Closed ericagol closed 7 years ago
Right! I'll add a section on this to the paper, and perhaps you can flesh it out?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I forgot to mention: we should look into mid-infrared observations from the ground (this is important if we want to justify JWST time - one shouldn't be able to make a measurement from the ground). The sky brightness is significant, and so perhaps this is a non-starter, but the sky noise decreases as the aperture of the telescope increases, so perhaps a 30-40 meter telescope would have a small enough PSF at 10-20 micron that the star would outshine the sky. The sky is so bright that it quickly saturates detectors from the ground: http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/mid-ir-resources/mid-ir-observing
The N band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_band or Q band http://www.gtc.iac.es/instruments/canaricam/MIR.php would probably be best - N band has higher transmission from the ground, but planets will be fainter. Q band has lower transmission, but planets should be brighter; although PSF is larger and sky is bright at that wavelength as well.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI5FKzRN0zqDBPu9JirMeB0eQkXnfinCks5sNPzBgaJpZM4OV7bX .
Olivier Guyon remains adamant that the 30m class telescopes will be able to do exoplanet science at 10 microns. Not sure he has published anything yet that we can cite for this...
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Rodrigo Luger notifications@github.com wrote:
Right! I'll add a section on this to the paper, and perhaps you can flesh it out?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I forgot to mention: we should look into mid-infrared observations from the ground (this is important if we want to justify JWST time - one shouldn't be able to make a measurement from the ground). The sky brightness is significant, and so perhaps this is a non-starter, but the sky noise decreases as the aperture of the telescope increases, so perhaps a 30-40 meter telescope would have a small enough PSF at 10-20 micron that the star would outshine the sky. The sky is so bright that it quickly saturates detectors from the ground: http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/mid-ir-resources/ mid-ir-observing
The N band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_band or Q band http://www.gtc.iac.es/instruments/canaricam/MIR.php would probably be best - N band has higher transmission from the ground, but planets will be fainter. Q band has lower transmission, but planets should be brighter; although PSF is larger and sky is bright at that wavelength as well.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AI5FKzRN0zqDBPu9JirMeB0eQkXnfinCks5sNPzBgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-314834680, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJIuoKWWPchsh9PV8B8E8hYJyrqlkvks5sNP2CgaJpZM4OV7bX .
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
Cool. Can you do a sample calculation for that?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:21 AM Jacob Lustig-Yaeger < notifications@github.com> wrote:
Olivier Guyon remains adamant that the 30m class telescopes will be able to do exoplanet science at 10 microns. Not sure he has published anything yet that we can cite for this...
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Rodrigo Luger notifications@github.com wrote:
Right! I'll add a section on this to the paper, and perhaps you can flesh it out?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I forgot to mention: we should look into mid-infrared observations from the ground (this is important if we want to justify JWST time - one shouldn't be able to make a measurement from the ground). The sky brightness is significant, and so perhaps this is a non-starter, but the sky noise decreases as the aperture of the telescope increases, so perhaps a 30-40 meter telescope would have a small enough PSF at 10-20 micron that the star would outshine the sky. The sky is so bright that it quickly saturates detectors from the ground: http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/mid-ir-resources/ mid-ir-observing
The N band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_band or Q band http://www.gtc.iac.es/instruments/canaricam/MIR.php would probably be best - N band has higher transmission from the ground, but planets will be fainter. Q band has lower transmission, but planets should be brighter; although PSF is larger and sky is bright at that wavelength as well.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AI5FKzRN0zqDBPu9JirMeB0eQkXnfinCks5sNPzBgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-314834680 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJIuoKWWPchsh9PV8B8E8hYJyrqlkvks5sNP2CgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-314838086, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI5FK0zGy9kZHgDgyJeGAlc0eQ1PMMxdks5sNQCLgaJpZM4OV7bX .
This is something that I don't have a lot of experience with. I suspect that high resolution will help out at these longer wavelengths from the ground, but that's not something we can take advantage of in the time domain. For Proxima b, I did calculate the diffuse sky brightness at the ground (more precisely, at the top of a mountain) out to about 100 microns. So we could do something like plotting the S/N on an event as a function of aperture and wavelength (for a fixed cadence, dlam, etc....)?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Rodrigo Luger notifications@github.com wrote:
Cool. Can you do a sample calculation for that?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:21 AM Jacob Lustig-Yaeger < notifications@github.com> wrote:
Olivier Guyon remains adamant that the 30m class telescopes will be able to do exoplanet science at 10 microns. Not sure he has published anything yet that we can cite for this...
