BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Peter G. Brown

Peter G. Brown contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
astro-ph.EPastro-ph.IM

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Computing optical meteor flux using Global Meteor Network data

Meteor showers and their outbursts are the dominant source of meteoroid impact risk to spacecraft on short time scales. Meteor shower prediction models depend on historical observations to produce accurate forecasts. However, the current lack of quality and persistent world-wide monitoring at optical meteoroid sizes has left some recent major outbursts poorly observed. A novel method of computing meteor shower flux is developed and applied to Global Meteor Network data. The method is verified against previously published observations of the Perseids and the Geminids. The complete mathematical and algorithmic details of computing meteor shower fluxes from video observations are described. As an example application of our approach, the flux measurements of the 2021 Perseid outburst, the 2020-2022 Quadrantids, and 2020-2021 Geminids are presented. The flux of the 2021 Perseids reached similar levels to the 1991-1994 and 2016 outbursts (ZHR $\sim$ 280). The flux of the Quadrantids shows high year-to-year variability in the core of the stream while the longer lasting background activity is less variable, consistent with an age difference between the two components. The Geminids show a double peak in flux near the time of peak.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A new method for measuring the meteor mass index: application to the 2018 Draconid meteor shower outburst

Context. Several authors predicted an outburst of the Draconid meteor shower in 2018, but with an uncertain level of activity. Aims. Optical meteor observations were used to derive the population and mass indices, flux, and radiant positions of Draconid meteors. Methods. 90 minutes of multi-station observations after the predicted peak of activity were performed using highly sensitive Electron Multiplying Charge Coupled Device (EMCCD) cameras. The data calibration is discussed in detail. A novel maximum likelihood estimation method of computing the population and mass index with robust error estimation was developed. We apply the method to observed Draconids and use the values to derive the flux. Meteor trajectories are computed and compared to predicted radiant positions from meteoroid ejection models. Results. We found that the mass index was $1.74 \pm 0.18$ in the 30 minute bin after the predicted peak, and $2.32 \pm 0.27$ in the next 60 minutes. The location and the dispersion of the radiant matches well to modeled values, but there is an offset of $0.4^{\circ}$ in solar longitude.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Estimating trajectories of meteors: an observational Monte Carlo approach -- I. Theory

It has recently been shown by Egal et al. (2017) that some types of existing meteor in-atmosphere trajectory estimation methods may be less accurate than others, particularly when applied to high precision optical measurements. The comparative performance of trajectory solution methods has previously only been examined for a small number of cases. Besides the radiant, orbital accuracy depends on the estimation of pre-atmosphere velocities, which have both random and systematic biases. Thus it is critical to understand the uncertainty in velocity measurement inherent to each trajectory estimation method. In this first of a series of two papers, we introduce a novel meteor trajectory estimation method which uses the observed dynamics of meteors across stations as a global optimization function and which does not require either a theoretical or empirical flight model to solve for velocity. We also develop a 3D observational meteor trajectory simulator that uses a meteor ablation model to replicate the dynamics of meteoroid flight, as a means to validate different trajectory solvers. We both test this new method and compare it to other methods, using synthetic meteors from three major showers spanning a wide range of velocities and geometries (Draconids, Geminids, Perseids). We determine which meteor trajectory solving algorithm performs better for: all-sky, moderate field of view, and high-precision narrow-field optical meteor detection systems. The results are presented in the second paper in this series. Finally, we give detailed equations for estimating meteor trajectories and analytically computing meteoroid orbits, and provide the Python code of the methodology as open source software.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Estimating trajectories of meteors: an observational Monte Carlo approach -- II. Results

In the first paper of this series we examined existing methods of optical meteor trajectory estimation and developed a novel method which simultaneously uses both the geometry and the dynamics of meteors to constrain their trajectories. We also developed a simulator which uses an ablation model to generate realistic synthetic meteor trajectories which we use to test meteor trajectory solvers. In this second paper, we perform simulation validation to estimate radiant and velocity accuracy which may be achieved by various meteor observation systems as applied to several meteor showers. For low-resolution all-sky systems, where the meteor deceleration is generally not measurable, the multi-parameter fit method assuming a constant velocity better reproduces the radiant and speed of synthetic meteors. For moderate field of view systems, our novel method performs the best at all convergence angles, while multi-parameter fit methods generally produce larger speed errors. For high-resolution, narrow field of view systems, we find our new method of trajectory estimation reproduces radiant and speed more accurately than all other methods tested. The ablation properties of meteoroids are commonly found to be the limiting factor in velocity accuracy. We show that the true radiant dispersion of meteor showers can be reliably measured with moderate field of view (or more precise) systems provided appropriate methods of meteor trajectory estimation are employed. Finally, we compare estimated and real angular radiant uncertainty and show that for the solvers tested the real radiant error is on average underestimated by a factor of two.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access