I used Peter's images among others as a basis for comparison. I think we have to lock things down pretty soon, but if he makes a 12h long simulated mosaic for 331 in the next day or so I can easily drop it in.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Chris Carilli <[email protected]> wrote: > I think a model in which we can say that noise and resolution were set > using HERA and assuming we can remove the continuum would be a lot more > convincing to a referee than using some fake and saying 'the peaks are > 10sigma'. and Peter has done such modeling. as for making it a strip, i > think that would be straight forward doing a few sequential fields and > using standard mosaic sofware. peter could probably do this in a matter > of a few days? > > cc > > > > > On 01/28/2016 12:03 PM, danny jacobs wrote: > > Here are some other options that address most of the comments. > > Aaron, I played with making the foreground strip smaller, but without the > broader context of the galaxy it was hard to tell the context of the field > on the sky. I've played with the positioning of things to try and squeeze > things a bit more. > > > About the 'simulations' > Its actually not even a model. Since time was of the essence I used an > algorithm that makes non-gaussian random fields. To make it look right, I > compared with the actual instrumental simulation to match up the minimum > and maximum size scales. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Chris Carilli <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is this a real image put through the HERA configuration/sampling then >> imaged and mosaiced etc... or just the model? >> >> cc >> >> >> > Neat. >> > >> > Minor tweak: shift the hour angle so that the HERA stripe is in the >> > center. >> > That has the additional benefit of making the galactic plane passage >> > through the HERA declination contiguous. >> > >> > You might want to denote the HERA core synthesized beam size at z=7 and >> > z=10. What scale do you smooth to? >> > >> > I'd put z=10 above z=7 so it reads going down chronologically. >> > >> > Also, any reason why we use 8 degrees rather than 10? >> > >> > -Josh >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:46 PM, danny jacobs <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Proposers, >> >> >> >> I've replaced the imaging figure with the new figure (attached) as >> >> discussed on the telecon. I played with a few of the other options >> >> suggested on the telecon, but liked this one best. It takes up three >> >> inches >> >> of page. I can shrink it to two if necessary. >> >> Thoughts welcome. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> ~Danny >> >> >> >> -- >> >> ================================================================ >> >> Daniel C. Jacobs >> >> KE7DHQ >> >> National Science Foundation Fellow >> >> Arizona State University >> >> School of Earth and Space Exploration >> >> Low Frequency Cosmology >> >> Phone: (505) 500 4521 >> >> Homepage: http://loco.lab.asu.edu/danny_jacobs/ >> >> MWA: mwatelescope.org >> >> HERA: reionization.org >> >> PAPER: eor.berkeley.edu >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > > -- > ================================================================ > Daniel C. Jacobs > KE7DHQ > National Science Foundation Fellow > Arizona State University > School of Earth and Space Exploration > Low Frequency Cosmology > Phone: (505) 500 4521 > Homepage: http://loco.lab.asu.edu/danny_jacobs/ > MWA: mwatelescope.org > HERA: reionization.org > PAPER: eor.berkeley.edu > > > -- ================================================================ Daniel C. Jacobs KE7DHQ National Science Foundation Fellow Arizona State University School of Earth and Space Exploration Low Frequency Cosmology Phone: (505) 500 4521 Homepage: http://loco.lab.asu.edu/danny_jacobs/ MWA: mwatelescope.org HERA: reionization.org PAPER: eor.berkeley.edu
