Index Thread Archive Jan-2011 Archive Send
 Main index   Previous in threadNext in thread   Previous in archiveNext in archive   Index by Subject for Jan-2011Index by Author for Jan-2011Index by Date for Jan-2011   Index by Subject for ArchiveIndex by Author for ArchiveIndex by Date for Archive   Reply to messageNew message 

Subject: draft of
Author: Darin Ragozzine <dragozzine@cfa.harvard.edu>
Date: 17-Jan-2011 11:31:39
Yan-

A few comments from my perspective as a Kuiper belter. I must say, however, that I'm not familiar at all with how these assessment groups work (which is one reason, I've subscribed and am trying to follow what's going on), so if any of my comments aren't appropriate, feel free to ignore them.

1) I think it is reasonable to subdivide the Kuiper belt subpopulations (resonant, hot, cold) into different subsections in section 3 as you did with comets. I could write some text on these that briefly summarizes what their "current status". If so, could you give me a ~specific prompt on what I need to describe?

2) Though I'm biased as a dynamicist, I think more discussion on theoretical (e.g. dynamical) studies of these populations can be discussed as important for "characterization". 

3) Regarding optimal filters for chemical characterization, Trujillo and Sheppard have also been working on this and have already executed a large program at Gemini to characterize KBOs. There's also Henry Roe's Spectroscopic Survey planned for the Discovery Channel Telescope at Lowell. JWST will do an amazing job in the Kuiper belt, based on slides I've seen from John Stansberry. 

Hope this helps. Best, 
Darin
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Yan Fernandez <yrf@me.com> wrote:

Hi everyone -- Attached is the Jan-16th draft of
our identification and characterization section.
Instead of an outline, we now have an actual document. :)
Thanks to those of you that sent me ideas and text.

Please, everyone: Read through it and make your edits.
Put 'track changes' on in Word and send the document back
to me. I'll merge everything together.

There is _a_lot_ of room for editing. I expect and want
many tomatoes to be thrown at the text -- feel free to go wild.
Also: (a) There are some parts of section 3 that are still blank;
(b) There are no 'findings' yet; (c) There are almost no references
yet. All this needs to be taken care of.

In theory we'd like to have something that we can show
the rest of the community on the 19th, Wednesday.
But the definite hard deadline to have something reasonable
is Monday the 24th, when the SBAG meeting starts.

Thanks for your input !
--Yan
--Dr. Yan Fernandez, Asst. Prof. of AstronomyDepartment of Physics, University of Central Floridayan@physics.ucf.edu, http://www.physics.ucf.edu/~yfernandez

This Thread
  Date   Author  
23-Jan-2011 Carey M. Lisse
21-Jan-2011 Yan Fernandez
18-Jan-2011 Andy S. Rivkin
17-Jan-2011 Mark V. Sykes
17-Jan-2011 Andy S. Rivkin
* 17-Jan-2011 Darin Ragozzine
This Author (Jan-2011)
  Subject   Date  
* draft of 17-Jan-2011