@renerpho

Space fan. Nerd. Genealogist. All maths and history. Asteroid 128345. @NBObservatories

Marburg, Deutschland
Joined July 2015
I am proud to announce that @NBObservatories have been awarded a 2025 Shoemaker NEO Grant by The Planetary Society! 🎉🔭🌠 planetary.org/articles/2025-…
1
4
196
Daniel Bamberger retweeted
In exactly 10 minutes, Asteroid 46925 Bradyharan will cross the ecliptic plane, plunging from the north to the south of our huge planetary disc. This extreme north/south nature is a reason the rock was picked for me - 🇬🇧🇦🇺 - and coincidentally it's currently visible in my constellation of Gemini!? 🤪 youtube.com/playlist?list=PL…
1
1
55
4,188
To my knowledge, yesterday's naming of (429733) Gilbertbaker, a large Amor-type Near Earth asteroid, marks the first -- even indirect -- representation of the LGBTQ community in space. wgsbn-iau.org/files/Bulletin…
1
142
A friend took some images of "my" asteroid (128345) Danielbamberger in February, and sent me the raw data today. I turned it into a little animation. It's been a while since I've seen that rock! Visible here at 21.3 mag. Images taken at Deep Random Survey, Chile (X09).
2
3
180
@BradyHaran These were taken immediately after we had finished imaging (46925) Bradyharan that night.
1
111
Wow, the number of known moons of Saturn has nearly doubled today!
5
25
13
192
93,128
Daniel Bamberger retweeted
An Asteroid named Bradyharan youtu.be/VLLrHQVMx64
5
7
1
71
10,820
Asteroid (46925) 1998 SS27 has just been named after @BradyHaran, the host of YouTube channels like "Numberphile", "Periodic Videos", and "Objectivity". Naming it was my idea, and I am very grateful to David Rankin at the Catalina Sky Survey for helping me with it! A thread. 1/7
1
2
267
Contratulations to Brady, and enjoy your new piece of real estate among the stars! 7/7
1
1
141
There is this puzzle to approximate the number e with a "pan-digital formula", in which each of the digits from 1-9 is used exactly once. The best known solution (Sabey, 2004), covered by @numberphile in 2016, is correct to 18 trillion trillion digits. I just found a better one!
4
1
256
The new approximation is correct to 8368428989068425943817590916445001887164 decimal digits.
155
As an extra benefit, it also works as a pan-digital formula with the digits from 0 to 9, if you prefer to write the decimal number .2 as 0.2. This was one of the criticisms/questions from the 2016 Numberphile video. youtube.com/watch?v=xgBGibfL…
186
My solution starts from Richard Sabey's, and is similar to his in many ways. I just tried to increase the base of the expontial tower from 3 to 5, leaving the rest intact if possible. Turned out that works!
136