Re: OK Nancy, Where Is It?

In Article <3C37825E.9050004@telocity.com> Idon't wrote:
> We have obtained a CCD exposure of the coordinates 
> posted by Nancy for her planet. Although the CCD 
> image was taken with the requisite R filter and an 
> observatory grade telescope, and it shows objects fainter 
> than 18th magnitude (and hence more than 1000 times 
> fainter than Nancy specifies for her planet), there is no 
> sign of any unexpected object. All is available for 
> examination at
> Nancy, please explain.

You CAUGHT it! I've marked the spot with a red circle. With your
permission, Idon't, I've made a copy of the pertinent images and put
them on my web site as this posting of mine, which I web, will want to
refer to them going forward. For absolute purity of truth, one should
look to IDON'T's web site, however, not my copies. Certainly the copy
with a red circle has been bastardized, as my PC Paintbrush program only
works in 256 colors and damages what it touches, etc. Here is the Zeta
comments about your wonderful efforts, Idon't!


    Given that the Jan 2, 2002 exposure in the red 
    spectrum was 20 minutes vs the comparison chart 
    of 45 minutes, the planet you are seeking is NOT 
    as visible in the comparison as one would like, but 
    is there.  Our emissary, Nancy, has circled the spot 
    where you captured the inbound planet, barely
    larger than Pluto is at its center and with a swirl 
    of dust and moons about this center, not yet 
    reflecting sunlight as does Pluto but giving an 
    even diffuse spread of light from its surface, and 
    certainly without any intensity of light as stars or 
    star clusters.  Our instructions, in that the RA and 
    Dec given are to suffice for the whole world, are to 
    look AROUND the spot for something not on the 
    star charts.  Thus, the EXACT RA and Dec are 
    not the guidelines, in any given search. Visibility 
    in a magnitude range area affected by the SIZE of 
    the spot being observed, and the SPREAD that the 
    object takes over an area, as in the M31 example 
    where it is considered a magnitude 3.7 but can 
    scarcely be seen, as it is spread about a large area.
    Thus, Planet X, being a magnitude 11 but this 
    light coming from its entire surface, does not take 
    on an image as starlight or objects reflecting 
    sunlight.  Take another CCD, given greater 
    exposure time, and come again. 
        ZetaTalk

The pertinent coordinates, again, for this time period:
    RA 4.45623 Dec 12.13873 on Jan 17, 2002 
    RA 4.45631 Dec 12.14997 on Jan 08, 2002
    RA 4.45657 Dec 12.15692 on Jan 03, 2002

My red circled SPOT: 
    http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05cir.gif
which by the way shows up on an inverted JPG image that a Troubled Times
member made:
    http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05inv.jpg

To compare with Idon't images:
   Palomar Survey (45 Minute) in red spectrum
        http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05pss.jpg
   Jan 05, 2002 (20 Minute) in red spectrum
        http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05zzz.jpg
   Zeta Coordinates on above, identified as X
        http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/jan05xxx.jpg