Re: More Variables

["Rolling Hills Obs \(Shawn D\)" <rollinghillsobs@cfl.rr.com>]

Tom,

Here's some cross-references for the objects in your list.  A couple are
known variables (always reassuring to find the things you expect to find).

 RA Dec Variation V Mag. Comment
72.5796 9.3916            GSC 687 209
88.2707 13.1170 0.2 11.4            GSC 724 155
91.5623 13.9046 0.7 11.5 tass Mark III Richmond        DY Ori (RV Tauri
type)
101.9376 1.3717 0.3 9.1 tass Mark III Richmond        V448 Mon (EB-type
eclipsing binary)
102.7177 -1.4294 0.6 11 TX Mon
109.1269 3.4760 0.4 10.7            GSC 168 1700
110.3632 6.2743 0.9 12.4 Could be blend ????        GSC 176 3218 (doesn't
look blended on DSS)
116.9394 9.6885 1.2 12            GSC 783 628
118.7544 0.3936 0.6 11.3 SDSS Henden, tass Richmond        GSC 181 179
123.3777 13.8015 1.1 11.4            SU Cnc (Mira type)

Shawn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Droege" <tdroege2@earthlink.net>
To: <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:56 PM
Subject: More Variables


> Just for fun I have gone through the current WS file and picked out those
> between 50 and 100 for the statistic.  The current list contains 3 million
> measurement of 600,000 stars taken in the mode where the star is always
> measured in the sam spot in the image.
>
> This is just for fun, folks, so do with the data what you will.  I think I
> have 100 with the WS statistic over 100.  Another couple of hundred over
> 25.  Most of these look variable when you look at a plot.  Just paging
> through the data, other stars near these on the list do not look so
variable.
>
> For the stars below, I tried to pick out the longer period variables.
This
> is just the first 10 that I found on the WS 50-100 list that looked like
> they were really long period and not some alias of a shorter period.  This
> is one measurement a clear day data, so sometimes there are many days
> between points.  Most of these have 7 to 14 data points.
>
> There is no guarantee that I have not been bit by aliasing.   There were
> far more stars that looked like eclipsing binaries and other short period
> objects than looked like long period stars.  I somehow expected it to be
> the other way around.  I really don't have enough data yet.  It is
> encouraging to find a couple of known variables on this list.  I notice 3
> of of these stars were published before by someone called Richmond at some
> place called tass.
>
> I tried to look all of them up in Vizier, but I am less than an expert at
> this.
>
> The variation below is the V mag variation observed in the data.  The V
> Mag. is a mean value.  Sorry in advance if I make a typo.  Eventually I
> will automate the process.  But really I will leave this up to one of you
> and will concentrate on taking the data.  Youall can have the analysis
fun.
>
> RA Dec Variation V Mag. Comment
> 72.5796 9.3916
> 88.2707 13.1170 0.2 11.4
> 91.5623 13.9046 0.7 11.5 tass Mark III Richmond
> 101.9376 1.3717 0.3 9.1 tass Mark III Richmond
> 102.7177 -1.4294 0.6 11 TX Mon
> 109.1269 3.4760 0.4 10.7
> 110.3632 6.2743 0.9 12.4 Could be blend ????
> 116.9394 9.6885 1.2 12
> 118.7544 0.3936 0.6 11.3 SDSS Henden, tass Richmond
> 123.3777 13.8015 1.1 11.4
>
> When I get Michael R's improved software, I will process this data
> again.  Then I will send it to Michael S. so that you all can get at the
> data points.
>
> I could put out a list of hundreds, and I bet that 95% would be real
> variables.
>
> Tom Droege
>
>