Jump to content

(612911) 2004 XR190: Revision history

External tools:

For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

3 October 2024

14 June 2024

11 February 2024

8 February 2024

27 November 2023

16 May 2023

2 October 2022

7 April 2022

26 December 2021

21 December 2021

25 October 2021

21 August 2021

21 February 2021

13 February 2021

17 January 2021

11 January 2021

8 January 2021

  • curprev 01:1301:13, 8 January 2021 Kheider talk contribs 16,631 bytes +262‎ | time_periastron = ≈ 4 April 2117<ref name=perihelion>[http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi?find_body=1&body_group=sb&sstr=2004XR190 JPL Horizons] Observer Location: @sun (perihelion occurs when deldot changes from negative to positive)</ref><br />±1 month undo

30 October 2020

1 May 2020

3 April 2020

20 February 2020

19 August 2019

  • curprev 07:5007:50, 19 August 2019 Kheider talk contribs 16,483 bytes −359‎ too much rubbish. B-R (Blue-Red) is a color index. undo
  • curprev 00:4800:48, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,842 bytes 0‎ Not sure where "550" came from, unless we're deliberately rounding off to the nearest 50km for some reason - which isn't going to be immediately obvious to a casual observer who may think it's "nearest 10km". In any case, 560km (or maybe even 590 or 600km) is a good sight closer, and auto-rounds off to miles about as accurately. undo
  • curprev 00:3900:39, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,842 bytes +49‎ →Physical characteristics: And we probably need a ref for the AstDys data, plus how some of them were derived (backwards or forwards) undo
  • curprev 00:3700:37, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,793 bytes +130‎ →Physical characteristics: proportional "size" hinges rather on whether you're considering diameter, apparent area of its disc, or the volume of the body - it's less potentially confusing to specify which metric we're using. Also "roughly a quarter" of Pluto only really applies to figures around 594km, though that is a good match for the (previously unstated) midpoint of 335 to 850km - but it also happens to match well with the mean of the 5 different otherwise widely varying figures/ranges. undo
  • curprev 00:2900:29, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,663 bytes +210‎ May as well toss this one in, as we've a listed magnitude with no size calculated for it, and it's in agreement with / doesn't exceed either the lower or upper bounds of the other estimates and so doesn't need the article body text updated undo
  • curprev 00:1900:19, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,453 bytes +71‎ →Physical characteristics: the albedos don't really seem to be "estimated", more like each individual group of scientists' preferred assumptions for objects of unknown albedo. Also the magnitudes are somewhat important to the size estimates produced from both figures. undo
  • curprev 00:1200:12, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,382 bytes +26‎ oops forgot my notelist section undo
  • curprev 00:1100:11, 19 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 16,356 bytes +782‎ The papers don't state AbsMags themselves, but they're simple enough to derive mathematically using common formula; both seem in close agreement with each other and might only really differ in terms of rounding precision. Still, giving both to 3sf seems prudent to demonstrate a small difference is needed to actually produce those particular diameter estimates (H=4.5 would make the Allen estimate 420-840 not 425-850km), and that Schaller actually best agrees with "exactly" 4.5 (not 4.49 or 4.51). undo

18 August 2019

  • curprev 23:5223:52, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 15,574 bytes +491‎ →Physical characteristics: This does suggest there must be a paper out there which lists more detailed measurements of 2014 XR190's colour profile, and so possibly a better estimated albedo (which may be behind the JA's size estimate), as well as lightcurve / rotation period data etc... but until that's uncovered we'll have to treat said report with a pinch of salt. Also the MPC data might be useful for this, esp. with i-band obs alongside visible, but IDK how much. undo
  • curprev 23:3923:39, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 15,083 bytes +35‎ filling another gap undo
  • curprev 23:3723:37, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 15,048 bytes 0‎ quick switcheroo, think this order will flow better; "w" covers into infrared and thus comes "below" / covers beyond the other two anyway, whilst also encompassing them (whilst the "other" set nominally spreads further still), so it makes a kind of logical sense. undo
  • curprev 23:3423:34, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 15,048 bytes +24‎ The discovery paper does specifically say it's an r-band (not R, which is a subtly different filter; likewise G vs g and so-on) measurement... another FWIW, the "other bands" covers 22 readings, from V, R, r, I, i and g... the independent w band readings count 26, and G band counts 40, latest in 2015 and 2017 respectively; latest of all the others is 2011, and V band is covered only by 2003. The "-1.5" of G is a single pair of readings from one opposition, but we should always consider outliers. undo
  • curprev 23:2923:29, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 15,024 bytes +88‎ Though maybe this could be acceptable, and further supports the other readings anyway? FWIW yes, "21.85 +- 0.35" isn't 1dp, but it's not entirely 2dp (more 1.5dp, as effectively to the nearest 1/20th rather than 1/100th or 1/10th), and the range is still bounded by 1dp measurements. It was too close to the "half" for the fully rounded off version to work / make much sense, as it did for the others (with a single rather than their separate +/- parts) undo
  • curprev 23:2123:21, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 14,936 bytes +150‎ Means/ranges not directly given but easily calculated from source data with a few moments' work in Excel. Rounded off to 1dp as measurements were not any more precise. "w" (PAN-STARRS wide, equiv to g+r+i) and "G" only bands for which a considerable amount (10+) of measurements given, or anything within the last five years. Had to be selective so as not to clog infobox with literally 8 different bands... undo
  • curprev 22:0122:01, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 14,786 bytes +40‎ OK, that'll have to do for now. First one I've come to in 3 or 4 sources. Still checking for more. undo
  • curprev 21:5921:59, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 14,746 bytes −73‎ AstDys has moved off the UPI site, and it doesn't look like it displays apparent mag any more, but it has grown an absolute magnitude... different from the MPC and JPL. I'll see if I can find an AppMag to sub in from one of the various other sources. Captcha: TacoYule. What an amazing idea. Gonna have to try it. undo
  • curprev 21:5121:51, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 14,819 bytes +92‎ filling a small gap undo
  • curprev 21:4721:47, 18 August 2019 146.199.60.87 talk 14,727 bytes −6‎ →Discovery and naming: I don't see any references to a "Lynne Jones" anywhere when searching around for said professor, and she seems to sign her name as "Lynne Allen", "R Lynne Allen", or "R L Allen" in various available papers, on the MPC etc. If her name has changed at some point relevant to the article, we're going to need some kind of citation for it. Seems out of place, not to mention poorly evidenced, otherwise. undo

11 May 2019

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(612911)_2004_XR190"