Tuesday, July 17, 2007

DX Cancri

Star type
g M6.5Ve

Distance from Earth
g 11.82 ly

Star Service No.
g NA

Age
g NA

Diameter/Mass/Temp (xSol)
g 11%; 8.7%; NA

Brightness (xSol)
g 12/1,000,000th

Metallicity
g NA

Comparison to Sol
g NA

Picture of star
g See picture

Star system features
g NA

Known planets
g NA

Habitable zone
g The distance from DX Cancri where an Earth-type planet would be comfortable with liquid water is less than 0.04 AU would result in a "year" that last less than 10 hours. At that distance, the rotation of the planet would probably be tidally locked with the star so that one side would have perpetual daylight while the other would be in eternal darkness. Moreover, DX Cancri's light is so red that Earth-type plants may not be able to photosynthesize very well.

Orbital map
g NA

View from star
g NA

Nearby stars
(Star systems with 10 light years)
g Procyon 2, 5 ly
g LTT 12352, 5.1 ly
g Luyten's Star, 5.5 ly
g GJ 1116 AB, 5.7 ly
g Lalande 21185, 6.7 ly
g AD Leonis, 7.3 ly
g Wolf 359, 7.7 ly
g Groombridge 1618, 8.2 ly
g Wolf 294, 8.2 ly
g Ross 614 AB, 9.1 ly
g BD+44 2051 A/WX Ursae Majoris (B), 9.2 ly
g Sirius 2, 9.5 ly

Map locating star system
g See stellar map (listed as “G51-15”)

Location in Earth sky
g Just north of the center of Constellation Cancer, the Crab - northwest of the famous open star cluster M 44 (also known as the Beehive Cluster and Praesepe, Latin for "Manger") and Ascellus Australis (Delta Cancri); however, too faint to be seen with the naked eye

Other names
g GJ 1111
g G51-15
g LHS 248
g Proxima Cancri
g GCTP 2016.01

Sci-fi mentions
g NA

Get your SF book manuscript edited


.

.

3 comments:

David said...

Hello, I found through a search you referencing the name 'Proxima Cancri', though not other Proxima names, except Centauri. What do think of my suggestion that I posted on Astronomy magazine, reader forums/polls:
"Should closest stars have names like Proxima Leonis?"
Most of the closest stars to our solar system don't have common constellation-based names. I propose that the closest in each constellation have an alternate name starting with Proxima, followed by the constellation name, as is already done for Proxima Centauri. For example, Wolf 359 would be Proxima Leonis, and Ross 154 would be Proxima Sagittarii. You can see more of my suggestions at http://www.closeststars.com/. Please give your opinion. Perhaps if many agree the IAU would as well.

DHunter said...

Hello, I found through a search you referencing the name 'Proxima Cancri', though not other Proxima names, except Centauri. What do think of my suggestion that I posted on Astronomy magazine, reader forums/polls:
"Should closest stars have names like Proxima Leonis?"
Most of the closest stars to our solar system don't have common constellation-based names. I propose that the closest in each constellation have an alternate name starting with Proxima, followed by the constellation name, as is already done for Proxima Centauri. For example, Wolf 359 would be Proxima Leonis, and Ross 154 would be Proxima Sagittarii. You can see more of my suggestions at http://www.closeststars.com/.

Please give your opinion. Perhaps if many agree the IAU would as well.

Rob Bignell said...

It's an interesting suggestion, David. One "problem" I've encountered as cataloging the nearest stars is the plethora of names that exist for each one, often based on previously done star catalogs - there's a Gliese number, an HIP number, an HD number, a Luyten number, etc. etc. This sometime causes great confusion, especially when a star list or research paper gives a wrong catalog number.

We clearly need a new, universal naming system, preferably one that describes a star's location. After all, imagine if some cartographers called New York City "New York 5" (for the five burroughs) ontheir maps, others called it "New York ABCDE", still others called it "ZC 10001" and a few referred to it as "AC 212". Perhaps dividing the galaxy into sectors, then those units into smaller ones, and then assigning numbers based on each of those units would be helpful and still allow for the discovery of new stars without duplicating of numbers. We could a consistent system that shows exactly where a star is location (though not show where it is in the earth sky, as many of our star names and catalog numbers aim to do).

While stars do move, the numbering system still would be accurate for hundreds of thousands of years. Of course, that takes the romanticism out of the star's name, but we might still use common names for most stars (such as Sirius or Altair) and simply use the universal star number for those that only possess catalog number names (such as the majority of red dwarfs). I suspect we'll have to become a space-faring civilization before most see the practical advantages of such a system, though.