Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:02:50.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Ground-based opportunities for astrometry

from Part I - Astrometry in the twenty-first century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

By
Norbert Zacharias
Edited by
William F. van Altena
William F. van Altena
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Chapter 1 surveys the opportunities and challenges for astrometry in the twenty-first century (van Altena 2008) while Chapter 2 discusses space satellites primarily designed for astrometry. We now review the situation for ground-based astrometry, since it is often mistakenly stated that there is no longer any need to pursue ground-based research once satellites are operating. It is certainly true that the levels of precision and accuracy projected for Gaia and others are far beyond what can be achieved from the ground. However, there are also consequences of the fairly small aperture size and short flight durations that impose constraints on the limiting magnitudes and our ability to study long-term perturbations. In this chapter we will explore those areas of research using astrometric techniques that will be able to make important contributions to our understanding of the Universe in the coming years, even with high-accuracy satellites such as Gaia operating.

Radio astrometry

It is likely that radio astrometry observations (see Chapter 12 for a detailed discussion of radio astrometry and interferometry) will continue to be made primarily from the ground due to the difficulty and cost of launching large objects into space. Since the diffraction limit of a telescope is inversely proportional to the wavelength and radio wavelengths are about 103 to 105 times longer than those of visible light, no high-resolution imaging or high-precision angular measures can be performed with a single radio telescope.

Type
Chapter
Information
Astrometry for Astrophysics
Methods, Models, and Applications
 , pp. 29 - 36
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrei, A. H., Souchay, J., Zacharias, N., et al. (2009). The large quasar reference frame (LQRF). An optical representation of the ICRS. A&A, 505, 385.Google Scholar
Boboltz, D. A., Fey, A. L., Puatua, W. K., et al. (2007). Very large array plus Pie Town astrometry of 46 radio stars. AJ, 133, 906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charlot, P., Boboltz, D. A., Fey, A. L., et al. (2010). The Celestial Reference Frame at 24 and 43 GHz. II. Imaging. AJ, 139, 1713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinescu, D. I., Girard, T. M., van Altena, W. F., and Lopez, C. E. (2005). Absolute proper motion of the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy and of the outer regions of the MilkyWay Bulge. ApJ, 618, L25.Google Scholar
Fey, A., Gordon, D., and Jacobs, C. S., eds. (2009). The Second Realization of the International Celestial Reference Frame by Very Long Baseline Interferometry. IERS Technical Note No. 35.
Genzel, R., Eckart, A., Ott, T., and Eisenhauer, F. (1997). On the nature of the dark mass in the centre of the Milky Way. MNRAS, 291, 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghez, A. M., Salim, S., Weinberg, N., et al. (2008). Probing the properties of the Milky Way's central supermassive black hole with stellar orbits. Proc. IAU Symp., 248, 52.Google Scholar
Han, I. (1989). The accuracy of differential astrometry limited by the atmospheric turbulence. AJ, 97, 607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartkopf, W. I., Mason, B. D., and Rafferty, T. J. (2008). Speckle interferometry at the USNO Flagstaff Station: observations obtained in 2003–2004 and 17 new orbits. AJ, 135, 1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmi, A. and White, S. D. M. (1999). Building up the stellar halo of the Galaxy. MNRAS, 307, 495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, T. J., Jao, W.-C., Subasavage, J. P., et al. (2006). The solar neighborhood. XVII. Parallax results from the CTIOPI 0.9 m program: 20 new members of the RECONS 10 parsec sample. AJ, 132, 2360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horch, E. P., Franz, O. G., and van Altena, W. F. (2006). Characterizing binary stars below the diffraction limit with CCD-based speckle imaging. AJ, 132, 2478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horch, E. P., Veilliette, D. R., Baena Gallé, R., et al. (2009). Observations of binary stars with the differential speckle survey instrument. I. Instrument description and first results. AJ, 137, 5057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horch, E. P., van Altena, W. F., Howell, S. B., Sherry, W. H., and Ciardi, D. R. (2011). Observations of binary stars with the Differential Speckle Survey Instrument. III. Measures below the diffraction limit of the WIYN telescope. AJ, 141, 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivezic, Z., Axelrod, T., Brandt, W. N., et al. (2008). Large Synoptic Survey Telescope: from science drivers to reference design. Serb. Astr. J., 176, 1.Google Scholar
Jacoby, G., Tonry, J. L., Burke, B. E., et al. (2002). WIYN One Degree Imager (ODI). Proc. SPIE, 4836, 217.Google Scholar
Johnston, K. V., Spergel, D. N., and Hayden, C. (2002). How lumpy is the MilkyWay's dark matter halo?ApJ, 570, 656.Google Scholar
Kaiser, N., Aussel, H., Burke, B. E., et al. (2002). Pan-STARRS: a Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Array. Proc. SPIE, 4836, 154.Google Scholar
Labeyrie, A. (1970). Attainment of diffraction limited resolution in large telescopes by Fourier analyzing speckle patterns in star images. A&A, 6, 85.Google Scholar
Mason, B. D., Hartkopf, W. I., Gies, D. R., Henry, T. J., and Helsel, J. W. (2009). High angular resolution multiplicity of massive stars. AJ, 137, 3358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platais, I., Kozhurina-Platais, V., Girard, T. M., et al. (2002). WIYN open cluster study. VIII. The geometry and stability of the NOAO CCD Mosaic Imager. AJ, 124, 601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platais, I., Kozhurina-Platais, V.,Mathieu, R. D., Girard, T. M., and van Altena, W. F. (2003). WIYN open cluster study. XVII. Astrometry and membership to V = 21 in NGC 188. AJ, 126, 2922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platais, I.,Wyse, R. F. G., and Zacharias, N. (2006). Deep astrometric standards and galactic Structure. PASP, 118, 107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, M. J. (2008). Micro-arcsecond astrometry with the VLBA. Proc. IAU Symp., 248, 141.Google Scholar
Ten Brummelaar, T. A., et al. (2010). An update of the CHARA Array. Proc. SPIE, 7734, 773403.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. R., Moran, J. M., and Swenson, G. W. (2001). Interferometry and Synthesis in Radio Astronomy, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonry, J., Burke, B. E., and Schechter, P. L. (1997). The orthogonal transfer CCD. PASP, 109, 1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonry, J., Burke, B. E., and Schechter, P. L. (2004). The orthogonal parallel imaging transfer camera. In Scientific Detectors for Astronomy: The Beginning of a New Era, ed. P., AmicoJ. W., Beletic and J. E., Beletic. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 300, New York, NY: Springer, p. 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Altena, W. F. (2008). The opportunities and challenges for astrometry in the 21st century. Rev. Mex. A&A (Serie de Conf.), 34, 1.Google Scholar
van Altena, W. F., Lee, J. T., and Hoffleit, E. D. (1995). The General Catalogue of Trigonometric Parallaxes, 4th edn. New Haven: Yale University Observatory.Google Scholar
Walter, H. G. and Sovers, O. J. (2000). Astrometry of Fundamental Catalogues: The Evolution from Optical to Radio Reference Frames. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacharias, N. (1992). Global block adjustment simulations using the CPC 2 data structure. A&A, 264, 296.Google Scholar
Zacharias, N. (2008). Dense optical reference frames: UCAC and URAT. Proc. IAU Symp., 248, 310.Google Scholar
Zacharias, N., Urban, S. E., Zacharias, M. I., et al. (2004). The Second US Naval Observatory CCD Astrograph Catalog (UCAC2). AJ, 127, 3043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacharias, N.,McCallon, H. I., Kopan, E., and Cutri, R. M. (2006). Extending the ICRF into the infrared: 2MASS-UCAC astrometry. In JD16: The International Celestial Reference Ssytem: Maintenance and Future Realization, ed. R., Gaume, D., McCharthy, J., Souchay. Washington, DC: USNO, p. 52.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×