Update On poss new Variable

[Darryl]

Originally Posted by dmill1220

Hi Darryl,
I was afraid that was the case, I did'nt check out the link, but I was suspect of the Link, it includes the dss in the URL.
I do have three separate images that confirm both star positions, one is a 1996 B band Image that correlates to the 1956 r band image, it just needed a contrast and brightness adjustment on my Monitor.
another is a 1996 image from an Independant source, that shows the star in the position that my image shows.
I'm sure that as soon as Mrs.Meuller at MT. Palomar, gets her Microscopes she will shed some light on this, I have sent her the Images along with the links were they were found. she has answered back and is really interested.
even if I got nothing at all and its all one big coincidence, A dss survey plate defect will be annotated and corrected.
Dennis

Hi Dennis,

I think this whole process has been interesting and a learning experience. Its also been exciting thinking of even the possibility of it being something other than a glitch.

Regards,

[dmill1220]

Darryl.

Jean Mueller Of My Palomar has just got back to me regarding that Possible Variable.
Here is the Official Response sent via E-mail from Mt Palomar:
Hi Dennis:
Funny you should write today. I was telling
my astronomer about your "variable" and was asking
him if he minded if I left the dome for awhile
to check on it. Tonight was good since it's
cloudy and not humid so it was safe to pull the
original POSSI plates from the archive. Then I
read your email message.
Anyway, I looked at both the O (blue) and the
E (red) plates. The area in question is perfectly
clean background...no star or "defect". Our kodak
print shows a "defect" at the position on the red
print but not on the blue print. Bottom line, the
original plates do not show an object at (or near)
the position in question.
Sorry this took so long. But it could not be
helped...I hadn't forgotten you.

Best regards, Jean

On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, dmill1220@aol.com wrote:

I suppose that it shold now get corrected or,I may have to push the Issue with Simbad, NEDS and the IRSA and the AAVSO so that this does not occur again I Will forward this to the IRSA project scientist.
Oh well! se la vie!
Dennis

[Darryl]

Originally Posted by dmill1220

I suppose that it shold now get corrected or,I may have to push the Issue with Simbad, NEDS and the IRSA and the AAVSO so that this does not occur again I Will forward this to the IRSA project scientist.
Oh well! se la vie!
Dennis

Hi Dennis,

It was exciting while it lasted. I hope it doesn't turn you off from bringing forth your next possible variable star discovery, or any other astronimcal discovery for that matter. The thought of there even being a chance it was something was exciting in itself.

Good hunting,

[dmill1220]

Hi Darryl,
Its not over yet by a long shot!
The star that I noticed on that Dss 1 r band image is not the same star I imaged, I only noticed it when I querried the data base and saw that it was in the proximity of my star. all of those plates do not show my star in its current position.

here is a shot that does seem to show a faint patch in exactly the same spot that I found my star. here is the link and my image attached, you may have to readjust your monitors settings to see it.
http://www.robgendlerastropics.com/M51NML.html
and my circled inverted image.
do you see the faint smudge in the color shot link?
Dennis

[Darryl]

Hi Dennis,

Could you circle the spot on the color image where you think the object is. The color shot goes quite deep. Could it be a faint galaxy?

Regards,

[dmill1220]

Originally Posted by Darryl

Hi Dennis,

Could you circle the spot on the color image where you think the object is. The color shot goes quite deep. Could it be a faint galaxy?

Regards,

Hi Darryl,

Sure no problem here it is look towards the bottom near the Spiral Arm on the left its the familiar Keystone pattern with the faint smudge circled in red.
you will probably have to blow it up in here, shoud I post it somewhere else?
Dennis

[dmill1220]

Darryl,
The full Size link I previously gave you, instead of my Circled image, is much larger and better, once you know where to look, just go back to my previous post with both images. you may have to adjust your contrast, I can see it on both my laptop and my desktop.
it could be a faint really deep Galaxy, at least the fact that its not circular, its more of a oblong tiny smudge, I may have just caught some kind of an outburst.

Dennis ????

[Darryl]

Originally Posted by dmill1220

Darryl,
The full Size link I previously gave you, instead of my Circled image, is much larger and better, once you know where to look, just go back to my previous post with both images. you may have to adjust your contrast, I can see it on both my laptop and my desktop.
it could be a faint really deep Galaxy, at least the fact that its not circular, its more of a oblong tiny smudge, I may have just caught some kind of an outburst.

Dennis ????

Hi Dennis,

It definitely looks like a faint background galaxy. Maybe you caught a Supernova going off. If so, and it was that short lived, it will be hard to prove.

Regards,

[dmill1220]

Originally Posted by Darryl

Hi Dennis,

It definitely looks like a faint background galaxy. Maybe you caught a Supernova going off. If so, and it was that short lived, it will be hard to prove.

Regards,

Hi Darryl.
An asteroid or spcejunk possibility, has been ruled out by Mt. Palomar and The IRSA. ESA and JPL.

Im hypothesizing that it may have been a possible GRB or Supernova from that faint background Galaxy,
in my image, the star appears almost as large as the faint galaxy itself, but this could be a result of the difference in the Image scale between both shots, again Im not sure either way.

Jean is interested in what I have imaged, the only thing that I can do is to keep re-imaging that area and, look for more online evidence, I somehow need to call for a general all out alert, to keep an eye on that particular area.

As far as I can tell from online images, since I have trolled the internet extensively, there seems to be quite a time gap from when I imaged M-51 and the times of the images that I have so far seen online.

So I have two problems, I discovered a sdss Image defect that has been reproduced extensively thru NEDS, SIMBAD, IRSA, ESA, and quite a few others, then there is my image which is in the exact position of that faint background Galaxy, I find it interesting that the only shot deep enough to show that faint smudge is, Rob Gendlers Image, I didnt see it in any of the so called deep DSS or 2Mass surveys.

I only used a 6 inch refractor and a lousy DSI pro CCD camera for equipment, if you compare my shot with all the other databases and Robs Image, I didnt even get the full Keystone pattern distinctively, by that I mean that one of the stars in the keystone pattern is dim on my shot, whereas they keystone is quite prounounced on most other images, yet that star on my image sticks out like a sore thumb!

I have made many requests for help online, on other forums, maybe folks just dont care, but I know I have defintely made some kind of discovery or anomaly.

I would like to believe thats why Jean Meuller at MT Palomar, wants to see me obtain more evidence, I think she suspects that I do have something indeed, but two images are not enough evidence.
Like I said this is not over by a long shot!

Whats needed I believe is getting some of these big observatories to re-image that area, a spectral analysis on that faint galaxy might give us more valuable Info, such as redshift Values in the Sodium line for distance and, composition, I wonder If that Galaxy has even been discovered by anyone else since I dont see it on the Deep sky survey projects. it may not have even been charted yet.

Dennis

[Darryl]

I have made many requests for help online, on other forums, maybe folks just dont care, but I know I have defintely made some kind of discovery or anomaly.

I don't think its that they don't care, at least not all. I think they are not sure how to proceed or have the time to spend on what seems to be an elusive object.

I would like to believe thats why Jean Meuller at MT Palomar, wants to see me obtain more evidence, I think she suspects that I do have something indeed, but two images are not enough evidence.

And there is the problem.

Whats needed I believe is getting some of these big observatories to re-image that area, a spectral analysis on that faint galaxy might give us more valuable Info, such as redshift Values in the Sodium line for distance and, composition, I wonder If that Galaxy has even been discovered by anyone else since I dont see it on the Deep sky survey projects. it may not have even been charted yet.

If you send enough requests out to different observatories with the evidence you do have, maybe someone will make a quick swing over in that direction.

I'll try and take a shot in that direction once I can get my telescope to see through cloud.

Regards,