Paper detail

Early star catalogues of the southern sky: De Houtman, Kepler (Second and Third Classes), and Halley

De Houtman in 1603, Kepler in 1627 and Halley in 1679 published the earliest modern catalogues of the southern sky. We provide machine-readable versions of these catalogues, make some comparisons between them, and briefly discuss their accuracy on the basis of comparison with data from the modern Hipparcos Catalogue. We also compare our results for De Houtman with those by Knobel (1917) finding good overall agreement. About half of the about 200 new stars (with respect to Ptolemaios) added by De Houtman are in twelve new constellations, half in old constellations like Centaurus, Lupus and Argo. The right ascensions and declinations given by De Houtman have error distributions with widths of about 40 arcmin, the longitudes and latitudes given by Kepler have error distributions with widths of about 45 arcmin. Halley improves on this by more than an order of magnitude to widths of about 3 arcmin, and all entries in his catalogue can be identified. The measurement errors of Halley are due to a systematic deviation of his sextant (increasing with angle to 2 arcmin at 60 degrees) and random errors of 0.7 arcmin. The position errors in the catalogue of Halley are dominated by the position errors in the reference stars, which he took from Brahe.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.