Re: Planet X: MOVED to Oct 4 Coordinates

Idon't wrote in message <[email protected]>
> Steve Havas wrote in message <[email protected]>
>> Earl Colby Pottinger wrote in message <[email protected]>
>>> [email protected] (I M Openmind):
>>>
>>>> Steve and Dell and others continue to play with single frame pixel
>>>> defects as I show at
>>>> and Nancy proves again that she is always wrong by confirming that a 4
>>>> pixel defect on Steve's frame 4 is her "planet"
>>>
>>> Now Nancy faces a big problem.  Finding 1 pixel noise, easy!  Finding 2-3
>>> pixel noise,  takes a little looking.  Finding 4 pixel noise or defect,
>>> harder still.  But the more pixels needed, harder to find random matches.  6
>>> pixels is going to be very hard and eight pixels (unless it is a very cheap
>>> CCD) near impossible!
>>>
>>>              Earl Colby Pottinger
>>
>> Nancy doesn't face any problem, you guys are the ones facing the problem! What 
>> are the odds of this 4 pixel "noise" along with a companion white light 
>> 2 pixel "noise" showing up in two images in a row, at the exact location of the 
>> Zeta coordinates and additionally moving exactly as the Zeta coordinates predict 
>> from Sept 21 to Oct 4 and being the correct predicted size in addition? Hmmm...
>> what are the odds??? The odds are only going to get better for PX and exponentially 
>> worse for you!
>>
>
> Hmm, I'm not an astronomer, but I think I/we recently learned that the
> apparent size of a point-source object is a function of it's
> magnitude, not it's angular size. Could you please expound on the
> angular size of your object compared to image pixels and how that, and
> it's current magnitude relate to it's apparent visual size in the
> images?
> -
> By the way, what IS the magnitude of your object and how did it manage
> to fall from 11th magnitude a year and a half ago to whatever it is
> now?
>
> I

Is it not that stars are considered a point source and measured with magnitude while 
planets etc. can be expressed in angular size and also magnitude? This page shows the 
size PX would show up on the images based on discussions from sci.astro some months ago.
http://www.zetatalk.com/teams/rogue/pierre4.htm