There is an article in the newest S&T (The Two Top Miras, by Alan McRobert, October, 2016 issue) that got me thinking...
What if there were a regular column in S&T along the lines of the variable star of the month? Has this been tried before?
It seems that we get monthly information about minima of Algol, and occasionally some information about Mira, but in my creaky & unreliable memory, not a whole lot more about variable star astronomy than that. Since a good deal of what we know about the universe is based on, or supported by research into variable stars, perhaps there is a case to be made for additional exposure for variable star work.
Over the past 10 years or so, there has been an ever-increasing emphasis on astrophotography & image processing, and every month we see stunning examples of images that were nigh on impossible for amateurs just a few years ago. Access to affordable, high quality imaging equipment appears to be at an all-time high. With thousands of amateurs around the globe with CCD or CMOS imagers and stable astrophotography mounts, there's an army of capable amateurs out there that could be doing variable star science in addition to all the "pretty picture" imaging.
Do all these astro-imagers have an interest in this sort of work? Well, maybe not -- or, at least, not yet. Could we mount a campaign to inform and educate the broader amateur astronomy community about the pleasures and the value of variable star observing? About how their equipment could be used to do this sort of work, and the interesting targets that await their study? Maybe about how they could work with a high school or college class or their local astronomy club to focus their attention on monitoring a few stars for each season? Perhaps out of the legions of amateur astronomers, there are even a few hundred that would be willing to use their equipment in a new and rewarding way, but who don't know why or how.
Maybe this has been tried without success, or perhaps the major publications have no interest in a collaboration on the topic, but it does seem that we have something interesting to share with a wider audience, and that all parties involved could benefit. I'd be happy to help with this sort of effort, but I don't have the astronomical "chops" or experience in variable star work to lead the effort. For now, I'll float the idea out there, and see what everyone thinks.
Clear skies,
Brad Vietje, VBPA
Newbury, VT
AS&T have been doing it for years. Just released is Oct 2016 that gives the LPV section and Andrew Pierce a big plug. (I used T Cet for this issue.) Recently, using diferent stars for each column I've discussed Who (are the observers), What (are the stars), Why (do we observe them) and How (we oobserve them.)
Alan.
While there are thousands of advanced amateurs out there, with large Dobs or very expensive refractors and mounts and sophisticated software for image processing, a miniscule percentage of those people actually do scientific observing! It seems the big thing nowadays, is to push the limits of high resolution ground based imaging of planets.
Unfortunately, the scientific theories behind this are pretty well known, and it looks like most of these people are just trying to get the next APOD, or outdo the top guns like Christopher Go or Damian Peach. Few, if any, scientific discoveries are to be got via this effort.
Over the years, I have tried to get advanced amateurs into scientific observing, with practically zero success. It seems vast majority do not believe they can do anything of scientific value with their instruments. Even with all the inforamtion available on the internet, it seems most are ignorant of AAVSO or any other organizations doing such valuable oserving.
I think we have to take stock in ourselves, as a very very tiny percentage of humanity who do this kind of scientific studies with or own small instruments!
Mike
Unfortunately, the appearance of any regular VSO articles in S&T through the years seems to have been highly dependent on who is at the magazine's helm at the time. Back in the days when Joe Ashbrooks was editor we saw many VS articles, the majority penned by Joe himself. In addition, each issue always included a listing of Mira's that were anticipated to be at or near maximum that month tucked somewhere in the Observing section of the magazine. Only the table for Algol minima remains today. There were likewise occasional articles authored by prominent AAVSOers to be found in S&T's pages. One by Clint Ford I recall as particularly good, running for several pages in the magazine. However, each subsequent editor since Joe seemed less and less interested in practical contributions by amateurs. Notice that there are no longer follow-up analysis articles for submitted observer data on any celestial events like lunar eclipses, occultation timings of bright stars, meteor shower activity levels, transits, etc. Granted, some of these areas of study today have their own organizations that do this work, but you never hear of their results in the magazine either.
Unlike the enthusiasm we saw for making meaningful observations during the first three decades of the Space Age, nowadays interest among amateurs has moved away from this toward one of two areas. These are pointlessly looking at so-called Deep Sky Objects (note the broad coverage that this subject gets in each issue now), or imaging mainly for the purpose of creating "pretty pictures", just as Mike notes.
Good luck at promoting anything in the magazine today regarding VSO with the current crop of hobbyists' interests largely divided between those two groups of readers.
BrooksObs
Unfortunately, the appearance of any regular VSO articles in S&T through the years seems to have been highly dependent on who is at the magazine's helm at the time. Back in the days when Joe Ashbrooks was editor we saw many VSO articles, the majority penned by Joe himself. In addition, each issue always included a listing of Mira's that were anticipated to be at or near maximum that month tucked somewhere in the Observing section of the magazine. Only the table for Algol minima remains today. There were likewise occasional articles authored by prominent AAVSOers to be found in S&T's pages. One by Clint Ford I recall as particularly good, running for several pages in the magazine. However, each subsequent editor since Joe seemed less and less interested in practical contributions by amateurs. Notice that there are no longer follow-up analysis articles for submitted observer data on any celestial events like lunar eclipses, occultation timings of bright stars, meteor shower activity levels, transits, etc. Granted, some of these areas of study today have their own organizations that do this work, but you never hear of their results in the magazine either.
Unlike the enthusiasm we saw for making meaningful observations during the first three decades of the Space Age, nowadays interest among amateurs has moved away from this toward one of two areas. These are pointlessly looking at so-called Deep Sky Objects (note the broad coverage that this subject gets in each issue now), or imaging mainly for the purpose of creating "pretty pictures", just as Mike notes.
Good luck at promoting anything in the magazine today regarding VSO with the current crop of hobbyists' interests largely divided between those two groups of readers.
BrooksObs
John has it about right. There have been many VSO articles in S&T, but more so in earlier decades. Ashbrook was, of course, an AAVSO director and launched the amateur timing of eclipsing binary minima in S&T. He also often reported on Mira stars with his own observations as illustration.
But I also understand the editorial imperatives of the S&T staff. They seek readership, and that means providing content that appeals to the broadest spectrum of amateur astronomers. Thus, the recent focus on DSO observing and CCD imaging. And magazine publishing is expensive and marginal as a business. Each inch of space is worth big money. Thus, the lack of follow-up reports on lunar eclipse timings, or very abbreviated reports on meteor shower maxima etc.
The good old days were back in the late 1960s when I was the managing editor of The Review of Popular Astronomy. We had a regular department for the AAVSO Director, with a featured variable and chart and news of the organization in every issue. Good for the AAVSO, good for VSOing, but alas, RPA failed to gain a large enough readership, lost money, and had to close down. So I don't think you'll see a dedicated VSO column in S&T any time soon.
As a long time AAVSO member whose academic background is in physics, I have to agree with both John and Mike. For a publication to survive it needs a broad readership base, and as Mike has so ably pointed out, most people who are interested in astronomy just don't have any ambition to do science. Our strategy should be to keep the public at large aware of our existence and occasionally of what we are doing - particularly when some variable star event is in the news, and thereby provide the links for the few who are interested in science to join us.
If our interest was in getting press coverage, all we'd need to do is issue a position statement on the climate change deniers' contention that solar variability is the cause of global warming. That would bring us plenty of visibility, but I don't think it would do anything to swell the ranks of our membership.
Like you, Brad, I don't have the chops to lead an effort of this type but would certainly be willing to help in the effort. Citizen Science of all types has enjoyed an increased following in the last 10 years. I think it might be time to try, try again. Never could understand the pretty piccy peeps (and I am an artist). Making a true contribution to science is far more exciting.
Linda Morgan-O'Connor
Maine and the world.
When Leslie Peltier first started out the results of individual efforts would be reported monthly in the magazines. It would be ironic, but welcome,to see magazines have a monthly column devoted to variable star work!
in journals far and wide! We have some things in the works for AL's Reflector, but I love the idea of articles - if not regular columns - everywhere we can get them!
KL
Friends,
Very interesting discussion, and good background/historical perspective on publications and what popular science magazines want in order to attract readership. Maybe variable star observing wasn’t fashionable in the 90’s and 00’s, but it is back and very relevant. Furthermore our observers are sought after for high-profile products, our data are being used in publications, the AAVSO is being discussed in conferences … we are relevant and it would be great to advertise this relevance. The AAVSO has its own publications - its newsletter, its Journal and recently, AAVSO Communications - which disseminate information and showcase science. It would be great if a short article on the AAVSO appears in other publications, such as S&T in the USA or its equivalent anywhere else in the world. For this, we can’t rely on one individual, so I would like to request your help.
Please do let us know if you would like to write a short article about the AAVSO for the publication of your choice (it can be a magazine, a newsletter or a blog). That article can be on your experience with variable star observations or with science projects, the AAVSO’s (and citizen science’s) role in the current variable star research landscape, how you think our observers will participate in surveys and/or how we can attract more young astro-entusiasts to the AAVSO. We can also help you wordsmith or find a relevant subject. A 300-word piece can make all the difference and will tremendously help our association! Your testimonial. Your personal experience and opinion is our best advocate!
Please let us know at aavso@aavso.org. All contributions are welcome!
Best wishes, clear skies,
Stella.
Hi Stella,
it was great meeting you in Hamburg during the weekend.
Just to let you know there is a webbased artcile about AR Sco, I wrote together with the S&T editor who is responsible for web stories.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/stargazers-corner/amateurs-aid…
It has been also taken now up for the printed version. We are still in dicussion about that but it will come one of the next months.
Regards,
Josch