Re: LR Com Observations?

["Thomas Droege" <tdroege2@earthlink.net>]

There are 78 million or so data pairs in the data base.  Why don't you all
ask for stars where I have data?  ;^)  It seems like every time I look for
a star the bin is (nearly) empty.

Sigh!  

I suppose you all would not ask if there was data there.

More data will come, but it will take years to get enough for all the uses.
That is good, I think, since I won't have to think up any new projects for
my lifetime. ;^)  Besides, I have a sub project taking pictures of
Rolls-Royces.  That keeps me busy.  

Meanwhile, I am quiet because I am writing code and computing.  I want to
make the data just a nit better before I publish.  I am not greedy, I just
want a small improvement.  (I am pretty sure that is all I can hope for.) 

Tom 


> [Original Message]
> From: Michael Sallman <msallman@pro-ns.net>
> To: <tdroege2@earthlink.net>
> Cc: DWest61506@aol.com <DWest61506@aol.com>; <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
> Date: 12/8/2003 7:48:22 PM
> Subject: Re: LR Com Observations?
>
> Doug, Tom and all,
>
> It looks like it wasn't a bug in the query, just that the observations 
> in the database don't meet the criteria to be included in the statistics.
> I find 11 pairs of images from Tom's #2 camera with could have included 
> this position. Of these, 9 of the pairs have problems with either the V 
> or I images (or both).
> And in the remaining 2 pairs, there is a large discrepancy between the 
> number of stars detected in V vs. I.
>
> For image JD 2452763.62887 - 2852 stars in V, 645 in I
> For image JD 2452780.59346 - 2453 stars in V, 497 in I
>
> As Tom said, perhaps a combination of clouds and bad luck.
>
> Mike
>
>