Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T16:33:10.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Maintenance of the ICRS - Statistical Treatment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

H. Schwan
Affiliation:
Astronomisches Rechen-Institut Moenchhofstrasse 12-14, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany
R. Wielen
Affiliation:
Astronomisches Rechen-Institut Moenchhofstrasse 12-14, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this paper we briefly describe the influence of astrometric binaries on derived proper motions and we draw some conclusions with respect to the reference systems. For more details the reader is referred to Wielen (1997) and Wielen et al. (1997).

Increased measurement accuracy determines not only the derived parameters with much more precision, but it may even allow one to describe new phenomena, which were of no importance before. This happened in the case of the highly precise Hipparcos measurements (ESA, 1997) which were able to determine stellar proper motions within less than four years with an accuracy comparable with the best proper motions available from ground-based observations as given in the FK5 (Fricke et al. 1988). The basic difference between the Hipparcos and the FK5 proper motions showed up within our task of validating the Hipparcos proper motions during the reduction process. Our main result was that the dispersion of the residual differences between both proper motions was about three times as large compared with the error estimates expected from the data given in the catalogues. Since it was rather unlikely that one of the two catalogues had so strongly underestimated its errors, we looked for other reasons to explain the discrepancy. For many of the stars with the largest differences between the Hipparcos and FK5 proper motions, information on their duplicity was found in the literature. We thus suspected that the influence of astrometric binaries to be responsible for the discrepancy.

Type
II. Joint Discussions
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1998

References

Bien, R., Fricke, W., Lederle, T. & Schwan, H., (1978) Methods for the comparison of systems of star positions to be applied in the construction of the FK5, Veroeff. Astron. Rechen-Inst., Heidelberg, No. 29, Verlag G. Braun, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
ESA, 1997, The Hipparcos Catalogue, ESA SP-1200Google Scholar
Fricke, W., Schwan, H., Lederle, T. et al., (1988) Fifth Fundamental Catalogue (FK5), Part I; VeroefF. Astron. Rechen-Inst., Heidelberg, No. 32, Verlag G. Braun, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
Wielen, R., (1997) Principles of statistical astrometry A&A, 325, 367382 Google Scholar
Wielen, R., Schwan, H., Dettbarn, C., Jahreiss, H. & Lenhardt, H. (1997) Statistical astrometry based on a comparison of individual proper motions and positions of stars in the FK5 and in the Hipparcos catalogue in Hipparcos - Venice ’97, ESA SP-402, 727732 Google Scholar