Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617

Open
Open
Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
Assignees
knutagodnidever
Labels
LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
Milestone
Version 2.0 Development

Description

@michaelstrauss
michaelstrauss
opened on Apr 21, 2017

  • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.

  • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).

7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?

  • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

    , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
     blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

    Skip to content
    Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
    Open
    Open
    Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
    Assignees
    knutagodnidever
    Labels
    LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
    Milestone
    Version 2.0 Development
    Description
    @michaelstrauss
    michaelstrauss
    opened on Apr 21, 2017
    • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
    • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
    7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
    • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
    Metadata
    Metadata
    Assignees
    Labels
    LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
    Type
    No type
    Projects
    No projects
      Milestone
      Relationships
      None yet
      Development
      No branches or pull requests
      Issue actions
      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

      Skip to content
      Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
      Open
      Open
      Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
      Assignees
      knutagodnidever
      Labels
      LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
      Milestone
      Version 2.0 Development
      Description
      @michaelstrauss
      michaelstrauss
      opened on Apr 21, 2017
      • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
      • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
      7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
      • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      Labels
      LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
      Type
      No type
      Projects
      No projects
        Milestone
        Relationships
        None yet
        Development
        No branches or pull requests
        Issue actions
        
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

        Skip to content
        Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
        Open
        Open
        Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
        Assignees
        knutagodnidever
        Labels
        LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
        Milestone
        Version 2.0 Development
        Description
        @michaelstrauss
        michaelstrauss
        opened on Apr 21, 2017
        • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
        • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
        7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
        • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
        Metadata
        Metadata
        Assignees
        Labels
        LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

          Skip to content
          Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
          Open
          Open
          Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
          Assignees
          knutagodnidever
          Labels
          LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
          Milestone
          Version 2.0 Development
          Description
          @michaelstrauss
          michaelstrauss
          opened on Apr 21, 2017
          • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
          • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
          7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
          • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          Labels
          LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
          Type
          No type
          Projects
          No projects
            Milestone
            Relationships
            None yet
            Development
            No branches or pull requests
            Issue actions
            
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

            Skip to content
            Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
            Open
            Open
            Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
            Assignees
            knutagodnidever
            Labels
            LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
            Milestone
            Version 2.0 Development
            Description
            @michaelstrauss
            michaelstrauss
            opened on Apr 21, 2017
            • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
            • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
            7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
            • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
            Metadata
            Metadata
            Assignees
            Labels
            LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

              Skip to content
              Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
              Open
              Open
              Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
              Assignees
              knutagodnidever
              Labels
              LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
              Milestone
              Version 2.0 Development
              Description
              @michaelstrauss
              michaelstrauss
              opened on Apr 21, 2017
              • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
              • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
              7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
              • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              Labels
              LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
              Type
              No type
              Projects
              No projects
                Milestone
                Relationships
                None yet
                Development
                No branches or pull requests
                Issue actions
                
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

                Skip to content
                Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds) #617
                Open
                Open
                Comments from Jason Kalirai (SAC) on Chapter 7 (Magellanic Clouds)#617
                Assignees
                knutagodnidever
                Labels
                LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
                Milestone
                Version 2.0 Development
                Description
                @michaelstrauss
                michaelstrauss
                opened on Apr 21, 2017
                • I suggest moving the grouping of the 6 science themes to be before the list of the themes. I think this comes across clearer if you first create the bin of "Galaxy formation and evolution" and define it, and then input items 1-3 under it. These are all aimed at learning about the MCs themselves. Then, create the second bin of "Stellar Astrophysics and Exoplanets" and list items 4-6 under that. These are examples of using the convenience of the Clouds to tackle fundamental stellar astrophysics. For the latter, the authors correctly highlight the importance of the Clouds over general MW sightlines given the cospatial nature of the stars. But, this alone undersells the importance. All of the stars in nearby galaxies are also cospatial...the MCs are special because of this and because of their proximity that allows us to explore deeper into the luminosity function of the stellar populations.
                • I was confused about the part of this section related to finding transiting exoplanets in LMC stars. First, it would be nice to show some of the analysis in the paper itself, hopefully backed up by simulations of LSST's performance. Second, if the motivation is to tackle this in the Clouds due to their low metallicity, why not simply propose for such an experiment in a more nearby metal-poor system (with or without LSST).
                7.2.1 – the opening paragraph is missing the science hook. There is a clear explanation for how/why LSST proper motions are going to be better than anything before, but the text doesn't actually say what we will learn from such measurements. Is it the case that the resulting constraints on the orbit or past accretion history break some current uncertainty in models of the MC evolution?
                • related, it wasn't clear why individual stars are needed. Shouldn't the proper motion precision being referenced here be for the population as a whole?
                Metadata
                Metadata
                Assignees
                Labels
                LSST reviewMagellanic Cloudsnoted in comments
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions