(meteorobs) History

[Sergey Shanov]

I should comment my the emotional performance now (and I ask Lew to delete all my previous messages with a theme history from archive!). Yes, really, it is necessary to disjoint professional simulation and simulation of the amateurs of astronomy. Our models and the programs (Mikiya and Sergey) can predict activity of meteor showers (Leonids, Draconids, Perseids...). However, than the cometary trail is old, the more indefiniteness of results, because there are unaccounted and poorly investigated effects (satellites of Jupiter, A2-effect, Poynting-Robertson, Yarkovsky...). To be engaged in prediction it is necessary cautiously. Case 2004 June Bootids much more interesting and composite for study (than Perseids 1 rev.). The Earth has met with old trails, doubly by dispelled Earth (in 1910 and 1916). Meteoric maximas diffuse. It is difficult at once for describing by any model. All this is necessary for studying in details in the future! We (Sergeys) have find this case, but were not sure in the estimates. And we came to you (Esko, Jeremie for an improvement of results). We not took into account not perihelion ejections (this innovation was made absolutely recently). Also took into account 9 planets. Gradually we shall refine our possibilities, but Even for such composite case for 2004 June Bootids an exactitude an exactitude of our evaluations very good (It was confirmed at first Esko, then Jeremie and observations)! We are engaged with simulation recently, but we shall perfect our possibilities further! In our brief browse two comets 15P and 45P are retrieved which can generate new (earlier not observed) meteor showers! The exactitude of evaluations, in these cases, does not influence on our actual results! These estimates still not sure, but interesting enough to detail research already now. Evaluations Mikiya even more precise (he takes into account influence not perihelion cometary ejections and Moon). However even in case of 2004 June Bootids our results almost identical! However we, probably, can not precisely enough evaluate very old cometary trails (for example JBO, ejections XVIII of century). Esko and Jeremie, probably, will make it much more precisely. The professional programs take into account much more minor effects. Therefore it is important to disjoint simulation of the amateurs of astronomy and professional simulation. However old trails JBO (XVIII of century) are not investigated even by the professionals! Similar situation with Draconids, Perseids. All observable cases cannot be predicted. The amateurs of astronomy can bring a big profit in searching interesting cases! However, it is necessary really to evaluate the possibilities. We evaluated the possibilities really and have predicted 2004 JBO good: http://kaicho.pobox.ne.jp/tenshow/meteor/7p2004/JBO2.htm. However, in case of meteoric strorm our exactitude of evaluations does not differ almost from professional (and even is inside possible admissible, probable error)! And even of meteoric storm are be not always, when the comet is close. For example, the case 2018 Draconid was investigated by the soviet astronomer Reznikov. He has not found possibility of meteoric storm, in this case. However he did not investigate very old trails (XIX of century). To investigate such trails, it is necessary at first safely to define an orbit of a comet in the past (in not observable appearances).
Me has surprised, that the datas Mikiya very well have described observations JBO. Probably, it could be random. Is probable, that is not random. It should be investigated in the future.
So anybody deceived nobody. It were only emotions... On web page you see our future project to WGN.
Sergey
  I did evaluations 2004 Perseids (trail 1 rev.) earlier. I offer you to compare results Esko and Sergeys:

              Time (UT)     rD-Re
  Esko     August 11 20:54  0.0013 (0.0012 it is a corrigendum on web page)
  Sergeys  August 11 20:53  0.0013
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.meteorobs.org/pipermail/meteorobs/attachments/20040708/824a63ca/attachment.html