[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: idea
- From: Glenn Gombert <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 02:44:30 -0400
- Old-Return-Path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 02:40:16 -0400 (EDT)
- Resent-From: email@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"DBG_6D.A.DWE.ju8A0"@kani.wwa.com>
- Resent-Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Looks like the NSF Proposal didn't get funded this time around.
"I'll be happy to write a page or two. Some things have changed.
Most substantial: NSF did not fund my proposal. This is not the
end of the world, but it changes the way we proceed.
On the positive side.
I do not consider TASS as a "scaled down OGLE". It is scaled down in
one dimension (limiting magnitude) but scaled up in another (the area
covered). Also, when a number of MARK IV cameras become operational then
TASS will be more than OGLE in the number of photometric measurements per
night. I'll elaborate on these differences."
At 09:05 PM 8/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Chris mentioned that programs would have to change anyway, since the
>mark IV will be coming on-line. Maybe I'm naive, but I was considering
>the mark III survey as a separate entity. Once you start including
>data from other sources, databases are going to get much more complicated.
>For instance, the mark IV can cover most of the visible sky, not just the
>equatorial region. An observer with a 0.5m telescope and CCD might
>cover a small portion of the equatorial region, but down to 20th magnitude
>or with UBVRI filters.
> BP was going to submit an NSF proposal to do the 'whole thing'; a generic
>database of photometric information for any region in the sky. Tom - do
>you know if that was submitted? I'd rather send the ancillary observations
>to something like that, than try to include everything in the TASS DBMS.
> Certainly the extraction programs, up through and including astrometry
>and photometric transformations, could be made general enough to handle
>most CCD images that are in FITS format. Glenn mentions that Sextractor
>can do this, and I'm sure Star is the same way. The rest of the pipeline
>is more TASS-specific in my opinion.
Glenn Gombert <email@example.com>
- Re: idea
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Herbert R Johnson)