What do you do? [possibly unknown moving object detected]

rogerg (Roger) · #1 01-04-2011, 02:31 PM

Hi all,

What do you do when you have a object which is slowly moving through a FOV, and the object is not identified in a program like Astrometrica or CCDSoft when you do a "known object overlay" ?

I have to assume it's a known or unimportant object, because I come across this often and woldn't expect to find a new object "often", but the question still bugs me .. what do I do about it? how do I take it further and be more sure it's a known object?

I have MPO Canopus but am barely starting to understand how to use it. I am hence using Astrometrica and CCDSoft at this stage.

Background: I often find moving objects when comparing my supernova comparison images, and to date I've never successfully identified one. I have three from last night, so it's starting to bug me

How slow is slow you might ask? Let's say 5 arc seconds over a 23 hour period, is one example from last night.

Thanks,
Roger.

mithrandir (Andrew) · #2 01-04-2011, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogerg

Hi all,

What do you do when you have a object which is slowly moving through a FOV, and the object is not identified in a program like Astrometrica or CCDSoft when you do a "known object overlay" ?

What are the "known objects"? Is this an April 1 event?

Quote:

Let's say 5 arc seconds over a 23 hour period ...

sounds like an asteroid. MPC lists over 500,000 of them. Where in the sky was it?

rogerg (Roger) · #3 01-04-2011, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mithrandir

What are the "known objects"? Is this an April 1 event?

Known, as in minor planets/asteroids that are known.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mithrandir

sounds like an asteroid. MPC lists over 500,000 of them. Where in the sky was it?

South, one is -41 declination, another -62, another -70, another -65.

Edit: some of the pictures were taken on April 1st, but it is not a joke if that is what you are getting at. And yes, motion is like an asteroid but the question is more how to identify exactly which they are, or if they are yet to be catalogued.

Roger.

OICURMT · #4 02-04-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogerg

South, one is -41 declination, another -62, another -70, another -65.

Actual coordinates would be nice...

rogerg (Roger) · #5 02-04-2011, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OICURMT

Actual coordinates would be nice...

I was hoping to find out the procedure to identify the objects, not necessarily these particular ones, so hadn't focused on their individual location etc. Having someone else identify them for me won't help me in a few days time when I stumble upon another...

I'll dig up the co-ordinates tomorrow hopefully, when I'm back in the observatory.

Thanks,
Roger.

PeterM · #6 03-04-2011, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogerg

I was hoping to find out the procedure to identify the objects, not necessarily these particular ones, so hadn't focused on their individual location etc. Having someone else identify them for me won't help me in a few days time when I stumble upon another...

I'll dig up the co-ordinates tomorrow hopefully, when I'm back in the observatory.

Thanks,
Roger.

If anyone does find an object in their image a good starting point is the minor planet checker (below) this will identify any known minor planets around the date and co-ordinates. You can use it backwards also, so here is a starting point.
If there is nothing listed then the images you have can probably be used to determine its movement and if lucky then you may have a discovery that you may have the priviledge of naming (subject of course to IAU procedures).

Jim Riffle (USA) discovered 2 asteroids in images he took from Leyburn when he was in Australia a few years back.

Peterm.

http://scully.cfa.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/checkmp.cgi

rogerg (Roger) · #7 03-04-2011, 05:30 PM

Thanks Peter, much appreciated. That is the kind of site I was looking for. The thing I like about that site is it provides a source of information for the area in question which is independent from the analysis of my images.

mswhin63 (Malcolm) · #8 03-04-2011, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogerg

Thanks Peter, much appreciated. That is the kind of site I was looking for. The thing I like about that site is it provides a source of information for the area in question which is independent from the analysis of my images.

I am sure there are other sites available we can register what you have found unfortunately I don't know of those sites.

I will have one of my Uni lectures tomorrow I might ask my lecturer if he knows of an Australian site to registering unknown minor planets or asteroids.

PeterM · #9 04-04-2011, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mswhin63

I am sure there are other sites available we can register what you have found unfortunately I don't know of those sites.

I will have one of my Uni lectures tomorrow I might ask my lecturer if he knows of an Australian site to registering unknown minor planets or asteroids.

Hi Malcolm,

When it comes to reporting a possible discovery there is a set process that the IAU have. Follow the process and you have pretty much done all you can. The process is found at the site below and that's pretty much it in a nutshell.

There has to be much care in the process or it can get out of hand, as happened about 20 years ago when an amateur astronomer reported to the Australian amateur community a "supernova" in Omega Centauri, what was it? nothing other than his poor observation. The excitement of the moment has to be calmly addressed. I have heard that CBAT (Central Bureau Astronomical Telegrams) are forever getting "I saw this I saw, I have imaged this" emails. CBAT are the ultimate bull#%@# filter before a discovery is sent out to professional observatories and subscribers. Emails without detail, confirmation and other required process no doubt end up where they belong, in the trash bin, it's blunt but thats the way it is.

There is much more responsibility placed on the observer and in particular with imaging to do your homework, there are a multitude of things to rule out, not the least artifacts, known objects (like minor planets and variables) and with some CCD cameras they can and do "bleed" bright objects into the next image, showing as what we call ill defined non star-like floaters or blobs.

http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/HowT...Discovery.html

Regards
Peter