JPL lists of satellite radius, density, albedo
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sat_props.html
JPL lists of satellite orbital properties
http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sat_elem.html
Todd Henry of CHARA at Georgia State University keeps an updated list of the nearest stars. The list in the appendix of my text is from Harmut Jahreiss, who uses parallaxes from either Hipparcos or the Yale Parallax Catalogue. Henry uses weighted means of the combined values for all objects in a system. Thus the lists differ a bit from that reason as well as from the fact that the CHARA people are finding some additional nearby systems.
The first 13 systems match. Then there are subtle differences. The CHARA group has found the 20th and 55th nearest systems, both red dwarfs in the southern hemisphere.
http://www.chara.gsu.edu/RECONS/TOP100.htm
The International Astronomical Union Working Group in charge of naming moons of planets has rejected naming S/1986 U10 since they feel that its existence has not, in the words of Brian Marsden of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, been "sufficiently demonstrated to warrant a permanent number (and name). (Consider, too, that all 12 of the distant Saturnian satellites from 2000 do now qualify because of observations at the following opposition; likewise, 11 of the 12 distant jovian satellites from 1999 and 2000 have a second opposition.)"
Appendix 11 lists element 118, whose discovery was reported at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in 1999 with a paper in the Physical Review. But the discovery was withdrawn in July 2001 in an embarrassing reversal. The original paper reported the detection of 3 chains of decay to elements 116, then 114, then 112, and so on down to element 106. The chains were thought to reveal the fusion of a krypton atom and a lead atom to make element 118. But reexamination of the data, following failures to produce more of element 118 in the same way, indicated that the chains did not exist. reference: New York Times, July 28, 2001, p. A26. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/28/science/28LAB.html
Megabytes aren't really a million bytes, since computers use binary
numbers. Since 2^1=1, 2^2=4, 2^3=8, 2^4=16, 2^5=32, 2^6=64, 2^7=128,
2^8=256, 2^9=512, 2^10=1024, and not 1000, new prefixes were voted by
the International Electrotechnical Commission, with kibi (instead of
kilo) for 10^10, mebi (instead of mega) for 10^20, and gibi (instead
of giga) for 2^30.
[Science, 283, 12 March 1999, p. 1631]
Many photographs from the Electronic Universe Project at the
University of Oregon.
http://zebu.uoregon.edu/messier.html
This table was provided by Dan Green of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.