[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) The AMS
As Jim framed it, there definitely does seem to be much complementarity between
the AMS and IMO in terms of using visual data. I assume the same is somewhat
true of radio work as well, since Jim, Tom, Chris Steyaert, Cis, etc. all seem
to have very different interests in the excellent work they do.
Perhaps emphasizing this point in itself is the best way of bridging any gap
between the two organizations? Also, I don't doubt the representatives of ALPO
Meteors on the list could probably provide us some insights if they wanted, into
how their work clearly complements what's going on in Europe and Geneseo, too!
In the final analysis, I guess I have faith (based on no experience - the
strongest kind ;>), that meteor science is an extremely wide field, with a vast
amount still to discover, and far too few people in the world right now to do
the hard analysis, and to research all the outstanding questions!
It seems like the only real snag (and this is probably the bone of contention
with many), is the need for those few OBSERVERS out there in the world to be
able to share their data among ALL of the few existing organizations who might
be able to make scientific use of it!
Maybe that's the only issue that really needs resolving after all: sharing data?
Lew
References: