Re: (meteorobs) Re: Visual magnitude

• To: The ASTRO Mailing List <astro@store-forward.mindspringdot com>, Meteor Observing Mailing List <meteorobs@latradedot com>
• Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Re: Visual magnitude
• From: Lew Gramer <dedalus>
• Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 12:30:11 -0500
• In-Reply-To: Your message of "30 Oct 96 10:00:55 EST." <961030150055_100114.1361_EHQ24-3@CompuServedot com>
• Reply-To: meteorobs@latradedot com
• Sender: owner-meteorobs

Hi, Rainer, thanks for a very intriguing response! (I forwarded it to the other 
forums - hope you don't mind). But now this raises another question (as good 
answers usually do :>), which I address to the astro community: I've heard a 
number of experienced observers describe the detectabiltity of deep-sky objects 
in terms of their contrast against the background sky glow.

If visual LM is really dependent on both transparency and sky brightness 
*independently* (in other words, assuming neither of these two factors could be 
derived from the other), then wouldn't detection of extended objects and details 
also depend on both factors? And what about "stellar" objects like clusters?

In other words, wouldn't an independent measure of sky transparency have to be 
taken into account in "optimal detection magnification" algorithms and similar 
calculations? If not, why not? A question which lingers...

Clear skies all!
Lew

• Re: (meteorobs) Re: Visual magnitude
• From: Rainer Arlt <100114.1361@CompuServedot com>

• Prev: (meteorobs) Introduction: Nico Lonetti
• Next: Re: (meteorobs) Meteor Photo Sept 11/12
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread