[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Very Fast Sporadics
Of course you can always make your own judgement calls, George - though when
your plots are recorded by IMO, there's really no judgement call is there?
Either they match objective criteria for a shower or they don't?
Think about it: if we relied on your interpretation of your plots to say those
meteors were *not* DAUs, wouldn't we have to agree with George Gliba (or anyone
else for that matter) if they interpreted their plots to mean there *were* DAUs
on a given night, or Aries Triangulids, or Upsilon Pegasids, or Andromedids, or
anything else for that matter??? Can't have it both ways...
Anyway, based on your assertion that ALL FIVE meteors appeared to radiate from
"The Kids" (again 10o degrees from the DAU radiant), and that the DAU radiant
is probably relatively ill-defined even assuming it IS a single radiant, and
that even a well-defined radiant can (according to the IMO method) have meteors
TWENTY OR MORE degrees in error assigned to it if they're sufficiently far from
the radiant (of course you are familiar with that part of IMO's reduction
method)... Again, if we assume all this, it seems to point mighty heavily to an
objective assignment of these meteors as DAUs. Judgement calls, committee
votes, or personal views aren't at issue, are they?
Of course, I haven't seen your plots! It could be two of those meteors were too
long to be DAUs, but weren't too long to match an apparent Kids radiant 10
degrees away... (BTW, isn't putting "radiant" in quotes spurious? You can argue
that every meteor actually DOES have a radiant, whether it's a shower meteor or
not! Find the point of tangency of a meteor's orbit with our globe, and project
that norm into space: there's your radiant.)
Clear skies,
Lew
References: