EPHEMERIS 2010 : Trial Document

[Enchilada]

During the recent debate on the IceInSpace Compendium 2009, there was an expression by me and supernova1965 about a possible Ephemeris / Astronomer's Diary

So I have attached a useful example, which I've done in the last few hours. This contains a pdf document that is a DRAFT of the Ephemeris 2010, giving all the detailed information on the planets etc., sun positions for 2010.

There plainly no other information expressed here, but naturally the missing explanations, and things like nice graphics, sunrise/set and moonrise/set, or twilights tables, etc.

I have left room mainly for other ideas for what this document should have, or contributions that others might like add in, or even what others thinks might be useful pertaining to such a document.

I'd also be very happy to collate and work towards such a developed electronic document, based on what people mostly say in this thread. :)

The sky the limit in what can be achieved by amateur astronomers, the only limitation is ones imagination and surviving the critics… ;)

Any ideas???

:jump:

Note: Ephemeris 2010 is attached below...

Cheers

Encha...

[supernova1965]

Looks great and I think will be a very useful reference tool now I will need some education to be able to use it to its full potential. I hope that you get heaps of contributions and few NAYSAYERS.;):thumbsup:

[Rodstar]

Onya Enchilada for putting this idea forward.

To what extent do you think this would present information which overlaps with the Quasar publication Astronomy 2010? What would distinguish this from that hallowed publication?

I would be happy to contribute some observing notes on specific objects if the publication has traction. I say this because Astronomy 2009 (and all of its predecessors) have shown a bias towards solar system objects. Whilst there are constellation maps and a Messier list (and a few other items) near the rear, there is nothing detailed on deep sky objects in the Quasar Publication.

I would like to see a collaboration with the compendium idea if that is at all possible.

[BerrieK]

Looks good Enchilada; another good idea has been hatched.

As suggested by others, what do you see setting this apart from the Quasar publication? or other electronic sources of ephemeric data? (other than the fact that this will be the IIS version and that it will contain reports and info as collated by IIS members? And that it will / might be available electronically?)

What is the source of the data? Should this be recognised in order to avoid suggestions of plagiarism?

Kerrie :)

[Enchilada]

I agree. The ephemeris is just an example of core information for such a document, as the data changes year to year for a planetary ephemeris. Once done, the remaining additions are only open to the imagination.

Other information can also be included that can totally unrelated to planets. A true beauty of a "diary" is that really anything could go into it, deep-sky objects or say variable or double stars to observe each month.

Another alternative is perhaps a number of selected objects, married with observations and images from contributors each month. Better still, once done, it is available perpetually

It is interesting to note, the reason why I haven't added Moon Phase or Sunrise and sunset, is because it appears in the sidebar of this very page. There is no need to have that data - its at your fingertips now! One good option is to have a simple graphic that covers the entire year, works for any latitude, and whose precision is around 5 minutes. This is one page, instead of having pages and pages of tables. (The question becomes what ACTUALLY need the sunrise data for? For most purposes, knowing it to the precise second is not important. Knowing to a few minutes is only required for, say, taking an image of the sunrise. Again, what do observers want? )

Of course, explaining phenomena and data could also be part of the publication. It could include the brightest and nearest stars, the names of the brightest stars, 50 best southern variable stars.

In the end, what do people actually want here? :question:

[Enchilada]

I fail to see the relevance of this. "Astronomy 2010" is its own publication, but it is not unique nor is it totally original.

The point is what is presented in it is mostly the views by the three authors, and what they deem as what might be of some use to observers. Much that it contains is very useful, but what is relevant to the observer is what I sometimes question. Let's face it. Ephemerides ain't rocket science, nor is it difficult to obtain or generate.

One main disadvantage "Astronomy 2010" is that it is slow to adapt to changes required by observers, only because it is prepared in the last quarter of the previous year, then print. Once done, it stays as is, and cannot be changed until the next edition. If a comet pops up, for example, the publication cannot satisfy the observer with the information of its position nor describe the comet's apparition.

By doing something electronically, it can be changed (or added too) in a few hours, and simply redistributed.

[An example, is the page on the geocentric position of the Moon. It gives the location of the moon to RA and Declination at 0h UT, to hours, minutes, seconds. As ask you, what use is this information? Frankly, no one uses it! Hence, it is not a core element.
Another example, is the precision of the geocentric planetary positions, which are to the positions with the precision of hh mm ss. Who need that accuracy? All is required is to minutes, enough so the planet can be identified on a star chart or to dial it up to find it in the 'scope.]

IMO, this publication does provide more of the "ancillary data" and text on a variety of subjects. Whilst it might or might not be useful, it is the most attractive part of buying it each year. However, the written information also not unique. (Much of the general text. I.e. The Brightest star, or Nearest Stars, are available on Wikipedia, for example.) In the proposal I'm presenting here, we could add somethings that are similar or other things they many not have covered adequately. We could also add other things that have never been covered.



I agree, and thanks for saying that. What I think we need is suggestions of what observers here might like to have or contribute. There are so many things that could be done, in fact the whole gambit of possibilities, but what needs to be focussed on is "core" information that will have the most impact towards new and established observers and imagers.



Agreed. I personally would like to see more collaborations between the imagers and the observers. I.e. How I see this deep-sky object visually and how do I image it; and what do these observations TELL ME of the nature of the object!
Basically. Image, what the image is, how was it done, and what it is telling me.

[Enchilada]

Much of what I've said is to the post to Rod (below). My point would be to produce pdfs, which could be printed out by the user if required.

The important issue is what are it "core" elements. Quasar is a good publication, but it is limited in its scope because of it physical nature as a book. Some of its ephemeris data is relevant, but some of it isn't. The good example here, is having sunrise or sunset on the sidebar (left) on the IceInSpace Site Menu, and it means an electronic or physical form of an ephemeris is not really required. "Astronomy 2010" may have that in its volume, but to our IIS'ers here it is not required. All that is really required is how to use it, perhaps via some educational based text.

One example for me, as an observer is how many hours of darkness do I have to observe, which changes (dramatically) throughout the year. I can calculate it, by subtracting the difference between civil twilights (or if an imager, subtract between astronomical twilights), but a yearly table showing the number of hours available per night might be very useful. Furthermore, if you could also correlated the time of moonrise and moonset, you could then narrow the opportunity for the best mights to observe or image, and the total number of hours available. Nothing really like this is tabulated in "Astronomy 2010", except for some monthly Rise/Set Graphic. IMO, it is far too complicated.



An interesting question. Perhaps I should ask you, instead, how difficult do you think the data to obtain or calculate yourself? Where do you think the Quasar authors get there data from? Where did they get their ideas of doing their publication?

As for plagiarism, whom is cribbing from whom I wonder? Look. Astronomical data is not unique, nor is it controlled by just a few individuals. Many want you to think there ideas are unique, especially when it comes to the written word. Much of it isn't true — an open con, if you like.
Really. I haven't purchased a copy of "Astronomy 2010" or any of its earlier for many years now. Why? I have all the means and capabilities to generate or interpret observational data for the purposes I require. It is really not that hard (though some might try to convey the opposite view.)
In the end, as long as you attribute your sources, plagiarism doesn't enter into it.
I don't think anyone here is remotely suggesting to mimic something else. It should be a document that defines the community here - regardless of the detractors or individual's vested interests.

Your comments here are an interesting insights to your own (and probably others) perceptions of existing mores regarding astronomical information. It is probably valid that such perceptions might need to be challenged before the full potential of what I propose can be realised.

I appreciate your realistic candour. :thumbsup:

NOTE: My view is there are a possible 6000+ people here who could contribute in some manner. As I said;

The sky the limit in what can be achieved by amateur astronomers, the only limitation is ones imagination and surviving the critics…

[Enchilada]

Interested to see there has been fifty downloads!! :thanx:

Any thoughts about what else you might like to see in new additions to what's already here? :shrug:

[stephenb]

Congratulations, A great idea.

Actually, this is similar to what I do for myself. I download Ephemera from the JPL Horizons website for the coming year and print them out. Quasars book is good, but when you don't need all the pictures, diagrams, and filler material, simple text tables is easier to manage for me.