Most of my research has been on Chandra, AAVSO, NASA, and Arxiv. SIMBAD has always been confusing for me. Most of the data doesn't seem to make sense, and I have trouble using the search algorithm, Do you have any advice on how to use SIMBAD?jonboyage wrote: Another good resource is SIMBAD; It usually has almost all the numbers I need for a DSO. Arxiv is better for very specific things and if you're good at reading these kinds of documents. Chandra is the most user-friendly probably. AAVSO is also a nice website to find light curves of variable stars on; I've found that many tests-makers use it. All of these sites should have all the information you will ever need for the DSOs, but even more research on your own time can never hurt.
Astronomy C
-
Simulacrum
- Member

- Posts: 4
- Joined: September 15th, 2017, 7:22 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Astronomy C
West High Science Olympiad
- Unome
- Moderator

- Posts: 4321
- Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 228 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Astronomy C
SIMBAD makes the assumption that you know exactly what it's talking about, which is why it tends to be confusing. Take a look at this page and ask about something in particular, one of us on here can probably explain it.Simulacrum wrote:Most of my research has been on Chandra, AAVSO, NASA, and Arxiv. SIMBAD has always been confusing for me. Most of the data doesn't seem to make sense, and I have trouble using the search algorithm, Do you have any advice on how to use SIMBAD?jonboyage wrote: Another good resource is SIMBAD; It usually has almost all the numbers I need for a DSO. Arxiv is better for very specific things and if you're good at reading these kinds of documents. Chandra is the most user-friendly probably. AAVSO is also a nice website to find light curves of variable stars on; I've found that many tests-makers use it. All of these sites should have all the information you will ever need for the DSOs, but even more research on your own time can never hurt.
- Adi1008
- Moderator

- Posts: 525
- Joined: December 6th, 2013, 1:56 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: CA
- Pronouns: He/Him/His
- Has thanked: 153 times
- Been thanked: 107 times
Re: Astronomy C
This isn't anywhere close to perfect, but perhaps it's a reasonable estimate.ashucha wrote:This may be a bit too specific but does anybody know what the apparent and absolute magnitude of DEM L241 (aka NGC 2029) is and where you got this information? Thanks!
This paper says that the x-ray source has a luminosity
The same paper also mentions that the distance is about 50 kpc. Using the distance modulus, this gives an apparent magnitude of about 19.03
As for the entire remnant, Table 5 in the paper says that it has a luminosity of about
Stanford University
University of Texas at Austin '22
Seven Lakes High School '18
Beckendorff Junior High '14
University of Texas at Austin '22
Seven Lakes High School '18
Beckendorff Junior High '14
- PM2017
- Member

- Posts: 524
- Joined: January 20th, 2017, 5:02 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: CA
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 13 times
Re: Astronomy C
Correct me if I'm wrong, but simbad seems to give an apparent magnitude of 12.29.Adi1008 wrote:This isn't anywhere close to perfect, but perhaps it's a reasonable estimate.ashucha wrote:This may be a bit too specific but does anybody know what the apparent and absolute magnitude of DEM L241 (aka NGC 2029) is and where you got this information? Thanks!
This paper says that the x-ray source has a luminosity. Converting that to absolute magnitude gives about 0.54
The same paper also mentions that the distance is about 50 kpc. Using the distance modulus, this gives an apparent magnitude of about 19.03
As for the entire remnant, Table 5 in the paper says that it has a luminosity of about. This would give an absolute magnitude of about -1.11 and apparent magnitude 17.385
http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-i ... =NGC++2029
this would imply an absolute magnitude of -6.20, using the distance modulus (with d= 50,000 pc, from the aforementioned paper)
West High '19
UC Berkeley '23
Go Bears!
UC Berkeley '23
Go Bears!
-
jonboyage
- Member

- Posts: 106
- Joined: December 13th, 2016, 8:32 am
- Division: Grad
- State: PA
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: Astronomy C
I would tend to believe PM2017 because later in the paper it says, "The bright optical counterpart, a V = 13.5 O5III(f) star, isPM2017 wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but simbad seems to give an apparent magnitude of 12.29.Adi1008 wrote:This isn't anywhere close to perfect, but perhaps it's a reasonable estimate.ashucha wrote:This may be a bit too specific but does anybody know what the apparent and absolute magnitude of DEM L241 (aka NGC 2029) is and where you got this information? Thanks!
This paper says that the x-ray source has a luminosity. Converting that to absolute magnitude gives about 0.54
The same paper also mentions that the distance is about 50 kpc. Using the distance modulus, this gives an apparent magnitude of about 19.03
As for the entire remnant, Table 5 in the paper says that it has a luminosity of about. This would give an absolute magnitude of about -1.11 and apparent magnitude 17.385
http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-i ... =NGC++2029
this would imply an absolute magnitude of -6.20, using the distance modulus (with d= 50,000 pc, from the aforementioned paper)
easily visible within the Head of the remnant." The star probably emits a lot of ionizing radiation and lights up, so-to-speak, the rest of the nebula. Note that SIMBAD lists the magnitude in the J band, which is infrared, so that makes sense.
I was in a bin
Rustin '19
UPenn '23
Rustin '19
UPenn '23
- PM2017
- Member

- Posts: 524
- Joined: January 20th, 2017, 5:02 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: CA
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 13 times
Re: Astronomy C
Also the fact that Wikipedia uses SIMBAD as a source, so many test-makers will expect that value.jonboyage wrote:I would tend to believe PM2017 because later in the paper it says, "The bright optical counterpart, a V = 13.5 O5III(f) star, isPM2017 wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but simbad seems to give an apparent magnitude of 12.29.Adi1008 wrote: This isn't anywhere close to perfect, but perhaps it's a reasonable estimate.
This paper says that the x-ray source has a luminosity. Converting that to absolute magnitude gives about 0.54
The same paper also mentions that the distance is about 50 kpc. Using the distance modulus, this gives an apparent magnitude of about 19.03
As for the entire remnant, Table 5 in the paper says that it has a luminosity of about. This would give an absolute magnitude of about -1.11 and apparent magnitude 17.385
http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-i ... =NGC++2029
this would imply an absolute magnitude of -6.20, using the distance modulus (with d= 50,000 pc, from the aforementioned paper)
easily visible within the Head of the remnant." The star probably emits a lot of ionizing radiation and lights up, so-to-speak, the rest of the nebula. Note that SIMBAD lists the magnitude in the J band, which is infrared, so that makes sense.
West High '19
UC Berkeley '23
Go Bears!
UC Berkeley '23
Go Bears!
- Adi1008
- Moderator

- Posts: 525
- Joined: December 6th, 2013, 1:56 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: CA
- Pronouns: He/Him/His
- Has thanked: 153 times
- Been thanked: 107 times
Re: Astronomy C
Looks like I was completely wrong then xDPM2017 wrote:Also the fact that Wikipedia uses SIMBAD as a source, so many test-makers will expect that value.jonboyage wrote:I would tend to believe PM2017 because later in the paper it says, "The bright optical counterpart, a V = 13.5 O5III(f) star, isPM2017 wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but simbad seems to give an apparent magnitude of 12.29.
http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-i ... =NGC++2029
this would imply an absolute magnitude of -6.20, using the distance modulus (with d= 50,000 pc, from the aforementioned paper)
easily visible within the Head of the remnant." The star probably emits a lot of ionizing radiation and lights up, so-to-speak, the rest of the nebula. Note that SIMBAD lists the magnitude in the J band, which is infrared, so that makes sense.
jonboyage and PM2017's stuff seems much more reasonable
Stanford University
University of Texas at Austin '22
Seven Lakes High School '18
Beckendorff Junior High '14
University of Texas at Austin '22
Seven Lakes High School '18
Beckendorff Junior High '14
-
syo_astro
- Exalted Member

- Posts: 619
- Joined: December 3rd, 2011, 9:45 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 20 times
- Contact:
Re: Astronomy C
Welp, my internet was bad and post got deleted...so I'll try to summarize before internet goes out...
Adi: That sucks, happens to me too. Would be careful about the paper and other papers because it seems to focus a lot on the X-ray spectrum (and even calls the luminosity "Lx"). While paper reading can help, interpreting the results and data yourself can be a dangerous endeavor, tread carefully. I leave the rest to you all;).
Others: Not sure about that app. mag...no reference seems to be listed, but I guess maybe lots would be satisfied stopping there (though, if you want, feel free to dig deeper!...I won't right now). Question then: Do many test writers ask to give an app. mag. for a random DSO or to calculate the abs. mag for a random DSO (showing work or something)? It's a bit of an odd question, but I got my share of odd questions when I competed. I wouldn't be too surprised.
Fun fact: Alpha, me, someone from Troy I didn't get to see were at an astro conference! It's the American Astronomical Society / AAS conference, and we all presented our research:). Sadly, didn't take a look at many of the black holes / compact objects talks...that said, I should probably get test writing for everyone ASAP >.<.
Adi: That sucks, happens to me too. Would be careful about the paper and other papers because it seems to focus a lot on the X-ray spectrum (and even calls the luminosity "Lx"). While paper reading can help, interpreting the results and data yourself can be a dangerous endeavor, tread carefully. I leave the rest to you all;).
Others: Not sure about that app. mag...no reference seems to be listed, but I guess maybe lots would be satisfied stopping there (though, if you want, feel free to dig deeper!...I won't right now). Question then: Do many test writers ask to give an app. mag. for a random DSO or to calculate the abs. mag for a random DSO (showing work or something)? It's a bit of an odd question, but I got my share of odd questions when I competed. I wouldn't be too surprised.
Fun fact: Alpha, me, someone from Troy I didn't get to see were at an astro conference! It's the American Astronomical Society / AAS conference, and we all presented our research:). Sadly, didn't take a look at many of the black holes / compact objects talks...that said, I should probably get test writing for everyone ASAP >.<.
B: Crave the Wave, Environmental Chemistry, Robo-Cross, Meteo, Phys Sci Lab, Solar System, DyPlan (E and V), Shock Value
C: Microbe Mission, DyPlan (Fresh Waters), Fermi Questions, GeoMaps, Grav Vehicle, Scrambler, Rocks, Astro
Grad: Writing Tests/Supervising (NY/MI)
C: Microbe Mission, DyPlan (Fresh Waters), Fermi Questions, GeoMaps, Grav Vehicle, Scrambler, Rocks, Astro
Grad: Writing Tests/Supervising (NY/MI)
-
themightyweeaboo
- Member

- Posts: 13
- Joined: January 14th, 2018, 6:06 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests