[Aavso-photometry] Newbie Question Re: AW Cyg

[Michael Sallman]

And then I go and send it back to the wrong AAVSO list. :-(


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Aavso-photometry] Newbie Question Re: AW Cyg
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 10:01:52 -0500
From: Michael Sallman <msallman at pro-ns.net>
To: salgiambruno at yahoo.com,  "aavso-discussion at mira.aavso.org" 
<aavso-discussion at mira.aavso.org>
References: <001b01c806f6$32c93df0$0200a8c0 at galileo>

Sal and all,

I had originally emailed Sal personally instead of the entire group
(damn you "Reply To All"!) but I thought I would bring this back to the
list as others might be interested and/or be able to contribute to the
discussion.

So, as I said to Sal, it seems that the photographic magnitude range
comes from GCVS (which makes sense):
http://www.sai.msu.su/gcvs/cgi-bin/search.cgi?search=AW+Cyg

They reference this work from 1981. Which, oddly enough, appears to be
visual magnitudes, not photographic.:
http://www.stw.tu-ilmenau.de/science/pub/MVS/texts/MVS09/MVS09.052.html

They also reference the 1980 AAVSO Variable Star Atlas. I don't have a
copy of this, but the current online charts do show the same 11.0-14.5 p
magnitude range.

Checking Simbad, there are 62 references for this star dating back to
1899. Looking at the 1899 paper it is still referenced as BD +45 2906.
In the next paper (1933) it is named AW Cyg. So it "became" AW Cyg
sometime between those 2 dates. I then ran across this page:
http://cdsweb.u-strasbg.fr/afoev/var/edenom.htx

In it they mention that the first time there was a need to go beyond the
letter ZZ in the namimg scheme was after ZZ Cyg was named in 1907. So it
appears that AW Cyg might have been named a bit after 1907. The paper
also mentions that the Astronomische Gesellschaf created a commission
that was responsible for naming new variables between 1900-1942. They
published these new variables in the Astronomiche Nachricten.
Querying ADS ( http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abstract_service.html ) in that
date range with the string "Benennung von veränderlichen Sternen" in the
Title Words section (click on the "And" button instead of the default
"Or") will bring up these lists of variables. It appears that the
original naming of the star as AW Cyg occurs here:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1912AN....191..341.

But again, the magnitude range is visual!

So where did the photographic magnitudes come from? None of the Simbad
references that I was able to access appear to have them. It would be
interesting to know if they were in the 1st edition of the GCVS (and
hopefully a reference to where they came from). Anyone have a copy lying
around that they could check?

What am I missing?

Take care,
Mike SVI

Sal Giambruno wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> Well I'm glad your interest is piqued.  Very interesting what you've
> discovered so far about AW Cyg.  It would be nice to hear what more you
> learn, and if a definitive name history can be grasped from the research.  I
> will definitely keep a look out for this one myself, but I doubt my list of
> resources for research is anywhere near as expansive as yours.  Of the few
> places I've stumbled upon, I still have no idea where each source's
> authority lay in the big scheme of things. 
> 
> I didn't cc this message to The List because you did not either - and I
> really have no idea what is, and what is not an appropriate conversation for
> The List.  However, if this IS an appropriate conversation, it certainly
> should be "Listed" so that it might benefit a wider audience.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sal
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Sallman [mailto:msallman at pro-ns.net] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:03 PM
> To: salgiambruno at yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: [Aavso-photometry] Newbie Question Re: AW Cyg
> 
> 
> Sal,
> 
> The range and passband referred to are usually from the discovery paper 
> on the particular star in question (or perhaps a newer "definitive" 
> reference).
> 
> So, in this case, the numbers come from the GCVS:
> http://www.sai.msu.su/gcvs/cgi-bin/search.cgi?search=AW+Cyg
> 
> They reference this work from 1981. Which, oddly enough, appears to be 
> visual magnitudes, not photographic.:
> http://www.stw.tu-ilmenau.de/science/pub/MVS/texts/MVS09/MVS09.052.html
> 
> It is a relatively "old" named variable (it is not named AW Cyg in an 
> 1899 paper, but is in a paper from 1933). My guess is that the magnitude 
> range is from back in the early 20th century, when it officially became 
> AW Cyg. And when photography was a prime method of finding new variables.
> 
> I can't seem to find a paper yet that actually provides the referenced 
> photographic range, but I will keep looking. Now you've got me curious! :-)
> 
> Take care,
> Mike SVI