[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(meteorobs) Those pesky path lengths (was Re: OBSERVATION Aug 6/7 GRALE)
At 09:15 AM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Lew...what is too short? they can all be short in relation to the
>radiant..dot its the ones that are too long while being close to the radiant
>that should be disqualified as perseids. I think you have it backwards?
>George
Nope, George, not backward: just in too many directions. :)
Since last year, I've been doing shower identification only if the path
length was "WITHIN a reasonable amount" of 1/2 the start-point-to-radiant
distance... Based on Juergen's comments recently, I'm slowly realizing this
is wrong! What I understand from Juergen (and now you), is that the path
can be any length LESS THAN or equal to this 1/2 radiant-distance amount??
This would put a skew in all my shower totals up to this point! (So I guess
it's a lucky thing there haven't BEEN too many shower totals from me yet...
;>)
Of course, if a meteor is MUCH BRIGHTER than the current LM, can this
really be true?? I'm guessing there must be SOME lower limit to path
lengths for shower ID... Otherwise, a nearly-stationary meteor anywhere in
the sky could be identified as a shower member, if it pointed in the right
direction: Nonsense!
BTW, on another note, Wayne pointed out something to me I had missed from
the current IMO Handbook: radiant sizes must actually correlate with meteor
path lengths! Because IMO believes that visual (and plotting) path accuracy
decreases steadily with distance from the radiant, the further your meteor
is from the radiant, the WIDER (in degrees) the radiant has to be for you
to ID the meteor with that shower... Something I'm sure the old hands will
shrug their shoulders at (bad metaphor :>), but it sure was news to me.
Lew Gramer, life-long learner :)
Follow-Ups: