[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(meteorobs) Re: perception and darrell conger
> Does Sirko's video data support these high visual rates by Gates et al?
> If these rates are "true" there must be some correlation.
>Ed Majden
Well, that's an interesting question. Perhaps a few video cameras covering
a field 120 degrees wide while Gates et al are observing would finally
reveal hard proof that they are seeing all these meteors. One feeble visual
attempt we did in 1975 was to surround the central vision of Gates with 4 of
us, each looking 25 degrees away. One above, one below, two either side.
The first meteor he saw was outside our ring of coverage. "Sorry about
that, folks" was his response. We spent only a few minutes more then gave up.
> Those of us blessed with above average perceptions see more of
>those fainter meteors.
>Malcolm
There are two types of high perception : leaning toward brighter meteors
(top-heavy), or toward fainter meteors (bottom-heavy). The bottom-heavies
have the advantage in sheer numbers of meteors available, and they are the
ones with the highest perception, 3.0 and upwards with no definite limit.
Gates was one of these, seeing only twice my bright-meteor rates but up to
10 times the faint ones. The top-heavies, such as Bob Lunsford, are
moderately high, from 1.5 up to 2.5 or so. These I can keep up with on
faint meteors.
> 7000--8000 in a decent year doesn't strike me as
>particularly beyond the bounds of a keen observer.
I can accept that, on second thought. People that see 50/hour in February
won't take long to reach 5-figure totals if they can get enough clear
nights. That was the typical range for Gates but with constraints of school
and bad weather in New Mexico where the major showers are more often cloudy
than clear. We were just itching to get a report from Gates on the
Geminids, expecting him to pass 200/hour. But he never did see the
Geminids. It took several years for him to believe those of us that were
finding the Geminids to be double the Perseids, in the early 1970's.
Three separate years Gates went to the Keys with us for the July-August
showers. Each time he saw about 4000 meteors in just two weeks, equal to my
usual full-year total at the time. Before his first trip he declared that
his rates would come down to our level once he left the New Mexico mountains
to descend into the "inferior" sea-level Keys environment. He had to take
that back within the first ten minutes, after he had already seen ten
meteors when no one else had seen more than two, plus he admitted the Keys
sky was just as dark as New Mexico.
What if Gates had been with me for 500 hours in 1974? Take my 7000 meteors
that year, multiply by Gates' perception of 3.8, and he would have seen
around 26000 ! That was also the last good Leonid year of the previous
epoch, and Gates was pleading with us that there really was a good Leonid
shower, and "not just my eyes." I did get to confirm it myself, an amazing
40/hr Leonid peak before dawn with many bright meteors ranging up to -6m.
>One decent full Geminid campaign unless excellent skies can yield a few
>thousand meteors. I recall Paul Roggemans doing this from Provence and
>his perception was below average.
Paul rates close to 2.0, well above my perception. I cracked a thousand
Geminids during the 1985 display, and that was a major-league thrill.
Never came close to that with the Perseids.
> Even from Britain a few thousand
>during the Perseid campaign with a favourable moon and run of clear
>nights I've seen that kind of total.
Malcolm himself rates at least 3.0. His mention of 12/hr telescopic
sporadic rates blows me away. I would be happy to see half that. The same
perception situation applies to telescopics.
>If a genuine observer's data is only met with scepticism and can't be
>used because it's "not normal", it's no surprise if that observer
>vanishes from the scene.
That's true. If a bunch of beginners starts out together, and one of them
is like Gates, seeing 4 times what anyone else sees, he might be ridden out
of town on a rail. To decide whether someone is reliable, I look for
attitude and seriousness in the observer. Somebody goofing around while
claiming such rates is hard to take for real. Those of us here have had
that experience.
Darrell Conger was the first of the supers to come along, so naturally we
had no experience to draw on. In the early 70's high perceptions started
coming out of the woodwork. In my first group I personally saw the most, so
I thought my eyes were very good. Nobody in the AMS in the 60's before
Conger was unusual. Even in that period I seemed to be right about average.
In 1975 with six of us observing from the Keys, two were slightly above me,
1.15 to 1.2; two others were lower, .85 to .9, then Gates all by his
lonesome self at 3.8.
If there is any consolation from seeing meteors the way I do, most of them
are seen very well and in detail. My DCV average (distance from central
vision) for the start of each meteor is only 6 degrees. For Gates, his DCV
was 25 degrees.
Norman
Norman W. McLeod III
Staff Advisor
American Meteor Society
Fort Myers, Florida
nmcleod@peganet.com
The archive and Web site for our list is at http://www.meteorobs.org
To stop getting all email from the 'meteorobs' lists, use our Webform:
http://www.meteorobs.org/subscribe.html