|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 YEARS OF VISUAL AND
CCD PHOTOMETRY OF ASTEROIDS FOR THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUMMARY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HISTORY OF THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RESULTS OF THE MAP ON
OCTOBER 30,2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANALYSES OF THE MAP
RESULTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE TOOLS OF THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
METHODS AND DEVELOPMENT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VISUAL METHOD |
|
|
|
|
USE OF THE CCD MEASURES
UP TO 2005 |
|
|
|
|
DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE
INCREASE OF ACCURATE CCD MEASURES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since
1801, more than 362500
asteroids have been discovered and 145705 of them are numbered at mid- |
|
|
December
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
observed magnitudes of the minor planets are useful for : |
|
|
|
|
the computation of the
absolute magnitudes |
|
|
|
|
the constitution of the
ephemerides |
|
|
|
|
the estimation of the rough diameters of the asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evolution
of the magnitude types for the asteroids and their absolute magnitudes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Up
to 1985, the absolute magnitude B(1,0) was based on the photographic B band
of the UBV system |
|
|
The
photographic plates were at that time the tool of the observatories |
|
|
|
The
magnitudes B(1,0) used then were issued from published lists officialized in
1978 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
1985, there was a change of band for the absolute
magnitude renamed H
and passing to the V band |
|
|
The
standard conversion from the B magnitude to V had been made by H = B(1,0) -1,0 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
Formula for the computation of the V magnitudes of the ephemerides : |
|
|
|
Based
on the absolute magnitude of an asteroid located at 1 astronomical unit to
the Sun and Earth |
|
|
|
Formula
adoptes by the IAU commission 20 in November 1985 : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
magnitude
= H + 5 * log(r*delta) - 2,5 * log [ (1-G)*phi1 + G*phi2 ] |
|
|
|
|
with |
|
|
|
|
|
phi1 = exp[ -3,33*(tan
(bęta/2) )0,63] |
|
|
|
|
|
phi2 = exp[ -1,87*(tan
(bęta/2) )1,22] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H is the averaged absolute
magnitude in the V band, with the solar phase
angle = 0° |
|
|
|
G is the slope parameter ( standardized to 0,15 if the G parameter is unknown ) |
|
|
|
r and Delta respectively are the heliocentric and geocentric distances |
|
|
|
Phi
1 and Phi 2 are two phase functions |
|
|
|
|
beta is the angle phase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NB
: The formula predicts the observed opposition surge and the non-linear drop
off in brightness at large phase |
|
angles
and is valid from 0 <= beta <= 120 degrees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Various
remarks : |
|
|
|
The
H magnitudes of the numbered asteroids have been used
for the first time in the "Ephemerides |
|
|
of
Minor Planets" of 1988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some
modifications of these H
magnitudes have been made mostly in 1992 and other revisions for the |
|
|
last
time in 1998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
asteroids with problems of magnitude are numerous : about 1 on 10 observed
objects |
|
|
|
(estimation based on
the total of MAP or pre-MAP objects with regard to the 4500 different objects
seen by Harvey) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Various
differences of absolute magnitude have been reported by the visual observers
before 1996. |
|
|
The
most part of the high discrepancies seen before 1998 have been taken in
account by the MPC : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE OF OBJECTS WITH A
HIGH DISCREPANCY OF ABSOLUTE MAGNITUDE - 1980 TO 1996 |
|
|
NAME AND NUMBER |
DIFF. |
|
NAME |
MAG. |
MAG. |
MAG. |
MAG. |
|
|
|
|
ASTEROID |
MAG. |
DATES |
OBSER- |
B(1,0) |
H |
H |
H |
REMARKS |
|
|
|
|
|
SEEN |
|
VER |
EMP87 |
88-91 |
92-97 |
1998 to |
|
|
|
|
( F= fainter or B= brighter than predicted in the annual EMP ) |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
316
Goberta |
|
1,2 +B |
88/11/11 |
Pilcher |
11,5 |
11,5 |
9,8 |
9,8 |
Correction
on EMP92 |
|
|
473
Nolli |
|
1,0 +F |
88/02/10 |
Harvey |
- |
10,0 |
12,3 |
12,3 |
Correction
on EMP92 |
|
|
1206
Numerowia |
|
1,6 +F |
89/10/22 |
Harvey |
12,4 |
9,5 |
11,2 |
11,8 |
Correction
on EMP92 |
|
|
1212
Francette |
|
2,0 +F |
80/02/12 |
Pilcher |
8,0 |
9,4 |
9,5 |
9,54 |
Correction
on EMP87 |
|
|
|
|
|
0,8 +F |
83/08/09 |
Fabre |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,2 +F |
85/10/10 |
Harvey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1293
Sonja |
|
1,8 +F |
92/11/08 |
Harvey |
15,4 |
14,0 |
12,0 |
12,0 |
Error
on EMP92 |
|
|
|
|
1,3-1,6 +F |
96/08/09 |
Faure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1656
Suomi |
|
1,0 +F |
87/11/21 |
Harvey |
15,4 |
13,1 |
12,4 |
12,4 |
Error
on EMP87-92 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,1 +F |
96/02/24 |
Faure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1663 Van Den Bos |
1,5 +B |
90/11/12 |
Harvey |
14,9 |
13,7 |
12,2 |
12,2 |
Correction
on EMP92 |
|
|
1890 Konoshenkova |
1,0 +F |
95/12/21 |
Harvey |
12,6 |
11,2 |
10,8 |
10,8 |
Error
on EMP92 ? |
|
|
2143
Jimarnold |
|
2,5 +F |
97/08/31 |
Faure |
15,3 |
14,1 |
11,2 |
14,3 |
Correction
on EMP98 |
|
|
2183
Neufang |
|
1,0 +F |
90/06/20 |
Harvey |
12,6 |
11,4 |
11,5 |
11,5 |
|
|
|
|
2491
Tvashtri |
|
1,5 +F |
87/01/03 |
Harvey |
14,6 |
13,7 |
13,7 |
13,68 |
|
|
|
|
2791
Paradise |
|
1,3 +F |
88/01/24 |
Harvey |
13,0 |
11,5 |
12,2 |
11,5 |
|
|
|
|
3578
Carestia |
|
1,8 +F |
91/10/04 |
Faure |
- |
10,5 |
8,1 |
11,6 |
Error
on EMP 89/92 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,9 +F |
91/10/13 |
Harvey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,0 +F |
96/07/22 |
Garrett |
|
|
|
|
Correction
on EMP98 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,1 +F |
96/09/04 |
Garrett |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3873
Roddy |
|
1,4 +F |
92/12/03 |
Harvey |
- |
13,1 |
11,8 |
12,0 |
Error
on EMP92 |
|
|
|
|
1,3-1,6 +F |
96/06/11 |
Faure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4116
Elachi |
|
1,2 +F |
94/03/16 |
Harvey |
- |
13,3 |
13,0 |
13,2 |
|
|
|
|
4729
1980 RO2 |
|
1,3 +B |
90/10/17 |
Harvey |
- |
- |
13,1 |
13,0 |
|
|
|
|
4744
1988 RF5 |
|
1,2 +F |
91/01/26 |
Harvey |
- |
11,6 |
10,9 |
11,1 |
Error
on EMP92 ? |
|
|
5641
Mc Cleese |
|
1,7 +F |
95/03/25 |
Harvey |
- |
- |
12,7 |
12,7 |
|
|
|
|
5905
Johnson |
1,1-1,4 +F |
95/08/02 |
Harvey |
- |
- |
13,0 |
13,2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Causes
of the high discrepancies of H magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eventual
errors of the photographic magnitude measures which
served as basis for the calculation of |
|
|
the
absolute magnitudes B(1,0) modified after in H magnitudes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
inaccuracies relating to the standard conversion from B(1,0) to H by H = B(1.0) + 1.0 mag, for |
|
|
some
of the first thousand of numbered asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
H Magnitudes of the new numbered minor planets often computed from magnitudes
of different |
|
|
color
bands, and/or sometimes with
a small number of photometric measures, the actual main goal of |
|
|
the
MPC being to do accurate orbital elements for the legions of new discovered
asteroďds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HISTORY OF THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Late
in the year 1996, creation of the "Magnitude Alert
Project" ( MAP ) by
Lawrence GARRETT from
the |
|
|
ALPO
Minor Planet Section ( Association of Lunar and Planetory Observers ) to do messages of alerts on the |
|
|
asteroids
suspected to have a real magnitude different from the predicted magnitudes of
the ephemerides. |
|
|
He
was helped by Dr. Richard Binzel in getting the start of the Magnitude
Program |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
I also had the same wish for the asteroids with magnitude discrepancies, I
joined immediately the MAP. |
|
|
|
Soon,
we completed the MAP by a program of follow-up of the
MAP objects, for the estimation of their true H |
|
|
magnitude. |
|
|
|
As
a member of AUDE ( Association des Utilisateurs de Détecteurs Electroniques,
managed by Dr François COLAS |
|
as
the Chairperson ), I proposed to do measures for the MAP to the other AUDE
members |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This
Observation project then is run by the Minor planet Section ( Prof. Frederick
PILCHER as the coordinator |
|
|
and
Lawrence GARRETT as the acting assistant coordinator ) and by the French AUDE
association. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
goals of the MAP are then to find the asteroids with errors of H magnitude equal to 0,3 magnitude and |
|
more, and to follow the MAP objects on many oppositions for a better estimation of the true H magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
this goal, we must obtain many measures in V or similar
to V and made on several oppositions, |
|
|
by
several observers, to permit STATISTICALLY the elimination of the sources of errors (variability, |
|
|
personal
deviation and various causes of random errors ). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
that, some measures made
during a night on one or some MAP objects always are useful. |
|
|
|
It's
an easy task, feasible on a part of night
or between two other types of
observations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE
ACTUAL NICHE OF THE MAP ( AMONG THE AMATEURS ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASTEROIDS
< 6 UA |
OCCULTATIONS |
LIGHTCURVES |
|
MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DIAM.
> 75 KM |
|
Known accurate orbit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sure occult. Sites |
|
|
|
|
|
|
sűre H mag to 0.1 mag |
|
|
=> out of MAP goals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diameter |
|
very accurate |
|
no |
|
|
|
0.01
mag H accuracy |
with help lightcurve |
Adjustment
on |
|
no |
|
|
|
albedo |
|
with help lightcurve |
the V band to do
. |
|
no |
|
|
|
taxonomical
type |
|
with help lightcurve |
|
no |
|
|
|
period
of rotation |
|
|
no |
|
yes |
|
sometimes possible |
|
|
Light
variability |
|
|
no |
|
yes |
|
|
seen if high |
|
|
|
visible
shapes of object |
|
yes |
|
yes |
|
no |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DIAM.
< 75 KM |
|
Orbit less accurate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Narrow width of occ.line |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
mag H accuracy |
|
not easy |
difficult adjustment on
V band |
possible |
|
|
estimation
of diameter |
|
not easy |
( faint stars + filters
) |
|
possible |
|
|
period
of rotation |
|
no |
|
yes |
|
sometimes possible |
|
|
Light
variability |
|
no |
|
yes |
|
seen if high |
|
|
|
visible
shapes of object |
|
not easy |
|
fairly good |
|
no |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OBLIGATION TO OBSERVE
AGAIN THE OBJECT AT SEVERAL OPPOSITIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From
1997 to 2002, the observers of 2 associations formed the
hard core of the MAP observers : |
|
|
|
|
The visual observers of
the ALPO Minor Planet Section |
|
|
|
|
The AUDE observers using CCD cameras |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All
the 6 most active visual observers are members of the virtual club named
"Millenium Club",
which contains, |
|
|
with
Paul COMBA and Tom LASKOWSKY, the eight observers
who observed visually
MORE THAN 1000 |
|
|
|
DIFFERENT
ASTEROIDS ... and even
several thousands as Roger HARVEY, unmatched
world record |
|
|
holder
with more than 4400 minor planets ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
CCD observers, mainly AUDE
members, discovered since 1996 many asteroids ,
supernovae and |
|
|
|
made
numerous lightcurves which permitted the discovery of several binary
asteroids, but also many |
|
|
variable
stars in the images of the followed asteroids ( group "CDR-CDL" managed by Raoul BEHREND
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some
other active CCD observers, notably Americans ( Brian
WARNER from the CALL,... ) or Italians ( Sergio |
|
|
FOGLIA et al ) also made measures for the MAP, directly or
indirectly during their lightcurve work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since
2003, the activity mainly continued visually |
|
|
|
|
The difficulties
to obtain accurate CCD magnitudes by the amateurs
were the causes of the retirement by |
|
|
|
a majority of the CCD
observers |
|
|
|
|
Reorientation
from a part of the CCD observers toward the asteroid lightcurves, more easy
feasible and |
|
|
|
more desired by the
professional astronomers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE OF THE MORE ACTIVE
MAP OBSERVERS |
|
|
|
|
In blue, the visual observers |
In gold, the CCD
observers ( measures often linked to lightcurves ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
OBSERVER NAME |
|
|
TOTAL OF MEASURES |
visual |
CCD |
CCD |
CCD |
|
|
|
|
( on December 31,2006 ) |
estimations |
Tycho |
USNO |
GSC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gérard
FAURE |
|
|
France |
715 |
|
667 |
44 |
4 |
|
|
|
René
ROY |
|
|
France |
474 |
|
|
402 |
72 |
|
|
Andrew
SALTHOUSE |
|
|
USA |
295 |
|
295 |
|
|
|
Roger
HARVEY |
|
|
USA |
293 |
|
293 |
|
|
|
Jean-Marie
LLAPASSET |
|
|
France |
200 |
|
|
132 |
68 |
|
|
Pierre
ANTONINI |
|
|
France |
174 |
|
|
92 |
82 |
|
|
Bernard
CHRISTOPHE |
|
|
France |
138 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
Lawrence
GARRETT |
|
|
USA |
122 |
|
122 |
|
|
|
Claude
BOIVIN |
|
|
Canada |
110 |
|
|
78 |
32 |
|
|
Stefano
SPOSETTI |
|
|
Swiss |
102 |
|
|
26 |
60 |
42 |
|
|
Robin
CHASSAGNE |
|
|
France |
91 |
|
|
39 |
52 |
|
|
Stephane
MORATA/Didier MORATA |
France |
68 |
|
|
43 |
25 |
|
|
Raoul
BEHREND ( +6 MOWLAVI + REVAZ) |
Swiss |
64 |
|
|
54 |
10 |
|
|
|
Frederick
PILCHER |
|
|
USA |
62 |
|
62 |
|
|
|
Bruno CHARDONNENS |
|
|
Swiss |
43 |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
Olivier
THIZY |
|
|
France |
42 |
|
|
1 |
41 |
|
|
Serafino
Zani Observatory |
|
Italy |
41 |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
(FOGLIA,CREMASHINI,
MARINELLO, PIZETTI) |
|
|
|
|
|
Emmanuel
BROCHARD |
|
|
France |
34 |
|
|
17 |
17 |
|
|
|
Raymond
PONCY |
|
|
France |
33 |
|
|
18 |
|
15 |
|
|
Fernand
VAN DEN ABBEEL |
|
Belgium |
29 |
|
|
14 |
15 |
|
|
|
Dennis
CHESNEY |
|
|
USA |
27 |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
Ben
HUDGENS |
|
|
USA |
26 |
|
26 |
|
|
|
Philippe
MARTINOLE |
|
|
France |
24 |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
Jean-Gabriel
BOSCH |
|
|
Swiss |
23 |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
VISUAL OBSERVERS OF THE MAP, ON DECEMBER 31,2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
(by chronological order
of entrance in the Millenium Club) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
visual |
Visual |
Actual |
|
Obser- |
Local |
Total |
Total |
|
Honoured |
|
|
|
Observers |
activity |
teles- |
Country |
vation |
limit |
obser- |
different |
by the |
|
|
|
|
|
since |
cope |
|
site |
mag. |
vations |
asteroids |
asteroid |
|
|
|
|
...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PILCHER |
1968 |
35 cm |
USA |
Illinois |
14,9 |
> 4500 |
1816 |
|
(1990) Pilcher |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HARVEY |
1974 |
73 cm |
USA |
North |
16 |
> 9500 |
4493 |
|
(4278) Harvey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAURE |
1975 |
20 cm |
France |
Isere |
16,5 |
~ 4600 |
1974 |
|
(8297) Gerardfaure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SALTHOUSE |
1965 |
44 cm |
USA |
New |
14,5 |
18600 |
1728 |
not yet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jersey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HUDGENS |
1972 |
40 cm |
USA |
Texas |
15,5 |
> 4500 |
1980 |
not yet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GARRETT |
1974 |
32 cm |
USA |
Vermont |
15,9 |
> 2500 |
1223 |
not yet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE SIX MORE ACTIVE
VISUAL OBSERVERS IN THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frederick PILCHER |
|
Roger HARVEY |
|
Gérard FAURE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew SALTHOUSE |
|
Ben HUDGENS |
|
Lawrence GARRETT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE ASTRONOMICAL
EQUIPMENTS USED BY THE VISUAL OBSERVERS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C 14 PILCHER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Celestron 14 used by Frederick
PILCHER |
Dome and 29 inch Telescope from Roger
HARVEY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Celestron 8 and movable panels used by
Gerard FAURE |
Andrew SALTHOUSE and his 17 inch
telescope |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben HUDGENS and one of his telescopes (
Meade 16 ) |
Lawrence GARRETT near his 13 inch
telescope |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
five American observers use big telescopes but are hindered by the light
pollution of the nearest cities. |
|
|
Contrary
to all expectations, the small telescope of 20 cm, used under a pure mountain
sky, has |
|
|
|
one
of the highest limit magnitudes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
theoritical limit of magnitude for a telescope is soon exceeded, when the
observer can see through an |
|
|
eyepiece,
under a pure and quiet sky, at more than 20° over the horizon and by high
magnification. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RESULTS OF THE MAP ON OCTOBER 30,2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAP
asteroid by group : |
|
|
|
|
|
Near
Earth Asteroids |
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
Mars-crossers |
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
Hungarias |
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
Cisjovian
Belt |
|
332 |
|
|
|
|
Jupiter-trojans
and jupiter-crossers |
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
asteroids
in the MAP Database on October 27,2006 |
416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution
of the MAP objects by thousand of numbered asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Groups
of numbers |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 to 999 |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
1000
to 1999 |
|
91 |
included 3 Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
2000
to 2999 |
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
3000
to 3999 |
|
20 |
included 1 NEA and 3
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
4000
to 4999 |
|
37 |
included 1 NEA and 3
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
5000
to 5999 |
|
43 |
included 2 NEAs and 5
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
6000
to 6999 |
|
40 |
included 3 NEAs and 3
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
7000
to 7999 |
|
23 |
included 1 NEA and 2
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
8000
to 8999 |
|
4 |
included 1 NEA |
|
|
|
|
|
9000
to 9999 |
|
6 |
included 1 NEA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10000
to 19999 |
|
28 |
included 3 NEAs |
|
|
|
|
|
20000
to 29999 |
|
7 |
included 3 NEAs and 1
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
30000
to 39999 |
|
4 |
included 2 NEAs |
|
|
|
|
|
40000
to 49999 |
|
5 |
included 3 Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
50000
to 135000 |
|
7 |
included 4 NEAs and 3
Mars-crossers |
|
|
|
|
Unnumbered |
|
20 |
included 20 NEAs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
"bright" objects of the seven first thousands are more accessible
by the amateur observers of the MAP |
|
|
Beyond
the N°10000, NEA and Mars-crossers often are the objects which are possibily
visible by the amateurs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution
of the MAP Asteroids by official H magnitudes : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
absolute |
Total |
|
NEA |
Mars- |
Hungaria |
Cisjovian |
|
Jupiter- |
|
|
|
Magnitude |
|
|
|
crosser |
|
|
belt |
|
trojans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 8 |
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
mag H = 9 |
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
mag H = 10 |
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
mag H = 11 |
111 |
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 12 |
113 |
|
|
12 |
|
3 |
98 |
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 13 |
64 |
|
1 |
7 |
|
4 |
51 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
mag H = 14 |
11 |
|
2 |
6 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 15 |
6 |
|
5 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 16 |
9 |
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 17 |
5 |
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 18 |
8 |
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 19 |
3 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 20 |
7 |
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mag H = 21 |
2 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
416 |
|
42 |
27 |
|
8 |
332 |
|
7 |
|
|
|
%
on Total |
|
|
10% |
6% |
|
2% |
80% |
|
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
size of the smallest object of each group decreases with the increasing
distance to the Earth |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Averaged
difference of absolute H magnitude in the MAP, by tenth of magnitude : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Averaged.Diff. |
B/x,x |
F/x,x |
Total |
% |
cumul % |
|
Legend |
|
|
|
V band |
Objects |
Objects |
Objects |
|
B/x,x = x,x mag brighter
than predicted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F/x,x = x,x mag fainter
than predicted |
|
|
0 |
mag |
5 |
5 |
10 |
2,43% |
2,43% |
|
Total = Total objects by averaged diff. |
|
|
0,1 |
mag |
15 |
15 |
30 |
7,28% |
9,71% |
|
% = % of the total of MAP objects |
|
|
0,2 |
mag |
23 |
25 |
48 |
11,65% |
21,36% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0,3 |
mag |
17 |
46 |
63 |
15,29% |
36,65% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0,4 |
mag |
14 |
41 |
55 |
13,35% |
50,00% |
|
|
|
|
0,5 |
mag |
7 |
62 |
69 |
16,75% |
66,75% |
|
|
|
|
0,6 |
mag |
4 |
36 |
40 |
9,71% |
76,46% |
|
|
|
|
0,7 |
mag |
1 |
33 |
34 |
8,25% |
84,71% |
|
|
|
|
0,8 |
mag |
3 |
17 |
20 |
4,85% |
89,56% |
|
|
|
|
0,9 |
mag |
4 |
15 |
19 |
4,61% |
94,17% |
|
|
|
|
1,0 |
mag |
|
4 |
4 |
0,97% |
95,15% |
|
|
|
|
1,1 |
mag |
|
4 |
4 |
0,97% |
96,12% |
|
|
|
|
1,2 |
mag |
|
3 |
3 |
0,73% |
96,84% |
|
|
|
|
1,3 |
mag |
|
4 |
4 |
0,97% |
97,82% |
|
|
|
|
1,4 |
mag |
|
3 |
3 |
0,73% |
98,54% |
|
|
|
|
1,5 |
mag |
|
1 |
1 |
0,24% |
98,79% |
|
|
|
|
1,6 |
mag |
|
4 |
4 |
0,97% |
99,76% |
|
|
|
|
1,7 |
mag |
|
|
0,00% |
99,76% |
|
|
|
|
1,8 |
mag |
|
|
0,00% |
99,76% |
|
|
|
|
1,9 |
mag |
|
|
0,00% |
99,76% |
|
|
|
|
2 |
mag |
|
|
0,00% |
99,76% |
|
|
|
|
2,6 |
mag |
|
1 |
1 |
0,24% |
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
93 |
319 |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
Undefined |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grand Total |
416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
majority of MAP objects are fainter than predicted. |
|
|
|
|
|
The
discrepancy of light is below 0.5 magnitude for 50% of the MAP objects. |
|
|
|
Nevertheless,
5% of the MAP objects have a discrepancy of H magnitude H superior
or equal to 1.0 |
|
|
magnitude
and more ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
state of the MAP objects : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Objects
put in the MAP because observed with at least 0,3 mag of
difference between predicted and |
|
|
observed
magnitudes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
of oppositions followed for the MAP objects : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
MAP objects seen at 3 oppositions and more |
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
MAP objects seen at 2 oppositions |
|
|
|
|
|
313 |
MAP objects seen at 1 opposition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
October 17,2006, are noted as without possible H magnitude discrepancy in the
MAP : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 |
objects with difference
< half-variability, following the accumulation of measures |
|
|
|
|
6 |
unnumbered NEA, for
which the MPC rectified its H mag to a value similar to the MAP H mag |
|
|
|
13 |
objects for which the
successive measures brought back the difference < 0,2 or even 0,1 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
MAP objects, then 17,3%
of the total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like
this, this is the indirect proof of the efficiency of the statistical
processing of the measures. |
|
|
|
|
( minoration of the
impact of the natural variability of the asteroids and of the errors of
measures ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
344 |
other MAP asteroids need
more measures ! |
|
|
|
|
|
The
most urgent goals are the objects with a high discrepancy of magnitude and
those |
|
|
|
observed at less than 3
oppositions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
29 MAP objects observed at least during 3 oppositions : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oppositions |
Mea- |
Obser- |
H MPC |
# MAP |
H MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sures |
vers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(921)
Jovita |
|
6 |
30 |
5 |
10,6 |
-0,9 |
9,7 |
|
|
|
|
(1444)
Pannonia |
|
5 |
457 |
8 |
9,1 |
2,6 |
11,7 |
|
|
|
|
(9117)
Aude |
|
5 |
36 |
9 |
12,4 |
0,7 |
13,1 |
|
|
|
|
(3904)
Honda |
|
4 |
42 |
8 |
11,3 |
0,7 |
12,0 |
|
|
|
|
(4483)
Petofi (Hungaria) |
4 |
19 |
6 |
11,9 |
1,1 |
13,0 |
|
|
|
|
(1166)
Sakuntala |
|
4 |
18 |
4 |
8,8 |
1,1 |
9,9 |
|
|
|
|
(881)
Athene |
|
4 |
12 |
3 |
10,3 |
1,3 |
11,6 |
|
|
|
|
(1353)
Maartje |
|
4 |
12 |
2 |
10,4 |
-0,4 |
10,0 |
new measures to do |
|
|
(927)
Ratisbona |
|
3 |
194 |
8 |
9,54 |
-0,1 |
9,4 |
out of MAP; diff.H very
small |
|
|
(1384)
Kniertje |
|
3 |
121 |
6 |
9,7 |
1,7 |
11,4 |
|
|
|
|
(2829)
Bobhope |
|
3 |
75 |
2 |
10,3 |
-0,3 |
10,0 |
out of MAP; diff.H <
half-variab. |
|
(552)
Sigelinde |
|
3 |
39 |
11 |
9,4 |
0,2 |
9,6 |
out of MAP; diff.H <
half-variab. |
|
(775)
Lumiere |
|
3 |
33 |
2 |
10,4 |
-0,2 |
10,2 |
out of MAP; diff.H <
half-variab. |
|
(5641)
Mc Cleese (Mars-cr) |
3 |
15 |
5 |
12,7 |
1,4 |
14,1 |
|
|
|
|
(612)
Veronika |
|
3 |
15 |
3 |
11,2 |
-0,4 |
10,8 |
|
|
|
|
(1178)
Irmela |
|
3 |
14 |
5 |
11,81 |
-0,1 |
11,7 |
out of MAP; diff.H <
half-variab. |
|
(1388)
Aphrodite |
|
3 |
12 |
4 |
8,9 |
1,6 |
10,5 |
|
|
|
|
(6354)
Vangelis |
|
3 |
12 |
3 |
11,8 |
0,5 |
12,3 |
|
|
|
|
(4628)
Laplace |
|
3 |
10 |
4 |
11,0 |
0,3 |
11,3 |
|
|
|
|
(1239)
Queteleta |
|
3 |
10 |
4 |
12,5 |
-0,6 |
11,9 |
|
|
|
|
(453)
Tea |
|
3 |
10 |
2 |
10,6 |
-0,3 |
10,3 |
out of MAP; diff.H <
half-variab. |
|
(1296)
Andree |
|
3 |
9 |
3 |
10,9 |
0,4 |
11,3 |
all measures of the same
value |
|
|
(1656)
Suomi (Mars-cr) |
3 |
9 |
3 |
12,4 |
0,5 |
12,9 |
|
|
|
|
(5518)
Mariobotta |
3 |
9 |
4 |
12,8 |
0,3 |
13,1 |
new measures to do |
|
|
(4378)
Voigt |
|
3 |
9 |
3 |
11,7 |
0,1 |
11,8 |
out of MAP; diff.H very
small |
|
|
(3401)
Vanphilos (Mars-cr) |
3 |
9 |
3 |
12,6 |
-0,3 |
12,3 |
new measures to do |
|
|
(3455)
Kristensen |
3 |
5 |
4 |
12,7 |
0,8 |
13,5 |
|
|
|
|
(1909)
Alekhin |
|
3 |
5 |
2 |
12,3 |
0,6 |
12,9 |
new measures to do |
|
|
(3873)
Roddy (Mars-cr) |
3 |
3 |
3 |
12,0 |
1,1 |
13,1 |
new measures to do |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
objects marked in orange are those for which the discrepancy decreades under
0.3 mag or about equal to the half-variability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A visual evidence of the
reality of high discrepancies of magnitude : (921) Jovita !! |
|
|
|
|
( 0,06 mag of highest
half-amplitude for the known lightcurve ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
20 MAP Objects with the highest discrepancy of magnitude ( difference >
1,0 magnitude ) : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number,
name and group |
Diff.H mag |
half- |
Oppo- |
mea- |
Obser- |
History of Magnitude H |
|
|
|
|
|
|
variability |
sitions |
sures |
vers |
88-91 |
92-97 |
98 and + |
|
|
|
(maximum) |
|
|
|
|
|
(1444)
Pannonia |
|
2,6 |
F |
0.29 |
5 |
457 |
8 |
11.7 |
11.2 |
9.7 |
|
|
(1388)
Aphrodite |
|
1,6 |
F |
0.25 |
3 |
12 |
4 |
12.23 |
11.7 |
11.7 |
|
|
(6823)
1988 ED1 |
|
1,6 |
F? |
? |
2 |
5 |
3 |
- |
10.7 |
10.7 |
|
|
(44227)
1998 QP14 |
1,6 |
F? |
? |
1 |
10 |
1 |
- |
- |
17.3 |
|
|
(6911)
Nancygreen (Hungaria) |
1,6 |
F |
0.26 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
- |
- |
13.0 |
|
|
(1384)
Kniertje |
|
1,5 |
F |
0.26 |
3 |
121 |
6 |
11.29 |
11.25 |
11.25 |
|
|
(5641)
Mc Cleese (Mars-cr) |
1,4 |
F |
0.06 |
3 |
15 |
5 |
- |
12.0 |
12.6 |
|
|
(4440)
Tchantches (Hungaria) |
1,4 |
F |
0.16 |
2 |
141 |
5 |
13.20 |
12.8 |
12.9 |
|
|
(5749)
1991 FV |
|
1,4 |
F |
? |
2 |
4 |
3 |
- |
12.5 |
12.1 |
|
|
(881)
Athene |
|
1,3 |
F |
0.27 |
4 |
12 |
3 |
10.27 |
10.29 |
10.29 |
|
|
(5738)
Billpickering (Mars-cr) |
1,3 |
F? |
0.23 |
1 |
7 |
4 |
- |
11.1 |
11.3 |
|
|
(5785)
Fulton |
|
1,3 |
F? |
? |
1 |
9 |
4 |
- |
12.8 |
12.7 |
|
|
(8021)
Walter |
|
1,3 |
F? |
0.04 |
1 |
36 |
3 |
- |
- |
12.5 |
|
|
(4860)
Gubbio |
|
1,2 |
F? |
0.43 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
- |
12.0 |
12.0 |
|
|
(10772)
1990 YM |
|
1,2 |
F? |
0.65 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
- |
- |
11.4 |
|
|
(1166)
Sakuntala |
|
1,2 |
F |
0.20 |
4 |
18 |
4 |
14.2 |
13.0 |
13.0 |
|
|
(3873)
Roddy (Mars-cr.) |
1,1 |
F |
0.05 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
11.8 |
11.7 |
11.8 |
|
|
(5026)
Martes |
|
1,1 |
F? |
? |
1? |
3 |
2 |
- |
11.6 |
11.6 |
|
|
(4483)
Petofi (Hungaria) |
1,1 |
F |
0.49 |
4 |
19 |
6 |
- |
10.8 |
11.7 |
|
|
(7663)
1994 RX1 |
|
1,1 |
F? |
0.20 |
1 |
91 |
3 |
- |
- |
12.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
the table, one can see that the known half-variabilities
are nearly all small with regard to the highest |
|
|
|
differences
of H magnitudes. These discrepancies of magnitude
certainly are mainly due to wrong H magnitudes. |
|
|
|
|
|
The
asteroids only observed at one opposition may be would be have a modification
of their discrepancy of H |
|
|
magnitude. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE
BEST RESULTS OF THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
estimated DIAMETER |
|
|
|
Oppositions |
Mea- |
Obser- |
H MPC |
# MAP |
H MAP |
MPC |
MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
sures |
vers |
|
|
|
in Km |
in Km |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(921)
Jovita |
|
6 |
30 |
5 |
10,6 |
-0,9 |
9,7 |
33,4 |
50 |
|
|
|
(1444)
Pannonia |
|
5 |
457 |
8 |
9,1 |
2,6 |
11,7 |
65 |
19,9 |
|
|
|
(9117)
Aude |
|
5 |
36 |
9 |
12,4 |
0,7 |
13,1 |
14,3 |
10,4 |
|
|
|
(3904)
Honda |
|
4 |
42 |
8 |
11,3 |
0,7 |
12,0 |
23,7 |
17,5 |
|
|
|
(4483)
Petofi (Hungaria) |
4 |
19 |
6 |
11,9 |
1,1 |
13,0 |
18,3 |
11 |
|
|
|
(1166)
Sakuntala |
|
4 |
18 |
4 |
8,8 |
1,1 |
9,9 |
74,5 |
45 |
|
|
|
(881)
Athene |
|
4 |
12 |
3 |
10,3 |
1,3 |
11,6 |
38 |
20,7 |
|
|
|
(1384)
Kniertje |
|
3 |
121 |
6 |
9,7 |
1,7 |
11,4 |
50 |
22,6 |
|
|
|
(5641)
Mc Cleese (Mars-cr.) |
3 |
15 |
5 |
12,7 |
1,4 |
14,1 |
12,5 |
6,2 |
|
|
|
(612)
Veronika |
|
3 |
15 |
3 |
11,2 |
-0,4 |
10,8 |
24,8 |
30,2 |
|
|
|
(1388)
Aphrodite |
|
3 |
12 |
4 |
8,9 |
1,6 |
10,5 |
71 |
35 |
|
|
|
(6354)
Vangelis |
|
3 |
12 |
3 |
11,8 |
0,5 |
12,3 |
19,1 |
15,1 |
|
|
|
(4628)
Laplace |
|
3 |
10 |
4 |
11,0 |
0,3 |
11,3 |
27 |
23,7 |
|
|
|
(1239)
Queteleta |
|
3 |
10 |
4 |
12,5 |
-0,6 |
11,9 |
13,5 |
18,3 |
|
|
|
(1296)
Andree |
|
3 |
9 |
3 |
10,9 |
0,4 |
11,3 |
28,6 |
23,7 |
|
|
|
(1656)
Suomi (Mars-cros.) |
3 |
9 |
3 |
12,4 |
0,5 |
12,9 |
14,3 |
11,5 |
|
|
|
(3455)
Kristensen |
3 |
5 |
4 |
12,7 |
0,8 |
13,5 |
12,5 |
8,5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
this list, 4 objects with an
estimated size divided by 2 and 1 object increasing its size
by 50 % !! |
|
|
A
good result acquired by some amateurs !! |
|
|
|
All
these asteroids were been observed at 3 oppositions and more and all have a
half-variability smaller than |
|
|
the
H discrepancy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANALYSES OF THE MAP RESULTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
analysis
N°1 : Comparative analysis between the most used observational means from
1997 to 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Types of measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMv |
|
Visual
observations with comparative measures of asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
TMx |
|
CCD
Observations made with photometric stars of Loneos,
Tycho, Hipparcos |
|
|
|
UMx |
|
CCD
Observations made with USNO stars |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMx |
|
CCD
Observations made with stars GSC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NB: |
Some visual measures
made with the USNO or the GSC catalogs are not taken in account |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
Computation of the averaged difference on H magnitude
for each type of measures and each asteroid |
|
|
2)
Difference by asteroid between the averaged differences
of CCD types of measures and the visual ones |
|
taken as basis. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3)
Global averaged difference of the 3 types of CCD
observations with regard to the visual one |
|
|
|
4)
Computation of the global averaged absolute value of
each type ( no sign +
or - ) with regard to the visual |
|
type. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
results of the phases 3 and 4 are summarized in the table below : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAP
Objects taken in account : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
179 objects ( 2158 measures ) observed at once
visually and by one of the CDD types |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMv |
TMx |
UMx |
GMx |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global
averaged difference of H mag for the 179 asteroids |
|
0,32 |
0,27 |
0,43 |
0,51 |
|
|
Global
averaged difference with regard to AMv ( phase 3 ) |
|
|
0,01 |
0,14 |
0,17 |
|
|
Global
averaged difference (absolute value) with regard to AMv ( ph.4 ) |
0,30 |
0,27 |
0,34 |
|
|
Highest
individual difference found with regard to AMv |
|
mag |
0,82 |
1,95 |
1,53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
small difference between the visual observations and those TMx show the acceptable quality of the |
|
|
visual
measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
increasing global difference of the AMv and TMx measures toward the UMx and
the GMx measures |
|
|
show
the increasing inaccuracy of the used stellar catalogs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
individual analysis of the averaged differences of the TMx show that the
errors of magnitude may be |
|
|
sometimes
high (errors on CCD processing), up to 0,8 magnitude
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With
the experience, yet now, the visual observation is the quickest mean and the
less hazardous to |
|
|
estimate a
magnitude in the V band, for an amateur. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visually,
an inacurracy of +/-0,2 mag implicate 5 tenths of magnitude, fan already
rather large for a |
|
|
trained
eye |
|
|
|
|
|
A
result at +/- 0,3 mag is rare for an experienced visual observer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analysis
N°2 : Some comparative results betwen the MAP, the Minor Planet Center and
Astdys |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
website "Asteroids - Dynamic Site (AstTDys)" is specialized in the
in the development of proper orbital |
|
|
of
minor planets ( except orbits too chaotic ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
revised H magnitudes of the numbered asteroids of the file "allnum_pro,htm" from Astdys are updated |
|
|
quarterly, thank's to the new astrometrical measures published by the MPC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only
Astdys and the MAP have lists of revised H magnitudes; It's not the case for
the MPC |
|
|
|
The
3 entities use the statistical effect to appreciate the averaged H magnitude and to reduce the |
|
|
|
inaccuracies
( measures and variability ). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
H magnitudes from the MPC and Astdys are issued from approximate measures
joined to the |
|
|
astrometric
data from astrometrists. The measures without indication
of color band are assimilated to V |
|
|
measures. As numerous measures come from R band, some of them are
brighter than predicted if they |
|
|
are
assimilated to V |
|
|
|
|
In
the MAP, we try to take in account only the "sure" measures or eventually corrected by a standard |
|
|
deviation
( V-R = + 0.4 by example ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A)
Comparisons MPC - MAP : |
|
|
|
The
corrections of H magnitudes on the NEA by the MPC on the unnumbered asteroids converged on |
|
|
the
same results than the MAP for 8 cases : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H MPC / observations |
|
H MAP |
|
H MPC after adjustment |
|
number |
Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1999
RH27 |
16,5 |
|
16,9 |
|
16,9 |
|
|
16064 |
Amor 3 |
|
|
|
1998
FX2 |
18,0 |
|
18,3 |
|
18,2 |
|
|
20255 |
Amor 3 |
|
|
|
1998
PG |
17,0 |
|
17,4 |
|
17,3 |
|
|
31345 |
Amor 2 |
|
|
|
1998
WS |
12,1 |
|
12,5 |
|
12,5 |
|
|
47035 |
Mars-crosser |
|
|
1998
SS49 |
16,5 |
|
15,8 |
|
15,8 |
|
|
85713 |
Apollo 2 |
|
|
|
1998
QR15 |
18,5 |
|
18,1 |
|
18,1 |
|
|
- |
Amor 3 |
|
|
|
2000
DO1 |
20,3 |
|
20,4 |
|
20,4 |
|
|
- |
Apollo 1 |
|
|
|
2001
SG276 |
17,4 |
|
17,8 |
|
17,7 |
|
- |
Amor 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NB:
on 28 other objects for
which have been used MPC magnitudes for unnumbered objects during the MAP
observations : |
|
|
|
13
obtained modifications of their MPC H magnitude
going towards the MAP H magnitude |
|
|
|
|
15
had no modification of their MPC H or moving away from the H MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
( NB : For the majority
of them briefly bright, the MAP obtained only few measures ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then
there are 21 NEA which constitute 58,3% of the total of
41 MAP objects and for
which the MPC |
|
|
magnitudes
joined or approached the H magnitudes from the MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B)
Comparisons of the MAP with the MPC and Astdys : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global
average of the differences between the H magnitudes |
|
|
|
|
MAP-Astdys |
378 asteroids |
F/0,20 |
|
|
|
|
MAP-MPC |
416 asteroids |
F/0,34 |
higher, because no update
by the MPC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probable
reason of the faintness of the MAP magnitudes : |
|
|
|
Lack
of color bande type for many R measures joined to the astrometric measures
received by the MPC, which after didn't revise |
|
|
the
H magnitudes of the objects numbered since 1998 ! |
|
|
|
The
difference with Astdys is fainter, because Astdys periodically rectify the H
magnitudes of the MPC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
analysis
N°3 : Some comparative results between the MAP and the professional or
efficient observers |
|
|
|
|
|
During
the last 10 years, few H magnitudes of MAP objects processed independently by
the specialists in |
|
|
photometry. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some
results have been published in 2006, thank's to works on lightcurves : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oppos. |
Measur. |
# MAP |
H MPC |
H MAP |
revis.H |
Observatory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4440)
Tchantches (Hungaria) |
2 |
141 |
1,4/F |
12,3 |
13,7 |
14,0 |
Simeis |
MPB
2006-2 |
|
|
(4860)
Gubbio |
|
1 |
3 |
1,2/F |
11,8 |
13,3 |
13,3 |
Warner |
MAP Message 30/10 |
|
(5641)
Mc Cleese (Mars-crosser) |
3 |
15 |
1,4/F |
12,7 |
14,1 |
14,4 |
Ondrejov |
MPB 2006-1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Due
to the lack of accurate V-R indexes for these asteroids, the V-R indexes have been estimated to 0.4 |
|
|
magnitude
by the concerned observatories |
|
|
|
The
real V-R index may differ for the majority of the
cisjovian belt members of +/- 0,2 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
discrepancy of Gubbio seen at v mag 16.0-16.1 was visually detected in
October 2006 with a T20cm, |
|
|
then
confirmed with a CCD camera by Brian Warner (CALL) ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
analysis
N°4 : Impact of the natural variability of the minor planets : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution
of 2658 maximum amplitudes of lightcurves on October 15,2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(photometric database
G.FAURE of October 15,2006) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
highest |
|
total of |
|
% on |
cumul. |
cumulative
% |
highest half-amplitude |
|
|
|
Amplitude |
asteroids |
|
total |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less
than 0.1 mag |
202 |
|
8% |
202 |
8% |
|
less than 0.05 mag |
|
|
|
0.1x mag |
609 |
|
23% |
811 |
31% |
|
about 0.05 mag |
|
|
|
0.2x mag |
571 |
|
21% |
1382 |
52% |
|
about 0.1 mag |
|
|
|
0.3x mag |
423 |
|
16% |
1805 |
68% |
|
about 0.15 mag |
|
|
|
0.4x mag |
286 |
|
11% |
2091 |
79% |
|
about 0.2 mag |
|
|
|
0.5x mag |
177 |
|
7% |
2268 |
85% |
|
about 0.25 mag |
|
|
|
0.6x mag |
118 |
|
4% |
2386 |
90% |
|
about 0.3 mag |
|
|
|
|
0.7x mag |
62 |
|
2% |
2448 |
92% |
|
about 0.35 mag |
|
|
|
0.8x mag |
61 |
|
2% |
2509 |
94% |
|
about 0.4 mag |
|
|
|
0.9x mag |
53 |
|
2% |
2562 |
96% |
|
about 0.45 mag |
|
|
|
1.0x mag |
23 |
|
1% |
2585 |
97% |
|
about 0.5 mag |
|
|
|
1.1x mag |
29 |
|
1% |
2614 |
98% |
|
about 0.55 mag |
|
|
|
1.2x mag |
13 |
|
0% |
2627 |
99% |
|
about 0.6 mag |
|
|
|
1.3x mag |
9 |
|
0% |
2636 |
99% |
|
about 0.65 mag |
|
|
|
1.4x mag |
9 |
|
0% |
2645 |
100% |
|
about 0.7 mag |
|
|
|
1.5x mag |
3 |
|
0% |
2648 |
100% |
|
about 0.75 mag |
|
1 NEA on 3 |
|
|
1.6x mag |
2 |
|
0% |
2650 |
100% |
|
about 0.8 mag |
|
1 NEA on 2 |
|
|
1.7x mag |
3 |
|
0% |
2653 |
100% |
|
about 0.85 mag |
|
2 NEA on 3 |
|
|
1.8x mag |
0 |
|
0% |
2653 |
100% |
|
about 0.9 mag |
|
|
|
1.9x mag |
0 |
|
0% |
2653 |
100% |
|
about 0.95 mag |
|
|
|
2.0 mag and more |
5 |
|
0% |
2658 |
100% |
|
1 mag and more |
all are NEA |
|
|
Total |
|
2658 |
|
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
natural variability of the asteroids is not a crucial problem for the MAP
because : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
An asteroid doesn't reach its maximum amplitude of light at each opposition, due to the different |
|
|
vision angle of this body from Earth,
from an opposition to the next one.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
When it's the case, they are at the maximum or the
minimum just during a
short time, one time by |
|
|
entire rotation, the
average of the rotation period of the minor planets being about
9 hours |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3)
It's only the half-amplitude
of light which has a possible impact for the MAP |
|
|
|
90% of the asteroids with known lightcurves
have at most or less than 0.3 magnitude of maximum |
|
|
half-amplitude ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4)
For the 10% of asteroids more variable, the maximum
half-amplitude of light is problematic only |
|
|
during some oppositions, at the moments of maximums and
minimums of light...then in average |
|
|
less than 1 observation made on 6 to 8 ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5)
With the computation of the average of all the measures made for an asteroid,
the statistical effect |
|
|
reduces or eiminates the impact of mesures
made near a maximum or a minimum of light |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then,
the natural variability of the asteroids has generally only a small
repercussion on the MAP objects ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
200 MAP objects for which a lightcurve is known gives un cumulative
percentage of 87% for a maximum |
|
|
half-amplitude
of 0.3 magnitude. As the very variable objects often are more easy to detect
then the others, the |
|
|
percentage
of half-amplitudes < 0.3 mag is less important for the MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE
TOOLS OF THE MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAP
ALERTS |
Published
on e-mails by Lawrence GARRETT for 47 actual receivers who are amateur
or |
|
|
|
professional astronomers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They
include news on the last MAP measures and calls for observations for the
interesting and |
|
|
|
new MAP objects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registration to : |
|
LSGasteroid@msn.com |
|
|
|
|
|
or : |
|
gpmfaure@club-Internet.fr |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archives loadable to : |
http://mysite.verizon.net/lgasteroid/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAP
DATABASE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It
contains all the measures made for the MAP, asteroid by asteroid, with a
difference of magnitude |
|
|
averaged
by night for all the measures made during the concerned night |
|
|
|
Even
the rejected measures are present in the database ( waiting for the possible
corrections ) but do not contribute |
|
|
to
the results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
minimum to ensure a difference of H magnitude : 3 observed oppositions with at least the contribution |
|
|
|
by
3 observers, to permit the
average of the possible different averaged H magnitudes of the asteroid from
Earth, |
|
during
successive oppositions, and to smooth out the personal standard deviations
from the visual CCD observers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
Maximum of measures is needed by asteroid to eliminate
statistically the variability and the possible various |
|
errors
of the observers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
measures must be made with one of the stellar catalogues and in one light
band allowed by the MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
December 31,2006, the MAP Database contains 430 asteroids, 4927
individual measures on 3411 |
|
|
lines
of averaged measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recapitulative list
on HTML page loadable at : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.astrosurf.com/map/MAP_DATABASE_recap.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://mysite.verizon.net/lgasteroid/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://astrosurf.com/aude/map/MAP_DATABASE_recap.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
Entire Database
on zipped Excel file loadable at : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.astrosurf.com/map//MAP_DATABASE_measures.zip |
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://mysite.verizon.net/lgasteroid/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://astrosurf.com/aude/map/MAP_DATABASE_measures.zip |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART OF THE MAP DATABASE
ON OCTOBER 17,2006 FOR ONE ASTEROID |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TYPES OF MAGNITUDES
PRESENT IN THE MAP DATABASE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Magnitude
type: The most recommended types of measures are in bold type |
|
|
|
|
AMv |
Visual magnitude with asteroid
comparison |
|
|
|
|
|
GMv |
Visual magnitude with GSC comparison |
|
|
[Not used for H
revision] |
|
|
|
UMv |
Visual magnitude with GUIDE USNO-A (mag V
GUIDE comparison) |
|
|
|
UMr |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with USNO A (mag.R
comp.) |
[used for H revision
with R-V = + 0.4 mag] |
|
|
SMr |
Unfiltered CCD mag with USNO-SA (mag R
comp.) |
[used for H revision
with R-V = + 0.4 mag] |
|
|
GMu |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with GSC comparison |
|
[Not used for H
revision] |
|
|
|
LMu |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with LONEOS
(notably PGSC) or LANDOLT comparison (mag V comparison) |
|
SMu |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with GUIDE USNO-SA
(mag V GUIDE comparison) |
|
|
|
|
UMu |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with USNO-A (mag V
GUIDE comparison) |
|
|
|
|
TMu |
Unfiltered CCD magnitude with Tycho 2 (mag V
comparison) or HIPPARCOS (mag V comparison) |
|
|
GMR |
CCD magnitude with Red filter and GSC (Mag
GSC comparison) |
[Not used for H
revision] |
|
|
|
UMB |
CCD magnitude with Blue filter and USNO-A
(mag B comparison) |
[Not used for H
revision] |
|
|
|
UMR |
CCD mag with Red filter and USNO-A (mag R
compar.) |
[used for H revision
with R-V = + 0.4 mag] |
|
|
LMV |
CCD magnitude with V filter and LONEOS (
notably PGSC) or LANDOLT (mag V comparison) |
|
|
SMV |
CCD magnitude with V filter and USNO-SA
comparison (Mag.V GUIDE) |
|
|
|
|
|
TMV |
CCD magnitude with V filter and TYCHO 2
comparison or HIPPARCOS (mag V comparison) |
|
|
UMV |
CCD magnitude with V filter and USNO-A
comparison (mag V Guide comparison) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
total of measures : |
|
visual AMv + UMv |
|
1442 |
measures |
|
|
|
|
CCD Tycho 2 + Loneos |
129 |
measures |
|
|
|
|
CCD USNO |
|
1283 |
measures |
|
|
|
|
CCD GSC |
|
490 |
measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MONTHLY
MAP PROGRAM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It
includes all the MAP objects visible at more than 4 hours in R.A. from the
Sun and at predicted magnitude < V 16,5 |
|
|
Order
of the objects by Right Ascension, from + 4 hours East up to 4 hours west to
the Sun |
|
|
|
|
Useful
for the visual Observers who may plan an observational program for all the
night |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Example visible at : |
http://astrosurf.com/map/MAPast.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://astrosurf.com/aude/map/MAPast04-05.htm |
|
|
|
|
Discontinuous update; To
ask for : |
gpmfaure@club-Internet.fr |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LISTS
OF CONJUNCTIONS LONEOS-MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Made
by Bernard GUILLAUD-SAUMUR o
the AAAA (Association des Astronomes Amateurs d'Auvergne), |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conjunction
lists at less than 15' between the numbered asteroids or those of MAP with
one of the |
|
|
34000
stars of the LONEOS catalog ( managed by Brian SKIFF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
List by chronological order
: list of asteroids in conjonction "Loneos", night after night |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
List by increasing N° of asteroid : list of monthly conjunctions to locate the best nights for
the following of a |
|
|
chosen asteroid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advantages
mainly for the CCD Observers who will do image together asteroids and
reference stars |
|
|
The
conjunctions between LONEOS stars and MAP asteroids already are rare. Those
between stars and minor |
|
|
planets
of the same magnitude are more rare, hence the exceptional use by the visual
observers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Possibilities
to predict in advance for a precise night the following of an asteroid
lightcurve and/or the obtaining of |
|
|
measures
of accurate measures permitting the verification or the modification of a
possible erroneous H magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lists loadable at : |
http://www.astrobgs.dyndns.org/astro/MAP/index.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
or by link on : |
http://astrosurf.com/map |
|
|
|
|
|
http://astrosurf.com/aude/map/index.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NB:
The conjunctions beyond some months are subject to increasing inaccuracies,
due to the use of the orbital |
|
|
elements
of the files "MPCORB" from the MPC and then only are indicative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXAMPLE OF CONJUNCTIONS
"LONEOS - MAP" LISTS BY CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
METHODS
AND DEVELOPMENT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VISUAL
METHOD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERY
FEW stellar references => Obligation to compare the asteroid magnitudes
between them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
conditions : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observations
through a sky acceptable, without Moon and not too polluted by human lights |
|
|
|
|
|
or compensate by a big
diameter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Always
the use of the same telescope |
|
Minimum 150mm, under a
pure and black sky |
|
|
|
|
At least real
instrumental limit +14.5-15.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Always
the use of the same powerful eyepiece |
to obtain always the
same light power |
|
|
|
|
|
for a maximum darkening
of the sky |
|
|
|
|
|
NB: but let Keep a
sufficient field and sharp stars |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquire
a good experience in the brightness comparison of asteroids distant the ones
from the others |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Learn
to "gauge the weight" of the light for the 3 last limit magnitudes
of the telescope |
|
|
|
|
These are those for
which the difficulty of observation increases from tenth to tenth of
magnitude. |
|
|
|
Learn
to estimate a magnitude by its averaged difficulty of visual observation with
his telescope and |
|
|
|
the useful eyepiece used
continuously |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observation
method |
|
|
|
Préparation
: |
|
|
|
Choose
asteroids if possible successive in R.A. and spreading in predicted V
magnitudes, for more |
|
|
easily
comparisons of magnitude |
|
|
|
NB:
Avoid to choose objects too different in altitude over the horizon, or take
in account a difference of |
|
|
|
magnitude for the estimation of the
observed magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Choose
asteroids enclosed by stars nor too bright ( glare ), nor too faint (
difficulties to locate and to plot |
|
|
both
the faint stars and the asteroid ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepare
star charts for the location of the asteroid and eventually note the known
accurate magnitudes |
|
|
of
the neighbouring stars ( rare...) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
See,
if possible, at the beginning of the observations, an area of faint stars
with accurate V magnitudes |
|
|
to
estimate the limit magnitude limite for the night |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observations
: |
|
|
|
Note
the difficulty of observation for the object : "visible directly",
"visible slightly indirectly", "rather |
|
|
indirectly",
"well enough indirectly", "well indirectly", "very
indirectly","fugitive", "very fugitive, etc... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimate
the magnitude of the object by the estimate brightness |
|
|
|
Indispensable
experience with always the same telescope and with the same powerful eyepiece |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indicate
the eventual uncertainty of magnitude ( +/- 0,1 in
general, +/- 0,2 mag for the contentious cases ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note
the comparisons of brightness between the objects : "asteroid
x < asteroid y of 0,x
mag" |
|
|
|
|
|
or
"asteroid x = asteroid z", etc... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verify
imperatively the motion of the object ( ~ 1 hour later
for a cisjovian object ) and do if possible a |
|
|
second
measure of magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsequent
analysis : |
|
|
|
In
the report of observations, used also as Analysis table, classify the
asteroids by increasing V |
|
|
|
magnitude
predicted by the ephemerides |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recopy
for each asteroid all the "photometric data" noted during the
observations : |
|
|
|
|
- precise hours of
observations |
|
|
|
|
- estimated magnitude or
range of estimation |
|
|
|
- level of difficulties
to see the object |
|
|
|
|
- comparisons of
brightness with other asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
Compare
all the data and determinate the final visual magnitude(s) of each
asteroid, |
|
|
|
|
- by beginning by the objects observed at
the predicted magnitude |
|
|
|
- by determining at the end the more
contentious cases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NB:
eventually take in account the great difference of elevation on the horizon
for an object |
|
|
|
The eventual incertainty must be
given ( +/- 0,1 mag in general, +/- 0,2 mag for the contentious cases ) |
|
|
|
|
|
The
discrepancies between the observed magnitudes and the magnitudes of
ephemerides indicate the |
|
|
MAP
difference ( x,xx mag brighter "B/x.xx" or fainter
"F/x.xx" than predicted ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REPORT OF VISUAL
OBSERVATIONS DURING THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 26-27, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USE
OF THE CCD MEASURES UP TO 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Few
accurate reference stars |
|
|
|
Calibration
on the V band not easy... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
particular method given by the MAP, due to the existence of a great number of
softwares and CCD |
|
|
cameras |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Responsibility of each
observer to give : |
|
|
|
|
The precise date and
hour of observation ( hour and tenths of hour on 5 positions ) |
|
|
|
|
The magnitude type, among
those used by the MAP |
|
|
|
|
The measure of magnitude
itself, with a precision of one tenth of magnitude |
|
|
|
|
The eventual incertainty
of the magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stellar
References to use : |
|
|
|
|
In first : the LONEOS catalog ( including the Landolt, the GSPC and various
photometric data ) |
|
|
|
In second : the TYCHO 2 catalog
( by using the stars nor too bright, nor too
faint, under the mag V10,5 ) |
|
|
Otherwise : the USNO SA2 including yellow stars of magnitudes 11 to 16 (inaccuracy
~0,25 mag) |
|
|
|
the USNO A-2 less sure, but the less
inaccurate catalog among those covering all the sky |
|
|
|
|
|
NB
: The GSC catalog was quickly rejected, because more
inaccurate than the USNO ( about 0,5 mag ) |
|
|
The MAP database contains many GSC
measures which sometimes are near GPSC stars. Then, some of |
|
|
them certainly would be correct for
the computation of the H magnitudes of the asteroids. Nevertheless, |
|
|
the analysis of each case should be
made |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catalogues of stellar magnitudes actually
used : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
of |
|
Year of |
Total of |
Limit |
photometric |
|
Remarks |
|
|
Catalog |
issue |
included stars |
mag |
stellar mag.
inaccuracy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Landolt |
|
1982 |
526 |
11,5 to 16 |
BVRI
references |
|
also
included in Loneos |
|
|
GSPC |
|
1988 and + |
~8900 |
V 9 to 15 |
0,05
to 0,1 mag (faint stars) |
also
included in Loneos |
|
|
GSC
2.1 |
1989 and + |
19 millions |
V 14 to 16 |
>0,5
mag, to 1 mag and + |
|
|
|
|
|
USNO-A2 |
1996/1998 |
526 millions |
B and R 19 |
>0,25 mag, up to -20° |
>0,5
mag, more on south |
|
|
USNO-SA |
1996/1998 |
55 millions |
B and R 19 |
<0,25 magnitude |
|
stars of solar type selection |
|
|
GUIDE
+ USNO |
1996 et + |
526 millions |
B,V,R 19 |
<0,25
to > 0,5 mag, |
mag
V calculated by Guide |
|
|
LONEOS |
1998/2003 |
33924 |
11 to 22 |
BVRI references |
|
|
|
|
|
|
UCAC 1 |
|
2000 |
27 millions |
R 16 |
> 0,3 mag |
|
Southern stars |
|
|
|
TYCHO 2 |
2000 |
2,5 millions |
V 11 to 12 |
0,013
to 0,1 mag (faint stars) |
|
|
|
|
|
USNO-B |
2003 |
1,04 billion |
V 21 |
0,3 mag |
|
downlable
on internet |
|
|
Calsberg Merid.Cat. |
2005 |
95,9
millions |
r 9 to 17 |
0,025
to 0,18 mag (faint st.) |
-
30 to + 50° of declination |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
2001, a great number of unfiltered CCD measures made near the R band were rectified by treating |
|
|
their
averaged difference of H mag with the standard deviation of V-R = +0,4 mag usually admitted in the |
|
|
astronomical
community |
|
|
|
Concurrently,
the use of the Tycho catalog increased slowly, with CCD measures more
accurate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE INCREASE OF ACCURATE CCD
MEASURES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development
N°1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
the beginning of 2006, thanks to the efficient computer help from Bernard
GUILLAUD-SAUMUR of |
|
|
the AAAA association,
creation of the : |
|
|
|
|
"lists of
conjunctions between LONEOS stars and the MAP objects", |
|
|
|
|
including also many
"standard asteroids" ( very faint variability and sure H mag ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Important
advantages of these lists : |
|
|
|
Possibility
to take images including both MAP asteroids and LONEOS stars rather than to
do |
|
|
|
separately
images of asteroids and Loneos stars |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chronological
lists : |
|
|
|
possibility
to know for a precise night what will be the numbered asteroids or the MAP
objects which |
|
|
will
be in conjunction with Loneos stars, at less than 15' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lists
by increasing number of asteroids |
|
|
|
possibility
to search an eventual conjunction between a specific object and LONEOS stars
in a month |
|
|
or
the next ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evolution
N°2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement
of failure for the methods of V measures proposed since 10 years ( methods nevertheless |
|
|
efficient
for the professional astronomers and their equipment ),
by the small number of measures |
|
|
generated
by the amateurs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
Great difficulties with the amateur equipment to obtain many V measures : |
|
|
|
|
"Admited"
methods too purist, too much and difficult to implement them for an amateur |
|
|
|
|
Obligation to use
fillters absorbing too light |
|
|
|
|
Very few reference stars
in the asteroid images made by observers |
|
|
|
|
Possible
failuie causes are numerous ( instrument, calibration of CCD cameras,
softwares, etc.. ) |
|
|
|
Lack
of time to do numerous and delicate handlings for an amateur during the
starry nights which |
|
|
|
|
frequently are rare |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
Too high requirements by the astronomical community for the level of accuracy
and for methods |
|
|
often restrictive : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to the emergence of
the amateur CCD camera judged wrongly too suited to obtain an easy accuracy |
|
|
|
Due to the rejection of
the intermediary methods, less acurate, but more effective in results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) During these last ten years, the fashion
was not the reliability of the asteroid H magnitudes : |
|
|
|
|
The possible discoveries
of asteroids and SN by the the amateurs were more exciting |
|
|
|
|
|
There
was a desire to steer the amateurs towards the astrometry, before the start
of the automatic |
|
|
|
observatories, as LINEAR,
LONEOS, etc... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A
later reorientation since 2000 was made towards the making of lightcurves,
domain judged more |
|
|
|
interesting by the
professional astronomers and more easy to do only by differential magnitude
measures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4)
The MPC was very occupied in doing the increasing number of orbital elements
of discovered comet |
|
|
and asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
computation of orbits rightly is the main goal of the MPC. The accuracy of
magnitudes then has a |
|
|
|
secondary importance |
|
|
|
|
|
The interest on the
accuracy of the H magnitudes then had no real craze among the observers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
conclusion, the professional observatories with their
expensive material have no time to do this type |
|
|
of
basic but important task. Then, it is necessary to permit the amateurs to do
this task with methods |
|
|
adapted
to their real possibilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
POSSIBLE
ORIENTATIONS FOR THE MAP OBSERVERS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
10 years of inefficiency of the purist methods "imposed" on the
amateurs, it is necessary to test |
|
|
other
alternative methods which would permit more results, with an accuracy
approaching the tenth of |
|
|
magnitude |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
the visual observers, the increase of the personal observations by the CCD
imagery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerous
MAP objects with a high discrepancy of magnitude need new observations on
successive |
|
|
oppositions.
