HI, A cracking night. Many meteors but only the usual small number of spectra. There was a very bright one low to my east at 045050this morning (28th Dec) Anybody catch something about this time? Cheers, Bill.
A reasonably clear night in Cheshire though somewhat hazy at times. A total of 93 meteors detected from Ravensmoor. Alas didn't get your 20141228_045050 event (probably outside my FOV) - the brightest of the night up to my North was at 20141228_060252
Yes it looks like you had very nice skies last night Bill. Patchy cloud floating about down south but lots of clear spells. I only ran one cam last night to test a 3.8mm lens, but got 56 captures. The brightest for me was a December Virginid at 055224. Unfortunately it dropped off the bottom of the frame so I didn't get it all. It may have been caught by Alex, Nick and the South Downs as it also falls in their fov.
It's not brilliantly focused but looking at the individual frames something really bright comes up next to the sodium line. There's also some really bright calcium emission. Interesting. Bill. Time for lunch.
Hi, This is only a single frame, so it's noisy but as far as I can tell most of the little peaks are geniune. This was a doozy!!!
and giving it the patented colour treatment...
With the poor angle and saturated lines I can't reall do the usual frame intergrations to stretch the weaker lines but I might try some sort of animation. But I've left the bloody user manual at work, so something for the new year...
The synthetic colour versions are just a re-represenation of the graph. The bigger the peak the "brighter" the colour (and usually broader) I find them easier to understand and interpret than the more formal analytical graphs. If you lined up row of graphs it would convery some technical information but if you line up a sequence of the colour versions the differences are more apparent I think. One reason I started experimenting with this aspect of the graphical software was for demonstrating spectroscopy techniques. People seem to intuitively understand what a rainbow is but shy away from the maths behind a graph.
The colours portayed are (more or less) what the eye would see if we could see actually the spectrum. The only problem is the colour/wavelength auto-selection. As humans we can generally see between 400-700nm The watecs can pick up between about 350nm and 1000nm, the scaling tends to stretch the blue and red ends. So, each of the vertical lines is an emission from an element present in the meteor. Mostly they are the same ones, the planets and asteroids are made from the same stuff. It's the relative quantities of each that define particular properties or origin. That's a tricky proposition....
However I don't fully understand what they mean either, and believe me, neither do the "experts"!
yes I'd have to agree with the majority of the population Bill. Colours representing elements seem easier to understand than a graph. Unless you can mentally envisage what colour/element corresponds to each wavelength, the graph is much harder to understand.