|
|
Post by BillW on Dec 28, 2014 7:35:35 GMT
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.
|
|
|
|
Post by stewartw on Dec 28, 2014 10:00:42 GMT
Hi 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  Best regards William |
|
|
|
Post by allanuk on Dec 28, 2014 11:42:13 GMT
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.  |
|
|
|
Post by jeremy on Dec 28, 2014 11:57:54 GMT
Not got Bill's or Allan's, but did get William's.
Go well!
Jeremy
|
|
|
|
Post by BillW on Dec 28, 2014 12:24:30 GMT
Hi, Here's the image and the spectrum. Ran shallow to the dispersion axis but I'll see what I can extract. Total was 73 meteors and 3 spectra. Cheers, Bill. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by BillW on Dec 28, 2014 12:57:10 GMT
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.
|
|
|
|
Post by stewartw on Dec 28, 2014 12:58:59 GMT
Hi Allan, I assume you meant 055254 as opposed to 055224 ... this being the case I picked it up with the RM SE Camera:  Will run an analysis tonight ... currently making use of the daylight to do some tidying up in the observatory. Bill - apologies for hijacking this thread ... nice spectrum in spite of the shallow angle. Best regards William |
|
|
|
Post by allanuk on Dec 28, 2014 14:04:09 GMT
I stand corrected William, 055254 is correct. The lens is working well.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillW on Dec 28, 2014 16:25:38 GMT
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... Cheers, Bill. |
|
arp
Full Member
Posts: 96
|
Post by arp on Dec 28, 2014 16:39:12 GMT
Hi all,
Here's my captures of 2 of the 3 separate events being discussed in this thread.
20141228_045050 - sorry Bill, didn't get that one.
M20141228_055254 - captured on Leeds_SE
20141228_060252 - captured on Leeds_NW
Cheers,
Alex.
|
|
|
|
Post by allanuk on Dec 28, 2014 17:47:43 GMT
I love the colour version Bill...if only I understood it.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillW on Dec 28, 2014 19:33:15 GMT
Hi Alan,
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"!
Cheers,
Bill.
|
|
|
|
Post by allanuk on Dec 28, 2014 19:49:26 GMT
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.
|
|
