RE: (meteorobs) Re: Leo 2001 coverage in S&T 3/2002

• To: meteorobs@atmob.org
• Subject: RE: (meteorobs) Re: Leo 2001 coverage in S&T 3/2002
• From: Rob McNaught <rmn@aaocbn.aao.GOV.AU>
• Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:34:40 +1100 (EST)
• Delivered-To: meteorobs-mh@atmob.org
• Delivered-To: meteorobs@atmob.org
• In-Reply-To: <020206120642.266010dc@grovx3.gsfc.nasa.gov>
• Reply-To: meteorobs@atmob.org
• Sender: owner-meteorobs@atmob.org

> But the American Meteor Society plot of the american Leonid Shower Outburst
> today shows a peak ZHR of 2500 near 11 UT on November 18, 2001! At the time
> the March issue went to press the earlier IMO ZHR was about 1500 for the
> same time, which is much different than the AMS ZHR of 2500.

Most estimates of error rates in visual observations appear to be largely
a formal statistic based on the number of meteors seen.  I personally
believe the absolute errors are significantly larger than this, and for me
a ZHR of 1500 is not so different from 2500.  Surely this is clear from the
various differing estimates?  More relevant is the relative intensity and
the magnitude index of the various peaks in terms of what happened and why.
Whatever these results end up being it is important the result is
objective and not influenced by the myriad subjective factors that can
colour our perceptions (should such ever be possible).

Cheers, Rob

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

• RE: (meteorobs) Re: Leo 2001 coverage in S&T 3/2002
• From: Stop Light Pollution! <GLIBA@grovx3.gsfc.nasa.gov>

• Prev: RE: (meteorobs) Re: Leo 2001 coverage in S&T 3/2002
• Next: RE: (meteorobs) Re: Leo 2001 coverage in S&T 3/2002
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread