the devil to find. I can only conclude that some of these stars have high proper motions. Could it be that there's another lens effect here, due to a "dimple" caused by a mini solar system way out there in the boonies?

You asked why is that green dot so dim? First, we have to say that it could simply be an artefact of the electronic camera on the telescope. it could be a variable star that was very dim on the first image but brighter on the second. So look at the channels. Nothing at all on the red, a bright dot on the green and an almost none existent tonal change on the blue. I would say that it's an object, as it does show on two colour channels.

Remember that the object of the game is to get an image of a planet, that's more massive than jupiter but of a smaller radius. We don't know its intrinsic brightness, and whether or not it's surrounded by a dust halo. Plus it's at about 180 AU. It's going to be at about the best resolution of the Bradford telescope, or even dimmer still.

To Joe, the top clearer image is the most recently taken, with the fits files I sent you, it's called nem4b. Remember that a robotic telescope can have problems with gimbal lock. One of the images put up here had to be flipped vertically. To line them up on a skyview plate, you may have to flip them both vertically back and also flip them horizontally as well.

If anyone is a dab hand at bringing out the best of fits files, pm me and I'll send them to you
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 04 Apr 2008 :  16:36:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars

Gross dimming of the stars occurs between 1954 and 1987 (basically, the R1 & R2 mags) according to the USNO-B catalog. I considered three regions with 2 deg radii: centered at the 1954 & 1987 Barbarossa geocentric coordinates, and another centered about 5 deg N of Barbarossa's track. The effect is unmistakable for magnitudes +15.00-17.99. More to follow (school's out and I have to get off the public library computer).
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 04 Apr 2008 :  19:22:07  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars (Part II)

Now I've automatically searched six regions of the USNO-B1 catalog. All have radius 2.00 degrees.

Region 1. Centered on the geocentric position of Barbarossa in 1954.
Region 2. ", 1987.
Region 3. Centered on RA11:10:00, Decl -2:30:00 (approx. 4.5deg N of the midpt. of Regions 1&2).
Region 4. ", RA11:10:00, Decl -12:30:00 (approx. 5.5deg S of the midpt. of Regions 1&2).
Region 5. ", RA11:34:00, Decl -12:00:00 (approx. 5deg prograde along Barbarossa's orbit and 2 deg to the S).
Region 6. ", RA10:46:00, Decl -3:00:00 (approx. 5deg retrograde along Barbarossa's orbit and 1 deg to the N).

Let n = 15, 16, or 17. Using the online VizieR service, automatically search the USNO-B catalog, for stars whose R1 lies within the interval [n,n+0.49] but R2 within the interval [n+0.50,n+0.99], for some n. Repeat with R1 & R2 switched. (A completely different but comparably big sample would be got by investigating instead the intervals [n-0.50,n-0.01] and [n,n+0.49].) This finds the numbers of stars whose R1 & R2 differ by very roughly +/- 0.5 mag.

According to the online documentation I've found for the USNO-B catalog, and the DSS "plate finder":

R1 was found from either the POSS-I survey (1949-1965; three relevant plates: 1954x2, 1956);
or, the ESO-R survey (Decl < -5 only; no plates intersect region).

R2 was found from either the POSS-II survey (irrelevant; Decl > 0 only);
or, the SERC-ER survey (1978-2002; five relevant plates: 1985, 1986, 1987, 1991, 1992).

So, the R1 magnitudes are from 1954 or 1956, and the R2 magnitudes from 1985, 1986, 1987, 1991 or 1992. For each of the six regions, I found the number of stars in the above magnitude ranges, for which R1 was dimmer and for which R2 was dimmer. For mag +15.0 to +18.0:

Region 1: R1 dimmer 445, R2 dimmer 3229, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 7.26.
Region 2: R1 dimmer 503, R2 dimmer 2299, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 4.57.
Region 3: R1 dimmer 916, R2 dimmer 864, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.94.
Region 4: R1 dimmer 1119, R2 dimmer 1759, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 1.57.
Region 5: R1 dimmer 1137, R2 dimmer 1488, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 1.31.
Region 6: R1 dimmer 1300, R2 dimmer 804, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.62.

As Barbarossa moved from its 1954 to roughly its 1987 position, the background stars near the first end of that track dimmed most consistently, and near the second end of the track somewhat less consistently. Much less consistently, but still with high statistical significance, stars 5deg retrograde of the track brightened, stars 5deg S the track dimmed, and stars 5deg prograde of the track dimmed. Stars 5deg N of the track brightened insignificantly.

A tabulation of Regions 1,2, and 3, for n = 13 or 14, confirms the above. For mag +13.0 to +15.0:

Region 1: R1 dimmer 45, R2 dimmer 845, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 18.78.
Region 2: R1 dimmer 100, R2 dimmer 611, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 6.11.
Region 3: R1 dimmer 244, R2 dimmer 128, ratio (R2 dimmer / R1 dimmer) = 0.52.

Either the stars really dimmed in Regions 1 & 2, or they didn't. If they didn't, it must be that despite calibrations made, a large error overestimating R2, or underestimating R1, at least for magnitudes +13 to +18, was made for Regions 1 & 2 (Barbarossa's hypothetical track) but not for the four surrounding Regions. Barbarossa's track does intersect the boundaries of all eight relevant plates, so, often, different plates must have been used for different regions.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
958 Posts

Posted - 05 Apr 2008 :  22:07:50  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In Barbarossa's Cavern There Are No Stars (Part III)

Transient dimming of background stars near the location of Barbarossa, also occurs for the Blue magnitudes. These magnitudes derive from completely different plates than the Red magnitudes. The POSS-I Blue plates have the same dates as the corresponding Red plates; for the somewhat expanded area considered below, the average date of the relevant POSS-I Blue plates is within a year of that of the POSS-I Red plates considered above; none of them differ from that date by more than 2 yr. The relevant SERC-J Blue plates all are from about 5 yr earlier than the average date of the SERC-ER Red plates.

I've added more (circular, 2 degree radius) Regions, 7 through 9. Listed from retrograde to prograde, the Regions now are:

Region 9. RA 10:30 Decl -2:00
Region 6. RA 10:46 Decl -3:00
Region 1. RA 11:02:25.26, Decl -5:56:11.3 (Barbarossa 1954 pos.)
Region 2. RA 11:18:03.18, Decl -7:58:46.1 (Barbarossa 1987 pos.)
Region 5. RA 11:34 Decl -12:00
Region 7. RA 11:50 Decl -12:00
Region 8. RA 12:06 Decl -14:00

Also there are the regions displaced laterally,

Region 3. RA 11:10 Decl -2:30
Region 4. RA 11:10 Decl -12:30

Blue magnitudes often are missing from the USNO-B catalog. I searched for stars whose B1 mag was 12.00-13.99 and B2 mag 14.00-15.99 (or vice versa). There averaged fewer than a dozen of these in each Region, so I also searched for stars whose B1 mag was 16.00-17.99 and B2 mag 18.00-19.99 (or vice versa). The totals were:

(prograde on Barbarossa's track)
Region 9: B1 dimmer 73, B2 dimmer 1, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 73.0
Region 6: B1 dimmer 77, B2 dimmer 5, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 15.4
Region 1: B1 dimmer 44, B2 dimmer 8, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 5.50
Region 2: B1 dimmer 38, B2 dimmer 14, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 2.72
Region 5: B1 dimmer 120, B2 dimmer 45, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 2.67
Region 7: B1 dimmer 103, B2 dimmer 18, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer=5.72
Region 8: B1 dimmer 118, B2 dimmer 3, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 39.3

(lateral regions)
Region 3: B1 dimmer 66, B2 dimmer 3, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 22.0
Region 4: B1 dimmer 44, B2 dimmer 28, B1 dimmer::B2 dimmer= 1.57
(The position of Region 3, projected onto Barbarossa's track, is approx. Region 1; the projected position of Region 4, is approx. Region 2.)

So, the Red and the Blue plates together, prove that transient, generalized dimming of background stars recently has occurred in the vicinity of the positive "CMB" dipole. This is the position of the "disappearing dots", which because of their orbital regularity, I believe to be Barbarossa and its satellite(s).
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 06 Apr 2008 :  06:58:50  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Heres the dss red image of that bit of sky. I've put two yellow lines on it as markers for where you have to drag the Bradford telescope image onto it in photoshop (the tracking is a bit off with the Bradford.) I'm not sure yet hen the dss image was taken but there's quite a bit of proper star motions going on in here.

Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 06 Apr 2008 :  08:05:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The dss image was taken in 1987. Teh image size is 17.1' wide by 17.6' deep
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 72  Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated © © 2002-? Meta Research Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 1.3 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.03