[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Meteor Elevation Data
Looks like I'm nearing some closure on this question, anyway! :)
Rainer Arlt <100114.1361@CompuServedot com> writes:
>These are theoretical considerations, and it might be interesting to deal with
>actual meteor heights and magnitudes to verify this. I don't think the azimuth
>will help in this respect. In order to keep the amount of notes reasonable I
>suggest to leave it out.
I'm sorry, Rainer. Are you saying leave out *altitude*, or only that *azimuth*
is not important to magnitude studies? If altitude, then I guess you're saying a
simple constellation (or part of one) is sufficient. If azimuth, then I think
Neil was suggesting that for another reason: namely, studies of train duration.
Am I right here, Neil? Of course with specific enough notation about a meteor's
constellation(s) (e.g., WUMa, SPeg, Lyr-Her, etc.), any researcher can derive
values for either or both of altitude and azimuth from the observer's location
and time, so I think this is kind of a moot point.
Anyway, I guess I'll start noting constellation on my NAMN count forms! (Now I
guess I really will have to learn exactly where Lacerta starts and ends! 8^o)
Lew
Follow-Ups:
References: