Calculating Quasar Variability Using CCD Camera and Magnitude Comparison

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on using a CCD camera to determine the variability of a 16th magnitude quasar by comparing its photon output to that of a 0 magnitude star, which emits 1 × 10^9 photons/second. The equation m2-m1=-2.5log(F2/F1) is applied to relate the magnitudes and fluxes of the two sources. Clarification is sought on whether "flux" and "photons/second" are equivalent, leading to the calculation of the quasar's flux as approximately 398 photons/second. It is noted that the problem assumes the photon energies from both the quasar and the reference star are similar, which may depend on their respective colors and redshifts. Overall, the approach to solving the problem is confirmed as correct.
StillLearningToronto
Messages
9
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


You have decided to use a CCD camera to check if a 16th magnitude quasar is variable.
With your telescope/camera combination, you know that a star with a magnitude of 0 would deliver 1 × 109 photons/second to one pixel, so this allows you to work out the photons/second from the quasar delivered to one pixel.

SO- taking out the numbers i need: My quasar is the 16th magnitude.
The star I am comparing it to has a magnitude of 0.
The 0 mag star gives out 1*10^9 photons/second (1 pixel)

Homework Equations



m2-m1=-2.5log(F2/F1)

The Attempt at a Solution



Im not sure if "flux" and "photons/second" are the same thing, BUT if they are, then:
m2-m1=-2.5log(F2/F1)
16-0=-2.5log(F2/1*10^9photons/second)
F2=3.98*10^2 photons/second.**Im not looking for the answer because I really want to figure this out, I just need to know if I am going in the right direction, thank you in advance ! (:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
StillLearningToronto said:

Homework Statement


You have decided to use a CCD camera to check if a 16th magnitude quasar is variable.
With your telescope/camera combination, you know that a star with a magnitude of 0 would deliver 1 × 109 photons/second to one pixel, so this allows you to work out the photons/second from the quasar delivered to one pixel.

SO- taking out the numbers i need: My quasar is the 16th magnitude.
The star I am comparing it to has a magnitude of 0.
The 0 mag star gives out 1*10^9 photons/second (1 pixel)

Homework Equations



m2-m1=-2.5log(F2/F1)

The Attempt at a Solution



Im not sure if "flux" and "photons/second" are the same thing, BUT if they are, then:
m2-m1=-2.5log(F2/F1)
16-0=-2.5log(F2/1*10^9photons/second)
F2=3.98*10^2 photons/second.**Im not looking for the answer because I really want to figure this out, I just need to know if I am going in the right direction, thank you in advance ! (:
You're approach looks good to me. :smile:

By the way, power "flux" here is power per unit area. And the area in question is the area of a single pixel. So in the end, you're really just comparing powers. Power is energy per unit time.

And another "by the way," this problem seems to have an inherent assumption that the photons from the reference star and the photons from the quasar have approximately equal energies, on average. Or to put it another way, it assumes that the color of the quasar is the same color as your magnitude 0 reference star, as seen from the telescope (including the effects of red-shifts -- most quasars are significantly red-shifted due to expanding space). This might be a perfectly good assumption depending on the star and quasar in question, but I thought I'd mention it.
 
Last edited:
collinsmark said:
You're approach looks good to me. :smile:

By the way, power "flux" here is power per unit area. And the area in question is the area of a single pixel. So in the end, you're really just comparing powers. Power is energy per unit time.

And another "by the way," this problem seems to have an inherent assumption that the photons from the reference star and the photons from the quazar have approximately equal energies, on average. Or to put it another way, it assumes that the color of the quasar is the same color as your magnitude 0 reference star, as seen from the telescope (including the effects of red-shifts -- most quasars are significantly red-shifted due to expanding space). This might be a perfectly good assumption depending on the star and quasar in question, but I thought I'd mention it.

Thank you so much ! Its a part of a bigger question I am working on, but i just wanted to make sure i was off to a good start (:
 
  • Like
Likes collinsmark
StillLearningToronto said:
Thank you so much ! Its a part of a bigger question I am working on, but i just wanted to make sure i was off to a good start (:
Yes, you are off to a good start. :smile:
 
By the way, earlier in Post #2 I said,

"power 'flux' here is power per unit area."​

But I meant to say power "flux density" is power per unit area. To get the "flux," you multiply the flux density by the given area. Other than that, what I said was OK.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Back
Top