Then it is necessary to find simple methods getting
closer to the visual ones |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
possibility to compensate the departure of the first CCD observers in the MAP
by doing the two |
|
|
types
of measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMPLEMENTATION
OF THESE ORIENTATIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
Use the amateur means :
economy softwares, sure catalogues and material without filters |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
Loss a minimum of time for the imagery procedures, apart from those strictly
necessary, notably |
|
|
to increase the number of MAP targets
during a night of observations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3)
Find simple methods of measures and of processes getting closer to the visual ones ( 1 to 2
hours |
|
|
after observations, and computerizable ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4)
Do not go to an academic method, nor to go to a too high accuracy which would
reduce the number of |
|
|
the obtained measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5)
Find tactics permitting to ELIMINATE some causes of
difficulties for the obtaining of magnitude |
|
|
measures : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a) by searching what
are the asteroids close to sure reference stars, rather than the inverse |
|
|
|
(elimination of the complementary imaging of
distant reference stars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b) by imaging together
the asteroids and the reference stars |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(elimination of various problems of type
airmass, different extinction ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
c)
by doing preliminary tests on some objects with sure H magnitudes and
half-amplitude of |
|
|
|
variability < 0,08 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(utilisation of a standard adjustement
characteristic of the used CCD camera for the index
R-"r") |
|
|
|
|
for the index R-"r") |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
d) by finding simple
analyses of measures, which would be after computerized |
|
|
|
|
( use of conversion
tables for the stellar indexes B-V to V-R ) |
|
|
|
|
(
building up of a list of real V-R indexes of minor planets from
professional |
|
|
|
articles and reviews ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main
elements which normally permit to obtain an unfiltered CCD measure equivalent
to V |
|
|
|
|
(for stars and asteroids
present in the same image) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mag r |
+ |
+/- |
+/- |
+ |
+ |
+/- |
+/- |
=known |
+/- |
= Real |
|
|
|
CCD |
Index V-R |
differ. |
Diff. |
Extinc- |
Airmass |
no Flat |
various |
Mag V |
Diff. |
V Mag |
|
|
|
star |
star |
R-r |
USNO |
tion |
|
|
differ. |
Tycho 2 |
Tycho 2 |
star |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sure V mag of asteroid = |
Mag r |
+ |
+/- |
+/- |
= sure |
+/- |
= Real |
|
|
|
|
CCD |
Index V-R |
differ. |
various |
mag V |
Diff. |
V Mag |
|
|
|
|
asteroid |
asteroid |
R-r |
differ. |
base |
Tycho 2 |
asteroid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
asteroid |
star |
Tycho 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
POSSIBLE
METHOD IN PROGRESS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Image
an asteroid near a star HIPPARCOS, TYCHO ou LONEOS with a sure magnitude, if
possible yellow, then |
|
|
after
the observation : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1)
measure the unfiltered "r" magnitude of the sure reference star,
with the Astrometrica software anf the USNO-A2 |
|
|
catalog |
|
|
( important choice of
the "Aperture radius" surrounding the star ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2)
measure the "r" magnitude of the asteroid, with the Astrometrica
software and the USNO-A2 catalog |
|
|
|
|
( same Aperture radius
than the star ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3)
calculate for the star the difference between R magnitude of Tycho 2 and the
unfiltered "r" magnitude obtained by Astrometrica |
|
by Astrometrica |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4)
apply the same difference found to rectify the "r" magnitude of the
star |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5)
apply the standard deviation "R - r CCD camera" of the spectral
type of the star, to the asteroid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6)
apply the standard type "R - r CCD camera" of the asteroid to
rectify its "R" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7)
Apply the V-R index of the asteroid (or the standard V-R = 0.4) to obtain the
pseudo-"V" final magnitude of the |
|
|
asteroid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FIRST
TESTS MADE (Differences R-r
of stars and asteroids not yet processed) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Images
made on the "standard" asteroids with very low variability and with
a sure H magnitude |
|
|
|
|
( substracted blacks and
flats on images of ordinary quality ) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AVERAGE
OF THE DIFFERENCES "REAL - EPHEMERIDES" MAGNITUDE MEASURES BY
ASTEROID |
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
each imaged asteroid, the average of the differences "Real - Ephemerides" of V magnitude (
all |
|
|
measures
taken in account ), resulting by the comparison with each star (sure in
magnitude) is put in the |
|
|
column
of the spectral type of the star |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend : |
|
|
|
|
differences of asteroid
measures < or ~ 0,1 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
differences of asteroid
measures < or ~ 0,2 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
differences of asteroid
measures > 0,2 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASTEROID |
1/2 VAR. |
real |
STARS |
A |
F |
G |
K |
R |
|
|
|
|
STANDARD |
MAX. |
V-R |
V-R min = |
-0,030 |
0,181 |
0,345 |
0,538 |
0,910 |
|
|
|
|
(sure
H / var < 0.16) |
|
|
V-R max = |
0,168 |
0,338 |
0,507 |
0,893 |
2,31 |
|
|
|
|
(1) Ceres |
|
0,02 |
0,41 |
moyenne |
|
|
0,08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moyenne |
|
|
-0,02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moyenne |
|
|
-0,07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) Pallas |
|
0,08 |
0,36 |
moyenne |
|
0,11 |
-0,12 |
-0,18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moyenne |
|
-0,01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14) Irene |
|
0,06 |
0,55 |
moyenne |
|
|
0,10 |
-0,65 |
|
|
|
|
|
(14)
Irene N°2 |
0,06 |
0,55 |
moyenne |
|
|
0,17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(57)
Mnemosyne |
0,06 |
0,54 |
moyenne |
|
0,14 |
-0,19 |
-0,05 |
|
|
|
|
|
(75)
Eurydike |
0,08 |
0,43 |
moyenne |
|
|
|
0,04 |
|
|
|
|
|
(91)
Aegina |
0,08 |
0,45 |
moyenne |
|
|
|
-0,85 |
-1,26 |
|
|
|
|
(96) Aegle |
|
0,06 |
0,51 |
moyenne |
|
0,05 |
|
-0,24 |
|
|
|
|
|
(101)
Helena |
0,07 |
0,57 |
moyenne |
|
0,03 |
0,14 |
-0,84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moyenne |
|
0,11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(105)
Artemis |
0,08 |
0,40 |
moyenne |
|
|
|
-0,08 |
|
|
|
|
|
(109)
Felicitas |
0,03 |
0,41 |
moyenne |
|
-0,06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(142)
Polana |
0,06 |
0,36 |
moyenne |
|
-0,39 |
|
-0,42 |
|
|
|
|
|
(409)
Aspasia |
0,07 |
0,44 |
moyenne |
|
-0,02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(409)
Aspasia N°2 |
0,07 |
0,44 |
moyenne |
-0,16 |
|
-0,38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average by stellar type = |
|
|
-0,16 |
0,00 |
-0,03 |
-0,36 |
-1,26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
diff. of measure < ou
~ 0,1 mag = |
17 |
59% |
of good measures |
|
|
|
|
diff. of measure < ou
~ 0,2 mag = |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
diff. of measure >
0,2 mag |
|
7 |
24% |
of bad measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remarks
: |
|
|
|
The
effect of the difference "R-r" ( not yet
treated ) according to the stellar spectral type
is visible, |
|
|
because
the big differences especially are on the K and R stars |
|
|
|
The
measure for the A stellar type is isolated and then is not conclusive |
|
|
|
With
the exceptions for the asteroids N°57 and N°101, the individual or global
"Real-Ephemeride |
|
|
differences
strech for the faintest to the brightest ones, the CCD camera SBIG ST6 being
more focused |
|
|
on
the red band |
|
|
|
More
work is needed on the accuracy of the measures, on the choice of the
reference stars and on the |
|
|
used
data to increase the vision in the detail |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Celestron 8 Fastar
and the Sbig ST6 camera used for the tests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TESTS
AND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
contacts with Richard MILES, the Chairperson of the British Astronomical
Association and a |
|
|
specialist
in CCD photometry for the amateur equipments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Find
the standard deviation by spectral type of star for the SBIG ST6, in the R
band |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apply
the difference "R-r" to the stars and to the asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collect
sure data concerning the real V-R color indexes of the asteroids and the
conversions B-V and V-R |
|
|
|
|
|
Image
again standard asteroids to do better measures and to reduce the differences |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue
to analyse the acquired CCD measures for the detection of the frequent causes
of errors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONCLUSIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It
is necessary to observe the objects with magnitude discrepancies x times on x
oppositions to reach |
|
|
the
sufficient number of oppositions and measures ( through
the individual measures or the lightcurves ) pour |
|
permitting
the validity of an averaged H magnitude. Then the task is gigantic ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
visual observers actually are too little numerous and those using CCD cameras
almost non-existant |
|
|
Then,
the MAP needs new volunteers for the increase the number
of the visual and CCD measures ! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
these future goals, the actions seem to be : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- make the visual observation and its
creditable results known |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- finalize a simple method to obtain amateur
unfiltered CCD measures permitting the obtaining of results |
|
|
similar to the V band and reliable to at
least 0,1 mag |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- find the response deviation of the CCD
cameras in relation to the V and R bands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Find volunteers with a different CCD
equipment to do tests and measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Collect sure data on the real V-R color
indexes of the asteroids and the conversions B-V and V-R |
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Continue to analyze the CCD measures to
increase their accuracy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Publish the MAP results and analyzes with
the hope that one day the MPC may include our data and |
|
|
rectify the erroneous H magnitudes of the
numbered minor planets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you
for the interest in this article and in the MAP. |
|
|
|
Thank
you also for all the eventual good ideas and the futures willingnesses ! |
|
|
|
Thank
you at last to Lawrence GARRETT for his revision of this article and to
Richard MILES for his |
|
|
advices
on the CCD tests made in the MAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEE
YOU SOON MAY BE AMONG THE MAP MEMBERS .... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gérard
FAURE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VARIOUS
LINKS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gérard
FAURE |
|
|
mail adress |
gpmfaure@club-Internet.fr |
|
|
|
Files
of analyses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawrence
GARRETT |
|
mail adress |
LSGasteroid@msn.com |
|
|
|
MAP
Alerts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUDE
- MAP Page on the website |
|
http://astrosurf.com/map/ |
|
|
|
MAP
Database, Photometric Base (data December 2006) + various records on
asteroids |
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://astrosurf.com/aude/map/index.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MAP
site web |
|
|
|
|
http://mysite.verizon.net/lgasteroid/ |
|
|
|
MAP
Database and photometric list (data December 2006) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ALPO
Minor Planet Section site web |
|
http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~rhill/alpo/minplan.html |
|
|
MAP
Database and photometric list (data December 2006) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bernard GUILLAUD-SAUMUR |
|
http://www.astrobgs.dyndns.org/astro/MAP/index.htm |
|
|
Conjunctions
"numbered asteroids - LONEOS stars" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asteroids
- Dynamic Site (AstTDys) |
|
http://hamilton.dm.unipi.it/cgi-bin/astdys/astibo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minor
Planet Center |
|
|
|
|
MPCORB
- downloading |
|
|
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/MPCORB.html |
|
|
MPCORB
- Mirror site in Europ |
|
|
http://mpcorb.klet.org/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|