Name a Star - Real or Ripoff?
Written by Tammy Plotner
One of my many hats is as the president of a public observatory, helping people discover the wonders of the night sky. On many occasions people have come into the observatory with a certificate and locater chart to help them find the star they named. Since the fourth century BC, mankind has been looking up at the heavens and assigning names to the stars. Nearly 2400 years later, we're still doing the same thing. Is the process recognized by the science community? Can you really name a star?
Master Shi Shen and Lord Gan were ancient Chinese astronomers/astrologers who began compiling their own star catalog roughly around the height of Greek civilization. Although the catalog was small, time would march on and others would begin their own process, such as Timocharis and Hipparchus. By the second century BC, Ptolemy had leaned heavily of the work of Hipparchus and "Almagest" - a catalog of 1022 stars - became a standard for over the next thousand years. But what they lacked… was a system.
In 1603, an astronomer named Johann Bayer published what would eventually become a standard known as the Uranometria. Using Greek letters and listing over 1200 stars, it quickly was seized upon by the science of astronomy and Bayer designations are still widely recognized to this day. Enter John Flamsteed, who also created a standard numerical stellar catalog which designated 2554 stars. Much like his predecessor, Flamsteed's numbers were widely adopted and incorporated where no Bayer designation existed for a particular star. The use of both Bayer and Flamsteed star names are the backbone of many charts and maps still used to this very day.
As time progressed, so did mankind's ability to see ever farther and deeper into space. Astronomical catalogs began to flourish and expand. The Henry Draper Catalog published between 1918 and 1924, lists more than 225,000 of the brightest stars, named using HD followed by a 6-digit number. The satellite driven Hipparcos catalog lists a little more than 118,000 stars and the Tycho catalogue lists a little more than 1,050,000 stars down to magnitude 7.3. The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Star Catalog (SAO) takes it down to ninth magnitude and the Astrographic Catalog to magnitude 13 and over 4.6 million stars.
What all this amounts to is a specific, data driven need for a specific listing of stars for specific purposes. Astronomical catalogs are usually the result of an astronomical survey of some kind, and frequently contain data from other catalogs as well. So where does it all end? Probably never. As we delve deeper into our Universe we uncover more than ever dreamed possible and all of those stars need a name. The same object can be given different designations in many different catalogs. It's only the biggest, brightest stars that have more agreed names.
As the president of a public observatory, I am often called upon by strangers who come to me with packets and questions. Contained within these packets is information of where someone has named a star for a loved one - a common practice and one that's often perceived as a rip-off by the scientific community. Oh, I've read some very scathing articles about this practice, and the bottom line is: Only the International Astronomical Union (IAU) has the right to officially name celestial objects for scientific purposes. (Coincidentally, the same group of people who also decided that Pluto should no longer be a planet.)
But what if you're not a scientist? Do these stars that you pay to name actually exist and can they be seen? The answer is yes. A reputable star naming service (choose carefully!) provides you with a certificate, a locater chart, and a set of coordinates. In the long run, these coordinates are far more important than any name or designation will ever be. The very fact that they do point to a specific star answers loudly the question as to whether or not it is legitimate. Even if it's an 11th magnitude point of light set in a field of hundreds of others, the fact exists that it is there.
When you buy a name for a star, you are paying for the entertainment you will receive for learning a little about the night sky. If the agency is misleading about what you're getting in any way, then you should rightly feel that you're being scammed. But if they're up front that the name isn't official, and is only kept in their own catalog, you can know what you're getting.
Will science ever recognize that star?
No.
If star Laurie Hoffman goes nova tomorrow, the IAU records will indicate that HD 178543, or a similar designation according to what catalog and epoch they choose to use, blew its top. Yet, the fact remains there is a record somewhere that lists the nova as star Laurie Hoffman. You are given a set of coordinates for your name a star and a star does exist at the point.
What's my take on name a star? I see absolutely no harm in it IF you are given a set of coordinates, a star chart that matches those coordinates, and a certificate that let's you know it's for real in someone's eyes. Sure. The chances of a novice ever finding a name a star on their own is slim. But at least they're looking. If they come to me with a set of numbers, I have the knowledge to give them a sky survey picture of their star and to show them personally in a telescope. They are aware that there will be no arrow in the eyepiece pointing to the star they have named, no sign post or engraved plaque. It will be one in a field of many, but it will be there.
Believe me, folks… This is not a bad thing. Anytime you can motivate someone into taking a deeper look at what's above them, you've accomplished something. If they can't find it on their own? It doesn't matter. It gave them an excuse to really take a look at the stars. If they have to list the aid of an observatory to locate their "name a star", then they've been exposed to the wonderful world of astronomy. Star Laurie Hoffman might not ever be important to the scientific community…
But it is to you and me.
Filed under: Astronomy, Astronomy For Kids
April 17th, 2008 at 11:14 am
I know this article is going to be generating Google ads offering places you can buy stars. Can you email me at info@universetoday.com, providing the URLs to the companies offering this so I can remove them from the system?
On a totally unrelated note, I was thinking that somebody should provide a free service to compete with the people who try to take your money for naming a star. Be upfront and honest about how the star designation really works, take no money, and use it as an opportunity to teach both skepticism and astronomy.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Presumably, if HD 178543 becomes a super nova, Laurie Hoffman would be given a full refund.
Seriously though, what really bothers me about these star naming services is that they try to make it seem oh so important and official. "Your star name will be recorded in book form!" Wow, a book.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
I have to - respectfully - disagree with the writer of this piece.
In theory, "star naming" is harmless, and yes, in some cases it might lead to some people following up their purchase and getting more seriously into astronomy, but these are the exceptions. I think the whole star naming scam - and it is a scam - is misleading at best, and dangerous and hurtful at its worst.
Why? Because I am sick of having to disappoint and upset people who come to me as star parties and astronomy meetings, asking me if I can help find the star they "named" after their deceased mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister, fiance, wife, husband, grandmother, grandfather or pet. These people "buy" stars in good faith, thinking, genuinely, that a way out of - or to at least ease - their grief is to buy a star for their dead loved one, thus immortalising them and preserving their memory. They are led to believe by the advertising blurb that "their star " will be on view in the sky for all to see… so they come up to me at a star party, ask me to point out the star they bought, or, if it's cloudy, point it out to them on a star chart or in an atlas. And I feel sick to my stomach when I have to tell them that the star they "bought" and "named" only bears that name in that company's star registry database, and that you need a telescope to see it. They, in turn, are always disappointed, often gutted, occasionally enraged. And instead of making them interested in astronomy, the whole experience makes them turn AWAY from astronomy, and anything to do with stars and planets and space, because they've been taken advantage of, and made to feel foolish.
So, no, I'm sorry, but I refuse to give any kind of support to this practice, and will do anything and everything I can to make sure the people I come into contact with - at my astronomical society's star parties, at the Outreach talks I give, and at other events - know not to touch these "Registers" with a 20ft pole.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Hmm. The IAU may be missing a big source of funding. Leasing/selling stars to corporations and zillionaires could generate a lot of revenue for research. Just imagine how much the lifetime rights to get a naked-eye star renamed, in the official IAU real star catalog, would go for…
April 17th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I've been a 2 time victim of this 'scam'. Both times I got broken up with shortly there-after. No, I obviously didn't learn my lesson the first time. I got a star named for a second girlfriend as an anniversary gift and well, she dumped me about a month later.
Screw you International Star Registry and your relationship ruining ways! Bastards.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
But Stu, won't you even show people the star that they think was named after a loved one? And use it as a valuable opportunity to teach the real science?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
"Only the International Astronomical Union (IAU) has the right to officially name celestial objects for scientific purposes. (Coincidentally, the same group of people who also decided that Pluto should no longer be a planet.)"
Why should only the IAU be authorized to name celestial bodies? Who provides such authorization? They messed up royally with Pluto. That decision is not accepted by many astronomers and lay people, and it cannot help but lead one to question why this group should be the defining authority for the whole world.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Fraser, that is a great idea.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Good job, Fraser. IMHO, you've got the right bead on this….
April 17th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Here we go Fraser a free name a star site, http://www.freenameastar.com/.
Guess someone else was thinking the same.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
"But Stu, won't you even show people the star that they think was named after a loved one? And use it as a valuable opportunity to teach the real science?"
Hmmm, let me think… "Look into this eyepiece… see that star? That's the one you paid £20 for but DON'T own and ISN'T named after your mother… cool huh?"
I don't think so. Wound… salt… you know?
No. I show them - if they have hung around - Saturn's rings shining like glowing hoops around the planet and tell them that they used to be a moon before it was shattered in a cataclysmic collision… I show them the lavendar and grey whirls and whorls of the Orion Nebula and tell them there are stars being born in there… I show them the breath-on-glass fog of M31 and tell them that they're looking at a haze of stars 2 million light years away… I show them the salt and pepper stars of M15 and tell them that if they lived on a world whipping around one of those suns their night sky would be ablaze with beacons of light… and I tell them to look up, at the sky above them, and tell them that each of the stars twinkling there is a sun, a distant sun, and that if there are aliens "out there" then our sun is just a star twinkling in their sky after their own sun has set.
I don't need to show them falsely-named stars to open their eyes and minds to ther wonders and beauty of astronomy, and neither does anyone else. IMO.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I have just named a star, yippee,
see details below
The Star's Registered Name:
The Great Googa Monga
Of The Lesser Stair Master 2000
Your Name: Steven O Driscoll
Your Dedication: Dedication to all the poor souls who have paid for star naming, may they never be remembered for there stupidness and bless those that took there money, I salute them in there cleverness.
Extras: None
SAO Star Number: 193194
Magnitude: 9.8
Coordinates:
RA: 1H 35m 21s Declination: -32° 36m 14s
New View Map at Google Sky.
View Sky Chart at Sky-Map.com
(Sky-Map.com uses a different catalog so there will be a very slight difference in the location of the star.)
or
View Fourmilab Switzerland Sky Chart
Star Type: G5
Hemisphere: Southern
HOUSE: Aries, the Ram
April 17th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
My wife once had a star named for me via one of those companies. I didn't have the heart to tell her that only the IAU can actually name stars, but it was a very kind thought on her part. They did provide a certificate, a star chart, and coordinates of the star. I believe they also gave the magnitude.
I have conflicting feelings on the matter:
On one hand, if it encourages people to look up, and learn more about astronomy, then in may well be worth it.
On the other hand, it is rather arrogant to think that humans can "name" a huge ball of hydrogen and helium light years away, one that was around far longer than humans were, and will likely outlive the one that named it.
Actually naming a star is pointless, as only the ones who agree on the naming conventions will have any understanding of the name, and what it means. For scientific purposes, a steller catalogue is useful.
Maybe I should set up a business that allows people to claim exoplanets. A client can buy the planet, and I could give them a deed. I would charge extra for features such as moons, rings, and breathable atmospheres. They would have to provide the means to get there, of course.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
I try not to be bitter and mean-spirited to folks who simply don't know that much about astronomy. I have never seen in their documents - anywhere - something that says they "own" the star. So, unless someone is reading somewhere between the lines, they don't feel like they own it. After all, I know more than one person named Tammy and a few named Fraser… We don't "own" our names, either.
By the way… Who decided they should be called stars anyhow?
I don't support star naming services, so please don't feel this article was to advocate them. What I do support is anything that piques interest in astronomy. I make a sincere effort when someone comes to me with one of these things not to belittle them, it's not right for me to make them feel like they've done something foolish when I don't feel they have. I'm not going to cut them up and tell them the star they named in honor of their deceased mother is nothing… because it is! But at the same time, I'm not going to blow sunshine in their ears if they want science, ok?
It's the gesture that counts. The thought behind it. Since the beginning of time mankind has immortalized the stars and it's a way of expressing the permanance of the Universe… the connection between mankind and space.
The certificate will fade, crumble and return to dust long before the star it represents burns away. But the one moment in time you said "I should name a star!" will last your lifetime. For all we know, some day these registries will even be recognized, eh?
In the mean time? Here's to The Great Googa Monga Of The Lesser Stair Master 2000… May the citizens of all the extoplanets which orbit your holiness all have such a delightful sense of humor!
April 17th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Funny, isn't it, that in a culture where we email each other millions of time about Mars being "…the size of the full moon…:" or "…planet X is inbound and will cause a catastrophic pole shift…" that we can't get it together to start an email campaign that tells people the truth about ISR and their copycats?
If people crawl throught the sewers in search of knowledge, perhaps that is where we need to put the libraries.
Last I heard, the ISR had grossed about $54 million from the gullible public. You could build a few hospitals in Bangladesh with that kind of money. Too bad it's going to build monster houses and swimming pools in Florida.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Una de mis muchas tareas como presidente de un observatorio público es ayudar a la gente a descubrir las maravillas del cielo nocturno. En muchas ocasiones la gente se acerca al observatorio con un certificado y una carta estelar para que los ayude a encontrar una estrella a la que le pusieron el nombre. [...] Fuente: Tammy Plotner para Universe Today.
April 17th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Laurel — right on! The IAU has become rather big for its britches — we need nomenclatural standards, yes, but to be *dictated* to by an elitist group who only seem to care about who they get to dominate gets real old, real fast.
April 18th, 2008 at 12:08 am
Well, a few years ago I bought an acre of land on the Moon for £18. What a bargain eh? I can look at my little plot of land through a telescope and imagine the time when I'll have my own little house and point my telescope at the earth to see what you're all up to. Oh and if anyone wants to come and visit me, let me know beforehand and I'll put the kettle on.
Joking aside, it did cost me £18, but I didn't think that was too bad for a harmless piece of fun (even if I am helping to line someone's pockets with gold!)
April 18th, 2008 at 12:39 am
A few years ago I was desperately looking for a job and found one an ad in our local paper. Then I found what they were doing and decided there were some things I wouldn't do for money. Selling land on the moon is right up there. See: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages/article.html?in_article_id=409923&in_page_id=8
April 18th, 2008 at 12:53 am
Two sides of the coin in my case - When I left my last-but-one job, my leaving present was a star named after me - a 9th magnitude one in Sextans - just about visible in early spring from my latitude with the aid of a small telescope. I was delighted with this thoughtful present..
The flip side is that in my job as curator of a public observatory I had grieving people coming along asking to see their deceased grandad's star - as often as not a 13th magnitude thingy somewhere near the south celestial pole and not visible at ANY time from our latitude - and needing a pretty decent telescope to see it even if it was in the sky.
The difference was in the expectation of the recipient - In my case, it was a bit of fun. In their case, they probably imagined they could step outside and point out some twinkly naked-eye star to their kids and tell them that's where grandad lives now. What a let down to be told they'd never be able to see it unless they spent a large sum of money travelling to the southern hemisphere and even then they'd need to find somebody with a big telescope with reliable pointing to catch a glimpse.
I wasn't taken advantage of - They were.
April 18th, 2008 at 1:17 am
Hey Tammy,
Please don't get me wrong, I thought your article was very sincere and thought-provoking. I was just expressing a personal opinion and philosophy. If some people can find a way of turning this - IMO - cruel practice into a good thing for astronomy, then great!
I'm just not one of those people.
BTW, when you said "I try not to be bitter and mean-spirited to folks who simply don't know that much about astronomy" I hope you don't think I do, either. I never ridicule or make the victims of star-naming scams feel bad; I go to great lengths to explain to them that although it was a wonderful, loving gesture, it wasn't what they were thinking, or indeed paid for. It's not as if I jump up and down, pointing at them and laughing "haha! suckers!!" in the middle of a busy star party when they tell me what's happened. They're victims of clever salespeople, that's all.
Think of it this way. If someone came up to you in the street and offered to sell you a brick in the Great Wall of China, or a rivet in the Golden Gate Bridge, or one of the eyes, nostrils or ears of one of the faces carved into Mount Rushmore, would you be tempted? No. You'd tell them to take a hike!
Would you be tempted to buy one of those things for a friend or relation or loved one, thinking they might then develop an interest in Oriental history, civil engineering or sculpting? No, of course you wouldn't. 
The star naming thing is no different. It's a rip-off, aimed at people with good hearts, often aching hearts, who don't know better, and are easy prey.
I personally think that if we need to use star-naming to get people interested in astronomy, then we, as astronomy enthusiasts and Outreach educators are not doing our jobs properly. With a sky full of amazing sights, and a universe full of amazing things… with robots roving on Mars, spaceprobes flying through geysers at Saturn and towards Pluto… we have more than enough REAL wonders to promote and share. Don't we?
April 18th, 2008 at 1:24 am
"Stu Says:
April 17th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
"But Stu, won't you even show people the star that they think was named after a loved one? And use it as a valuable opportunity to teach the real science?"
Hmmm, let me think… "Look into this eyepiece… see that star? That's the one you paid £20 for but DON'T own and ISN'T named after your mother… cool huh?"
I don't think so. Wound… salt… you know?"
Seriously? When you put it like that, no wonder people leave upset and angry. Yes, star naming companies are basically grifters. However, don't take your anger with them out on the people who have bought these names in good faith. What good comes of saying "Yeah, you got ripped off big-time fool. Your loved one is dead and they aren't gonna be remembered by a star name, that's for sure!!"?
Instead, how about some compassion? Maybe find out gently about the circumstances involved, and if they are obviously painful, how about keeping your trap shut? Hint: They don't really care about science or astronomy just because they want a look through your telescope at 'their' star, they just want it as some comfort in a time of pain. And how does that harm anyone, or science, in the long run?
I hate these star naming crooks as much as anybody, but you have to make the distinction between them and those who are lead along by them.
April 18th, 2008 at 2:15 am
Astrofiend,
I'm guessing you posted that before you read my post above yours, in which I state very clearly that I don't make the people feel bad. I let people down very gently, I can assure you. Anything else would be a horrible thing to do. Most people are very grateful that I've been honest with them, because it means they won't recommend the idea to others and have them waste their money too. So no, my "trap" doesn't open angrily, but I'm not going to lie to them through silence, because if I didn't say something then they could tell one of their friends about their "gift", and before you know it another pair of grieving parents has named a star after their dead baby, or the mother of a serviceman has named a star after their lost son. Sorry, can't do that. Won't do that.
As for compassion, I like to think I've plenty of that. Waaay back in 1986 I spent a long evening up at an old woman's house, helping her see Halley's Comet. Again. She saw it as a kid in 1910 and her father, who she clearly hadn't got on with, had made a big thing of telling her she would never see it again. To be able to prove him wrong absolutely delighted her!
:-)
April 18th, 2008 at 2:25 am
… and BTW, when I said
"Hmmm, let me think… "Look into this eyepiece… see that star? That's the one you paid £20 for but DON'T own and ISN'T named after your mother… cool huh?"
I don't think so. Wound… salt… you know?"
"
… I was meaning that's exactly what I wouldn't say.
April 18th, 2008 at 4:14 am
Thanks for the tip O Driscoll
I've just named one myself!
Nuno G
April 18th, 2008 at 5:44 am
How about naming grains of sand? If Sagan was correct then the grain of sand is star bones.:):)
So for a modest donation, one could send a chart locating your grain of sand, for an additional amount we could locate the beach and if you act now! We will throw in the ocean and island the beach is located on. Remember this is a limited time offer.:):):)
April 18th, 2008 at 6:56 am
I don't need to name a star or "own" one. When I go out to my favorite spot to observe the night sky, I look up and feel a deep sense of satisfaction.
They're ALL mine. Every last one of them.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Stu? No offence taken, friend. By now, you've probably guessed that if you're out there promoting astronomy that I'd fight to the death for you. It's very easy to write a comment and have the spirit of it mis-read by the influence of what you're feeling at the moment or the comments around it.
(Eric Near Buffalo? Ah, ah, ah… Granny Tammy is waving her finger your way and asking to please play nice! What a shame these girls didn't appreciate someone so thoughtful as to point them towards the stars… May they be deemed the life of ignorance they chose when they left you!)
Don't be angry and mean-hearted towards those who have profited from "Naming A Star". I can assure you after having looked at these packets that they (the reputable ones) didn't just mass produce a bunch of crap. These are lovely, well-printed certificates, accurate locator maps, impeccible coordinates and genuinely registered on their "unscientific" star catalogs. My guess is half (or more) of what you pay goes towards the expense of creating this packet, maintaining the data base, and shipping. That's not even counting the person that makes sure it's really a star.
Do some of these stars exist in the southern hemisphere? Yep. Are some of the exceedingly faint? Yep. A little good investigation revealed that to a point you are allowed a certain amount of control over where (meaning what part of the sky) that you chose to name a star. (If there is gullability involved, it would be the person who didn't think to choose a constellation which can be seen from where they live!) I have also counciled (counseled?)… ok…. helped…. folks choose an area - and again, it was a good thing because it got them to thinking that the stars just aren't the same everywhere for every time.
I honestly understand where Stu is coming from and I do not advocate the "Name A Star" process - unless it pleases you. If you want to work out a lucrative enterprise? Try photographing the named star and including it…
In the meantime, remember this gist of this article was to point out that many star catalogs - or registries - have existed over time. Just like having my name put on a CD that's left on Mars may never be read… so these offspring catalogs may never be recognized.
But I gotta' really cool piece of paper that says it's there!
April 18th, 2008 at 7:24 am
Thanks Tammy, I think it's great your piece has prompted such a passionate debate! It shows how much we all care about the stars. Having said that I still can't, in any way, find it in me to say a single good word about the star naming thing, it just has WRONG written all over it in bright red pen, underlined a dozen times and highlighted in flourescent yellow. But if other people can find a way to incorporate it into their own Outreach efforts, then that's up to them.
Anyway, I've said enough, so I'm letting this go now. I've put a more detailed response to this issue up on my own blog, if anyone wants a read.
You have a great website by the way
April 18th, 2008 at 7:49 am
Why isn't the IAU using their monopoly on the right to name stars? This would be like the Internet and ICANN.
I own several points in Internet space as does Mr. Cain and everybody else around here. It's a lucrative business and ICANN significantly _undervalues_ their monopoly rights.
IAU could auction leases for visible stars. When Taco Bell spends money to put a giant foam target in the ocean for satellites to hit with the promise of free tacos if it hits, why wouldn't they get the Taco Bell Nebula?
It's not like laser advertisements on clouds or the moon… such advertisement will inspire me and others to stock up on ammunition and explosives. This, however, is harmless.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:02 am
I have had many people ask me to show them their star at the public observatory I work at.. I have no problem with that. Unfortunate most are 13 magnitude stars.
What I have never found is any one of these companies supporting the astronomical community.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:46 am
This NOT HARMLESS.
It instills the idea even more that ANY and EVERYTHING IS FOR SALE FOR AND BY HUMANS.
I am sick and tired of humans thinking we
can BUY and OWN EVERYTHING !!!!
April 18th, 2008 at 11:06 am
I have my own naming system, and named all the stars in the sky after myself. So, tonight after the Zeb goes down, make sure to go out and enjoy the zebs and all the little zebs that go around them.
April 18th, 2008 at 11:22 am
I can imagine God laughing at the futility of naming or buying stars.
He might say "Guess what, none of you own these stars, I do, and that includes the Sun, muhahaha! "
* The preceding post was intended for entertainment purposes only, and is not recognized by any astronomical society, any religious organization, or any political affiliates. The author of the post in no way intends to offend believers of any faith, agnostics, atheists, nor does the author promote any religious or philosophical ideals. This post was made in jest, and shall not be used for monetary gain without the permission of its author, and/or the owner of the site. This post was typed in a facility that contains peanuts, and may contain partially hydrogenate vegetable oils.
April 18th, 2008 at 11:31 am
If a star went nova 50,000 years ago, but the light from that event won't reach the Earth for 4.6 million years, then have you really named a star? You now own a white dwarf!
April 18th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Tammy, you are more right than you know. One thing I forgot to mention in another comment I made here is that the reason a lot of us Yankees, i.e., Americans, are not happy with the IAU's rather cavelier dismissal of Pluto as a "dwarf planet" is the fiction of Howard Phillips Lovecraft and his colleagues in the Lovecraft Circle of the first few decades of the 20th century. They predicted a possible 9th planet before the discovery of Pluto, naming it "Yuggoth," and also cited various stars and cosmological phenomena as the dwelling-places of monsters in their fiction. Like Yuggoth, these abodes of Mythos beings have names you'll never find in the IAU's catalogs or, for that matter, earlier ones compiled by Arabs, Chinese, Chaledean, European, or other pre-IAU astronomers. But, like Yuggoth, in their fiction, most of the time, they give enough informaton to pin down the likely location of the stars, etc. where their monsters dwell — and fans have a merrie time working out the remaining astronomical and cosmological details. Lovecraft himself was a ferociously intelligent man who, though self-educated, was once described by colleagues and fans as, "In a time when only 12 men understood Einstein's Special and General theories of relativity, H. P. Lovecraft was one of those 12 men." He was also an excellent chemist, and a man of enormous scholastic erudition. (He had his personal quirks, some of them repellent, such as the racism peculiar to his time and class, so I'm not saying he was perfect –just intellectually and artistically brilliant.) The point is: many of his fans, inspired by his fiction and that of his colleagues, went on to pursue careers in the sciences, and that will continue as long as there are people to become mesmerized by his fiction. When Pluto was discovered in 1930, from then on that planet became "a.k.a. Yuggoth" in the mind of fans, who learned all they could about it — and then, in many cases, also contributed a little something to the Lovecraftian canons as well as pursuing careers in the sciences. Those fans are furious at the displacement of the results of the hard work of Clyde Tombaugh — an American — and the historical and literary focus on their favorite fictional universe by the IAU. There is also the issue of rewriting all those textbooks should Pluto's status as a "dwarf planet" stand, and wonder if the IAU is getting huge kickbacks from textbook publishers who are gleefully contemplating the huge profits they'll get from all those new issues of older textbooks, whose purchase will gouge libraries, school systems, and university students for a long time to come. So yes, you have a point — and more than a point. In spite of the IAU's efforts to pooh-pooh the concerns of many of us about the demotion of Pluto to "dwarf planet" status — and also because of it — a lot of us out here are not only angry about their high-handed treatment of Pluto and other "dwarf" bodies, but that anger is increasing, for all the reasons cited above.
April 18th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Very nice article Cain, I have liked it very much. My sons gave me a certificate for my birthday some time ago. Of course I know that would not have had any meaning for the scientific community, but it has a lot for me and for my sons. It is more or less as when we bring flowers to a loved dead friend or relative, it is for us and for the memories we have, it is an act of love from one persone to another and that is extremely important for who is involved. My best compliments for your site. Ciao
April 18th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Jo Anne C. Mazurek:
The IAU should sell the stars, period. They have the monopoly. They live on planet earth. They are harming astronomy by NOT enforcing their monopoly on naming stars through either direct auctions or sanctioning existing star sale companies to control quality and raise money.
You want to promote astronomy? That costs money. Fraser and others are examples of people that promote science out of pocket.
What if it doesn't have to be that way? What if the IAU can have a marketing department and issue grants to people like Fraser? How do you propose to do that?
Everything is for sale and the only people NOT selling what they can are not "good guys", they are fools.
This is a clear cut issue. The IAU has a monopoly on naming stars. The IAU will dramatically improve the state of astronomy with a little bit of money. Sell the frakking stars.
Donations aren't going to convince people to look up at the sky.
April 18th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
The biggest problem I have with the “Name a Star” business is that it takes advantage of innocent people who know little or nothing about astronomy! Individuals who use “Name a Star’ businesses are almost always beginners to astronomy and don’t understand that only the International Astronomical Union (IAU) has authority to name a star or astronomical object. In my thinking this makes the “Name a Star” business nothing more than a scam. The business is disrespectful to the IAU and the professional astronomical community in general. The business is degrading to amateur astronomers because people are often given a very sour first impression of the hobby when they learn that their star is not actually named after them. Yes, It’s true the fine print on the documentation published by “Name a Star” companies may be generally truthful. But, most people don’t take the time to read all the fine print and they are ultimately misled to believe a star has actually been named after them or someone for whom they purchased it as a gift! When they learn the truth of course they are upset.
April 18th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Is there really a star (unofficially) named Laurie Hoffman? If so, where is it? Or is it just a name pulled out of a hat? Because, that's my wife's maiden name! It would save me having to buy her one, which now I cannot do anyway, since there is already a star with that name…
April 18th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
These companies are exploiting people for money, what corporatrion can you think of that won't do the same if it had the chance? Caveat Empor always applies. But there is a bit of logic and an important point in all of this. I do think that an international agency should be created with the purpose of naming stars. The star catalogs are nice and serve their scientisic purposes but are completely devoid of charm, creativity, identity and character. If mankind ever does survive long enough to colonize the galaxy, do you really think these scientific names will be used to describe peoples' home star system? If people were allowed to bid on buying stars then the proceeds could be used to fund international space exploration efforts. If this ever were to happen, then I would avoid picking stars near the supermassive black hole (Sag A) and try to pick a young red dwarf with high metallicity to get the highest chance of longevity and bearing planets where humans might actually live.
April 19th, 2008 at 4:50 am
One comment and one question:
Love the post above raising the question of whether or not one would "own" a star that had long since "died" … only the light it emitted millions of years before shucking off its mortal coil (or the celestial equivalent thereof) is still just reaching our shores now ….
And at the risk of exposing lack of astronomical sophistication … are the coordinates Man assigns to a given star eternal? If Laurie Hoffman's descendants 5000 times removed were to head to "her" star for a weekend getaway, will it be where it was way back in the mists of 21st century time?
April 19th, 2008 at 6:29 am
"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment or naming starts as a way to explain their frustrations."
April 19th, 2008 at 10:36 am
April 19th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Devout astronomer, most humbly wise,
For lessons brighter than the stars can give,
And inward light that helps us all to live.
The world has brought the laurel-leaves to crown
The star-discoverer's name with high renown;
Accept the flower of love we lay with these
For influence sweeter than the Pleiades!"
–Henry Van Dyke
April 19th, 2008 at 11:31 am
We really don't know if the Orion Constellation wasn't purchased by the Orion Bread Company of Rome from the Imperial Roman Astronomical Society of ancient times.
I wouldn't put it past the Romans to annoy the Egyptians this way and make money doing it.
April 21st, 2008 at 6:01 am
While "entertainment" may be too small a term to adequately encompass all the feelings associated with the transaction, It's a useful way to think about it.
We pay money — sometimes a lot of money — for pleasures and gestures that are ephemeral. That fine meal at the restaurant tonight will leave you tomorrow, and you'll flush it without regret or irony. The bouquet of flowers will wilt and be unceremoniously dumped. You could have seen the game better on television than from the upper reaches of a vast stadium. You pay money to see the stage magicians, knowing that they are not only taking money from you to lie to you, but will be doing their best to make you lie to yourself. The street's been called Avenue of the Americas since before I was born, but New Yorkers haven't called it anything but Sixth Avenue, no matter what its formal catalogue name is.
The main transaction here occurs long before the financial one. It's about love, or even just a moment's entertainment, but above all it's about connectedness. You can't really buy that connection. The buying of the token may fix that moment in time (like saying "this is where the star was located at that moment"), but the real value is in the memory. The chart and certificate are just a symbol of that love.
Antoine de Saint Exupéry said it well in The Little Prince: "Here is my secret. It is very simple: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
There will be star parties, observatories, and the quiet walking in the snow when just the two of you are looking at Orion's Belt , that random collection of visible stars that we order into meaningful story and memory and connectedness.
It's not a matter of having to choose between cold hard science, and human connections. We can hold them both at the same time, embrace paradox if we need to, honoring both the love we have for the brilliant far-away lights in the sky, and our love for those who are near, or those who are now just as unattainably far from our touch as the furthest stars..
Ironically, Stuart's angry response brought forth a banner ad on the website that said "This Mother's Day, Give Mom a Tiger!" Well-meaning non-profits are just as busy as star registrars trying to persuade you that the dollars you give will magically turn into a meal for a starving child rather than a ream of paper for the office copier.
Yael, thanks for your posting of the Lovecraft perspective.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:33 am
Humans dont think they can own stars! Do they??? Well not this human. My Mum is terminally ill, naming a star has given her pleasure not to mention something we can tell our children to look for Nana's star and encourage them to learn. I think they are a gesture more than an ownership.