HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 21 August
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 22 Aug 92 18:31:18 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 234, 08/21/92
10.7 FLUX=124.9  90-AVG=125        SSN=085      BKI=2213 3321  BAI=009
BGND-XRAY=B7.5     FLU1=1.0E+06  FLU10=1.3E+04  PKI=2213 3332  PAI=011
  BOU-DEV=012,015,008,029,035,025,017,008   DEV-AVG=018 NT     SWF=03:021
 XRAY-MAX= M1.9   @ 1200UT    XRAY-MIN= B4.0   @ 2305UT   XRAY-AVG= C1.8
NEUTN-MAX= +002%  @ 1330UT   NEUTN-MIN= -003%  @ 2330UT  NEUTN-AVG= -0.5%
  PCA-MAX= +0.2DB @ 1850UT     PCA-MIN= -0.5DB @ 2115UT    PCA-AVG= +0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55258NT @ 1014UT   BOUTF-MIN=55195NT @ 1641UT  BOUTF-AVG=55243NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+148NT@ 1737UT   GOES7-MIN=N:-008NT@ 1139UT  G7-AVG=+094,+041,+010
GOES6-MAX=P:+148NT@ 1758UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-014NT@ 1756UT  G6-AVG=+103,-001,+032
 FLUXFCST=STD:120,115,110;SESC:120,115,110 BAI/PAI-FCST=010,010,010/015,015,015
    KFCST=2224 5222 2224 3221  27DAY-AP=012,007   27DAY-KP=3222 3432 3312 2222
 WARNINGS=*MAJFLR;*SWF;*PROTON;*PCA
   ALERTS=**MINFLR:M1.3/1B@0018;**MINFLR:M1.0/1F@1110;**MINFLR:M1.9/1N@1200;
          **SWEEP:II=2@0848UTC
!!END-DATA!!
From: jmcd@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu (John McDonald)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Nude i sunspot
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:02:51 GMT
Organization: Center for EUV Astrophysics

In article 46z@cs.dal.ca, andromed@cs.dal.ca (Mike Boschat) writes:
>
>  an unimportant observation...nothing new about it..as others would say to
>me..so I say...
>
>                                               Mike

Isn't this group for the posting of observations?


This morning from Berkeley, i observed the sunspots about half way
to the western limb of the sun from its centre.  The western one
appeared larger than the eastern, and they both appeared to be at
the same solar latitude.

This was with the naked eye through dense morning fog, occasionally
a blessing around here.

John
jmcd@cea.berkeley.edu

begin 664 signature.uu
M:F]H;E\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7U\M7VUC9&]N86QD"@E!
M<G1I<W1S(%!R;W9O:V4@06QI96YS"E]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?
M+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+5]?+0IC96YT97(@(" @("!F;W(@(" @("!E=78@
2(" @("!A<W1R;W!H>7-I8W,*
end
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Standard model of QSOsex
Date: 17 Aug 1992 18:09:34 -0700
Organization: Sunsoft Inc., Los Angeles, CA.
NNTP-Posting-Host: smaug.West.Sun.COM

metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern) writes:
>Quasars are not, of course, *predicted* by the
>standard model.  They are just part of what it attempts to explain, ad hoc.
>     By contrast, quasars are predicted in the Meta Model

Are you saying that the Meta Model was around 30 years ago before quasars
redshifts were first measured?  If not, how does your theory predict any
more than does the standard model?  Don't both take a base of physical
principles and apply those to explain some observations?

Richard M. Mathews			Lietuva laisva = Free Lithuania
Internet:   richard@locus.com		Brivu Latviju  = Free Latvia
UUCP:	    ...!uunet!lcc!richard	Eesti vabaks   = Free Estonia
MIL/BITNET: richard%lcc@UUNET.UU.NET	        WE  DID  IT!!!
From: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: S&T Weekly News Bulletin
Date: 17 Aug 92 21:48:37 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: na
Reply-To: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   

In article <1992Aug17.030333.17761@utdallas.edu>, bcollins@utdallas.edu (Arlin B. Collins) writes...
>**** 
> YUCATAN NEWS 
> Today's issue of SCIENCE magazine carries a report that is big news for
> those in the impact biz. Using sensitive dating techniques, a team of
> scientists have finally determined an accurate date for a large impact
> feature buried beneath the Yucatan peninsula in Mexico. That date is
> 64.98 million years, with an error of no more than 50,000 years. The
> result virtually certifies that the 100-mile-wide crater is indeed the
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> cause of a tremendous extinction of life on Earth 65 million years ago.
> Moreover, the age of the rock sample tested is indistinguishable from
> that of a thick bed of impact ejecta "splashed" onto nearby Haiti. 

Geez.  I tend to lean toward the impact theory of the K-T extinction event
myself.  But the above claim that this dating "virtually certifies"
that the crater is the cause of the mass extinction seems to be more of a 
policital statement than a scientific one.  Anyone with a grade school 
education in logic can see that the temporal coincidence of the extinctions
with the meteor impact is certainly a necessary condition for the 
proposed causality.  But it is far from sufficient.  Surely the author 
of this statement knows that.  

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"The question seems to be of such a character
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		that if I should come to life after my death
				and some mathematician were to tell me that it
				had been definitely settled, I think I would
				immediately drop dead again."      - Vandiver
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: jms@spatial.com (Jim Sharpe)
Subject: Re: Pirate Instruments 6" f8 Dobsonian experiences?
Originator: jms@flash
Organization: Spatial Technology, Inc. [Boulder, Co]
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 17:08:39 GMT


I talked with the folks at AstroSystems (just up the road from here) about
the Pirate Kits.  They didn't know much about the Pirate kits but they have
just introduced a low cost finished scope if their own.  Here is what their
sales blurb says:

AstroSystems NOVA 6 Telescope

This telescope features a 6" f/8 primary mirror hand figured by Jerry 
Wilkinson.  Secondary mirrors are individually tested and exceed 1/12 wave.

Both optics are aluminized and silicon monoxide overcoated.  Unsurpassed 
AstroSystems workmanship throughout.  

Other features include:
	Smooth low profile focuser, similar to that on a CometCatcher (1/4"!)  
	Cork lined aluminum tube.
	All exterior metal hardware is stainless steel
	Stable vibration free wood mount with large (24") footprint
	Polyurethane coatings
	Fully adjustable, low diffraction secondary holder
	Hand adjustable primary cell
	Adjustable altitude friction control
	Three year unconditional warranty
	25mm eyepiece included (48x)
	Not a Kit, This is a finished scope, ready to use .

	Available October 1.

	Price $469.00 plus crating and shipping (approx. $20 in continental US)
	AstroSystems
	1109 Kimbark St.
	Longmont, CO  80501
	(303) 678-5339

	Jerry is the optician who is responsible for most of the Galaxy mirrors.
Currently he is doing all the Galaxy mirrors 16" and under and John is doing
the 20" and 25".  Jerry did my mirror and many of the mirrors in our club.
*Really* high quality!)  

	I also called Pirate to get some literature on their kits.  It won't get
here until next week, but here is what I found out over the phone.  If any
additional significant stuff is in the literature I'll post a followup :

	Pirate kit features:
		Helical thread aluminum focuser
		Laminated wood base.
		White painted exterior (you paint the inside of the tube)
		Predrilled holes.  Other than painting the tube putting it together
                           is more an assembly than a manufacturing job.
		
		Orders placed today will ship by the end of September.
		Phone number (714) 694-5876

		
sp.s.  When I was talking with the Terry at Pirate, he described a low cost
      alternative to Zerodur.  It has essentially the same characteristics
      as Zerodur but is just a little over 1/2 the cost.  (about $1125 for
	  a 12.5 inch blank)

	  Out of curiosity I asked about pricing on their *LARGE* mirrors

		2" pyrex 32"  $6795      Both these start out a 2 1/8"  blanks from 
        2" pyrex 36"  $7200      Corning.
	
		Thicker glass makes the price jump radically ($25K+) due to
        different manufacturing techniques.

Disclaimer: I have no ties with either the above companies other than an
            interest in their products.

-- 
Jim Sharpe / jms@spatial.com - 

Spatial Technology Inc. 2425 55th Street, Boulder CO  80301    (303)449-0649
Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: Daily Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for 18 August
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 19 Aug 92 02:46:01 GMT

!!BEGIN!! (1.0) S.T.D. Solar Geophysical Data Broadcast for DAY 231, 08/18/92
10.7 FLUX=129.6  90-AVG=126        SSN=102      BKI=0121 2121  BAI=004
BGND-XRAY=B3.9     FLU1=3.2E+05  FLU10=1.2E+04  PKI=2112 2222  PAI=006
  BOU-DEV=004,007,010,009,010,007,012,007   DEV-AVG=008 NT     SWF=00:000
 XRAY-MAX= C4.3   @ 0002UT    XRAY-MIN= B3.4   @ 1810UT   XRAY-AVG= B5.5
NEUTN-MAX= +003%  @ 0435UT   NEUTN-MIN= -001%  @ 2230UT  NEUTN-AVG= +0.2%
  PCA-MAX= +0.2DB @ 1450UT     PCA-MIN= -0.2DB @ 2130UT    PCA-AVG= -0.0DB
BOUTF-MAX=55261NT @ 1118UT   BOUTF-MIN=55219NT @ 1718UT  BOUTF-AVG=55248NT
GOES7-MAX=P:+136NT@ 1910UT   GOES7-MIN=N:+001NT@ 0138UT  G7-AVG=+093,+039,+012
GOES6-MAX=P:+147NT@ 2045UT   GOES6-MIN=E:-007NT@ 1535UT  G6-AVG=+103,+003,+032
 FLUXFCST=STD:130,127,124;SESC:130,125,125 BAI/PAI-FCST=010,010,010/015,015,010
    KFCST=2224 4112 2224 4112  27DAY-AP=046,019   27DAY-KP=2366 6353 4433 2333
 WARNINGS=*SWF
   ALERTS=**245STRM:0000-2153UTC
!!END-DATA!!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: dierick@brsux0.bro.dec.com (Dierick Dominique)
Subject: Re: Film Hypering
Reply-To: dierick@ketje.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Brussels
Distribution: USA
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 08:42:43 GMT



I hyper films myself, but only 2 brands :


	TP2415 :	18 hours at 60 degrees Celsius
			3 PSI
			film taken out of its cassette	

	Fuji HG400 :	9 hours at 60 degrees Celsius
			3 PSI
			film left in casette


Both give excellent results, no fogging, high sensitivity.



Dominique Dierick

Digital Equipment Corporation
From: midkiff@btr.BTR.COM (Neil E. Midkiff  midkiff@btr.com)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: ATM: tube materials?
Keywords: finderscope tube photocopy lens
Date: 16 Aug 92 23:32:17 GMT
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA. Contact: Customer Service cs@BTR.COM

In article <1992Aug16.032334.12778@panix.com> reynolds@panix.com 
(Brian Reynolds) writes:
>I am building a finder scope similar to the Copyscope from the May 1986
>Astronomy and the Tunable Finderscope from the October 1990 Sky & Telescope.
>
>My main problem is that my photocopier lens is a shade over 3-1/8" in
>diameter as opposed to the 3" lenses used in the articles.  This means
>it won't fit in the standard 3" PVC pipe used as a body tube in these
>designs.  Trying to bore out the PVC pipe by hand sanding, and by
>using a grinding wheel on a power drill, hasn't been successful.
>
>Has anyone out there got any ideas on what I can use for a body tube?

