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

Re: Recording meteors while fatigued (was Re: (meteorobs) re 73P/SW3 meteors: 1930)

Lew said (snip!)
   >>>Whew - finally a juicy thread about actual visual observing! :)

    Indeed, Mr. Gramer! Here is a subject that retains the power to grip my
curiosity on a very consistant basis and I feel
I have at least a couple of thoughts that may add a little fuel to the mixture.

    I have noticed, and remarked in this forum before, that I almost always
note an increase in peripheral flashes on nights when there seems to be an
overall increase in meteor rates.  Slow nights = few if any "flashes."  I was
seeing perhaps most of these hard-to-define flashes last September when
sporadic rates were quite high.  Almost always there is a sense of brief linear
motion associated with them, though I have never sensed any sort of "jagged"
motion.  I have discussed this with highly experienced observers who
recommended counting them *if* they were within (I think) about 20 degrees of
one center field of view and had measurable motion and if one could obtain a
magnitude estimate.  Accurately plotting such a beast would be impossible for
me.  Within 20 degrees DCV I would think a magnitude estimate should be easily
achievable.  I still discount anything that I feel I can't truly identify as a
meteor.
    One reason why recorded +6 meteors are so rare has to be the fact that an
observer has to be looking almost directly in the right spot to obtain good
visual information when the meteor appears.  It only serves to follow that a +6
just outside this area would provide far less adequate visual information yet
still be visible.  In addition, in my understanding, there are on average more
+6's than +5's (and more +5's than +4's and so on down the line) so the
observer who *doesn't* see at least some unidentifiable flashes should probably
have his/her peripheral vision checked.
     Multiple attestation:  One several occasions I have discounted a flash
only to have an observing partner immediately say, "there's one!" and point to
the appropriate area of the sky.  So I know that I see more meteors on a given
night than I actually record -- there's no doubt in my mind that a percentage
of the flashes discounted are true meteors.  Given that I am familiar with the
nature of these "visions,"  i.e. they are all quite similar, I feel a bit
cheated when they occur!
     Finally, as an avid camper, that is, someone who's spent a lot of time
(often quite fatigued) in the dark, I wonder why I never see these
"intra-ocular flashes" except when I'm looking at a clear, dark starry sky?  In
fact, I would probably be quite startled if, while lying awake in bed at night,
I began seeing +5 and +6 flashes with slight linear motion!
     In the end, my own private criteria requires actually seeing the meteor
itself and not merely the flash -- it's just that simple. But for me at least
that leaves a lot of frustration knowing I'm not counting at least a
percentage of the meteors that I detect.

Kim Youmans

Lew Gramer wrote:

> 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

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