Jump to content


Photo

Standadized Spelling constilation stick figures ??

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 NeilMac

NeilMac

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3183
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2010
  • Loc: MedHat, AB, Canada

Posted 17 June 2013 - 11:35 AM

Ive noticed that not all "charts" have the same drawings of the Constellations and some names of stars are spelled differently.
Is their a standard?

I use SkySafary and Starry Night (Less so of Stellarium). I tried looking up Alberio but could not find it in StarryNight, found out it spelled Albireo. This happens now and then, as well as the Constellations stick figures also differ between the two programs on some degree.

Thanks!

#2 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10654
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:47 PM

You should find spelling to be standardized to a quite high degree on constellations. On star names, perhaps not quite so much, but what differences there are are not numerous.

Constellation figures are definitely not standardized! (But the boundaries most certainly are.)

#3 desertlens

desertlens

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 838
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2010
  • Loc: 36°N 105°W

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:11 PM

There are inconsistencies between any two charts, electronic or otherwise. Many objects have multiple designators and it depends on the approach taken by the chart makers. As an example, charts focused on double stars may be different from those focused on DSOs. Some of these naming systems are old and have been adopted by convention over the centuries. As Glenn stated the stick figures are not standardized. They can be a bit whimsical at times. For me, Sagittarius is more easily seen as a teapot than as an archer.

#4 kfiscus

kfiscus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Albert Lea, MN, USA

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:14 PM

In general, the brighter the star, the more names and spellings. Standardized spelling is a fairly modern idea. An interesting example of this is in the early 19th century writings of Merriweather Lewis of Lewis & Clark fame. He spelled "pheasant" about 6 different ways...

It is unfortunate that there are not standardized figures. This makes learning and teaching them more difficult. But like the saying says, "You can't please everyone", there would be no way to draw some of the outlandish figures 'correctly' anyway.

#5 Jeff2011

Jeff2011

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1873
  • Joined: 01 Jan 2013
  • Loc: Sugar Land, TX

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:57 PM

Many programs may let you choose how the constellations are drawn. For example in Sky Safari, they can be drawn as traditional or modern.

#6 sg6

sg6

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 789
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Norfolk, UK.

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:30 PM

Seems that at times some organisation "reissues" the constellations, and of course they cannot have theirs the same as the previous so minor changes occur.

The IAU defined the present 88 constellations it appears between 1922 to 1930. Seems they were based on 48 defined by Ptolemy. Where Ptolemy got them from seems not specified.

Then could come which constellations Chinese, Babylonian, Greek, Roman, Arabic, Modern day. Until people started sailing round the world and exploring the Southern hemisphere quite a few were unknown, at least to us.

As to the spelling of stars again it depends on the language that the star is named in, and that has altered over time and location. Look how English and American has altered and is possibly altering faster now from each other.

#7 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11179
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:56 PM

Ive noticed that not all "charts" have the same drawings of the Constellations.


That's correct. Constellation "stick figures" are actually a very new invention, and they're not standardized at all. What is standardized is the sections of the sky covered by each constellation -- and the spellings. See my article on the subject.

Some names of stars are spelled differently.


That's correct; neither star names nor their spellings are standardized. Many stars have two or three unrelated names, and there are a fair number of cases where the same name has been applied to two or three different stars. That's one of the reasons that many people prefer to avoid "common" star names except for the couple dozen brightest and best-known stars.

I tried looking up Alberio but could not find it in StarryNight, found out it spelled Albireo.


In this particular case, Albireo is correct and Alberio is incorrect. If you saw the latter, it's because somebody typed it wrong. That's easy to do.

#8 NeilMac

NeilMac

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3183
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2010
  • Loc: MedHat, AB, Canada

Posted 17 June 2013 - 04:50 PM

Thanks!
I like some samples of one format and some of others lol. I like the Teapot "stick figure" compared to the other scattered one. The one I use in Starry night is the "Astronomical" version, On Skysafari its set on "Modern", I like the "Modern" one. Im guessing I cant load other versions for Starry night.
As to the spelling I guess just have to search for alternatives on the net when i cant find it on the software. Generally I watch a video and copy the spelling from their and search it on StarryNight, so if it does not show up i just have to search for it on the net till an alternative shows up. Ive noticed that as well when typing a name of a "M" object it does not show up until I use the number corresponding to it.

:)

#9 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11179
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 18 June 2013 - 05:56 AM

In general, the brighter the star, the more names and spellings.


Actually, I would say that just the opposite is true.

The only star names for which the "common" names are genuinely common -- widely used in preference to the Bayer designations -- are the first-magnitude stars visible from northern latitudes plus a few special cases such as Polaris.

Because they're so widely used -- even by professionals! -- these names have become pretty standardized, at least within any one language. Everybody calls Rigel Rigel and Betelgeuse Betelgeuse. There are a few variant spellings among bright second class, like Elnath vs. El Nath or Mirfak vs. Mirphak, but they're all instantly recognizable.

The brightest common star I can think of with two genuinely different names is Alkaid a.k.a Benetnash, the end of the Great Bear's tail.

Once you get below about magnitude 2.5, you're in the realm where "common" names aren't common at all -- in fact, hardly anybody uses them. Here's where you start to get genuinely huge variation, such as Rastaban, Alwaid, Asuia, or Rastaben for Beta Draconis.

#10 haywool

haywool

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 70
  • Joined: 07 May 2012
  • Loc: Illinois, U.S.A.

Posted 18 June 2013 - 06:16 AM

When talking about our star-studded night skies, one finds such astronomical nebulosity, that nothing is universal. And this can be drawn out to infinite proportions.

Rich

#11 kfiscus

kfiscus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Albert Lea, MN, USA

Posted 18 June 2013 - 03:22 PM

Check out the myriad names/spellings of Rigil Kent. I used one of its variants for my son's name.

#12 NeilMac

NeilMac

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3183
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2010
  • Loc: MedHat, AB, Canada

Posted 18 June 2013 - 04:35 PM

Hmmmm, Rigel Kentaurus is the closest in StarryNight. Alpha Centauri no problem except no visible from my location at this time of year.

:)






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics