(cba:news) V392 Persei
jop at astro.columbia.edu
Sat Nov 14 03:47:49 EST 2020
Sorry, this is more of a "chat' item... but I wanted to reach as many
V392 Per observers as I can.
1. We still have a very great need for European coverage, especially
early-night European coverage (and preferably all night, to join with
2. As usual for unfiltered data (and really for all data), it's
necessary to apply additive constants to put different observers on the
same scale. Those constants are determined by measurements which are
SIMULTANEOUS. There are two circumstances which make this particularly
(a) Changing comparison stars. When the data are simultaneous and of
good quality, a good measurement is made. But when you change
comparison stars (singular or plural), that additive offset could
change. I've noticed some variations as high as 0.15 mag. That's fine
- for the one night of observation. But simultaneity is not achieved on
most nights, so use of that additive constant could be erroneous. And
in searching for long periods (a few days or more), this can be a big
systematic and unmeasurable error.
This has always been true, but is usually not serious since I
often subtract the mean magnitude anyway, which optimizes the search for
short periods. But V392 Per may have a several-day period, where it can
be a problem.
(b) V392 Per has a close neighbor, and I imagine people have different
strategies for dealing with it (include, exclude, report with or without
subtraction, etc.). Not a big deal as long as you always do the same
thing. (No particular recommendation, since it always depends on the
precise details of telescope and quality of night.)
So... let me know if these issues could pose a problem with your data.
I measure the offsets in magnitude very frequently, so know that it's
not a common problem. But it can be - and for this star very reluctant
to yield its secrets, I wanted to be extra vigilant.
Center for Backyard Astrophysics (CBA) mailing lists
More information about the cba-public