radtech wrote:I've just installed 1.60 on my Windows laptop and it seems to be running fine. However, I have noticed a slight discrepancy in the distances between stars. For example, Simbad lists the distance from Earth to HIP 105075 as 0.49 mas (6563.3 LY); 1.60 shows the same distance as 1353.4 LY. I realize the new release uses CHARM2 data, but which is correct, Simbad or Celestia, in this particular instance? Is this a bug?
Radtech
Why should it be a bug in Celestia? After all, the stars of version 1.6.0 are now based on the much improved reanalysis of the Hipparcos stars (van Leeuwen, 2007).
http://cdsarc.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/Cat?I/311
which is not yet included in SIMBAD.
Accordingly, in that Strasbourg catalog, you find
(in the astrometric volume)
+++++++++++++++++++++++
plx(HIP 105075) = 2.41 +- 1.06 mas giving 1353.4 ly as we have it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
This new HIP analysis has effects in many places, including the distances of my binary stars (visualbins.stc and spectbins.stc)
Fridger
