Asteroid Zoo Talk

WHAT ON EARTH CAN THIS BE??

  • hightower73 by hightower73

    !st of all, it has 25 frames to this set

    2nd the object is not following a straight course unless the set is off alignment?

    3rd if it is an asteroid, its very slow moving and must be very close to earth.

    and 4th why is this ( what ever it is ) in unknown?

    Posted

  • hightower73 by hightower73

    astrometry does not know what it is, but its comming up with the following

    Center (RA, Dec): (189.333, 10.775)

    Center (RA, hms): 12h 37m 19.819s

    Center (Dec, dms): +10° 46' 28.207"

    Size: 10.7 x 10.7 arcmin

    Radius: 0.126 deg

    Pixel scale: 2.5 arcsec/pixel

    Orientation: Up is 180 degrees E of N

    Posted

  • Andy_Arg by Andy_Arg

    Realy strange. Here is another with 25 frames: AAZ000h6w6

    Posted

  • hightower73 by hightower73 in response to Andy_Arg's comment.

    thats a strange one to, i wonder whats causing these andy? maybe dmz can comment and maybe dr android could come up with an answer

    Posted

  • AstroTinker by AstroTinker

    I note the white spot in the 10 oclock position (upper left) on both 25 image sets AAZ000h70n
    and AAZ000h6w6 repeat a pattern of Left,Left,(then starting with 4) Right,Right,Left,Left,Left, repeat, until 19 is a single Right, followed by 2 lefts and 3 rights. This appears to me to be telescope positioning corrections, but for a dedicated scope following a particular sky position for 25 back-to back (10 sec?) images, rather than our usual 4 ea 10 sec images 30 min apart. The little gradual shift up the image would be an uncorrected amount of drift (attempting cumulative digital adjustments to an analog sky).
    Also, AAZ000h70n has a vague shape below it that moves in formation, like what we see in the rest of the 4-set images which I label generically as #ffd, flat field defect. I note in the web site for the Catalina Sky Survey that instead of the 0.5 meter scope, they use a 1 meter scope to do spot and verification checks on objects identified by their software.
    Thus, I suspect these are just regular ffd on a couple of 25 image sets on the 1 meter telescope. As to the particular type of Artifact that moves with the scope, it could be an actual defect in the flat-field correction image (i.e. star not re-corrected out), or dust spot, rain spot, etc. on either the flat field image or the scope lens/mirror light path. From what little I spotted on looking up that topic on the web, it might take physical dis-assembly to track down the exact cause.... My 2 cents...

    Posted

  • hightower73 by hightower73 in response to AstroTinker's comment.

    thanks astrotinker for your input, thats very strange how they follow the same pattern thougth. thought i had found a monster asteroid

    Posted

  • Andy_Arg by Andy_Arg

    another one:

    AAZ000h6xk

    Posted

  • AstroTinker by AstroTinker in response to Andy_Arg's comment.

    Added note in this discussion: Type of Object.

    I suggest we mark these as #25frames

    Posted

  • sisifolibre by sisifolibre

    another one

    AAZ000h70i

    the objet seems to repeat the pattern of the others but here aren't the "shadow shape" which can be seen in AAZ000h70n

    Like hightower73 say, there are 2 question here:
    1.what are these objets?
    2.Why these image sets have 25 frames?

    Question 1 must be more difficult (or impossible) to response, but question 2 should be more easy to respon by an admin. or scientist, but i havent found anything in the forum

    are there any answer or some imformation?

    Posted

  • AstroTinker by AstroTinker

    sisifolibre,

    To simplify my ramble earlier in this thread I'll respond to your two questions:

    Q1. The 'moving' objects look like 'regular' flat-field defects discussed elsewhere under the tag #ffd, just moving differently. They are obviously not something in the sky, but in the scope's light path.

    Q2. #25frames / #25Frames sets: I think these are where the Catalina Sky Survey team used the 1 meter telescope to look closer at a specific spot of sky, verifying possible asteroids identified by their software. They would dedicate the scope to this, take frames at a closer interval, and more of them. We still might not see an asteroid in these, for any number of reasons.

    The different motion of the telescope for 25 (quicker?) dedicated frames vs 4 frames explains why the ffd moves in a different pattern, more of a climbing zig-zag.

    With this in mind, please see if my note on 17 Jun makes more sense.

    Posted

  • sisifolibre by sisifolibre

    Thank you for your help AstroTinker.

    I entirely agree with you in Q1.

    The answer you give to q2 is good but I still missing me a little that such sets are introduced among others of 4 images... but I'm not going to lose sleep over it 😛

    I also said it a little to see if any moderator or scientist says something about the thread 😉

    But I guess the questions are a bit silly to merit attention 😛

    Posted