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Rodrigo Luger < notifications@github.com> wrote:
Right! I'll add a section on this to the paper, and perhaps you can flesh it out?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I forgot to mention: we should look into mid-infrared observations from the ground (this is important if we want to justify JWST time - one shouldn't be able to make a measurement from the ground). The sky brightness is significant, and so perhaps this is a non-starter, but the sky noise decreases as the aperture of the telescope increases, so perhaps a 30-40 meter telescope would have a small enough PSF at 10-20 micron that the star would outshine the sky. The sky is so bright that it quickly saturates detectors from the ground: http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/mid-ir-resources/ mid-ir-observing
The N band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_band or Q band http://www.gtc.iac.es/instruments/canaricam/MIR.php would probably be best - N band has higher transmission from the ground, but planets will be fainter. Q band has lower transmission, but planets should be brighter; although PSF is larger and sky is bright at that wavelength as well.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AI5FKzRN0zqDBPu9JirMeB0eQkXnfinCks5sNPzBgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26# issuecomment-314834680 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AIeJIuoKWWPchsh9PV8B8E8hYJyrqlkvks5sNP2CgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26# issuecomment-314838086, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AI5FK0zGy9kZHgDgyJeGAlc0eQ1PMMxdks5sNQCLgaJpZM4OV7bX .
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-314842006, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJIk8MrzQBcFyGwQGFbgUwJLGH1pVsks5sNQQWgaJpZM4OV7bX .
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
For Proxima b, I did calculate the diffuse sky brightness at the ground (more precisely, at the top of a mountain) out to about 100 microns. Did you also compute the atmospheric transmittance? So we could do something like plotting the S/N on an event as a function of aperture and wavelength (for a fixed cadence, dlam, etc....)? Yes, that would be interesting.
-Eric
Yes, both the diffuse thermal and the atmospheric transmittance. I will do this calculation as soon as possible.
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
For Proxima b, I did calculate the diffuse sky brightness at the ground (more precisely, at the top of a mountain) out to about 100 microns. Did you also compute the atmospheric transmittance? So we could do something like plotting the S/N on an event as a function of aperture and wavelength (for a fixed cadence, dlam, etc....)? Yes, that would be interesting.
-Eric
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-314900446, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJIkfjKtzo0NA82onBu6x1vuOdsbjzks5sNTiFgaJpZM4OV7bX .
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
Eric found this paper, which might be useful: http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/427988/pdf
I think the issue with ground-based observations will be precision limited by seeing (as it is for optical observations).
More so than the sky brightness in broad filters in the MIR? Or the transmittance? Sounds like ground-based PPOs are doomed.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I think the issue with ground-based observations will be precision limited by seeing (as it is for optical observations).
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-316227342, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJItHiRilWsht5gxEN6wzUtlXektluks5sPUCkgaJpZM4OV7bX .
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
If so, we can just remove that section from the paper (for now). If we figure out a way to do it, we can put it in the next paper!
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 5:20 PM Jacob Lustig-Yaeger < notifications@github.com> wrote:
More so than the sky brightness in broad filters in the MIR? Or the transmittance? Sounds like ground-based PPOs are doomed.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Eric Agol notifications@github.com wrote:
I think the issue with ground-based observations will be precision limited by seeing (as it is for optical observations).
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-316227342 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIeJItHiRilWsht5gxEN6wzUtlXektluks5sPUCkgaJpZM4OV7bX
.
-- Jacob Lustig-Yaeger Astronomy & Astrobiology Graduate Student University of Washington jlustigy.github.io
— You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rodluger/planetplanet/issues/26#issuecomment-316235968, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI5FK4N7SYYyqekYEjx96iC0unHfFfCFks5sPUu6gaJpZM4OV7bX .
It may be worth mentioning in the discussion as TBD
OK, closing this for now.
I forgot to mention: we should look into mid-infrared observations from the ground (this is important if we want to justify JWST time - one shouldn't be able to make a measurement from the ground). The sky brightness is significant, and so perhaps this is a non-starter, but the sky noise decreases as the aperture of the telescope increases, so perhaps a 30-40 meter telescope would have a small enough PSF at 10-20 micron that the star would outshine the sky. The sky is so bright that it quickly saturates detectors from the ground: http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/mid-ir-resources/mid-ir-observing
The N band or Q band would probably be best - N band has higher transmission from the ground, but planets will be fainter. Q band has lower transmission, but planets should be brighter; although PSF is larger and sky is bright at that wavelength as well.