Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- From: boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 26 Oct 2006 02:05:10 -0700
Paul Schlyter wrote:
Anyway, easily found it with 7x50 binocs. Ho Hum.
Frankly I found it underwhelming.
That's probably because you viewed it from light polluted skies.
The skies were not super dark, but they were not
terrible either. I could just see all the stars in the little
dipper. I clearly remember seeing both Bopp and
Hyakutake from city skies of similar darkness and
they were much more impressive and obvious.
(...)
What's the definition of a 'Great' comet? Easy, one that
even non-astronomy dorks notice. Unfortunately Swan
doesn't make the grade.
As light pollution steadily gets worse year after year,
your requirements of a comet to be 'Great' will increase.
It's not so much that light pollution is getting worse -
many areas are already saturated - as it is the afflicted
area growing.
A century or more ago, non-astronomy dorks would have noticed
a comet like Comet Swan.
Unfortunately those days are over.
Eric
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- From: Paul Schlyter
- Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- References:
- Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- From: Greg Crinklaw
- Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- From: boo
- Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- From: Paul Schlyter
- Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- Prev by Date: Re: Comet Swan -- increased in brightness from magnitude +6 to +4.5
- Next by Date: Re: Converting digital cameras
- Previous by thread: Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- Next by thread: Re: Comet 2006 M4 (SWAN) had brightened dramatically
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|