This may sound like a bizarre approach, and may not work given your lens
mounting cell from the photocopier, but have you considered flaring the
3" PVC tube at the objective end?

I ran across a similar problem in making an 8 x 52 finder; the 52 mm 
objective was just a trifle too large for 2" PVC tubing.  So I "stretched"
the front end of the tube by softening it with heat and using an empty
wine bottle as a flaring tool.  

Boiling water wasn't hot enough to soften the PVC so I used cooking oil in
a pan with a deep-frying thermometer to check the temperature.  CAUTION:
Take care, as with any kitchen work involving hot oil, to avoid burning
yourself.  Also be sure not to set the oil on fire!  This project is safer 
than French fries, though, as there is no water to spatter, and since the 
temperature is lower.  I think 275 or 300 F should work for the PVC (sorry,
I don't remember the temperature I used) compared to 375 F for potatoes.

For a 3" tube you may need a champagne bottle instead of the usual 750 ml
wine bottle.  In this case, be *sure* to empty the bottle before using it
to flare the heated plastic tube!

I hope this will work for you; if not, I hope others will find some 
amusement in my story.  Thanks for giving me a chance to share this
rather unorthodox solution to a problem similar to yours.

-Neil
From: mock@space.mit.edu (Patrick C. Mock)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Fossil Paradox (was: Structure of Time)
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:46:23 GMT
Reply-To: mock@space.mit.edu (Patrick C. Mock)
Organization: MIT Center for Space Research
Originator: mock@benz


In article <713917240snx@pands.demon.co.uk>, paul@pands.demon.co.uk (Paul Wilson) writes:
> 
> I must admit that this kind of comment has always concerned me.  Not because
> of any belief,  but because (my understanding here - please correct if I'm
> wrong!) current quantum theory allows (requires?) the transfer of information
> instantaneously.  The act of observing one particle of a pair,  affects the
> other.  The comment from a physicist recently when I mentioned this was
> something along the lines of ".. well it's OK,  because the amount of
> information which gets transferred is insignificant".  And *that's* the bit
> that concerns me.  You can break the lightspeed barrier as long as the effect
> isn't significant.
> 
No, this quite not correct.  The so called "FTL quantum effect" cannot
transfer any information.  It is a subtle correlation effect
that is only detectable by comparing the separate measurements. 

More explicitly, if the correlated pair of particles is generated at
site 0 and measurements are made at sites 1 and 2:


   site                     site                     site
    1 ----------<----------- 0 ---------->----------- 2

The measurements at sites 1 and 2 must be brought together and
compared to detect this effect.

Pat
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: F1.DAO@isumvs.iastate.edu (David Oesper)
Subject: Cleaning Eyepieces
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 06:09:19 GMT

Here's how I clean my telescope eyepieces (only when absolutely
necessary!):

(1) Blow off any loose material using "Dust Off" or equivalent.

(2) Give the eyepiece a blast of your humid breath (carefully),
    forming a thin layer of moisture condensation on the optical
    surface.

(3) Using a Q-tip (or equivalent), gently wipe the eyepiece dry,
    which also removes any oils, smudges, etc. that are on the
    optical surface.

(4) Blow off any loose material (e.g. Q-tip "lint") using "Dust Off"
    or equivalent.

One member of our club recommends dipping the Q-tip in acetone
before applying it to the optical surface. (I haven't yet tried this
but am tempted to give it a try the next time I have an eyepiece
that needs cleaning.)

What techniques do others of you use and recommend?

David Oesper  (S Per)
Ames Area Amateur Astronomers
Ames, Iowa
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.math,talk.religion.misc
From: hporopudas@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi
Subject: Re: Calendar (NEW)
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:23:10 GMT

In article <1371@eouk9.eoe.co.uk>, ahaley@eoe.co.uk (Andrew Haley) writes:
> hporopudas@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes:
> :
> :  Hi !
> :
> :    I refer here my paper <1991Dec31.225614.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi> last
> :  year in sci.astro. I would like to discuss about the question:
> :
> :  Is the old moon calendar represented in the Holy Bible better than my
> :  calendar below on very long time scale, if we keep for example vernal equinox
> :  always at its correct place or if we use additional leap-month corrections. ?
>
> [ ... deleted ... ]
>
> :  REFERENCES CITED
> :
> :  1. Allen, C. W., 1973.
> :     Astrophysical Quantities.
> :     3. ed. Athlone Press, University of London, London, 1973.
> :  2. The Easter Rule is taken directly from the Holy Bible.
>
> The Easter Rule isn't in the Bible, as far as I know.
>
> What Chapter and Verse?
>
> Andrew.


   I have not the Bible at my hands now but I remember that it was in some
 books of Mooses, where all holy days are defined according to the old Moon
 Calendar. Year's first month called nisa month is also defined in the Bible.
 The use of vernal equinox in Easter Rule is based also on the old time
 counting of old Moon Calendar in the Bible.

   The form of the Easter Rule in the Bible was something like:

   "Easter Sunday is 14.th day of nisa month"


          Hannu.
From: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Collimation and Saturn.
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:25:56 GMT
Reply-To: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va

About a week ago I posted asking for advice about a collimation problem I was
having. Images slightly out of focus weren't quite round but were elongated
along the axis of the tube. I would like to thank all the kind souls who sent
me advice. I found that when I had squared the focuser to the tube, I didn't
get it squared quite right from side to side. This led to a series of other
slight misadjustments which led to the problem. Last night I was able to use
the scope again after MUCHO rain around here (July was an all time high for
this area; August is looking like it is trying to follow suit). Out of
focus images are now nice clean circles.

It is amazing what you will tolerate for weather when you observe if it has
been awhile. Last night was extremely foggy. Naked eye limit was perhaps 2nd Mag.
This had its compensation in the fact that seeing was fairly good.

Saturn continues to be a very nice sight. The shadow of the disk on the rings
is definitely now to the one side of the disk. The equatorial band is still
very obvious with the disk a darker shade to the N of the band. The band
was definitely mottled (subtle) and at times seemed almost double. I did not see
any spots. Are any visible at the present?
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: gsh7w@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy)
Subject: Re: A super-blue branch of super-massive stars?
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 03:38:20 GMT

In article <Bt5t07.IrL@well.sf.ca.us> metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van
Flandern) writes: 
#Apparently M87 is the most prolific producer among "nearby" galaxies.

But HST and UIT observations show that M87 is not a UV bright object,
with the exception of the synchrotron jet.

--
-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
Newsgroups: sci.astro,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.shortwave
From: oler@rho.uleth.ca (Cary Oler)
Subject: WARNING: Potential Major Solar Flare Warning
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: 20 Aug 92 18:09:18 GMT

                   /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

                     POTENTIAL MAJOR SOLAR FLARE WARNING

                         UPDATED: 18:00 UT, 20 AUGUST

                   /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\


PRIMARY CANDIDATE FOR HIGH SOLAR ACTIVITY : REGION 7260 (N17W37@21/00Z)

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   ESTIMATED POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE OF ENERGETIC ACTIVITY OVER NEXT 7 DAYS   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| DAYS |   C5.0   |   M1.0   |   M5.0   |   X1.0   |   X5.0   |   >X12.0   |
|------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------|------------|
|1(+)PG|   99 %   |   60 %   |   40 %   |   10 %   |    1 %   |     0 %    |
|3( )PG|   99 %   |   70 %   |   50 %   |   15 %   |    3 %   |     0 %    |
|5(-)P |   99 %   |   75 %   |   55 %   |   20 %   |    5 %   |     1 %    |
|7( )  |   WLT    |   WLT    |   WLT    |   WLT    |   WLT    |    WLT     |
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

DAYS = Number of days (from present) into the future (1, 3, 5 and 7 days).
(+)  = Primary candidate region expected to GROW and DEVELOP.
( )  = Primary candidate region expected to STABILIZE or remain STABLE.
(-)  = Primary candidate region expected to DECAY and SIMPLIFY.
(x)P = Possible proton and/or PCA threat. (x) may be one of (+), (-), or ( ).
(x)G = If a favorable major flare develops, a moderate to high probability
       exists that the event may be geoeffective.
xx % = Probability of activity equalling or exceeding the given x-ray class
       sometime over the next number of DAYS.
WLT  = Data not applicable due to the West Limb Transit of the target region.

The above chart should be used as a guide only.  It represents anticipated
levels of activity based on current projections of region development.
Actual conditions may, of course, differ from these projections.


SYNOPSIS:

     Region 7260 has continued to grow and develop.  It has produced two
M-class flares over the last 24 hours (on 20 August): an M2.9 event at 09:20
UT and a class M4.0 event at 14:36 UT.  Another class M1.9 event is in
progress at the time of this writing.  A major flare is possible over the
next 24 to 48 hours.

     The probability for possible proton activity is enhanced due to the
increased level of energetics from this region.

     HF Short Wave Fadeout (SWF) activity has been observed with the recent
minor M-class flares.  Additional episodes of SWF activity over the daylit
hemispheres are expected over the next 24 to 48 hours.

     This warning will remain active until further notice.


                   /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
From: Richard.Mathews@West.Sun.COM (Richard M. Mathews)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: the moon
Date: 18 Aug 1992 11:32:32 -0700
Organization: Sunsoft Inc., Los Angeles, CA.
NNTP-Posting-Host: smaug.West.Sun.COM

rsb@mcc.com (Richard S. Brice) writes:
>How does the moon know that it's supposed to move further away from the
>earth just because the earth is slowing down?

The tidal force of the moon stretches the earth into an oblong shape.  The
rotation of the earth carries those bulges to the east faster than the
earth can take on a new shape.  The oblong earth thus points a bit to
the east of the moon.  The bulge closest to the moon has the strongest
pull, so it provides a slight eastward pull on the moon.  As the moon
orbits west-to-east, this accelerates the moon and pulls it into a higher
orbit.  The opposite force of the moon pulling on that bulge towards the
west slows down the earth's rotation by a corresponding amount.

Richard M. Mathews			F oster 
Internet:   richard@locus.com		 E stonian-Latvian-Lithuanian
UUCP:	    ...!uunet!lcc!richard	  I ndependence and
MIL/BITNET: richard%lcc@UUNET.UU.NET	   F reedom!
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Subject: Re: M33 naked-eye object.
Reply-To: chaloux@mandolin.mitre.org (Dave Chaloux)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:19:57 GMT

Joel B Stuckey writes:

>     I checked the galaxies you listed with the NED (NASA extra-
>   galactic database) and found the following magnitudes listed;
>
>     NGC 7335-14.44
>     NGC 7336-15
>     NGC 7337-15.24
>     NGC 7340-14.68
>
>    the database did not distinguish between photographic and
>   visual magnitudes. However it may be due to the size of the
>   galaxy and its surface brightness. Keep in mind that M33 is
>   listed as mag 6.5! which makes it a naked eye object. This
>   may be the reason for your discrepancy

I found out that there was a nice write up in Sky & Telescope on this
group in the Sept 91 issue. Morales also sees 7336 as the hardest of the
bunch. There is a very nice photo of the entire area. Interestingly, 7336
does not look bigger than 7337. If anything, it may be somewhat smaller.
My latest guess is that the above are photographic magnitudes and that
the one galaxy is considerably bluer than the other making the visual
magnitudes discrepant.

I do thank you for the time you took to look the data up.