arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1304.5494

Keepers of the Double Stars

Abstract

Astronomers have long tracked double stars in efforts to find those that are gravitationally-bound binaries and then to determine their orbits. Early catalogues by the Herschels, Struves, and others began with their own discoveries. In 1906 court reporter and amateur astronomer Sherburne Wesley Burnham published a massive double star catalogue containing data from many observers on more than 13,000 systems. Lick Observatory astronomer Robert Grant Aitken produced a much larger catalogue in 1932 and coordinated with Robert Innes of Johannesburg, who catalogued the southern systems. Aitken maintained and expanded Burnham's records of observations on handwritten file cards, and eventually turned them over to the Lick Observatory, where astrometrist Hamilton Jeffers further expanded the collection and put all the observations on punched cards. With the aid of Frances M. "Rete" Greeby he made two catalogues: an Index Catalogue with basic data about each star, and a complete catalogue of observations, with one observation per punched card. He enlisted Willem van den Bos of Johannesburg to add southern stars, and together they published the Index Catalogue of Visual Double Stars, 1961.0. As Jeffers approached retirement he became greatly concerned about the disposition of the catalogues. He wanted to be replaced by another "double star man," but Lick Director Albert E. Whitford had the new 120-inch reflector, the world's second largest telescope, and he wanted to pursue modern astrophysics instead. Jeffers was vociferously opposed to turning over the card files to another institution, and especially against their coming under the control of Kaj Strand of the United States Naval Observatory. The USNO got the files and has maintained the records ever since, first under Charles Worley, and, since 1997, under Brian Mason. Now called the Washington Double Star Catalog, it is online.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Joseph S. Tenn. 2013-04-19. Keepers of the Double Stars. https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.5494

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Scientific Promise

Scientists constantly face decisions about what lines of research to pursue. This Element introduces the philosophical debate about scientific pursuitworthiness. It explains how it can be rational to pursue a theory even if the theory is less well supported than its rivals, and it discusses existing philosophical frameworks for guiding pursuit decisions. The Element also develops a new perspective. Existing accounts focus predominantly on theories, while experiments are largely neglected. This is an important shortcoming. Theoretical promise depends on experimental promise, and experimental promise raises questions of its own. Drawing on the epistemology of experimentation, the Element advances an account of experimental pursuitworthiness. It is argued that such pursuitworthiness depends on experimental virtues like a clear signal and simplicity of design. Moreover, the kinds of uncertainty that constrain the assessment of scientific pursuits are examined. Finally, the Element highlights open questions in the philosophy of scientific pursuitworthiness.

physics.hist-ph

Is Black Hole Evaporation Prediction Friendly?

Manchak and Weatherall (2018) formulate the black hole information paradox as a failure of predictability in black hole evaporation spacetimes, diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I offer a strategy for resolving this paradox. I argue that failures of predictability in black hole evaporation are not well diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I then consider two weakenings of global hyperbolicity: prediction and retrodiction friendliness, the failure of which could ground a new paradox. However, deidealized black hole evaporation models can be prediction and retrodiction friendly. Therefore, the information paradox cannot be based upon failures of global hyperbolicity, nor either retrodiction or prediction unfriendliness.

physics.hist-ph

The Crab Nebula progenitor: recovering the 1054 AD supernova event as galactic Gamma-ray burst

In 1054 AD a daytime star appeared in the constellation of Taurus, for three weeks, and it was reported in various sources from Europe to China/Japan: it was one of the few documented galactic supernovae of the last two millenia. This paradigm has been established about sixty years ago, as the comprehension of the physics of supernovae progressed with enough observational data. The Gamma-ray bursts were discovered in the same period, but only in the past few years have their observations become daily and their distances have been fully understood as cosmological. After the explosion, the exponential decay of the luminosity in gamma-rays and X-rays has been followed with telescopes onboard dedicated satellites. Also the exponential decay of the afterglow's optical and radio frequencies have been observed with the largest optical and radio telescopes. Within the binary-driven hypernova framework, successful in explaining all the observed phases of the Gamma-ray bursts, the universal exponential decay can be extended to 1000 years after the burst, to account for the present values of Gamma and X-rays as well as optical and radio frequencies of the Crab Nebula. Both the daytime visibility of the burst, and the simultaneous radiation plagues appeared in Constantinople and Cairo is a strong evidence of the presence of Gamma-rays in the lower atmosphere, coming from the same source originating the Crab nebula. The association to the daytime visibility of that star and the following plague meets exactly the etymology of the word dis-aster, bad star.

physics.hist-ph