[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: (meteorobs) Re: Angular velocities

Malcolm wrote:
<<I'll look up the original WGN article so we have some numbers for
a comparison.>>

Yes, I think a comparison would help determine how much more the 
angular velocities method can be more accurate than the scale 1-5.


Bob Lunsford wrote:
><<I agree with Pierre that methods should be kept simple in the field. I
>would also ask him if he will be recording meteors in exactly the same
>manner 10 years from now? Maybe so, but like many bright and inquisitive
>minds Pierre will absorb more knowledge and experiment with different
>techniques as how to gather data. Isn't it every serious observer's goal
>to obtain the most accurate data possible? If new techniques appear
>does one bury their head in the sand or analyze it with an open mind?
>I understand the logic behind the idea "the less I record the more
>accurate my data will be". On the other hand does limiting the
>parameters provide a better overall understanding of the event?>>

Bob, what you say is true. I would not be surprised at all if at some 
point I would choose a new method that would make my data more 
accurate. In 10 years, I doubt I will be using exactly the same 
techniques that I am presently using. Although I mentioned before 
that the human eye has limitations, I don't necessarly claim that 
today's observers (even very experienced ones) have gone anywhere 
near those physical limitations yet. Its a good idea to keep an open 
mind for different ideas and techniques, and see what results from 
them ;>


>I would bet that down the road Pierre will look back at 1999 and feel he
>has made great strides. Pierre is a competent observer now but in 2009
>he will look back upon this discussion and smile at all the efforts to
>"keep it simple".

Yes, in 10 years, many things can change. I feel even the most 
experienced observer will learn something new every once in a while ;>


>For me, I am light years better than I was 10 years ago and I hope to
>continue to progress in the years to come. Bringing this full circle,
>would I continue to record all of this data if it were not enjoyable?
>Does recording one or two more aspects of meteors turn it into a chore?
>Not in the least as it has become second nature for me and it can become
>second nature for anyone truly interested in progressing to the next
>level.

I'm convinced that experience from active observers is gathered and 
improved continuously over the years. New knowledge happens all 
along. The main thing is to keep progressing to the next level the 
best we can. Adding a few more aspects is fine, yet as long as we 
still enjoy what we do. We should not let the data gathering take 
over the fun. If meteor observing was no longer fun, it would become 
a chore, and I would lose interest. The primary reason I do meteor 
observing is that it gives me a refreshing break from everyday 
routine work and stress. It's mainly to be out there and enjoy the 
fantastic night sky nature has to offer!

Clear skies (and lets all look forward to August's excellent Perseid meteors!)

Pierre




To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html
References: