[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Doomsday Icarus
In a message dated 98-03-13 21:48:16 EST, you write:
> << I guess it might have been better if the first IAUC had been a
bit
> more private to keep the machinations of science from misleading the
public,
> but the fact is that is how science works. It's not perfect all the
time,
> and you attempt to get more and better data to refine the predictions
and
> theories. And while the hype was pretty extensive, I don't think it was as
> bad as it could have been.>>
>
> This is what I was trying to get at. Before Marsden announces a comet
> discovery there are many, many observations done first. What happened here.
>
I think that the 1997 XF11 stuff was announced in two IAUCs is good at
least in this aspect: Both works of Jim Scotti (discover the object) and
K. J. Lawrence (find prediscovery images) are important, and each of their
works worth a seperate item in IAUC - it makes later researchers on this
object easier to reference the discovers' contributions and also make the
discovers easier to complete their paper-works to their funds providers
(where discovery itself may not be enough, but some publications and
citations are also necessary).
I'll try to observe that object if we have good weather next week. It will
always be an interested thing to see whether the orbit could be changing
slightly from further observations. Of course there might be less chance
for those new data to appear in IAUC again. :)
Clear Skies, Jin
(zj@bac.pkudot edu.cn)