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-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T00:00:03.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The Earth's atmosphere: refraction, turbulence, delays, and limitations to astrometric precision

from Part III - Observing through the atmosphere

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

By
William F. van Altena  and
Edward B. Fomalont
Edited by
William F. van Altena
William F. van Altena
Affiliation:
Yale University
William F. van Altena
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The Earth's atmosphere imposes several limitations on our ability to perform astrometric measurements from the ground in both the optical and radio regions of the spectrum. First, we are limited to wavelengths where the absorption is not too great, i.e. the broad optical region from the ultraviolet to the near-infrared, scattered regions in the infrared and broad regions at radio wavelengths. The fundamental limitations imposed by the atmosphere are different in the optical and radio and in this chapter we will deal with those important for the optical; the radio part is largely dealt with in Chapter 12 on radio interferometry, except for a summary given here on the precision limitations imposed by the atmosphere. The second problem created by observing through the atmosphere is refraction of the light waves as they pass through different levels of the atmosphere. If it were only refraction through a stable medium, the problem would be very simple; however, the atmosphere is a turbulent medium that causes variations in the amount of refraction both spatially and temporally and it therefore limits the precision and accuracy of our observations. In this chapter we will deal with both effects using the developments in Schroeder (1987, 2000) as the basic reference.

Refraction through a plane-parallel atmosphere

When we are dealing with relative positions in fields of view less than several degrees, it is sufficient to adopt a plane-parallel atmosphere for the model. In cases where we need to consider the total displacement, such as with meridian circles, it is necessary to adopt atmospheric models that are substantially more complicated, such as those developed by Garfinkel (1967) and Auer and Standish (2000). For the purposes of this chapter we can safely use the plane-parallel atmosphere.

Type
Chapter
Information
Astrometry for Astrophysics
Methods, Models, and Applications
 , pp. 121 - 141
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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Astronomical Almanac for the year 1990, London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, p. B62.
Auer, L. H. and Standish, E. M. (2000). Astronomical refraction: computational method for all zenith angles. AJ, 119, 2472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bessell, M. (1990). UBVRI passbands. PASP, 102, 1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandford, R. D. and Konigl, A. (1979). Relativistic jets as compact radio sources. ApJ, 232, 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, P. B., Britton, M. C., and Kulkarni, S. R. (2009). Precision astrometry with adaptive optics. AJ, 137, 83.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
Cornwell, T. and Fomalont, E. (1999). Self-calibration. ASP Conf. Proc., 180, 187.Google Scholar
Fey, L., Gordon, D., and Jacobs, C. S., eds. (2010). The Second Realization of the International Celestial Reference Frame by Very Long Baseline Interferometry. IERS Technical Note No. 35. See: http://www.iers.org/IERS/EN/Publications/TechnicalNotes/tn35.html.
Fomalont, E. B. and Kopeikin, S. M. (2005). The measurement of the light deflections from Jupiter: experimental results. ApJ, 598, 704.Google Scholar
Fomalont, E. B., Johnston, K. J., Fey, A., Boboltz, D., Oyama, T., and Honma, M. (2010). The position/structure stability of four ICRF2 sources. AJ, 141, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, T., Gillessen, S., Trippe, S., et al. (2010). What is limiting near-infrared astrometry in the Galactic Center. MNRAS, 401, 1177.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, B. (1967). Astronomical refraction in a polytropic atmosphere. AJ, 72, 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, I. (1989). The accuracy of differential astrometry limited by the atmospheric turbulence. AJ, 97, 607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helminiak, K. G., Konacki, M., Kulkarni, S. R., and Eisner, J. (2009). Precision astrometry of a sample of speckle binaries and multiples with the adaptive optics facilities at the Hale and Keck II telescopes. MNRAS, 400, 406.Google Scholar
Hirabayashi, H., Fomalont, E. B., Horiuchi, S., et al. (2000). The VSOP 5 GHz AGN Survey I. Compilation and observations. PASJ, 52, 997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoeg, E. (1968). The mean power spectrumof star image motion. Zeitschrift für Astrophysik, 69, 313.Google Scholar
Horch, E. P., Gomez, S. C., Sherry, W. H., et al. (2011). Observations of binary stars with the differential speckle survey instrument. II. Hipparcos stars observed in January and June 2010. AJ, 141, 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, C. S., Keihm, S. J., Lanyi, G. E., et al. (2006). Improving astrometric VLBI by using water vapor radiometer calibrations. IVS 2006 General Meeting Proceedings, Concepcion, Chile, January 9–11. See http://ivs.nict.go.jp/mirror/publications/gm2006/jacobs2.Google Scholar
Konig, A. (1962). Astrometry with astrographs. In Astronomical Techniques, ed. W. A., Hiltner. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, ch. 20.Google Scholar
Lindegren, L. (1978). Photoelectric astrometry – a comparison of methods for precise image location. In Modern Astrometry; Proceedings of the Colloquium. Vienna: Universitaets-Sternwarte Wien, p. 197.Google Scholar
Lindegren, L. (1980). Atmospheric limitations of narrow-field optical astrometry. A&A, 89, 41.Google Scholar
Lindegren, L. (2010). High-accuracy positioning: astrometry. ISSI Sci. Rep. Ser., 9, ch. 16.Google Scholar
Ma, C., Arias, E. F., Eubanks, T. M., et al. (1998). The International Celestial Reference Frame as realized by very long baseline interferometry. ApJ, 116, 516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moffatt, A. F. J. (1969). A theoretical investigation of focal stellar images in the photographic emulsion and application to photographic photometry. A&A, 3, 455.Google Scholar
Monet, D. G., Dahn, C. C., Vrba, F. J., et al. (1992). U.S. Naval Observatory CCD parallaxes of faint stars. I – Program description and first results. AJ, 103, 638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolic, B., Hills, R. E., and Richer, J. S. (2007). Limits on phase correction performance due to differences between astronomical and water-vapour radiometer beams. ALMA Memo Ser., 573.Google Scholar
Pickles, A. J. (1998). A stellar spectral flux library: 1150–25 000 A°. PASP, 110, 863.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
Pravdo, S. H. and Shaklan, S. B. (1996). Astrometric detection of extrasolar planets: results of a feasibility study with the Palomar 5 meter telescope. ApJ, 465, 264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, M. J., Menten, K. M., Zheng, X.W., Brunthaler, A., and Xu, Y. (2009). A trigonometric parallax of SGR B2. ApJ, 705, 1548.Google Scholar
Roddier, F. (1981). The effects of atmospheric turbulence in optical astronomy. Progr. Opt., 19, ch. 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, A. E. E. (1970). Very long baseline interferometry with large effective bandwidth for phase-delay measurements. Radio Science, 5, 1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, D. (1987). Astronomical Optics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schroeder, D. (2000). Astronomical Optics, 2nd edn. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sovers, O. J., Fanslow, J. L., and Jacobs, C. S. (1998). Astrometry and geodesy with radio interferometry: experiments, models, results. Rev. Mod. Phys., 70, 1393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sovers, O. J., Jacobs, C. S., and Lanyi, G. E. (2004). MODEST: a tool for geodesy and astrometry. IVS 2004 General Meeting Proceedings, Ottawa, Canada, February 9–11. See: http://ivs.nict.go.jp/mirror/publications/gm2004/sovers.Google Scholar
Stone, R. C. (1996). An accurate method for computing atmospheric refraction. PASP, 108, 1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatarski, V. I. (1971). The Effects of the Turbulent Atmosphere on Wave Propagation. Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations.Google Scholar
Tokovinin, A., Mason, B. D., and Hartkopf, W. I. (2010). Speckle interferometry at the Blanco and SOAR telescopes in 2008 and 2009. AJ, 139, 743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unwin, S. C., Shao, M., Tanner, A. M., et al. (2008). Taking the measure of the Universe: precision astrometry with SIM PlanetQuest. PASP, 120, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Altena, W. F. (1971). Trigonometric parallaxes determined with the Yerkes Observatory 40-inch refractor. I. Methods of observation, measurement reduction, and first results. AJ, 76, 932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vieira, K., van Altena, W. F., and Girard, T. M. (2005). Astrometry with OPTIC at WIYN. ASP Conf. Series, 338, 130.Google Scholar
Vieira, K., Girard, T., van Altena, W., et al. (2010). Proper motion study of the Magellanic Clouds using SPM data. AJ, 140, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacharias, N. (1996). Measuring the atmospheric influence on differential astrometry: a simple method applied to wide-field CCD frames. PASP, 108, 1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacharias, N. (1997). Astrometric quality of the USNO CCD astrograph (UCA). AJ, 113, 1925.CrossRefGoogle 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

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
×