-----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- From: Ralf Vandebergh Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 11:38 PM To: paulgrace@lookoutranch.com Subject: Re: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing,means it's rotating Yes, this is pretty insane, it is not allowed to link to my own website ,but this is allowed. Ralf -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- From: Paul Grace Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:45 PM To: SeeSat-L@satobs.org Subject: RE: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing,means it's rotating This message contains a link to a web page containing images that do not comply with the rules for these images. Why is this email acceptable, while similar emails are not? I'm puzzled by the new rules. -----Original Message----- From: seesat-l-bounces+paulgrace=lookoutranch.com@satobs.org [mailto:seesat-l-bounces+paulgrace=lookoutranch.com@satobs.org] On Behalf Of Thierry Legault Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 13:37 To: SeeSat-L@satobs.org Subject: Re: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing, means it's rotating Ted, I fully agree with you about the importance of the rule. Instead of making a long e-mail, I have made a page describing a deep technical analysis of recent Nanosail images from Mr Vandebergh. As you suspect, shape and colors are artifacts. I think that the new rule is especially interesting in this "textbook case". I even think that now a few raw images extracted from the video are not sufficient, the full avi file would be very interesting to assess. The analysis: http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/nanosail_vandebergh_analysis.html regards >From: Ted Molczan >Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 2:52 PM >To: seesat-l@satobs.org >Subject: RE: And I thought if Nanosail D was obseved flashing,means it's >rotating > >Ralf Vandebergh wrote: > > > Just wanted to link to my website to show an image to support this > > discussion, but even that is rejected. > > So It's even not possible to support a discussion by showing an image. > >When you comply with the rules, your images will be allowed: > >http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html#Rules > >In the rejected report, you claimed to have resolved the "the shape and >attitude of the Sail and perhaps a sign of >tumbling". Given the size and altitude of the object, the aperture of your >optics, and method of tracking, there is room >for doubt. The rules are intended to facilitate evaluation of your results. > >Ted Molczan > > > >_______________________________________________ >Seesat-l mailing list >http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l Thierry Legault www.astrophoto.fr _______________________________________________ Seesat-l mailing list http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l _______________________________________________ Seesat-l mailing list http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l _______________________________________________ Seesat-l mailing list http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 27 2011 - 23:08:02 UTC