Dictionary of minor planet names

320 Pages·2003·8.019 MB·English

by  Schmadel, Lutz D

DictionaryofMinorPlanetNames–Addendum
On 2008 September 5, the Rosetta control room at ESA’s European Space Operations Centre, ESOC, received
thefirst radio signal after closest approach to asteroid (2867)Sˇteins at 22:14 CEST, confirming a smooth fly-by.
Closest approach took place at 20:58 CEST ground time, 20:38 CEST spacecraft time, at a distance of 803km.
Rosetta’s relative speed with respect to(2867)Sˇteins was 8.6km/sec, or about 31,000km/h.
Thesizecanbedescribedbyanellipsoidwithaxesof6.7×5.8×4.5[km]. Thelargestcraternearthesouthpole
has a diameter of approx. 2km. The resolution amounts to about 160m. ((cid:13)c ESA 2008 MPS for OSIRIS Team
MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/RSSD/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA,courtesy H.Uwe Keller)
Lutz D. Schmadel
Dictionary
of Minor Planet Names
Addendum to Fifth Edition: 2006–2008
PreparedonBehalfofCommission20
UndertheAuspices
oftheInternationalAstronomicalUnion
123
Dr. Lutz D. Schmadel
Astronomisches Recheninstitut
im Zentrum für Astronomie der
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg
Mönchhofstraße 12-14
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
e-mail: [email protected]
This is the secondAddendum to Schmadel, Dictionary of Minor Planet Names, 5th Edition,
Springer(2003);ISBN978-3-540-00238-3.
ISBN978-3-642-01964-7 e-ISBN978-3-642-01965-4
DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-01965-4
SpringerDordrecht HeidelbergLondon NewYork
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2009930677
©Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2009
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.Allrightsarereserved,whetherthewholeorpartofthematerialisconcerned,
specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation,broadcasting,reproductionon
microfilmorinanyotherway,andstorageindatabanks.Duplicationofthispublicationorpartsthereofis
permittedonlyundertheprovisionsoftheGermanCopyrightLawofSeptember9,1965,initscurrentversion,
andpermissionforusemustalwaysbeobtainedfromSpringer.Violationsareliableforprosecutionunderthe
GermanCopyrightLaw.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,etc.inthispublicationdoesnotimply,
evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevantprotectivelawsand
regulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Typesetting :Camera-readybytheauthorusingTEXmacrosbyGernotBurkhardt
Cover design: WMXDesign GmbH, Heidelberg
Printedonacid-freepaper
SpringerispartofSpringerScience+BusinessMedia(www.springer.com)
Preface
Thehistoryandrapiddevelopmentofminorplanetdis- In addition tocitingthebibliographic sourceofthenam-
coveries constitute a fascinating story and one with a ing, we also provide the source of numbering. A spe-
rather breathtaking evolution. By October 2005, the cial concordance list will enable the evaluation of the
totalofnumberedplanetsexceededtheremarkablecor- respective publication dates. The complete work is,
nerstone of 100,000 objects and only three years later of course, a thoroughly revised and considerably en-
inNovember2008weareevenfacedwithminorplanet larged data collection and every effort has been made
(200000). This dramatic evolution must be compared to check and correct each single piece of information
with the huge time span of two centuries (1801–2000) again. For even more detailed information on the dis-
thatwasnecessarytodetectandtorefinetheorbitsof covery circumstances of numbered butunnamed plan-
onlythefirst20,000minorplanets. Nowadays,weneed ets, the reader is referred to the extensive data files
evenlessthan13monthsforthesamequantity! Atthe compiled by theMinor Planet Center.
end of 2005, we had achieved a total of 12,804 named
According to a resolution of IAU Division III (2000,
minor planets - a fraction of less than 11 per cent of
Manchester IAU General Assembly) DMPN attained
all numbered minor planets. This figure now approxi-
the status of an official IAU publication. The kind
mately decreased to only 7 per cent in comparison to
assistance by IAU General Secretaries Hans Rickman,
79 per cent in 1991.
OddbjørnEngvoldandKarelA.vanderHuchtduring
The fifth edition and the first addendum 2003-2005 the last decade is highly appreciated. I owe a great
serves as the basic survey, which is now updated and debtofgratitudetoBrianG.Marsdenforhiseverlast-
enlargedbythissecondaddendum.Itcontainsallnewly ing support of this common project of all interested
published names from the period2006 until February astronomers. TheKlausTschiraFoundationmadethe
2009aswellascorrections and amendments of all ear- publicationofthissecondaddendumpossiblebyacon-
lier editions. There are now 207,942 numberedminor siderable contribution. My gratitude is also due to
planetsand only15,054 arenamed! Thefundamental Ramon Khanna from Springer-Verlag for his coopera-
structuretheDictionaryhasbeenleftunchanged. Asa tion. Finally,Iwouldliketothankagain mycolleague
newfeatureoftheaddenda,weaddedroughdata of the Gernot Burkhardt for his indefatigable support with
orbitalelements [a,e,i] forquickclassificationpurposes. thedata crunchingand theextensiveTEX processing.
Heidelberg, April2009 Lutz D. Schmadel
Foreword
to the Fifth Edition
People love to name things. Parents name their chil- (or, in theoriginal Arabic, “Al Harris al Simak”). Now-
dren. Children name their pets. Why? Otherwise ra- adays, stars are named, for a fee, and with no obvious
tional human beings put an inordinate effort into this benefittoastronomy, by“TheInternationalStarReg-
naming activity. Some names are selected to remind istry” (ISR). After their children have left the roost,
the namer of some other person, place or event. In and their children’s pets have been buried ’neath the
otherinstances,thechoiceofanamemeanssomething apple tree, ordinary people with money to burn can
that “sounds good”, or is easily spelled. “What’s the stillnamestars. TheInternationalAstronomicalUnion
baby’s name?” is much more likely to be asked than (IAU)takes a dim view of the ISR, and the ISR takes
some question about its state of health, its weight or advantageofhumanirrationality. Astronomers,trained
the color of its eyes. People are often named accord- tocultivateatleastanairofrationality,nowadaysgive
ingtoreligioustradition,exemplifiedinthecustom,in to the objects of their quests more useful labels like
some countries, of speaking of a “Christian” name. In “Alpha Bootis”, PPM 130442, BD +19◦2777,
other countries, it is a “given” name, often the name PSR 1257-12 B and GRO J1744-28.
of some favored relative, particularly a father, as in
But in the solar system, names still – so to speak –
thesystemofpatronymics. Insomepartsoftheworld
have a place. Galileo knew what he was about when
a name may be more practical, making it clear that
he referred to the “Medician Stars”, as did Herschel
this person is “number one son”, for example. But in
with “Georgium Sidus”. A broader, more traditional
such a case, why not simply give numbers to the chil-
viewwonout,however,andPiazzi’s“Ferdinandea”ap-
dren in order of their birth? One might presume that
pendix was soon dropped from his choice of a name
other animals number their children: take one away,
for the small planet he discovered between Mars and
and the mother will realize that the count is wrong,
Jupiter. But when it was established that Ceres was
possibly even to the point of knowing precisely which
notalone, thepracticeofacknowledging eachnewdis-
infant has been removed.
covery with the name of a goddess somehow seemed
Themostbasicpartofspeechisa“noun”,awordthat appropriateandinternational –at least for discoveries
itself means “name”, particularly in its dominant use made in different parts of Europe and with the god-
as the subject, i.e., in the “nominative case”. Com- dessnamesfrom the“classical” tradition. But nation-
munication is essential to an intelligent species, and alist squabbles quickly arose, and soon the supply of
the human race simply would not have advanced if it namesofclassicalgoddesseswasexhausted. Othertra-
didn’t have, in its numerous languages, generic words ditions were tapped, more general female names were
for “tree”, “bird”, “food”, “rock”, “star” and “com- used, and the discoverers started concocting feminiza-
puter”. Oneclearlyalsoneedstobespecific,introduc- tionsofothernamesandwords. Atthesametime,the
ing further nouns in each of these categories, such as objects were simply given sequential numbers. The
“apple”,“kookaburra”,“apple”,“punk”,“quasar”and advent of photography also brought systems of pro-
“apple”. But where does that specificity end? Should visional designations, the use of which greatly facili-
everyindividualmemberofaspecies,typeorclassend tatedthebookkeepingoflinkingtogetherindependent
up with an obscure number or alphanumeric designa- discoveries of the same object, which could then re-
tion? Orshouldithaveanameordescriptorlike“The ceive a sequential number. And still the minor plan-
OnethatFellDownintheHurricaneLastWeek”,“The ets also received names. In a few cases, the names
VeryNoisyOnethatSomehowFounditsWayintoOur were inspired mnemonically by the provisional desig-
Barbecue”, “The 10-Meter Cake”, “Hope Diamond”, nations; and in a few other cases, particular classes of
“Arcturus” and,well, “Arcturus”. names were applied to members of particular dynami-
cal classes of minor planets. One could say that such
Astronomers named stars – and groupings of stars – names were helpful. Even when there was no obvious
longago. ThereweretrulyimaginativenamesforArc- connection, to have both a name and a number could
turus that translate into English as phrases like “Leg provide some useful redundancy when typographical
oftheLanceBearer”, “PatriarchMentoroftheTrain” errorsoccurred. Fromtimetotime,afewastronomers
Foreword to the Fifth Edition vii
would deprecatethenamingpractice,butit prevailed, thisnumberwas infact assigned already at thebegin-
with thevarious monikersproposed bythediscoverers ning of 2001 – to the then second-largest independent
being adopted essentially automatically. Perhaps un- objectinthetransneptunianbelt,2000WR ,named
106
like their colleagues in the star and galaxy businesses, Varuna. Sincethen thedoublingperiod hasshortened
planetary astronomers do evidently cultivate that air to less than 18 months, with the latest second-place
of irrationality common tothe general population. transneptunian object, 2002 LM60, becoming (50000)
Quaoar late in 2002.
Which are my own particular favorites among the
names of minor planets? Certainly, I like the ones Anticipating the surge of activity that began in the
where there is some particular “connection” between late 1970s, with many more professional and amateur
astronomersenteringthefield,somemembersofCom-
planet and name. Some discoverers have their lists of
mission 20 felt that oversight of the names being pro-
numberingsandthelistsofthenamestheywanttouse.
posed was desirable. So a committee of three was
Aseachnewnumberingcomesalong,theysimplyapply
formed... Itgrewtoacommitteeofseven,andin1994
thenextnameonthelist,whateverinterestingcharac-
itbecamethenine-memberSmallBodiesNamesCom-
teristicstheobjectmayhave. Mostproposersofnames
mittee, also taking on the responsibility for naming
couldusefullylearnfromPaulWild,veteranSwissdis-
comets. In 1997 the membership increased to 11, and
coverer of minor planets: he gave to the minor planet
the Committee was directly attached to IAU Division
withprovisionaldesignation1968HBthename“Swiss-
III, in which Commission 20 was one of six IAU com-
air”, HB being the international designator for that
missions. In 2000 the committee’s name was inverted
airline (now defunct); and the WK in another provi-
toCommitteeonSmallBodies Nomenclature,andthe
sional designation reminded him of the Swiss-German
membership was increased to 13. Those discoverers
word for annual military exercises, a grueling maneu-
whose pet names have been rejected might not agree,
ver through the Alps and – “Hannibal”. He gave the but the SBNC has good international representation
name “Cucula” to a rare discovery in May, themonth andhasgenerally acted in afair andeffectivemanner.
when the cuckoos call incessantly in the woods near Themain difficultiesarise withnamesconsidered “too
hisobservatory;andthename“Tripaxeptalis”wentto nearly similar” toothers, although aprecise definition
minor planet (2037), because 2037 = 3×679 = 7×291 of what is meant by this has so far been elusive.
– and given (679) Pax and (291) Alice. If one wants
tonameaminorplanetforthetwelfth-centurymathe- Quiteasimpressiveasthenumberingratehasbeenthe
progression of provisional designations. The modern
matician Fibonacci, the least he can do is ensure that
system of these designations was introduced in 1925
its number is a number in the Fibonacci sequence: so
with the idea that a simple sequence of letters could
thisnamewasthereforegivenrecentlytominorplanet
be used each halfmonth, it being considered unlikely
(6765).
that there would be more than 25 new discoveries in
WhentheMinorPlanetCenterwasestablishedin1947, any such interval. The first complement of 25 was al-
readyachievedinthesecondhalfofApril1926withthe
thenumberingofminorplanetsextendedto(1564). At
a meeting of IAU Commission 20 in 1952 it was re- assignment of 1926 GZ (the letters I and J being con-
sideredthesame). Then,inthesecondhalfofFebruary
marked that to reach (3000) would represent a “rea-
1928(well,itwasaleapyear),a26thdiscoverywasac-
sonableupperlimit”. When(3000)wasfinallyreached,
commodatedintheform1928DA anda30thas1928
in 1984, that remark had clearly been forgotten, and 1
furtherdoublingcould beexpectedin about adecade. DE1. (The utility of the system is that further desig-
nations can be added at any time, and thesetwo half-
WhenthefirsteditionoftheDictionaryofMinorPlanet
months currently terminate with 1926 GF and 1928
Nameswasprepared,inlate1991,(5000)hadjustbeen 1
numbered. It was then a foregone conclusion that DK1.)The 58 designations of the first half of October
1931, extending to 1931 TH , remained a special ac-
(10000)wouldbereachedaroundtheendofthecentury. 2
complishment for a long time, particularly when the
That milestone was in fact reached as early as March
examination of plates obtained in the continuation of
1999, a little more than 198 years after Piazzi first
thePlutosearchattheLowellObservatoryafewyears
sightedCeres. Althoughthesuggestionhadbeenmade
latertookthissequenceto1931TJ ;atpresent,itruns
4
that the number (10000) should be accorded to Pluto, to1931TR ,notsupersededuntil1950TU . Thenext
4 4
asthefirstmemberofthetransneptunianbeltbearing record was 1969 TG , and double digits were reached
8
some affinity to (1) Ceres as the first member of the forthefirsttimethreeyearslaterwithwhatnowstands
cisjovian belt, objections were raised, and (10000) was at1972TE ,i.e.,atotalof280discoveries. Ofcourse,
11
insteadnamed“Myriostos”,Greekforten-thousandth. these advances are quite artificial, because 1972 also
Thefirstmemberofthetransneptunianbelttobenum- saw thepublication of thePalomar-Leiden survey;the
beredwastherefore1992QB1 (thefirstofthemorere- latter did not in fact utilize the system of provisional
cent transneptunian discoveries) as (15760), but it has designations,buthaditdoneso,therewouldhavebeen
not yet been named. And although there were pre- designations extending to something like 1960 SR –
83
dictionsthat(20000)would not comealong until2004, a total of 2092 objects not surpassed until the second
viii Foreword to the Fifth Edition
halfofMarch1993,whenthedesignationsreached1993 in fact been restricted to four printed lines in the Mi-
FR . That record remained only until 1998, when norPlanetCirculars. Relativelyfewastronomersseem
84
the subscripts first reached three digits, new peaks of tohavedevelopedtheartofwritingagoodcitation. It
1998 FN149, 1998 HC158 and 1998 SM171. The next shouldnotbea“pottedbiography”ora“travelogue””.
yearsaw1999RH258 and1999TE328,andthecurrent It should be something that arrests the attention of
record is 2000 SE372. thereader, perhapsbypointingoutsome unusualfact
InthefirsttwoeditionsofthisDictionary,morethan80 about the person or place being honored, or why this
percent of the then-numberedminor planets had been particular object is being selected to have that name.
named. In the third and fourth editions the fractions International Asteroid Registry or no, theprognosis is
had dropped to 75 and 63 percent, respectively. But thattheIAUwillacceptfewernamesforminorplanets
now, for the fifth edition, the fraction is only 20 per- in the future. The CSBN has already carried out ex-
cent! InNovember2002,whenthenumberingsreached perimentsbyvotingonlyamongtheunionofthenames
(50000),thenamingsforthefirsttimesurpassed10,000! initiallyselectedbytheindividualmembersfromthose
That is the reason for the publication of the fifth edi- submittedbydiscoverersduringatwo-monthperiod,in
tion of the DMPN at this time. And, understandably thehopethatonlythe“best”nameswouldtherebybe
in terms of space, this edition restricts itself to doc- adopted... Thedrawback–todiscoverers–isthatthis
umenting just those minor planets that actually have would tend to discriminate against names of personal
names. significancetothem. Anothersuggestion hasbeennot
Thistailingoffinthenamingratehasbeeninevitable. to name intrinsically faint minor planets unless they
Indeed, some have suggested – and not for the first have some special dynamical or physical characteris-
time–thatthiscuriouspracticeofnamingminorplan- tics. The CSBN is currently examining a combination
ets should bestopped. Othersthinkthat, as long as a of procedures that could reasonably address perceived
sizable fraction of the discoverers want to name their unfairness.
finds,itisstillreasonableandappropriatetorecognize
As with the earlier editions, the principal responsibil-
theirindustryinthismanner. Thedangeris,ofcourse,
that future names will become more and more trivial. ity for this volumerests with LutzSchmadel, who has
Yet if the naming is not done by the IAU, in a gen- done a superb job putting together a truly authorita-
eral cooperation with the discoverers, some “Interna- tive piece of work. It is not just a catalogue or dic-
tionalAsteroidRegistry”willsurelyappearsomewhere tionary in the usual sense. One can in fact read the
tocarryoutthetask–undoubtedlyforahelfyfee. Not book like a novel, from beginning to end. In so doing,
alltheminorplanetsneedtobenamed,theycertainly one could certainly draw some conclusions about the
don’t have to be named immediately, and the tailing psychology of astronomers. Onecan also learn agreat
offisnotnecessarilysuchabadthing. Themainprob- deal about the world and its customs. The book is
lem is in fact the preparation of the citations, and in also a marvelous source of information about mythol-
ensuring that they are concise and well-written and – ogy, classical and otherwise.
yes–interestingtoread. Since1999thecitationshave
Cambridge, MA, January 2003 Brian G. Marsden
Director
IAUMinorPlanetCenter
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
Introduction
IntroductoryRemarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Minor Planet Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Evolution of Naming Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Information Content of the Catalogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Statistics and Classification of the Names . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Sources of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Catalogue of Minor Planet Names
and Discovery Circumstances . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendices
Discoverers in Alphabetical Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Discoverers RankingList . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Corporate Discoveries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Nobel Laureates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
IAUOfficers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Minor Planet Names with UnknownMeaning . . . . . . . . . 217
Publication Datesof theMPCs and MPOs . . . . . . . . . . 221
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Index of Minor Planet Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227