1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ASTRO.RESEARCH

  • Can someone confirm that I have found some typos in some 1960s Soviet a

    From Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 30 07:20:11 2019
    Consider the following papers:

    DZ65: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1965SvA.....8..854D

    @ARTICLE { VDashevskiiYZeldovich65a ,
    AUTHOR = "V. M. Dashevskii and Y. B. Zel'dovich",
    TITLE = "Propagation of Light in a Nonhomogeneous
    Nonflat Universe .II.",
    JOURNAL = SVA,
    YEAR = "1965",
    VOLUME = "8",
    NUMBER = "6",
    PAGES = "854--856",
    MONTH = may # jun
    }

    and DS66: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1966SvA.....9..671D

    @ARTICLE { VDashevskiiVSlysh66a ,
    AUTHOR = "V. M. Dashevskii and V. J. Slysh",
    TITLE = "On the Propagation of Light in a
    Nonhomogeneous Universe",
    JOURNAL = SVA,
    YEAR = "1966",
    VOLUME = "9",
    NUMBER = "4",
    PAGES = "671--672",
    MONTH = jan # feb
    }

    For some background, one might want to read as well

    Z64: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1964SvA.....8...13Z

    @ARTICLE { YZeldovich64a ,
    AUTHOR = "Y. B. Zel'dovich",
    TITLE = "Observations in a Universe Homogeneous in
    the Mean",
    JOURNAL = SVA,
    YEAR = "1964",
    VOLUME = "8",
    NUMBER = "1",
    PAGES = "13-16",
    MONTH = jul # aug
    }

    I have three questions.

    First, is there a term (z) missing in eq. (1) of DS66, but present in
    eq. (7) of DZ65?

    Second, in table 1 in DZ65, should the value 0.40 (the angular-size
    distance for Omega=0.1 and lambda=0 at Delta=0.74 (which corresponds to
    a redshift of 2.846), which can be calculated via the Mattig formula) be
    0.42 (0.421)? (The maximum does seem to be at 0.74.)

    Third, in the same table, should the value 0.23 (the angular-size
    distance for Omega=10 and lambda=0 for Delta=1 (corresponding to
    infinite redshift) but in the empty-beam approximation) be 0.24 (0.237)?

    (Note that there is a substantial difference in notation between Z64 and
    DZ65, and also some difference between DZ65 and DS66, but each paper
    seems to be internally consistent, apart from the apparent typo
    mentioned in the first question above. I suspect that the answer to the
    second question is a typo. This might also be the case for the third,
    but it might be the result of a too inaccurate numerical computation on
    the part of DS66.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)