Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a25ff37d0ffbada9

Jump to content

Talk:Ross 614

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Art LaPella in topic Explaining my edit

Explaining my edit

[edit]

The infobox apparent magnitude figures for Ross 614B come from the Gatewood study, Table 9, "COMPARISON OF ABSOLUTE MAGNITUDES". Absolute magnitudes, not apparent magnitudes. That's why the same 16.17 figure was used for both absolute and apparent magnitude. So those numbers have to go.

The harder question is, how should I document the right answer? The Gatewood study doesn't directly specify apparent magnitudes. In addition to absolute magnitudes, it also has "TABLE 6" "MAGNITUDE DIFFERENCES OF THE COMPONENTS OF ROSS 614", that is, the magnitudes for each wavelength specified as a difference between Ross 614A and Ross 614B. So I added the differences to the values given for Ross 614A. Those values don't match SIMBAD exactly, but that problem occurs for most star articles; perhaps SIMBAD is updated more often than Wikipedia. I don't know if it's kosher to use Gatewood as a reference when all it shows is the difference from the previous column. But almost any answer, including blank space, would be better than leaving the absolute values that were there before. Art LaPella (talk) 00:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)Reply