Naming Omega Centauri and 47 Tuc

[glenc (Glen)]

RE: Halley's Gigantic Globular = omega Cen
I don't think we should credit Ptolemy with seeing omega Cen as a DSO.

Omega Centauri had been listed in Ptolemy's catalog as a star. Halley was the first to document its nonstellar nature, and listed it as "luminous spot or patch in Centaurus" in his historical list of six such objects.
http://seds.org/messier/xtra/ngc/n5139.html

Ptolemy saw four DSO and discovered two of these DSO, M7 and the Coma cluster. http://seds.org/messier/xtra/histlist/histDis.html

This splendid cluster (M7) was known to Ptolemy, who mentioned it about 130 AD and described it as the "nebula following the sting of Scorpius." The description may also include M6, but this is uncertain. Because of this presumable discovery, the present author [Hartmut Frommert] has proposed the name "Ptolemy's Cluster" for M7 some years ago, a proposition which has found some acceptance meanwhile.
http://seds.org/messier/m/m007.html

This large and conspicuous (Coma) cluster was first cataloged by Ptolemy; it is scattered over an area of about 4.5 degrees diameter. Although conspicuous, it was neither included in Messier's nor in the NGC catalog, because its nature as a true, physical cluster was proven only in 1938 by R.J. Trumpler who identified 37 stars as true cluster members. Prior to this, P.J. Melotte had cataloged it in his 1915 catalog as No. 111. http://seds.org/messier/xtra/ngc/mel111.html

RE: Lacaille's Grand Globular = 47 Tuc
As its name "47 Tucanae" indicates, this object was first cataloged as a star and numbered the 47th in Tucana. Although a conspicuous naked-eye object, it is situated so much south at its declination of -72 deg, that it was not discovered as a deepsky object before 1751, when Abbe Lacaille cataloged it in his list of southern nebulous objects.
http://seds.org/messier/xtra/ngc/n0104.html

When I say Lacaille's Globular I mean he found it and we NOW know it is a globular, but he didn't know that.

No doubt Australian aborigines and others saw these objects long before written records were made.

[AJames]

"RE: Halley's Gigantic Globular = omega Cen
I don't think we should credit Ptolemy with seeing omega Cen as a DSO.

Omega Centauri had been listed in Ptolemy's catalogue as a star. Halley was the first to document its non-stellar nature, and listed it as "luminous spot or patch in Centaurus" in his historical list of six such objects."

You do bring up an interesting debate, and one that has more shades of grey than the Moon!

However, I would like to put my spin on it....

Much of the debates about astronomy regarding the actual discoverer of the deep-sky objects are based on lists produced by noted astronomers. From the 15th Century, many of the "DSO's" or deep sky objects - suddenly appeared in the star Catalogues. Halley was just one of these, who produces a short list of six objects that we now recognise as anagalactic objects. In his original dissertation he speculated that these objects were to "occupy Spaces immensely great" which he goes on to say "Medium is diffused, shine with there own lustre." This appears in his Phil.Trans., 347, 390 (1715).

This was contrary to general belief of the day in the in the so-called Empyrean - the area of sky reserved for the angels and the gods - essentially the vault in the heavens. With the invention of the telescope, many more stars and seemingly hazy or nebulous objects were revealed, which were assumed to be holes in the firmament. Halley is the one to allegedly brake that assumption - an argument that was a noncontradiction - forming the (meaning metaphysical and physical) cosmological concept of the metagalaxy - but that is yet another debate - but to the crunch...

Due to this some now assert that this makes Halley the one to define the first DSO's.

All well and good. However, there are contrary views. The problem with astronomy between the mid- to late-17th through to the 20th Centuries was the rise of so-called "nationalistic astronomy", where whole nations vied for recognition of astronomical observers and institutions. Here the European nations of England, France, Germany (and it sub-forms) and to a lesser extent, the Russians. Perhaps the most popular example was Mr William Herschel - "Will" to his mates - who proclaimed the planet Uranus as "Georgium Sidus" after his generous (and likely psychiatric disabled) patron, England's King George III.

Here the great astronomers and scientists of the day vied for supremacy in the "Best Country Stakes" - the prize being the honour for the glory of the State. This ranged from star catalogues, star charts, constellation, planets, comets, etc. Here were the dirty tricks, true and false claims and counter claims, and manipulations of the truth became the order of the day, often backed up by expeditions with heady ambitions or financial support. The nuances between the English and the French were particularly fanatical, backed up by new science institutions and observers. Later these ambitions were somewhat quelled, but continue to simmer in the present day. Without going into detail, for brevity, the promotion of Halley has been especially relevant to the English, as was Lacaille for the French. (Another was the French Descartes v. Newton or even Neptune's Adams v. Le Verrier.)
[A 18th Century drinking ditty is an example of this contempt. See "The Astronomer's Drinking Song";
Ie. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/heather...tronomy18c.htm

"Great Newton, who was never beat
Whatever fools may, think, sir;
Though sometimes he forgot to eat,
He never forgot to drink, sir:
Descartes took nought but lemonade,
To conquer him was play, sir;
Thefirst advance that Newton made
Was to drink his bottle a day, sir!"]

For the modern example, and likely the source of the DSO English favouritism was the English writer and once BAA Historical guru, Kenneth Glyn Jones is a classic example of this phenomena. This appears in his detailed book "The Search for Nebula" (1975). Each astronomer or observer is listed individually. Here Halley (pg.2) relation to omega centauri is described in detail, while oddly, Ptolemy (pg.7-8) is given the bums-rush - missing his observation all together! However, under Halley pg.24, he makes the claim that Ptolemy is often misquoted; see the translations below. This has proven to be false.

But even Halley has placed omega Cen in star catalogue (Object 180) in his "Catalogue of Southern Stars" (1677).

So, note the dates here. Omega Cen appear in a catalogue in 1677, but the claim of the deep-sky objects appears in 1715 - forty-eight (48) years later while Halley was starting musing about his life! (He died in 1742!)

Case in point... and here is the perpetuation of the myth.... while Halley observed Omega Cen the connection to it being a deep-sky object is a little stretch of the imagination.

The Case for Ptolemy

Observationally it could be argued that DSO's didn't really exist until even after Messier. Many of the globulars, due to the poor quality they were unresolved. For Ptolemy, I favour him because he was first to write down that the star was not stellar. (Halley also didn't realise Omega Centauri was stellar either!) For the wider discussion, this is what Ptolemy can be attributed too.

As I previously said;
"It was actually Ptolemy who discovered that the area was the "nebula on the back of the horse" - dorso Equino Nebulous."
[A translation of "(misty) nebula in tergus of equus" is sometimes quoted]

[The same text written by Jones (1975) says this quote is "Halley's and not Ptolemy's"; which has since been proven as false! Nationalism yet once again!]

This is also noted in the Almagest text (at least of the handed down copies available.)

Star 955 #21 of Centaurus; (Note : Ptolemy never knew it as "omega", (which was added later by cartographers in 15th Century) Thirty-seven stars were placed in Centaurus.

The position of No. 955 is described as; Quae est in principio scapulae or "Which is upon beginning sword belt"

I think Ptolemy deserves some credit!

Andrew

[glenc (Glen)]

Thanks Andrew, interesting read.

[AJames]

Glenn

I forgot to say, I do agree with the attribution of Lacaille with 47 Tuc.

No-one else before him has been known to have seen and catalogued it.

Andrew

[AJames]

It has been ten days since the last post on this thread. After reviewing the submissions for possible names, I was going to post two new "poll" threads for suggestions of proper names for Omega Centauri and 47 Tuc from the ideas presented here.

Does any one have any additional names suggestions before doing this?

Regards,
AJames

[glenc (Glen)]

Andrew I prefer to give Halley the credit for Omega Cen because he was the first to record it from the southern hemisphere (St Helena, latitude 16 south) and because he was the first to see it with a telescope (I suspect). Ptolemy was a northern observer with no telescope.

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by AJames

It has been ten days since the last post on this thread. After reviewing the submissions for possible names, I was going to post two new "poll" threads for suggestions of proper names for Omega Centauri and 47 Tuc from the ideas presented here.

Does any one have any additional names suggestions before doing this?

Regards,
AJames

Leave them alone, the names are just fine
It's the same with all these catalogue names, such as Caldwell, Bennett,ect.
Everybody wants to get in on the naming bandwaggon

[Stevo69]

Originally Posted by astroron

Leave them alone, the names are just fine
It's the same with all these catalogue names, such as Caldwell, Bennett,ect.
Everybody wants to get in on the naming bandwaggon

Ditto, I really don't care. I know them as 47 Tuc and Omega Centauri. And I don't lose sleep over it.

[AJames]

Stevo69

If you "Ditto, I really don't care." Then why did you comment?

AJames