HIP76694 is the reference name for the star in the Hipparcos Star Catalogue. The Id of the star in the Henry Draper catalogue is HD139541.
IW Librae has alternative name(s) :- IW Lib, IW Lib.
More details on objects' alternative names can be found at Star Names .
The location of the main sequence star in the night sky is determined by the Right Ascension (R.A.) and Declination (Dec.), these are equivalent to the Longitude and Latitude on the Earth. The Right Ascension is how far expressed in time (hh:mm:ss) the star is along the celestial equator. If the R.A. is positive then its eastwards. The Declination is how far north or south the object is compared to the celestial equator and is expressed in degrees. For IW Librae, the location is 15h 39m 38.09 and -27° 31` 28.3 .
All stars like planets orbit round a central spot, in the case of planets, its the central star such as the Sun. In the case of a star, its the galactic centre. The constellations that we see today will be different than they were 50,000 years ago or 50,000 years from now. Proper Motion details the movements of these stars and are measured in milliarcseconds. The star is moving -5.55 ± 0.83 milliarcseconds/year towards the north and 7.70 ± 1.66 milliarcseconds/year east if we saw them in the horizon. . When the value is negative then the star and the Sun are getting closer to one another, likewise, a positive number means that two stars are moving away. Its nothing to fear as the stars are so far apart, they won't collide in our life-time, if ever.
Based on the star's spectral type of F0V , IW Librae's colour and type is yellow to white main sequence star. The star has a B-V Colour Index of 0.65 which means the star's temperature is about 5,722 Kelvin. The temperature was calculated using information from Morgans @ Uni.edu.
IW Librae estimated radius has been calculated as being 2.43 times bigger than the Sun. The Sun's radius is 695,800km, therefore the star's radius is an estimated 1,691,465.19.km. If you need the diameter of the star, you just need to multiple the radius by 2. However with the 2007 release of updated Hipparcos files, the radius is now calculated at being round 6.9791273184600628574034085272. The figure is derived at by using the formula from SDSS rather than peer reviewed papers. It has been known to produce widely incorrect figures.
IW Librae has an apparent magnitude of 9.38 which is how bright we see the star from Earth. Apparent Magnitude is also known as Visual Magnitude. If you used the 1997 Parallax value, you would get an absolute magnitude of 2.96 If you used the 2007 Parallax value, you would get an absolute magnitude of 0.67. Magnitude, whether it be apparent/visual or absolute magnitude is measured by a number, the smaller the number, the brighter the Star is. Our own Sun is the brightest star and therefore has the lowest of all magnitudes, -26.74. A faint star will have a high number.
Using the original Hipparcos data that was released in 1997, the parallax to the star was given as 5.20000 which gave the calculated distance to IW Librae as 627.24 light years away from Earth or 192.31 parsecs. If you want that in miles, it is about 3,687,308,979,075,687.54, based on 1 Ly = 5,878,625,373,183.61 miles.
In 2007, Hipparcos data was revised with a new parallax of 1.81000 which put IW Librae at a distance of 1802.01 light years or 552.49 parsecs. It should not be taken as though the star is moving closer or further away from us. It is purely that the distance was recalculated.
Using the 2007 distance, the star is roughly 113,958,448.73 Astronomical Units from the Earth/Sun give or take a few. An Astronomical Unit is the distance between Earth and the Sun. The number of A.U. is the number of times that the star is from the Earth compared to the Sun.
The time it will take to travel to this star is dependent on how fast you are going. U.G. has done some calculations as to how long it will take going at differing speeds. A note about the calculations, when I'm talking about years, I'm talking non-leap years only (365 days).
The New Horizons space probe is the fastest probe that we've sent into space at the time of writing. Its primary mission was to visit Pluto which at the time of launch (2006), Pluto was still a planet.
|Description||Speed (m.p.h.)||Time (years)|
|Speed of Sound (Mach 1)||767.269||1,575,011,986.18|
|Concorde (Mach 2)||1,534.54||787,504,966.72|
|New Horizons Probe||33,000||36,619,935.50|
|Speed of Light||670,616,629.00||1,802.01|
The source of the information if it has a Hip I.D. is from Simbad, the Hipparcos data library based at the University at Strasbourg, France. Hipparcos was a E.S.A. satellite operation launched in 1989 for four years. The items in red are values that I've calculated so they could well be wrong. Information regarding Metallicity and/or Mass is from the E.U. Exoplanets. The information was obtained as of 12th Feb 2017.
|Primary / Proper / Traditional Name||IW Librae|
|Alternative Names||IW Lib, HD 139541, HIP 76694, IW Lib|
|Constellation's Main Star||No|
|Multiple Star System||No / Unknown|
|Star Type||Main Sequence Dwarf Star|
|Colour||Yellow - White|
|Absolute Magnitude||2.96 / 0.67|
|Visual / Apparent Magnitude||9.38|
|Naked Eye Visible||Requires a 7x50 Binoculars - Magnitudes|
|Right Ascension (R.A.)||15h 39m 38.09|
|Declination (Dec.)||-27° 31` 28.3|
|Galactic Latitude||22.04610421 degrees|
|Galactic Longitude||342.78452356 degrees|
|1997 Distance from Earth||5.20000 Parallax (milliarcseconds)|
|627.24 Light Years|
|2007 Distance from Earth||1.81000 Parallax (milliarcseconds)|
|1802.01 Light Years|
|113,958,448.73 Astronomical Units|
|Proper Motion Dec.||-5.55000 ± 0.83000 milliarcseconds/year|
|Proper Motion RA.||7.70000 ± 1.66000 milliarcseconds/year|
|Mean Variability Period in Days||0.891|
|Variable Magnitude Range (Brighter - Dimmer)||9.455 - 9.559|
|Radius (x the Sun)||6.98|
|Effective Temperature||5,722 Kelvin|
There's no register feature and no need to give an email address if you don't need to. All messages will be reviewed before being displayed. Comments may be merged or altered slightly such as if an email address is given in the main body of the comment.
You can decline to give a name which if that is the case, the comment will be attributed to a random star. A name is preferred even if its a random made up one by yourself.