Re: Fwd: IBVS

[Patrick Wils <patrickwils@yahoo.com>]

--- Michael Koppelman <lolife@bitstream.net> wrote:
> I'm forwarding this for another reason, though, which is the 
> openly hostile attitude they seem to have towards amateur work. 
> I believe that amateurs should be held to the same standard as 
> professionals. We don't want or need any favors. However, I 
> don't think it is fair to say that amateur observations "infest" 
> the IBVS like some sort of vermin. 

I think this sort of comment doesn't belong in a referee's report.  No
matter what the contents of the submitted paper may be, such a
"political" statement is inappropriate.

> > Variability of HD 170451 was suspected according to
> > the Hipparcos data. Tycho Epoch photometry is available
> > and can be used to further refine the period.
> >

As far as I know (I may be ignorant of some facts, but Simbad and
Vizier seem to agree with me in this), the star is not a suspected
variable on the basis of Tycho data.  Indeed, Tycho photometry is
available, but with standard errors in the range 0.15-0.35 mag in V
(and somewhat worse in B), they are no better than visual estimates.  I
am wondering what their view towards those would be, when used to
refine the period.
To make sure, I fitted the Tycho data with Michael's period, and with
some imagination, one can make out the typical double wave of a W UMa.

Patrick


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
http://news.yahoo.com