ZZ Car

Hi there.

I've been wondering what has happened to the designation "ZZ Car". I'm
used to see it in the literature as identical to "l Carinae". If you
make a query in the Simbad database, you'll find out that ZZ Carinae is
some other variable than the cepheid l Carinae. Likewise, the General
Catalogue of Variable Stars separates the two designations. However,
most star atlases put the label "ZZ" next to the "l" in Carina.

"James E" wrote in message
...
Hi there.

I've been wondering what has happened to the designation "ZZ Car". I'm
used to see it in the literature as identical to "l Carinae". If you make
a query in the Simbad database, you'll find out that ZZ Carinae is some
other variable than the cepheid l Carinae. Likewise, the General Catalogue
of Variable Stars separates the two designations. However, most star
atlases put the label "ZZ" next to the "l" in Carina.

This one was more complicated than you might expect. I tracked it down from
one reference that gave (RA, Dec, 1900.0) but called it "1 Car". So the
Bright Star Catalogue helped here. Simbad has an entry via RA, Dec for HR
3884, also know as "l Car" [letter ell lower case] which is your puppy (a
bright Cepheid), but it notes "sometimes called 1 Car in litt" [numeral
one].

However, if you then go into Simbad with "1 Car" you get nothing found,
while "l Car" seems to give you a B8 spectroscopic binary with different
coordinates.

ZZ Car seems to be something entirely different and unrelated.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

Mike Dworetsky wrote:

(...)

However, if you then go into Simbad with "1 Car" you get nothing found,
while "l Car" seems to give you a B8 spectroscopic binary with different
coordinates.

ZZ Car seems to be something entirely different and unrelated.

That's what I found, too. Maybe somebody is trying to save the "ZZ Car"
for future use. Anyways, southern star nomenclature is hopelessly messy.
You have 1 Pup, l Pup, L Pup, I Pup, i Pup ... what not. Then you have o
Pup (omicron?), O Pup, m Vel, M Vel, x Cen, X Cen ... Few constellations
have decent Flamsteed numbers. And, understandably, most bright southern
stars lack a traditional Arabic proper name. Scientists of the past have
resorted to such artificial monstrosities as Atria, Acrux and Gacrux!

"James E" wrote in message
...
Mike Dworetsky wrote:

(...)

However, if you then go into Simbad with "1 Car" you get nothing found,
while "l Car" seems to give you a B8 spectroscopic binary with different
coordinates.

ZZ Car seems to be something entirely different and unrelated.

That's what I found, too. Maybe somebody is trying to save the "ZZ Car"
for future use. Anyways, southern star nomenclature is hopelessly messy.
You have 1 Pup, l Pup, L Pup, I Pup, i Pup ... what not. Then you have o
Pup (omicron?), O Pup, m Vel, M Vel, x Cen, X Cen ... Few constellations
have decent Flamsteed numbers. And, understandably, most bright southern
stars lack a traditional Arabic proper name. Scientists of the past have
resorted to such artificial monstrosities as Atria, Acrux and Gacrux!

In general, stars that had previous constellation designations (Bayer,
Flamsteed, Herschel, etc numbers or letters) and were either known or found
to be variable kept their original names. As the highest letter used was Q,
there was a decision to start naming further variables from R. Or so I
understand. When they got to Z, they went to RR, RS, etc, then after ZZ,
AA, AB,...BB, BC... ending up at QZ, after which they were more simply V335,
V336, etc.

For lurkers wondering about this, see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_star_designation

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)

Mike Dworetsky wrote:

In general, stars that had previous constellation designations (Bayer,
Flamsteed, Herschel, etc numbers or letters) and were either known or
found to be variable kept their original names. As the highest letter
used was Q, there was a decision to start naming further variables from
R. Or so I understand. When they got to Z, they went to RR, RS, etc,
then after ZZ, AA, AB,...BB, BC... ending up at QZ, after which they
were more simply V335, V336, etc.

(...)

This much I know. I just took up the example of x Cen and X Cen
(actually, it should have been Vel) to show that stellar nomenclature in
the south is ambiguous. In textbooks, of course, this poses no severe
problem provided readers are able to tell lower case letters from
capitals. But when you deliver a lecture, say, and are discussing m
Velorum together with M Velorum, you need to specify which particular
star you're talking about. -- I have always thought that the practise of
naming further variables from R on came from the nature of the first
variables discovered, like R for Red.

Some day there will be large enough a number of catalogued variables in
the constellation of Sextans to fix NO Sex in the skies :-)