Return to Home Page
You make good points. I think this survey may struggle with what probably all surveys struggle with (as we've discussed on the TASS list) which is night-to-night variations. From the little poking around I've done on the star I'm working on, it seems to me the *average* accuracy might be 0.05 but the scatter around this average may be pretty high. If you can average a whole bunch of observations of non-variable stars, I could see how you could get very nice results. Cheers, Michael Koppelman http://vsnet.lolife.com/astronomy/ On Thursday, May 15, 2003, at 02:55 PM, Sebastian Otero wrote: > Every source has its problems. > The key to this is analysing what to use and what to discard. It's not > as > easy as one would like it but you can't have it all.... > The accuracy depends on the field and the brigthness. There are fields > where > in fact I had to abandon my attempts to make a sequence. > But in most cases the accuracy is higher than 0.05 and what matters > the most > is that this is better than the previously available results. > When photometry gives errors up to 0.4 mag, ASAS-3 data become a better > choice. > > I am on your side on the "only-use-good-data" approach.
Return to the Powerful Daisaku
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
