Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 1 of 212»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Science and Astronomy Discussions » Star classification (Better star classification?)
Star classification
steeljaw354Date: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 17:20 | Message # 1
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
I think the current star classification needs an overhaul.



Edited by steeljaw354 - Sunday, 12.06.2016, 17:21
 
MosfetDate: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 18:22 | Message # 2
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 719
Status: Offline
What you want is an inverse alphabetical order for lazy people, Am I correct? If this is the reason, then no.




"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram


Edited by Mosfet - Sunday, 12.06.2016, 18:25
 
steeljaw354Date: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 22:05 | Message # 3
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
I want this "inverse alphabetical order" so it is more efficient and simple for many to use, if you have someone that is a very amateur astronomer, and they are learning the current classification system, they will probably be a bit confused, so this "inverse alphabetical order" is a logical system.
 
MosfetDate: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 23:17 | Message # 4
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 719
Status: Offline
OBAFGKM spectral classification it's the first thing they teach you regarding temperature differences and Hertzprung-Russell diagram, I don't see why they should be confused, exactly as when you learn the name of planets in order of distance from the Sun.
It should be better in order to simplify astronomy for amateurs rename all planets: "One" for Mercury, "Two" for Venus, "Three" for Earth, and so on.





"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
steeljaw354Date: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 23:24 | Message # 5
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Well naming planets is not a part of this discussion as they are named after various gods and such and I don't have a problem with their names. That is irrelevant to this discussion.

Why did they decide on random letters instead of a nice simple orderly classification like I have shown? I mean they chose an illogical system that doesn't really seem to have an particular order, as logic means orderly and neat.


Edited by steeljaw354 - Sunday, 12.06.2016, 23:27
 
MosfetDate: Sunday, 12.06.2016, 23:51 | Message # 6
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 719
Status: Offline
The order is given by previous classification methods of stars, effectively starting from A, B, C, etc. but as new data followed, those classes were moved before or after nearby letters, or brand new letters like O were used, which was the next free letter.
This because moving letters around was more convenient than changing tons of accumulated and archived materials regarding stars spectra published since second half of 1800.
You may find many interesting facts by studying history of science.

I applied your logic at planet names, a bit stretched but that's how logic must be tested. You should have problems with planet names.





"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram


Edited by Mosfet - Sunday, 12.06.2016, 23:59
 
JackDoleDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 09:16 | Message # 7
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1737
Status: Offline
If the order of the spectral classes were changed, this mnemonic could no longer be used to remember the order:
'Oh Be A Fine Girl Kiss My Lips Tonight, Yennifer'.

So I'm definitely against it! dry

(The name Yennifer - for the Y class of brown dwarfs - I myself have added!)





Don't forget to look here.

 
WatsisnameDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 10:17 | Message # 8
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2610
Status: Offline
OBAFGKM is a historical remnant of the early days of spectral classification, where the sequence actually was A through Q. We still use this sequence because... well... we've used it for so long. It's entrenched. The letters themselves are arbitrary, anyway.

It's much like how we define current as a flow of positive charge, even though the actual charge carriers in a metal conductor are electrons. Totally backwards. Thank the person who rubbed a glass rod with a piece of silk and defined its acquired charge to be positive.





 
Brett001Date: Monday, 13.06.2016, 11:17 | Message # 9
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Hungary
Messages: 81
Status: Offline
We hungarians using this rhyme:
"Orosz Barátom Azt Felelte Gépek Készítenek Mindent, Rám Ne Számíts"

(Translate:
My russian friend said machines made everything, Count me out.)

:)


Edited by Brett001 - Monday, 13.06.2016, 11:20
 
SalvoDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 11:22 | Message # 10
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
Actually I get used to the current system so much that having an ordered classification wouldn't make it so much better. When I read "M" I know it's an red star, when I read "G" then it's yellow, and so on.

The only alternative would be having both classifications.





The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.

CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs

(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)
 
WatsisnameDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 11:44 | Message # 11
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2610
Status: Offline
Indeed. smile Eventually as astronomers we don't even need to think of a mnemonic; we just know the letters and what they correspond to by regular use. Yellow stars do feel very "G" to me. And blue stars are so O and B. I can't imagine relearning everything. "Okay, yellow's are F now, which were white. And A are now G. G is now blue-white. Blue's are now I and H. But B's are brown dwarfs?" Uuuuuugh. Yeah, the system makes sense. But my pre-programed brain hates it. tongue




 
steeljaw354Date: Monday, 13.06.2016, 19:26 | Message # 12
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Well we wouldn't have to do a quick and fast change, we could do a slower change where we wouldn't have to update anything before 1950's, we would change major sites and whatnot that use this classification and gradually change to it. Not that hard to do, we should have just used more efficient things instead and moved the letters so they are in the same order, instead of having to use an illogical system.

Edited by steeljaw354 - Monday, 13.06.2016, 19:30
 
midtskogenDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 19:36 | Message # 13
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1671
Status: Offline
The letters themselves are illogical, so why don't we replace Latin alphabet with something more logical?




NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
 
steeljaw354Date: Monday, 13.06.2016, 19:50 | Message # 14
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Because most of us are in a Latin system. And other systems can just use their equivalent.
 
DeathStarDate: Monday, 13.06.2016, 19:50 | Message # 15
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
Eh, I honestly see no reason why one should make such a drastic change for such an extremely minor, almost negligible benefit. Not only would people struggle to adapt to the new system for a time, but you'd make 150 years worth of literature a lot more confusing than it needs to be.

In my eyes, it's kind of like changing a minute to be 10 seconds long and an hour 10 minutes long. Yes, it might be more "logical" and easier to remember, but it would cause A LOT of confusion.
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Science and Astronomy Discussions » Star classification (Better star classification?)
Page 1 of 212»
Search: