Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Annals Vol. 7 errata?

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 steven40

steven40

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2012

Posted 19 November 2019 - 08:02 AM

Hi Folks,

 

Sat down with my Vol. 7 yesterday, and an apparent error caught my eye. I was wondering if anyone out there could confirm.

 

P.84, Fig. 4: The multiple stars (described later in the text) near the top of the figure, 1659 and 1669, appear to have the labels reversed. On page 97, top, the coordinates for 1669 are given, and on page 100, top, the coordinates for 1659 are given. The coordinates indicate that these objects have labeling reversed on Fig. 4.

 

The error is repeated on page 97, fig. 10, where I believe 1669 should be labeled 1659.

 

The error appears to be confirmed by NSOG Vol 2 page 122, Finder Chart 40-4.

 

Anyhow, if anyone has received their Vol. 7 and is so inclined to check that out I'd appreciate the confirmation. I'll probably just make the correction in pencil.

 

Which brings me to another point--I've enjoyed these volumes very much but the project is of such a magnitude that errors and typos are inevitable. If confirmed I plan on bringing it to the attention of W-B for possible future correction. 

 

Would it be appropriate for any other possible errors found by readers to be posted in one place?

 

Please understand that in no way am I being critical of this great series, and apologize for any typos in this post. smile.gif

 

Steve



#2 BradFran

BradFran

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 371
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2017
  • Loc: Mars

Posted 19 November 2019 - 10:45 AM

And so it begins! waytogo.gif

 

Came accross this highly relavant quote at the end of "Star Names Their Lore and Meaning" by Allen.

 

    Unto those Three Things which the Ancients

held impossible, there should be added this Fourth,

to find a Book Printed without erratas.

                                           Alfonso de Cartagena


  • desertstars, edwincjones, George N and 1 other like this

#3 dawziecat

dawziecat

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3031
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Rural Nova Scotia

Posted 19 November 2019 - 11:17 AM

My understanding, incomplete and erroneous as it may be . . .

 

These things are all stored in digital format these days. It should be an easy matter to correct the files for subsequent printings and these volumes are destined to be reprinted for many years.

 

The authors and the publisher SHOULD welcome having these errors brought to their attention and the digital files corrected.

 

Whether notification of error is actually welcomed, and whether there is an ongoing programme to correct the files, I can not venture to say. I would like to hear from anyone familiar with the publishing process to comment on it.

 

I will say that I noticed quite a few simple "typos" in the first two volumes I received. More than I would have expected.

If you are one of the many who seem not to care about errors, so be it. Best not submit anything to professional journals though. 



#4 helpwanted

helpwanted

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4888
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 20 November 2019 - 01:51 PM

in today's world where people use the tagline in emails:

 

"pardon any typos, i am sending this from my phone" 

 

i doublt many will notice!



#5 desertstars

desertstars

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44828
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Tucson, AZ

Posted 20 November 2019 - 03:56 PM

And so it begins! waytogo.gif

 

Came accross this highly relavant quote at the end of "Star Names Their Lore and Meaning" by Allen.

 

    Unto those Three Things which the Ancients

held impossible, there should be added this Fourth,

to find a Book Printed without erratas.

                                           Alfonso de Cartagena

I need to remember that one. grin.gif


  • edwincjones likes this

#6 GuzziAlfa

GuzziAlfa

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 21 November 2019 - 03:05 PM

Using Sky Safari Pro 6. I confirmed they are reversed in the chart. They are labeled as STF 1669 for Struve 1669, etc.
Please let me know if you are notifying Willmann-Bell or not.

Edited by GuzziAlfa, 21 November 2019 - 03:05 PM.


#7 rutherfordt

rutherfordt

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: 07 May 2006
  • Loc: Northeast Tennessee USA

Posted 21 November 2019 - 04:13 PM

Unto those Three Things which the Ancients

held impossible, there should be added this Fourth,

to find a Book Printed without erratas.

                                           Alfonso de Cartagena

 

 

Doesn't this quote contain a typo as well?  "Errata" is the plural form of "erratum" -- no "s."  Cartagena would not have used an "s" since he would have known that.  It seems that everyone now tries to use an "s" for all plurals, even though that is not always correct.


  • helpwanted likes this

#8 BradFran

BradFran

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 371
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2017
  • Loc: Mars

Posted 21 November 2019 - 04:31 PM

Unto those Three Things which the Ancients

held impossible, there should be added this Fourth,

to find a Book Printed without erratas.

                                           Alfonso de Cartagena

 

 

Doesn't this quote contain a typo as well?  "Errata" is the plural form of "erratum" -- no "s."  Cartagena would not have used an "s" since he would have known that.  It seems that everyone now tries to use an "s" for all plurals, even though that is not always correct.

The quote appears exactly how it is printed in the 1963 Dover edition. Whether it was itself an error, a translation issue or a joke I do not know.



#9 steven40

steven40

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2012

Posted 22 November 2019 - 09:21 AM

Using Sky Safari Pro 6. I confirmed they are reversed in the chart. They are labeled as STF 1669 for Struve 1669, etc.
Please let me know if you are notifying Willmann-Bell or not.

I did notify Perry at W-B, and he appreciated getting the correction. Thanks for checking it.

 

Steve



#10 GuzziAlfa

GuzziAlfa

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 23 November 2019 - 05:37 PM

Thanks for letting me know, Steve and for keeping us in the loop. I'm amazed at how quickly you found such a small set of double/triple star label reversals!

John S.

#11 Pat Rochford

Pat Rochford

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 23 November 2019 - 08:29 PM

I may have found another mistake.  Figure 21 on page 117 describes Bindon Stoney's 1852 observations of NGC 4038/39 through Lord Rosse's 48" telescope.  The illustration is that of the 72".  And to the best of my knowledge, Lord Rosse never built a 48" scope - as I recall he went from a 36" speculum directly to the 72".  



#12 GuzziAlfa

GuzziAlfa

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 24 November 2019 - 12:06 AM

I believe Lord Rosse had access to a 48" while the 72" was being built. Not sure where I remember this but it may have been around a club presentation. As a member of the BAA, I can check to see what resources exist on Lord Rosse's observations. It may just be mislabeled but could still be what he had been using.

#13 steven40

steven40

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2012

Posted 24 November 2019 - 11:12 AM

Thanks for letting me know, Steve and for keeping us in the loop. I'm amazed at how quickly you found such a small set of double/triple star label reversals!

John S.

My wife is amazed how I can go to the grocery store and come back with nothing that was on the list....grin.gif

 

Steve



#14 awitze

awitze

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2019
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 24 November 2019 - 06:22 PM

Hi, I'm Jeff Kanipe's wife and I do the proofreading and fact-checking for the Annals series. In practice I really only have the capacity to fact-check the text and as much of the figures/captions as I can. And yes inevitably errors slip through, even with my work and our external reviewers. We do correct errors in future printings so please bring them to the attention of Perry Remaklus at Willmann-Bell -- or you can email me directly at annalsofthedeepsky@gmail.com. Thanks!

 

Alex


  • edwincjones, George N, JNDiller and 3 others like this

#15 GuzziAlfa

GuzziAlfa

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Connecticut

Posted 24 November 2019 - 06:54 PM

Outstanding news, Alex! Thanks for confirming that all this was not for naught. I only validated what was originally posted so the real thanks, and yes, he did follow up with Perry for the 1st correction, does go to Steve, aka Mariner 2.
  • awitze likes this

#16 Pat Rochford

Pat Rochford

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 25 November 2019 - 03:49 PM

Hi, I'm Jeff Kanipe's wife and I do the proofreading and fact-checking for the Annals series. In practice I really only have the capacity to fact-check the text and as much of the figures/captions as I can. And yes inevitably errors slip through, even with my work and our external reviewers. We do correct errors in future printings so please bring them to the attention of Perry Remaklus at Willmann-Bell -- or you can email me directly at annalsofthedeepsky@gmail.com. Thanks!

 

Alex

Hello Alex.  In consulting The Scientific Papers of William Parsons, Third Earl of Rosse 1800 - 1867 (edited by Charles Parsons) and The Astronomy of Birr Castle (Patrick Moore), I could find no mention of a 48" telescope constructed by Lord Rosse.  The 36" was built in 1839, followed by the 72" in 1845.

 

Please pass on to Jeff that I feel a bit uncomfortable even mentioning this, as I am in absolute awe of his ability to tackle such a phenomenal project and bring it to publication.

 

I am not worthy!  I am not worthy!  I am not worthy!    

 

Pat Rochford 


Edited by Pat Rochford, 25 November 2019 - 07:50 PM.


#17 awitze

awitze

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2019
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 25 November 2019 - 05:15 PM

Hello Alex.  In consulting The Scientific Papers of William Parsons, Third Earl of Ross 1800 - 1867 (edited by Charles Parsons) and The Astronomy of Birr Castle (Patrick Moore), I could find no mention of a 48" telescope constructed by Lord Ross.  The 36" was built in 1839, followed by the 72" in 1845.

 

Please pass on to Jeff that I feel a bit uncomfortable even mentioning this, as I am in absolute awe of his ability to tackle such a phenomenal project and bring it to publication.

 

I am not worthy!  I am not worthy!  I am not worthy!    

 

Pat Rochford 

Ah thanks, will add to the list. The caption-writing is done by multiple people. I will track the source of this down and get it fixed.

 

There are approximately 100 zillion moving parts for each volume, and although we don't have the capacity to update the science with each printing, we do fix typos and other errata. Anyone can reach us directly at annalsofthedeepsky@gmail.com; I try to monitor the forums but I'm not always on top of everything that I need to be. Thanks!




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics