Re: Planet X: MAY Coordinates [OT]

In Article <awxP6.30038$vf6.3101451@news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com> Chosp wrote:
> In Article <3B0DA38B.CF761185@company.com>The Small Kahuna wrote:
>> However, since it is also stated that it is approximately
>> 9 times further than Pluto right now, it will be 81 times
>> dimmer.  (1/9^2)  Because the reflected light is so much
>> dimmer, we will also ignore it too.
>
> Why do you not include the fact that she said it was visible
> as a 2nd magnitude object which changed to 11th magnitude
> as it came closer?

Why is it you fail to register the difference between ABSOLUTE and
APPARENT magnitude?

In Article <3mdL6.16929$g61.1363687@e420r-chi1.usenetserver.com> S. Welknelk wrote:
> In article <cAvK6.2476$n81.1849356@typhoon.hawaii.rr.com> Dave Tholen wrote:
>>  The object cannot be both 2nd magnitude and 11th magnitude.
>
> Why all the BS about the difference between ABSOLUTE magnitude
> and APPARENT magnitude? Our own sun has an ABSOLUTE
> magnitude of +4.85 (if viewed from 10 parsecs distance from
> earth, standard definition). Isn't the APPARENT magnitude,
> even on a cloudy day, something brighter than +4.85? Unless
> you were looking for the sun at midnight I suppose, which
> could not be discounted based on the moronic replies I have
> seen here.