[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Recording meteors while fatigued (was Re: (meteorobs) re 73P/SW3 meteors: 1930)
Whew - finally a juicy thread about actual visual observing! :)
>NOW, I can imagine that someone can interpret a perception of many
>little things appearing at once at the very limit of perception,
>non-plottable but countable, and assume that they are barely detected
>faint meteors, only just picked up for a short part of their path by a
>concentrating eye. Whilst, in point of fact concentrating and straining
>on a small area means you're more likey to see your own retinal neurons
>firing!
This is an important point for folks just getting into meteor recording to
keep in mind, John... Some of us frequently have no choice but to observe
when somewhat fatigued - otherwise we'd not get to observe at all. And one
of the struggles most new observers - and even us not-so-new observers -
frequently face when observing with fatigue, is deciding exactly what to
count and record as being an actual meteor!
I'd love to hear others' private criteria for this important, difficult
aspect of visual meteor technique. My personal criterion is simple: if I
catch something for which I can confidently estimate at least ONE of two
pieces of information, I will count that as a meteor and record it. Those
two pieces of information are meteor path and meteor magnitude: If I can't
securely estimate BOTH these data, I note just the datum I know, along with
a comment about the missing one. If I can record neither, I record nothing.
What do other - more experienced or prolific - observers do?
Clear skies,
Lew
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html
Follow-Ups:
References: