STAR COLOURS : 1
“The form is the body of the colour, ’
The colour is the soul of the form.”
Sigfrid A. Forsius (1611)
I N T R O D U C T I O N
The general problems in observing star colours is an interesting
subject, whose true source and origin dates back to Europe in the
19th Century. Much has been written about the subject of star
colours, and very likely, much more will appear in the future.
Beginning in the early 1800s, the various conventional observations
with their accepted scientific theories about the nature of star
colours were popularly adopted by many visial observers, which
continued with great interest and real furore into the early 20th
Century. Without having the important advantages of modern
astronomical spectroscopy, little was really known about the
evolution of stars and their intrinsic luminosities, nor even knowing
the critical relationships between luminosity, stellar surface
temperatures and all the observed stellar colours. There were also no
broad-based knowledge of the true nature of radiation nor of the
source of the power that makes the all stars shine so brightly.
Yet by using some very careful and astute observations, some good
everyday information was soon to be obtained. They soon learnt about
general star colours by visual means, but were quickly found to be
greatly wanting by the simple failure of human eye to function
sufficiently well to see agreeable star colours in the nighttime.
Compared to the modern telescopes of today, most of the optics were
of poor to very poor optical quality, along with sometimes difficult
to use telescope designs. This was made more apparent with the need
for larger relecting telescopes, whose basic available technology did
included inadequately reflective surfaces from their metal speculum
mirrors or significant light loss through optical glass in their
often more crudely made optics or unsophisticated narrow-field
uncoated eyepieces. These real observational restrictions all
combined to make the observations of star colours as very
subjective, error-prone and often quite flawed. In the end,
from even their best adopted experimentation and observational
methods, they repeatably failed to reach any consensus or
repeatability in their visual obsrvations. Until they had more of an
objective means of producing more empirical based evidence,
their aspirations to understand the nature of stars from visual star
colours remained simply unobtainable. The final death knell of
naked-eye estimations of star colours was the discovery of
astronomical spectroscopy, being soon followed by using colour filter
photometry, and then finding the basic scientific explanation of the
electromagnetic nature of light and in how our eyes so see
colours.
Today, much of this early work can now be discarded as either
irrelevant or unimportant knowledge without much use in postively
contributing to observational astronomy or astrophysics. Sadly even
today, there still continues to be many poor and inaccurate views
about star colours. Some of these antiquated notions and ideas have
now continue to persisted beyond a whole century.
Another dreadful adopted aspects has been using far too many
grandiose colours having literally many thousands of different colour
names, technically known as colour descriptors. One has only
to look in the local paint shop and look at their colour charts to
see the range of possibilities for their names. If the truth be
known, you can incease the subtleties by mixing two or more coloured
paints in different proportions to make new colours, and that does
not include adding black or white paint to make the paint darker and
lighter. In the everyday world, colour is a vibrant and varied
phenomena. Each day we see uncountable differences in colour, that we
have learnt to take it all for granted — just a normal everyday
experience of life. No one seriously could be bothered to name them
all. Worst still, my eyes likely don’t
see exactly the same viewed colour as you or even another person. It
is like a personal experience. Hence, my own colour descriptor may
not exactly match yours. Like children, we combat this simple problem
by describe in everyday life basic colour names like red, blue,
yellow, green, orange, etc. If I see something that is blue, for
example, you quickly know what my word means even though it might be
different between you and me. Were the colour important, then I might
use other associated words like pale, strong, light, dull, bright,
etc., therefore extending the range to perhaps several hundred colour
mname variations. Change the background lighting on any painted
coloured room, say from light sources that daylight, incandescent,
halogen or fluorescent, and the percieved colour is significantly
again different.*
* Note: You can test this yourself using the paint
manufacturer, Dulux using their Java software program called
My Colour
4 and just follow the prompts. Here you can download a
example image or one of your own.
Colours may also have an effect on you mood, where reds and
oranges are often heart warming, yellows are perceived as more happy
and cheerful, while greens and blues can make you peaceful,
cool or even calming. Dark colours often are more sombre in mood,
while bright colours can be cheerful and pleasant. Contrasting
colours can give a dramatic effect changing the sense of a space, or
highlighting a internal or external feature. Changing the background
illuminating light source may make these effects even more
dramatic.
If colours are so greatly experienced in all its
diversity, then why can’t we simply
apply these same rules to stars?
Well yes you could, but it would not be very practical. The
problem is simple to realise, as if you go outside in the dark at
night, nearly all colour disappears. We see the wide gambit of
millions of colours in the bright day, but at night we mostly only
see black, greys and white. The cause is logically something to do
with the sensitivity of our eyes under hugely varied illuminations.
Our conclusion reaches to the idea that colours are not as obvious in
our surrounds or the many faint nighttime sky. To argue otherwise is
simply against commonsense. As an open question;
How real is perceived star colour at night?
Do our eyes see colour in precise exactitude,
or is it just some kind of grand illusion?
This broad-based article attempts to answer this question, and
lets you make your own general conclusions.
Star Colour Reportage at Night
It still remains a little hard to comprehend how such commonly
expressed border-line or subjective colours can exist in stars. Ones
like gold, crimson, lilac, indigo, grey or ashy can not be readily or
usefully employed to describe star colours for most practical visual
observers.
Some, perhaps, do often just innocently exaggerate the colours
that they see. Probably they are only wanting to present these more
exotic colours to make them seem either more original or accepted
within the amateur astronomical community. Few may be nonetheless
viewed as faux pas. Yet many do still continue to appear in
articles throughout the popular magazines or in the observational
astronomical press.
In my own humble opinion, several of them can only be described as
new-age charlatans. Several wilfully claim in having either
some kind of personal superior colour vision or special knowledge
based on the quite whimsical notion of the observer being the better
sex or having the better colour perception. I have even seen
published star colours seriously presented as apricot, peach, amber,
silver-white, lemon-brown, beige, khaki, or even turquoise! These
were even mixed with so-called reflectance terms, like
gloss, translucency or in illogical words like
shadowy — whose the latter meaning is very uncertain
here.
Why describe such insubstantial or unreal colours?
All usefully observed star colours are far more straight
forward!
In the end, such meaningless descriptions are just pure and utter
nonsense because they are pseudo-visual colours, which
verbally have quite arbitrary meanings — useless meanings that
convey nothing at all to another person and are only useful to the
individual that gave them! Worst with these kinds of observers is
that the colours they are describing are physiologically
impossible to see at night.
My reasoning of those persons stating these views is that they are
presenting descriptive colours of so-called highly rich and
saturated colours — something we will discuss and very
much argue against in depth in this article. Furthermore, these
importantly are also odd palette-like mixtures with the additional
tones of black, greys or white — something that is not seen in
the continuous spectra being observed with stars.
I really do think these types of amateur
charlatan observers must be immediately discredited, if only
for the reason that they give a very poor representation of the many
good, sensible and dedicated amateur astronomers throughout the
world.
Perhaps, as some earlier readers of this text have also said, I am
perhaps being a bit too critical of the situation. My sole aim and
open wish here to highlight that using more specific or simpler
colours schemes are far more sensible than in trying to match
precisely what subtle shade of colouration one particular star or
double star system appears to be.
Difficulties in Seeing Star Colours at Night
With star colours, much of the biological and chemical mechanism
regarding colour vision unfortunately does not work very well at low
illuminations. This is a major limitation for visual observers to
overcome. These serious flaws really lie with the specialised cells
known as cones located along the retina of the eye, being the
main sensor that gains nearly all of the light needed for
interpreting colour. It seems the human eye for all its true
biological wonder was just never designed for good night vision. This
is bad news for the amateur astronomer who is trying to perceive
fainter objects and to see colour or spectral-based phenomena. Worst,
there is no doubt that the age of the observer is likely another
contributing cause for the eventual loss of the ability to interpret
the spectral range. More unfortunate is that the younger the
individual, the less able they can describe the visual colours they
see just through lack of experience! Yet the real experts in recent
times about eye colour perception have been made by several French
visual observers, with several interesting papers in the last twenty
to thirty years or so. For example, I have presented in Southern
Astronomical Delights the translated version by Paul Biaze’s “Les Couleurs des
Étoiles” or [The
Colours of Double Stars] written in the late-1950s which is quite
analytical and very innovative. A further excellent summary of this
subject about star colour appears in David Malin’s Colours of the Galaxies
(1996), which is recommended reading for all amateur observers.
Overall, the study of colour perception for stars is still
incomplete. This general article is about the cause of colours that
we see in telescopes and why they are so hard to observe. It was also
written to counteract the seeming avalanche of several new double
star observers who have been claiming that they have some superior
vision or better colour perception.
Please, if you are one of those observers that
believe what I am saying here is completely wrong, then I do suggest
you reading the next four paragraphs very carefully before
reading the rest of the text before you condemning me for
evermore.
NATURE of EYESIGHT and COLOUR VISION
At the telescope, any observed colour is more often
than not, fairly poor. This physiological problem is indisputable, as
the weakness of the sensitivity of our human eyes at night or in
darkness is primarily the cause the loss of colour vision. The very
important mechanism of our vision lies with the so-called specialised
cells structures known as rods and cones that are
physically attached across the surface of the human retina at
the back of the eyeball socket. Each eye contains on average 137
million light-sensitive cells having the mean density of 650 per
square millimetre. These are approximately in the ratio as 617 black
and white rods with only of these 33 (5½%) being the colour
cones. About 7 million of the total are cone cells, whose average
density are divided into thirds — equally being divided as
either red, blue or green-sensitive.
Rods are designed to measure the
intensity of light in the eye (greyness) and respond very little to
colour. As light intensities vary so much, ranging from full sunlight
to the near pitch-blackness of night, the need for such a mechanism
is obvious. It also affords the detection of contrast. An analogy of
this is similar to the controls of black and white televisions. The
“rods”
will work regardless of the intensity of light.
Cones are the colour receptors, and as
their names suggest, are in the shape of a cone whose diameters
reduce almost to points. For this reason they are poor light
receptors, but with enough illumination, the wavelengths coming into
to eye can be separated in to their component colours. The signals
are then sent along the optic nerve of the brain and interpreted as
colour. The details on how our eyes do this is probably unnecessary
to describe for the general reader. Needless to say, the
understanding of the cause is chemically very complex, relying on
many reactions and processes.
There is no known difference in the number of
rods or cones between human males and females.
During the night, visual observers find most of the star and
deep-sky colours are just lost to our eyes. The simple reason is that
cones have known thresholds for colour sensitivity, and below
particular light energies (flux) they almost all completely cease to
function. Consequently, when we look at our general surrounds during
the night, we see only a slight range of “greyness.”
Looking through any telescope, we are immediately exposed to the wide
field illumination of the field stars and the astronomical object(s)
in question. Most stars just appear white in colour, but in some
circumstances, like the very blue or very red stars, we do begin to
see some distinct colour. Also the fainter the star or object the
less colour we see are able to discern. Hence, colour is also
magnitude dependant. (Further discussed in Star Colours : 2)
Star colours that we see are quite different from what
we mostly see during our everyday living because at night we perceive
very few hues. This is due to the colour component known as
saturation that can be described as the degree of
whiteness in any perceived colour. Importantly, saturation is
fairly weak in all stars. For many astronomical objects these will
produce only pale or washed-out colours and never intense ones. The
only true exception is probably the deep-red carbon stars which also
visually appear to have a little blue or yellow light contributing to
their general spectra and appearance. Such stars, however, are very
unusual and rare.
Seeing star colours at night is unusual because
we can see no more than about 10% Saturation.
Experience finds that the more intense colours at night
simply cannot be observed. The degree of saturation also
only slightly varies between different individuals, and
gets generally worst with age. Importantly it is also
visually dependant on the background colour it is seen against.
Figure 1a. Variation of Colour Saturation
The colour able here shows the colours red, orange,
yellow, light blue and deep blue. Colour saturations above 10% are
very rarely ever seen in stars or bright nebulae. 0% colour
saturation is the pure white. All 100% saturation colours are often
termed as pure colours.
Figure 1b. Variation of Star Colour Saturation
This shows an alternative view of colour saturation.
The horizontal axis shows the variation in star colour from
blue, through yellow and orange, ending in red. The vertical
axis gives the percentage (%) colour saturations. As previously
stated in the text, colour saturations at night are very rarely above
c.10% seen in stars or nebulae. This is designated by the “ > < ”
placed in the above graphic.
Important Note: How this figure appears
to you will vary significantly depending on the quality of your
monitor and its calibration. It should NOT be used when
compared to visual observations, as it is solely aimed just to
highlight the importance saturation in stars at night.)
Figure 2. Effects of the Background on Visual Perceived
Colour
The following figure shows the effect on 20%
saturated colours seen against either black or white backgrounds.
Each colour against each its altenative background are identical, but
visually our eyes see that those against the lighter background make
the inside circle colour seem to be slightly darker. This is caused
by the colour contrast as seen by the eye and is comparable to
looking at the stars. For example, seeing stars during the hours of
darkness when compared to seeing them against the background of
either twilight or daylight times. Similarly, pairs with quite
different surface temperatures finds similar visual effects, which
enhances the visual colour differences. Amateur observers should also
note that as the magnification is increased by using different
eyepieces that background field is seen as slightly darker and this
has an effect of changing the observed colour slightly.
Any real need for estimating the observed colour in
telescopes is likely not very important for most visual observers.
However this is not absolutely true for those engaged in writing
astronomical descriptions or in promoting astronomy. Such colour
reports are both interesting and important to advise, whose knowledge
may guide other deep-sky observers and amateurs astronomers to some
more attractive targets when observing.
How Much Reality is There In
Seeing Star Colours at Night?
Based on the scientific optical experiments by the visual
physiologist Denis Baylor in 1978, it is possible to conclusively
dismissed the often misconceived notions of colour discrimination
when observing through the telescope. (See References) These original detailed
experiments were conducted at the Department of Neurobiology at
Stanford University whose main aims were specifically to measured the
eye’s main photon response in darkness.
Baylor attached the photoelectric photometer to individual rod and
cone cells in human retinas, and then measured photoelectrically the
response of the photons of various monochromatic colours. After
analysing the results, his main conclusion found that at very low
illumination, all the cone cells switch off, and nearly ceasing their
entire electrical function. So it is for this reason that the loss of
colour vision at night was instantly explained and was for the first
time quantitatively determined. Baylor further says about his general
results;
“This state of
affairs makes it impossible for one cell, either a rod or cone, to
signal separately wavelength and intensity. Consider a single rod
upon which falls 100 photons of 550nm. wavelength. These photons will
be absorbed with the probability of say 10%, so that a total of ten
absorptions will occur. Ten absorptions would also occur if 1000
photons were incident at 600nm. A particular wavelength therefore has
the mean probability of absorption of only 10%. Since the cell
reports only the number of photons absorbed, the signals generated by
the two coloured lights are identical, even though their wavelengths
are different. Hence no colour (wavelength) information is available.
This explains why in starlight, where only the rods contribute to
vision, we have no colour sensation.”
From this we can only conclude that as the rods receive the dim
light, then our brains then try to interpret the actual colours it
thinks it is seeing. Furthermore, as the star colours are never
saturated, so what we generally see is only slight variations in
hues. Hence, a narrow range of greys and only very bright saturated
colours will be perceived as dull slightly coloured greys.
You can attempt such an experiment yourself. Look at a number of
highly coloured book covers in the home under normal light
illumination in the home. Turn off the lights, letting you eyes adapt
for a moment, then look at the same coloured objects. If possible,
turn on a more distant indirect light, and again observe the colours
you see. In the end, you can see the reds, yellows and blues, but it
becomes much harder to distinguish intermediate colours as readily
under normally bright illumination.
STAR COLOUR SCHEMES
One of the first crude scientific star colour schemes was made by
the variable star astronomer and editor of the Astronomical
Journal, Seth C. Chandler (1846-1913) in 1901 (Chandler
Scale — CI) using only seven basic colours to divide
stars into simple colour groups.
However, this idea was soon openly criticised, because it was so
limited and unnecessary. Even the southern visual double star
observer R.T.A. Innes (1861-1933) was one of the greatest
critics of Chandler, stating that he placed little credence in
knowing star colours as they could be equally obtained
photographically using two colour sensitive films or by
instrumentally by filter photometry. I could not find any related
information in whether John Hagen did accessed the work of Chandler
or Innes, but personally I do see much usefulness with the Chandler
Scheme for most visual observers — mainly because it can easily
distinguish these colours through the telescope. I’d also assume this would be exactly the same
for the majority of people!
Innes seems to have reflected on this in his “Southern Reference Catalogue of Double
Stars” (1899), but initially mostly
ignored the colours of double stars. Those that he did mention colour
were mainly the brightest pairs having clearly significant colour
contrasts. However, he seems to have changed his mind between 1901
and 1903. In the updated and additional pairs of this catalogue in
1903 (“Micrometrical measurements of
Double Stars 1849-1868 and 1899-1903”; Annals of the Royal Observatory,
Cape of Good Hope Vol. II. Part IV.), Innes adopted a colour
abbreviation system usefully describing double stars. This, I think,
seems to have eventually became adopted into others like the Hagen
Colour System. (See Below.) To reflect these changes, I have quoted
his exact words, which Innes says in the “Preface” on star colours on pages. ix.-x.;
“…the fifth column
gives the colours observed, wherein 0 will signify a white star, 10
an intense red star, and the intermediate numbers various
stages from white to red, as follows :—
| 0 White |
| |
6 Orange Red |
| 1 Yellowish |
| |
7 Reddish |
| 2 Yellow |
| |
8 Red |
| 3 Deep Yellow |
| |
9 Very Red |
| 4 Orange Yellow |
| |
10 Deepest Red |
| 5 Orange |
| |
|
further |
|
|
|
|
|
| b |
signified |
Bluish |
| B |
′ |
blue. |
| p or pur. |
′ |
purplish. |
| y |
′ |
yellowish |
| Y |
′ |
yellow |
It seems useless togo for further
subdivisions or for fancy names of colour which can only
convey distinct meanings to their actual author.
The close approach of Mars and
γ Virginis, as
seen with the naked eye in March 1903, affords a
comparison. Mars would be 4 or 5 in the above scale,
γ Virginis was decidedly
bluish (b); this was due to contrast, as
γ Virginis is a yellowish
star.
Although the data as to colours are very
incomplete (a) because if the companion is very faint it is
impossible to estimate its colour, (b) because of a
remarkable contrast in colour is unlikely to miss being
recorded, the following rough analysis of the observations
of colours of double stars is of some interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Proportion
per cent. |
Range of
Difference in
Magnitude. |
Difference of
Magnitude |
| Both stars white to yellowish, but of the
same tint |
29 |
0.4 |
0.0 to 1.7 |
| Both stars of the same tint but decidedly
yellow |
19 |
0.4 |
0.0 to 1.6 |
| or |
|
|
| Both stars of the same tint |
48 |
0.4 |
0.0 to 1.7 |
Chief star yellow or yellowish, but the
companion
decidedly a deep yellow |
4 |
2.5 |
1.7 to 4.1 |
| Chief star yellowish, companion
bluish, |
16 |
2.4 |
1.0 to 4.02 |
| Chief star full yellow, companion
bluish |
23 |
2.2 |
0.9 to 4.0 |
| Chief star yellow or yellowish, companion
blue, |
8 |
2.9 |
0.7 to 5.7 |
| Chief star bluish, companion yellow or
yellowish, |
1 |
1.0 |
0.2 to 1.7 |
|
____ 100 |
|
|
The general close accordance of the colour estimates
given in the catalogue shows that such observations are not without
value.”
During 1924 this was soon superseded, when Rev. John G.
Hagen (1847-1930) produced his new more logical
colour scale. Hagen had specialised in eclipsing binaries,
and also produced the famous Star Atlas called Atlas
Stellarum Variabilium between 1899 and 1908. In time
his name became synonymous with his colour scale that
proved to be the more useful version of the previous
and poorly adopted Chandler Index, simply known as the
Hagen Colour Index (HCI), the scheme just labelled
all star colours; ranging between the values of -3
for Blue and +10 for Red with neutral
White corresponding to the B-V value of 0.0. This
particular colour scheme has remained the popular
nomenclature now often adopted by amateurs who do variable
star observations or make micrometrical measurements of
pairs.
Colours in this scheme were; Blue, Bluish, White,
Yellowish, Yellow, Orange and Red. Hagen simply
just adds additional colour values for these seven basic
colour elements.
The HAGAN COLOUR INDEX (HCI)
No.
| Colour (English) |
Colour (French) |
| -3 | Pure Blue |
Bleu pur (Bleu) |
| -2 | Pale Blue (Bluish) |
Bleu-clair (Bleuâtre) |
| -1 | Bluish white |
Bleuâtre-blanc |
| 0 | Pure White (White) |
Blanc pur (Blanc) |
| 1 | Yellowish white |
Blanc jaunâtre |
| 2 | Pale Yellow (Yellowish) |
Jaune pâle (Jaunâtre) |
| 3 | Pure Yellow |
Jaune pur (Jaune) |
| 4 | Orange Yellow |
Orange-jaune (Orangâtre) |
| 5 | Yellow Orange (Orangish) |
Jaune-orange |
| 6 | Pure Orange (Orange) |
orange pur (Orange) |
| 7 | Reddish Orange |
Orange rougeâtre |
| 8 | Orangey Red |
Rouge d’orangey |
| 9 | Red Orange (Reddish) |
Rouge-orange (Rougeâtre) |
| 10 | Pure Red |
Rouge pur (Rouge) |
Most visual observers tended to use the Hagen Colour Index
(HCI) which relates closely to stellar surface temperatures
and the B-V Colour Index. No one truly adapted this as an
“analytical”
method, but as an extra means of determining the
“correct”
position angle of both the stars, especially when the magnitudes are
nearly equal.
Note: The original observer
designations in double stars overrides the estimation of
the brightest against the faintest star. This means the
designation of A and B components are pre-set
by the discoverer. The HCI probably has some analytical
basis, however, the linearity with visual divisions in
quite poor. I.e. The non-linear values, of say, white to
yellowish stars are different, from say, blue to bluish or
red to reddish stars.
Figure 3. The Hagen Colour Index (HCI) — 10% and 20%
Saturation
Figure 3 shows the Hagen Colour Index Scale
with both 10% Saturation, the likely maximum visible
colour, and 20% Saturation. I have contrasted the colours
against both black or white backgrounds so the visibility
of the colours and the contrast effects can be seen. The
Figure above clearly shows these differences. All observed
colours will be also slightly different when they are
pinpoints, and the colour presented here are closer to the
defocussed star images that can be seen in the telescope.
Observers should note that I have calculated the colours to
be approximately 10% and then I have had to make several
small adjustments so that the colours look a bit more
consistent. However this changes are quite likely
inconsequential for many visual observers. Most stars will
be fainter than the colours presented here and nearly all
of the fainter stars will have almost insignificant
saturations.
Anyone using the colours for observational
comparison should ONLY use the 10% SATURATION SCALE.
It was M. Minnaert who first discussed star colours in
more modern terms. If we assume that star colours are based
on the black body properties of objects, as seen in some
ultra-hot furnace. A famous simple experiment of this is to
continuously heat a small piece of tungsten wire in
electric light filaments. Here the colours distinctly
change as the temperature rises; from red-hot, yellow-hot,
white-hot then blue-hot. This also similarly follows the
observed spectral sequence of stars and the B-V colour
index.
He then usefully adopted the series of eight separate
colour groups as distinguish by eye. Then he did a simply
blind experiment by comparing his colour estimates against
the B-V colour index, which proved to have an observed high
correlation. From this, he then first achieved the feat of
being able to distinguish the spectral class letter of the
object. Minnaert gained much kudos for this achievement in
his day!
Minnaert also investigated the colour of the white and
yellow stars, finding that they could distinguish the
yellow ones into white-yellow, light yellow, pure yellow
and deep yellow. (The reason for this, I think, is that the
eye is more sensitive to seeing this part of the spectrum,
especially when compared with the red, and the far blue.)
Interestingly, his experiments validates the problems of
colour saturation. His book concludes that only eight major
or primary star colours each corresponding to the
mid-spectral classes of O, B, A, F, G, K, M, S.
Figure 4. Colours of the Spectral Classification
— 10% Saturation
Figure 4 shows the colours of the Spectral
Classification at 10% Saturation. The colours can be
estimated in the telescope with care, but observers should
note that these are the maximum colours and most of the
stars have much lower saturated colours. I have contrasted
the colours against both black or white backgrounds so the
visibility of the colours. The colours here are suitable
for using in drawings of star charts where the spectral
class is required.
Again, anyone using the colours for
observational comparison should ONLY use this 10%
SATURATION SCALE.
According to David Malin (AAO), it was the astronomer
Leslie Morrison from the Royal Greenwich Observatory who
attempted visual observation of stars through the transit
telescope, and doing a blind test, could guess the Spectral
Class of the star in question! Each class could be seen and
ascertained with the eye, with each have only three or four
shades of certain colours, with the solitary
“non-colour”
of white. There are fourteen “valid
colours” in this second system, being
in order of;
The MINNAERT COLOUR SCHEME
|
BLUES
|
WHITES
|
YELLOWS
|
ORANGES
|
REDS
|
Deep blue
Light blue
Blue-white
|
White
|
White-yellow
Light yellow
Pure yellow
Deep yellow
|
Yellow-orange
Light orange
Deep orange
Red-orange
|
Orange-red
Light red
Deep red
|
DESCRIPTORS FOR DOUBLE STAR COLOURS
For double star observers such methodologies have been
already established using scales like the Hagen Colour
Index (HCI). This scale has values between -3 and +10,
describing the possible range of fourteen double star
colours — from blue to white to yellow to orange to
red. This roughly mimics the range seen in astronomical
spectra, in stellar surface temperatures and spectral
classes. However, the problems for double stars
observers is that use this particular index, finds the
fundamental inherent weakness is a scale is that it does
not differentiate between the different colour
saturations. Furthermore it takes no account of the
stellar magnitude. Although this scale is quite arbitrary
between observers, different eyes will certainly see
different colours. Unfortunately, the HCI system leaves too
large a range of observable possibilities for the many
different colours. Moreover, detecting colour is also very
observationally troublesome to see as the stars more often
than not appear simply as point sources. Often by just
simply defocussing the star into small plate-like disks can
be applied to partially exacerbate this problem.
Figure 5. ⇒ (On the Right-hand
Side) gives the approximate look of the vast majority
of star colours in the telescope. This is based on 10%
Colour Saturation given earlier in the text.
A. The White Box on the left-hand side of the
Figure shows the Hagen Colour Index Number, the approximate
observed apparent colour and the Spectral Class it pertains
too.
B. The White Box on the right-hand side (at the
top) is the reported colours sometimes seen by observers.
I have labelled this as due to Contrast Effects
because more often than not they are only seen in visual
double stars.
C. The White Box on the right-hand side (at the
bottom) gives the pure monochromatic colours as they would
be seen in a telescope. These of course do not exist in
Nature and are given as comparison.
When reading some older books, texts and catalogues, you
will sometimes find the use of the following abbreviations.
(See small attached Table)
These main colour can also have the
following additions: Colour that are less bright than
normal are prefixed p pale — or if
brighter in colour are r rich or d deep. I.e.
pale blue, rich yellow, or deep red, etc. Colour tendencies
towards any colour are sh but is very rarely
used.
Unconvincing colours, for example, a suspect yellow star
would be Ysh (Yellowish) or Bsh (Bluish).
A further usefulness for this colour scheme is that the
observer can quickly write down these abbreviations in his
or her observation notes. Although the use of colour is
likely not important, but it is an additional descriptor
when checking the pair at some later date to differentiate
equally bright components or in reducing observations.
Later use of the abbreviations now tend to favour the
Hagen Colour Index (HCI), which relates closely to stellar
surface temperatures. Using this index, visual observers
should report as e.g. “-2 /
3”, being its pale
blue primary and pure yellow secondary. Other additional
colours were added later I.e. -0.5 for grey and -0.25 for
green.
| Abb. | Colour |
| W | White |
| B | Blue |
| Y | Yellow |
| O | Orange |
| R | Red |
| P | Purple |
| G | Green |
| C | Grey |
| L | Lilac |
| A | Gold |
| S | Ashy |
REPORTING STAR COLOURS
GENERAL RULES
If the colour is a definite colour, report it as
eg."White" or "Blue" etc.
If the colour seems a definite tint, report it as eg.
"Yellowish" or "Bluish" etc.
If it seems either like a combination or range of
colours report it as "Bluish" or
"Bluish-White" etc.
If the colour can not be described, record it as
"Unusual" or "Colourless"
If the primary’s colour is seen but not the
secondary, record it as "Blue / - " etc.
For a continuance of this page: See Star Colours 2. (Next)
Last Update : 4th August 2012
Southern Astronomical Delights ©
(2010)
For any problems with this Website or Document please e-mail me.
|