[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: NSV 24968 = DHK 13
I should have more data on this star taken in September. If someone will
give me the decimal RA and Dec I will look it up. I probably have seven
days of observations.
From another note on the AAVSO page, I seem not to be the only one who
likes to get decimal RA and Dec. for a star.
Tom Droege
At 03:19 PM 9/10/02 +0000, you wrote:
>Patrick,
>
>Interesting result. If you double the 1.700399 day period you will see
>a secondary eclipse at phase .5. Pure speculation at this point but
>interesting. David Williams did the Harvard study and so we will have
>to wait to hear from him as far as looking at the Harvard data again. I
>add his work email address to be cc 'ed. We may wish to look at this
>system with CCD's or photoelectric photometers on dates that have
>eclipses predicted by these elements.
>
>Dan
>
>On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 01:56:38 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
> >Hi Dan,
> >
> >Thank you for the data. You may forget about the 4.97d period, it is
> >contradicted by the observations of Roger Diethelm, apparently near a
> >minimum. Therefore I looked at the data more thoroughly, and I came up
> >with a period of 1.700399 days, which nicely fits all available minima
> >(granted that these are just times at which the variable was faint, not
> >necessarily at minimum):
> >
> >JD Obs E O-C
> >17366.76 H 0 0.00
> >18495.78 H 664 -0.03
> >27062.48 H 5702 0.05
> >43280.80 H 15240 -0.03
> >47356.72 H 17637 0.03
> >47684.85 K 17830 -0.02
> >48106.54 D 18078 -0.02
> >52457.90 T 20637 0.02
> >
> >The other data you provided, fill a complete cycle. If it is possible
> >you could perhaps have a look at the Harvard data again which show the
> >star near maximum, to see whether they contradict the period above.
> >
> >Patrick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Yahoo! - We Remember
> >9-11: A tribute to the more than 3,000 lives lost
> >http://dir.remember.yahoo.com/tribute