Talk:63 Ophiuchi

Constellation?

Why is this star in List of stars in Sagittarius and not in List of stars in Ophiuchus? Rothorpe (talk) 19:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is actually in Sagittarius, not Ophiuchus.--Imzogelmo (talk) 02:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks to be within the modern Sagittarius boundaries. The Flamsteed designation for the star would have been published in 1725, whereas the modern IAU constellation boundaries were set in 1922–1930. Regards, RJH (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Negative parallax

Amongst those stars for which a negative parallax was derived, the smallest formal error is 0.23 mas. There are no negative parallaxes amongst the 1000 stars with smaller errors than this value. (Leeuwen 2007). So "no firm conclusions should be drawn from the observed distribution of negative parallaxes" -- Kheider (talk) 18:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I read it, the comments apply to the study as a whole. He seems to be blaming the negative values on noise. Hence I'm not sure how valid the negative parallax could be; it doesn't seem to make sense physically. Regards, RJH (talk) 19:35, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]