Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T07:20:20.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review of the Occultation Technique for the Study of Binaries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Nathaniel M. White
Nathaniel M. White*
Affiliation:
Lowell Observatory

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The systematic search for stellar multiplicity by observations of lunar occultations began in 1969. David Evans will review a large portion of the data collected since then in the second paper of this session. Here we will outline the historical development of the technique and comment on its limitations, contributions to double star research, and future improvements.

Sir John Herschel (1865) may have been the first to suggest that “a double star, too close to be seen divided with any telescope, may yet be detected to be double by the mode of its disappearance.” However, the visual discovery of duplicity by occultation is not sufficient, for the observations are not subject to analysis after the fact. The power of the occultation technique was realized more than 100 years after the suggestion, with the application of photomultipliers and electronic digital data handling. Whitford (1939) took the first step in using a cesium photo tube, oscilloscope, and moving film to record the occultations of Beta Capricorni and Upsilon Aquarii. The resolution of the spectroscopic binary Beta Capricorni was discussed, but he concluded his data were not able to resolve it, an observation which was later accomplished at several observatories and summarized by Evans and Fekel (1979).

Type
Research Article
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 62: Current Techniques in Double and Multiple Star Research , May 1983 , pp. 60 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © Lowell Observatory 1983

References

Chen, P. C., and Sandmann, W. H. 1980, Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc. 12, 836.Google Scholar
Deeming, T. J. 1971, in Highlights of Astronomy 2, 587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, D. S. 1955, M.N.E.A.S. 115, 468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, D. S., and Fekel, F. C. 1979, Astrophys. J. 228, 497 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herschel, J. F. W. 1865, Outlines of Astronomy, p. 270. Longmaas, Green, and Co., London.Google Scholar
Nather, R. E., and Evans, D. S. 1971, Astrophys. Sp. Sci. 1l, 28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Keefe, J. A. 1950, Astron. J. 55, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rakos, K. D. 1964, Astron. J. 69, 556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgway, S. T. 1977, Astron. J. 82, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheuer, P. A. G. 1962, Austral. J. Phys. 15, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, N. M. 1977a, Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific 89, 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, N. M 1977b, In Proceedings of I.A. U. Colloquium No. 33 (Franz, O. G. and Pishmish, P., eds.), p. 43. Revista Mexicana Astronomica y Astrofisico, Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Whitford, A. E. 1939, Astrophys. J. 89, 472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar