[vsnet-chat 5150] Re: Curious observations and reports

["Berto Monard" <LAGMonar@csir.co.za>]

Sebastian, I mentioned that I only checked the date data on the outgoing
report.
It is exactly because of the No 1 type of error that I made in the past
(just like you do). By checking the dates you can easily pick out those
non-existing observations by their 'template' date. 

Regards,

Berto
PS In the South we get away with a lot, there is not that much
scrutiny...  :-)

>>> "Sebastian Otero" <varsao@fullzero.com.ar> 02/27/02 02:06AM >>>
Dear Berto, Taichi and all:


From: "Berto Monard"

> My approach is that I first download my template reporting sheet,
which
> contains all the variables that I intend reporting on during the
year.
>
> This template is written in the standard format for the VSNET report
> with the variable, spaces, dates, and most likely magnitudes followed
by
> the observer code.
> For each actual report the following needs to be done :
> 1. delete all variables not observed
> 2. adjust to proper UT date/time by overriding in insert mode
> 3. overriding for the observed magnitude, eventually add or remove
'<'
> and adjust spacing
> 4. check
> 5. send
>
> What went wrong with the TV Col observation? 3 and 4
> 3. my template gives 141 as the most probable magnitude. I changed
the
> 1 to 7, but 'forgot' to change the 4...


The spreadsheet I use is almost the same.
The difference is that I don't enter the magnitude of the star but the
estimate (comparison stars and steps), so I never work on the
magnitude
column directly.
This week I made two mistakes in my report and they were caused by not
being
careful with Berto's point 1: I didn't delete a couple of variable
stars
that I didn't observe!!!!!
Fortunately I use to look at my reports several times during the week
the
observations are made, specially because I have to copy and paste
individual
star observations to spreadsheets made for each of the stars. In the
process
I can find these kind of mistakes. It's almost impossible to avoid one
of
these things to happen from time to time. Although we do our best !

Anyway, this has nothing to do with the "other" kind of mistakes
mentioned
in this discussion.


From: "Taichi Kato"


>     Your analysis of erraneous observations sounds to more suggest
> professional astronomers not to trust in visual (or amateur)
observations...
> A more important thing is to analyze the reason for the errors.

I totally agree with all the comments expressed by Taichi Kato.
I think we should strenghten every person's own responsability while
reporting "doubtful" things.
It's important to check what we do, to compare with others and to
receive
advice if necessary.


 >     I tried to reveal the reason why T. Scarmato's observations
were
> erraneous, and at least some of problems seem to have been solved.

I think Toni could make a much better use of his observing time if he
stopped a little and try to check what he does before sending it out.
It's obvious that he likes observing very much but it is totally
useless to
report these kind of observations:


From: "Toni Scarmato"

> HYAHV 083528.5 -075854 ACV Type 5.66-5.76 V
>
>
> HYAHV 20020110.927 5.556 p TSc (+/-0.91)
> HYAHV 20020110.934 5.752 p TSc (+/-0.82)
> HYAHV 20020110.938 5.629 p TSc (+/-0.75)
> HYAHV 20020211.887 5.221 p TSc (+/-0.56)
> HYAHV 20020211.891 5.324 p TSc (+/-0.61)
> HYAHV 20020214.889 5.204 p TSc (+/-0.99)
> HYAHV 20020214.891 5.223 p TSc (+/-0.89)

As expressed in the heading, the star is an ACV type and the amplitude
is
0.1 mag.
Is it useful to send observations with 1 full magnitude error? NO.
It's not something that we can make an opinion on. It's simply wasting
Toni's time and reporting something that doesn't mean a thing actually
:-(
It's obvious that the software or something else is going wrong. It's
not
just this star... Sadly all of the reports sent by Toni suffer from
this
"whatever magnitude" disease...
But as Taichi said, this is not a wich haunt and observations should
be
deleted by the own observer.
So it is the observer who needs to understand what he is looking at and
if
his/her results are worth reporting.
Otherwise this sentence : "suggest  professional astronomers not to
trust in
visual (or amateur) observations" will be commonplace.
We don't like that.
And as Mike said, we are all friends here so we can discuss these kind
of
issue in all of us' profit.

Regards,
Sebastian Otero.


PS:  maybe we shouldn't be sending these mails to vsnet-obs !!! Don't
you
think?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://vsnet.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.325 / Virus Database: 182 - Release Date: 19/02/02

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp