Other
Scientific paper
May 2007
adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2007aj....133.2429l&link_type=abstract
The Astronomical Journal, Volume 133, Issue 5, pp. 2429-2429.
Other
Scientific paper
The authors thank John Marriner for calling their attention to an error in § 4 for the discussion of photometry relating to BD +26 2606 and BD +75 325. The error value used in the original calculation was the error for the star immediately below BD +26 2606 and BD +75 325 in Table 4. Those two paragraphs should read as follows:
BD +26 2606.-This star has long been used as a primary spectrophotometric standard star (Oke & Gunn 1983). Carney & Latham (1987) showed that BD +26 2606 (G166-45) is a double-lined spectroscopic binary. It is also a high proper motion star (Perryman et al. 1997; see vol. 8 of the Hipparcos catalog). The Hipparcos catalog shows a range in brightness of 0.1 mag. The present data indicate that the error of a single observation is 0.0025×6=0.015 mag, marginally larger than one might expect for so bright a star.
BD +75 325.-The star BD +75 325 was considered by Bartolini et al. (1982) to be a possible variable star of small amplitude, perhaps 0.03 mag. It has been assigned the suspected variable star name NSV 17739 (Kazarovets et al. 1998). Data taken on one night indicate the presence of a period of 0.0465116 days. However, small variations on other nights do not fit that period. The data in this paper were taken on 16 nights over a period of 63 months between 1985 December 14 and 1991 March 25. No more than two or three data points were taken on any one night. The mean error of a single observation is 0.011 mag, perhaps a bit too large for a star so bright, but certainly in disagreement with the short-term amplitude found by Bartolini et al. (1982). What is more interesting, however, is that Bartolini et al. quote a V magnitude of 8.9 (their Table 1), whereas the current data indicate V=9.548, in agreement with the Hipparcos value of V=9.55 (HIP 40047). On the other hand, if one reads off an average Δm of -0.06 from their Figure 4 and applies that quantity to a V of 9.60, taken from SIMBAD, for their primary comparison star BD +74 356, one finds V=9.54 on average for their measurements of BD +75 325. Therefore, overall the star has no long-term light variation of note. The fact that the Bartolini et al. (1982) data show a variation of 3%, and the current results show no variation, 1%, leaves the question of light variation unresolved. The quoted V=8.9 either is not a V magnitude or is a typographical error.
Landolt Arlo U.
Uomoto Alan K.
No associations
LandOfFree
Erratum: ``Optical Multicolor Photometry of Spectrophotometric Standard Stars'' (AJ, 133, 768 [2007]) does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.
If you have personal experience with Erratum: ``Optical Multicolor Photometry of Spectrophotometric Standard Stars'' (AJ, 133, 768 [2007]), we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Erratum: ``Optical Multicolor Photometry of Spectrophotometric Standard Stars'' (AJ, 133, 768 [2007]) will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1040885