|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
comet nomenclature questions
1. Quoting from the 'VdS-Fachgruppe Kometenweb' site
(http://www.fg-kometen.de/fgk_hpe.htm): 'Eric J. Christensen (Lunar and Planetary Laboratory) reports his discovery of a new comet on June 13, 2005, in the course of the Mt. Lemmon Survey. After posting on the NEO Confirmation Page J. E. McGaha (Tucson) was able to confirm the cometary nature of the 19m object. Pre-Discovery images by Spacewatch of June 03, 08, and 12, were also identified. The first orbit for comet P/2005 L4 (Christensen) shows a perihelion on Aug. 24, 2005, at about 2.4 AU. The period is about 8.3 years. This is the first comet discovery by the Mt. Lemmon Survey.' And: 'Rik Hill reported his discovery of a new comet on June 7, 2005, in the course of the Catalina Sky Survey. This was confirmed by C. W. Hergenrother (Lunar and Planetary Laboratory) on images taken with the University of Arizona 1.54-m Kuiper telescope. The MPC was then able to link this comet to the apparently asteroidal object 2005 JY126, which was also found by Catalina on May 12, 2005. Further prediscovery images of April 17, 2005 (Catalina) and May 09, 2005, (Spacewatch) were also found. The orbit for the 17.5m comet P/2005 JY126 (Catalina) indicates a perihelion on Feb. 21, 2006, at about 2.1 AU. The period is about 7.3 years. This is the 19th comet discovery by Catalina.' My question is: why did the IAU assign the name 'Christensen' to P/2005 L4 (rather than 'Mt. Lemmon'), while P/2005 JY126 was named 'Catalina' (rather than 'Hill')? In both cases the comet was found during the course of a survey, but one comet was named for a person and the other for the survey. This seems inconsistent. 2. In light of the fact that the era of amateur comet discoveries appears to be very near an end, do you think the IAU will ever re-visit the issue of comet naming, so that not all comets will have names like 'LINEAR' and 'SOHO'? It seems likely that eventually some mega-survey is going to come along and sweep up all comets once they brighten above 20th magnitude, and then every new comet will have the same name. At this point the assigning of names in addition to designations will be superfluous. Perhaps IAU will re-consider and once again begin naming comets for the first person to 'note the detection' by these surveys? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
And eventually I think some marketing person is going to come up with
this idea: corporate sponsorship of astronomical surveys. Suppose Wal-Mart, for example,. decides to fund the "Wal-Mart All-Latitude Malignant Asteroid Research Telescope (WALMART); then we'll end up with comets with designations like "P/2008 A1 (WALMART)". Yuck! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
snip My question is: why did the IAU assign the name 'Christensen' to P/2005 L4 (rather than 'Mt. Lemmon'), while P/2005 JY126 was named 'Catalina' (rather than 'Hill')? In both cases the comet was found during the course of a survey, but one comet was named for a person and the other for the survey. This seems inconsistent. I feel the assignment of new celestial names is best handled by a reputable independent scientific body. It is the best compromise solution and defense against the evil of allowing commercial interests creeping into the process. Perhaps Hill has a daughter or wife named "Catalina" and asked the IAU that the discover's suggested name be assigned to that, rather than to his personal name. Many names may simply end up as abbreviation of the discover's name because the discover does not care to exercise their privilege of suggesting an alternate name. Small body, minor planet, planet and star names are assigned by the International Astronomical Union. It is a two-step process. The IAU's Minor Planet Center assigns a provision designation based on the year and month of discovery. Later, a final designation is assigned by another IAU committee. The discover is given the privilege of suggesting a supplemental text name. The following are some excerpts from IAU FAQs on the naming process. For further reading, the IAU FAQs are collected at the IAU FAQ page - Frequently Asked Questions http://www.iau.org/IAU/FAQ/ "The Minor Planet Center [a division of IAU] assigns new provisonal designations when it is in possession of at least two nights of observations of an object that cannot be identified immediately with some already designated object." from http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/ps/info/OldDesDoc.html New- And Old-Style Minor Planet Designations "The discoverer of a particular object has the privilege of suggesting a name to a special Committee of the IAU that judges its suitability. Contrary to some recent media reports it is not possible to buy a minor planet. If you have a name you would like to apply to a minor planet, the best advice is 'Go out and discover one!'." "All proposed names are judged by the fifteen-person Committee for Small Body Nomenclature (CSBN) of the IAU, comprised of professional astronomers with research interests connected with Minor Planets and/or comets from around the world." from http://www.iau.org/IAU/FAQ/MPdesignation.html How Minor Planets are Named - Canopus56 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"canopus56" wrote:
... Perhaps Hill has a daughter or wife named "Catalina" and asked the IAU that the discover's suggested name be assigned to that, rather than to his personal name. I suspect the name has more to do with the discovery being made under the aegis of the Catalina Sky Survey, some of which is done at Steward Observatory's Catalina Station, atop Mount Lemmon. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Space Calendar - December 23, 2004 | [email protected] | History | 0 | December 23rd 04 05:03 PM |
Space Calendar - August 27, 2004 | Ron | Misc | 14 | August 30th 04 11:09 PM |
Space Calendar - August 27, 2004 | Ron | Astronomy Misc | 14 | August 30th 04 11:09 PM |
Space Calendar - August 27, 2004 | Ron | History | 14 | August 30th 04 11:09 PM |
Space Calendar - August 27, 2004 | OzPirate | Policy | 0 | August 27th 04 10:11 PM |