[meteorite-list] RE: 2004 BV18 discovery by Stu Megan

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

From: Matson, Robert <ROBERT.D.MATSON_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:31:20 2004
Message-ID: <AF564D2B9D91D411B9FE00508BF1C86904EE5987_at_US-Torrance.mail.saic.com>

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3E9CD.1C37EAE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi All,

Since Doug brought it up, I thought I would echo his congrats to Stu for his
January 19th
discovery of this FMO, and add a few cautionary comments to anyone
interested in trying
to duplicate the feat.

On average, you can expect to look through thousands of images before you'll
spot your first FMO in a Spacewatch images, and even then it may turn out to
be a
recently discovered object that Spacewatch was deliberately attempting to
recover.
(In addition to discovering 2004 BV18, Stu recovered 2003 WU21 on November
21 of
last year.)

Publicity surrounding Stu's discovery has led to a large increase in the
number of
people now reviewing images each night, with a corresponding decrease in the
probability of success for a given individual. (More analysts = less images
per
analyst per night). The temperament necessary for success is similar to
meteorite
hunting, though even more demanding since the rate of recovery for
meteorites is
so much greater than that for FMOs. There is also a learning curve for
those
without experience searching for the signatures of fast-moving asteroids in
CCD imagery. To a novice, there are a lot of image artifacts that are
initially
indistinguishable from real asteroids: proton/cosmic-ray streaks, bright
star
diffraction spikes, saturated pixel rows/columns (bleed), bad detector
columns,
edge-on galaxies, closely-spaced stars, and even manmade satellites. The
FMO Project website has an excellent identification tutorial for each of
these
cases, so with experience an image reviewer will learn to recognize and
ignore them.

On a final note, the moon is a waxing gibbous right now, so the telescope
will
be closed for more than a week before operations resume. --Rob

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3E9CD.1C37EAE0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">

<META content="MSHTML 5.00.3810.1700" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>Hi
All,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Since Doug brought
it up, I thought I would echo his congrats to Stu for his January
19th</DIV>
<DIV>discovery of this
FMO, and add a few cautionary comments to anyone interested in
trying</DIV>
<DIV>to duplicate the
feat.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On average, you
can expect to look through thousands of images before
you'll</DIV>
<DIV>spot
your
first FMO in a
Spacewatch images, and even then it may turn out to
be
a</DIV>
<DIV>recently
discovered object that Spacewatch was deliberately
attempting to recover.</DIV>
<DIV>(In addition to discovering 2004 BV18, Stu recovered
2003 WU21 on November 21 of</DIV>
<DIV>last year.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Publicity surrounding Stu's discovery has led to a
large increase in the number of</DIV>
<DIV>people now reviewing images each night, with a
corresponding decrease in the</DIV>
<DIV>probability of success for a given individual. 
(More analysts = less images per</DIV>
<DIV>analyst per night).  The temperament
necessary for success is similar to meteorite</DIV>
<DIV>hunting, though even more demanding since the rate of
recovery for meteorites is</DIV>
<DIV>so much greater than that for FMOs.  There is also
a learning curve for those</DIV>
<DIV>without experience searching for the signatures of
fast-moving asteroids in</DIV>
<DIV>CCD imagery.  To a novice, there are a lot of
image artifacts that are initially</DIV>
<DIV>indistinguishable from real asteroids: 
proton/cosmic-ray streaks, bright star</DIV>
<DIV>diffraction spikes, saturated pixel rows/columns (bleed), bad detector
columns,</DIV>
<DIV>edge-on galaxies, closely-spaced stars, and even manmade
satellites. 
The</DIV>
<DIV>FMO Project website has an excellent identification tutorial for each
of these</DIV>
<DIV>cases, so with experience an image reviewer will learn
to recognize and</DIV>
<DIV>ignore them.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On a final note, the moon is a
waxing gibbous right now, so the
telescope will</DIV>
<DIV>be closed for more than a week before operations resume. 
--Rob</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3E9CD.1C37EAE0--
Received on Mon 02 Feb 2004 03:42:44 PM PST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Dan Wray: "[meteorite-list] Discover Magazine article"
Previous message: magellon: "[meteorite-list] Hunters' Kits / Tucson / Sunday / Wilcox Playa"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

StumbleUpon

del.icio.us

Yahoo MyWeb