Skip to main content

Nova designations

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
mrv's picture
Nova designations

Anyone know why most of the novae discovered this year have yet to receive permanent designations?  The GCVS staff used to do this rather quickly after each discovery but not lately.


PYG's picture
Nova Designation

That's a very good question.  Might it have something to do with the lack of follow up spectra?  It can't be classed as a Nova without a confirming spectrum I believe.  

Coincidence that the death of Brian Marsden ties in with a lack of motivation in seeking out spectra for PNV's? I dunno - just thinking out aloud, but I find the current situation extremely frustrating.

It's a question that needs addressing I think!  


FRF's picture
the lack GCVS designation, not CBAT fault

Hi Gary,

The lack of GCVS designation is not a fault of the CBAT team I assume. It has nothing to do with spectra. Btw. as it was already mentioned the final GCVS designation is still missing even for spectroscopically confirmed novae too.

PYG's picture
Nova Des.

Hi Robert,

I would think that a confirming spectrum plays an important role though surely.  It's only after this has been achieved that a suspected Nova becomes a real Nova.  Once this has happened, then a final designation can be given by the GCVS team.  As to why confirmed Nova haven't yet been given proper names is a mystery to me.

There is a feeling over here that Brian's demise plays some sort of role in the delay.


Supernova case

In supernova case, situation is more difficult. There are several supernovae that has not been designated . They were reported to CBAT TOCP as supernova candidates and spectral confirmations were posted in Atel(!!). In such case, no confirmation report published in CBET . Thus such real supernovae did not have SN designation such as SN 2012xx and remain PNVs in TOCP list.
Any idea?

As you know, supernavae do not have GCVS neme. So, name such as SN 2012xx is usuful to identify supernovae.

Seiichiro Kiyota, Japan

FRF's picture
inform CBAT too

In case of SNe the solution is simple: instead of publishing SNe spetra only in ATEL the CBAT people needs to be informed too.

Simple, but not simple

Yes, simple. But, It might not be simple.

I dno't know reason why some astromomers publish thier spectroscopic confirmation only in Atel. And, I don't know whether they should send thier results to both CBAT and Atel or not. I think that some negotiation is needed in professional supernova community.

I know that many cosmic distance supernovae do not have old supernova designation such as SN 2012xx and they called with supernova search project name plus number or someting like that. 

But, I think that bright supernovae, discovered by amateuers, should have name like SN2012xx.

Seiichiro Kiyota



Log in to post comments
AAVSO 49 Bay State Rd. Cambridge, MA 02138 617-354-0484