egg changed the topic of #kspacademia to: https://git.io/JqLs2 | Dogs are cats. Spiders are cat interferometers. | Document well, for tomorrow you may get mauled by a ネコバス. | <UmbralRaptor> egg|nomz|egg: generally if your eyes are dewing over, that's not the weather. | <ferram4> I shall beat my problems to death with an engineer. | We can haz pdf | Logs: https://esper.irclog.whitequark.org/kspacademia
<raptop>
I swear, at least 95% of "learning a foreign language is easy" articles are about how someone fluent in French and with a working knowledge of Spanish had a great time picking up Italian
<galois>
title: KerbalismContracts/ModuleImager.cs at 6c6fe30e20b96d473cfb1c9295e6d04c9ff875c4 · eggrobin/KerbalismContracts · GitHub
<egg|anbo|egg__>
also does fire detection fit in MIR or NIR by this definition
<egg|anbo|egg__>
well, NIROPS is supposed to be N, but,
<egg|anbo|egg__>
NIROPS?
<galois>
NIROPS: National InfraRed OPerationS
<egg|anbo|egg__>
ah wait no, it is not NIR in that sense, so that is fine
<egg|anbo|egg__>
MIROPS,
<raptop>
egg|anbo|egg__: how about 1.6 µm for NIR (H band), and 200 µm for FIR?
* raptop
looks over those some more
<egg|anbo|egg__>
but then NIR and MIR get uncomfortably close together
<raptop>
Not sure how I feel about 10 µm for MIR, but itś a fuzzy place
<raptop>
1 µm is visible in an I or Z band trenchcoat
<egg|anbo|egg__>
well, unless I ditch the concept of reflective NIR entirely, I need an emissive band not much farther than 10 μm (consider VIIRS wavelengths)
<egg|anbo|egg__>
alternatively I call VIIRS Vis + NIR, and then MIR is, uh, something else?
<raptop>
Hrm, the blue cutoff for Johnson U is 3013 Å (Bessel 2005, see table 1)
<raptop>
ah
<raptop>
Right, also weather sat IR wavelengths might well tend to ones that I'd avoid (because of water absorption)
<egg|anbo|egg__>
yes, we should get rid of this pesky atmosphere
<raptop>
Given that the atmosphere has directly tried to damage the GMU telescope twice in the past 2 weeks or so, I very much agree
<raptop>
" Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) satellite in its far-ultraviolet (FUV; λeff = 1516 Å) and near-ultraviolet (NUV; λeff = 2267 Å) bands."
<raptop>
yeah, the UV band you're using is pretty far into the UV (EUV?)
<raptop>
Which, for solar observing, is fair
egg|anbo|egg has joined #kspacademia
egg|anbo|egg__ has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
<galois>
title: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 | Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation
SilverFoxy has joined #kspacademia
SilverFox has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
SilverFoxy is now known as SilverFox
egg|anbo|egg_ has joined #kspacademia
<egg|anbo|egg_>
raptop: well, there definitely is a point to distinguishing EUV/X-ray from NUV, because very different opticks; and NUV is not the same as visible, because atmosphere (not going to do remote sensing with GALEX)
egg|anbo|egg_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
egg|anbo|egg_ has joined #kspacademia
<egg|anbo|egg_>
whitequark: how are the cats
* egg|anbo|egg_
meows at ANBOcat
egg|anbo|egg__ has joined #kspacademia
egg|anbo|egg has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<egg|anbo|egg__>
raptop: maybe merging VisNIR? Both somewhat usable through the atmosphere, both either reflective or situationally emissive (fires, lämps) in remote sensing (in contrast with emissive MIR), largely the same opticks
<egg|anbo|egg__>
raptop: I wonder whether there is any use for VisNIR with solar elevation between, say, 15° and -15°; below that you have night-time imaging, which is a thing, above that daytime, but I guess there it is just a useless mess?
<raptop>
I'm not sure where prefered sun elevation is for terrain relief
egg|cell|egg has joined #kspacademia
egg|cell|egg has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
egg|cell|egg has joined #kspacademia
<raptop>
!8 Does our telescope need a rain gauge inside the dome?
<galois>
raptop: no
<raptop>
(which triggers an auto-shutdown if it ever reads more than 0)
<galois>
title: KerbalismContracts/ModuleImager.cs at baba9dd215daf2913f4eb0e3360d3ffed746bf3c · eggrobin/KerbalismContracts · GitHub
<raptop>
seems reasonable
<mofh>
00:56 <@raptop> mofh: are the estimates in table 1 trustworthy?
<mofh>
so the IHME data honestly appears to me to be quite an overestimate for many places.
<mofh>
sure, the USA number of ~575k is an undercount, but every other source adding up excess mortality doesn't get anywhere near 900k. 800k? sure. but 900 is just... ehh.
<mofh>
i'll take a look at the models they have again once this headache dissipates