TIPS/JIM
December 16, 2010
Agenda:
INS Division News (Danny Lennon)
The Response of COS below 1150 Angstroms (Derck Massa)!
JWST IFUs and IFU Development Plans (Tracy Beck)!
The Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop Summary (Brad Whitmore)!
JWST Presence at the AAS (Jason Kalirai and Matt Mountain)
Next TIPS/JIM: January 20, 2011
INS Status
TIPS/JIM Meeting
December 16, 2011
First of all, Happy Forthcoming Holidays. Thanks to all the INS staff for ensuring our
contribution to the Institute's holiday party was a great success. In particular we should thank the
organizing team:
Pey Lian Lim (our coordinator), Amber Armstrong, Elizabeth Barker, Ralph Bohlin, Van Dixon,
Brian Ferguson, Harry Ferguson, Norman Grogin, Diane Karakla, Danny Lennon, Chris Long,
Ray Lucas, Margaret Meixner, Sarah Ogaz, Marshall Perrin, Paule Sonnentrucker, Mike Wolfe,
Loretta Willers, Doug Long, Bill Blair, Justin Ely
JWST
-------The Casani report on JWST is out and has been discussed in the press. Refer to the presentation
by Matt Mountain for its implications.
Jason Kalirai will discuss how we can present JWST at the forthcoming AAS meeting. Jason will
also organize a special meeting of AAS attendees for a more detailed discussion. Interested
parties should contact him.
TIPS/JIM
December 16, 2010
Agenda:
INS Division News (Danny Lennon)
The Response of COS below 1150 Angstroms (Derck Massa)!
JWST IFUs and IFU Development Plans (Tracy Beck)!
The Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop Summary (Brad Whitmore)!
JWST Presence at the AAS (Jason Kalirai and Matt Mountain)
Next TIPS/JIM: January 20, 2011
The response of COS below
1150 Angstroms
(The new cycle 19 settings)
The COS team, the IDT (esp, S. Osterman, S.
Penton and S. Beland), S. McCandliss (JHU) and
P. Chayer (STScI/CSA)
Background:
•
•
•
•
•
MgF2 has very low transmission below 1150 Å
HST OTA has MgF2 coatings
STIS MAMA window is MgF2 = thousands of reflections
COS FUV gratings have MgF2 coatings
But, COS FUV has only one bounce and windowless
detectors
•  Expected to have some FUV response
•  First seen in SMOV -- McCandliss et al. (2010)
Two cal programs explored COS FUV:
•  12081 to establish FUV (and more?) G140L response
•  12082 to explore G130M FUV response.
The G140L -- A rock and a hard place
GD50
G130M
Resolution
Problems -- Challenges
•  New settings use FUVB only -- no wavecal
•  Cannot use the BOA -- it has a MgF2 substrate, and
does not transmit below 1150Å.
•  Resolution of the G140L and G130M are comparable
in the FUV.
•  G140L has complete coverage, but must contend
with the shoulder in the response curve.
•  G130M avoids the shoulder, but need two settings for
complete coverage
•  There may be some (~1cm2) EUV response.
Summary
Mode
Range
Aeff
R
G140L/1280
920-1160Å 10-20 cm2
2100
G130M/1096
1040-1081Å 15-25 cm2
2300
G130M/1055
900-1041Å 15-25 cm2
1800
For flat spectra, G130M/1096, segment B only:
• Bright limit reached
f(lam) = 7.5×10-11 erg cm-2s-1Å-1
• S/N = 10/resol in 60 min f(lam) = 2.7×10-13 erg cm-2s-1Å-1
TIPS/JIM
December 16, 2010
Agenda:
INS Division News (Danny Lennon)
The Response of COS below 1150 Angstroms (Derck Massa)!
JWST IFUs and IFU Development Plans (Tracy Beck)!
The Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop Summary (Brad Whitmore)!
JWST Presence at the AAS (Jason Kalirai and Matt Mountain)
Next TIPS/JIM: January 20, 2011
JWST IFUs and Data Tool
Development Plans
Tracy Beck
JWST NIRSpec Instrument Scientist
Integral Field
Spectroscopy… with JWST!
IFU Data Cube
Integral Field Units – provide 3-D
imaging spectroscopy of a small region
of the sky – every image location has a
(R~3000) spectrum associated with it!
Y (spatial)
JWST NIRSpec – 1-5µm IFU
With a 3” x 3” field of view (0.”1
square spatial sampling)
X (spatial)
JWST MIRI – 5-25µm IFU spectra
acquired with 4 IFUs. IFU spatial
fields scale with wavelength. This
“MRS” mode is MIRI’s ONLY
R=3000 spectral capability!
STScI Sponsored Workshop “IFUs in the Era of JWST”
•  Oct 26-28, STScI hosted the first major international
workshop on Integral Field Spectroscopy to take
place in the US
•  60+ Astronomers and Instrument developers from
four continents participated
•  All talks are archived: https://webcast.stsci.edu/webcast/
(view the archive for the week of Oct. 25th)
•  IFUs are in our Future!
•  ~15 IFUs presently in operation at ground-based telescopes
•  2 IFUS on JWST, MIRI and NIRSpec
•  First-light IFU instruments planned for both TMT and e-ELT (the
latter has 2)
IFU Data Analysis Tools
Science from IFU surveys is making an impact, but
the results are often very slow in coming…
IFU Users are experts at “reinventing the wheel” – by
necessity!
Robust, widely adopted data analysis tools don’t exist for IFU
data. Very Common Data Analysis for IFU sets:
•  Basic Data cube addition/subtraction (some tools exist)
•  Automated profile/dispersion fitting for basic kinematic
analysis (Does not Exist)
•  Make IFU velocity channel maps or movies for publication/
presentation analysis (Does not Exist)
IFU Data Analysis Tools
IFU Users are experts at “reinventing the wheel” –
by necessity!
“Qfitsview” – one of the
most popular 3-D cube
visualization tools
(work with images &
spectra at the same time)
Very Common Data
Analysis for IFU sets:
Basic Data cube addition/subtraction – combine multiple 2-D image
planes to form an average image, or 1-D spectra to make an average spectrum. Fit
continuum and subtract from an emission line, to make an emission line map.
(Exists in some viewing tools – BASIC functionalities).
IFU Data Analysis Tools
Very Common Data Analysis for IFU sets:
Profile/dispersion fitting:
Hα emission
Hα velocity
Hα dispersion
Fit a Gaussian or line profile to
an emission line, or crosscorrelate a template to a
spectrum, to derive kinematics in
a target. (velocity, dispersion)
z~2 galaxy From Forster-Schreiber et al. (2006)
If a datacube “visualization tool”
does not provide a means to
make publication quality figures,
users will need to use a different
environment to do that, and the
tool won’t be widely adopted. Jet from a young
star - Beck et al.
Make velocity
channel
maps or
movies for
publication
and
presentations
IFU Data Analysis Tools
IFU Users are experts at “reinventing the wheel” –
by necessity!
Very Common Data Analysis for IFU sets:
•  Basic Data cube addition/subtraction (some tools exist)
•  Line Profile/dispersion fitting for basic kinematic analysis
(Does NOT Exist)
•  Make velocity channel maps or movies for publication/
presentations analysis (Does NOT Exist)
IFU Data will be more accessible and easier to work
with and publish for all JWST users if we don’t have to
start from ‘step 1’ for these very common data analysis
techniques
•  IFU Data Analysis Framework document, by
Bacon, Beck, Greenfield & Stiavelli (ESO /
STScI collaboration)
ESO’s IFU Development
Plans
•  ESO - Development is very strongly linked to their
complex 1’ x 1’ field of view IFU, “MUSE” (300 x
300 x 4200 size datacubes). First light à 2012.
•  Wrote requirements for an IFU cube analysis tool,
and looked at available options
•  Recent decision: work with NRAO to update/adapt
the “CASA Viewer” that exists for radio data and is
being further developed for ALMA
•  ESO is a partner in ALMA, and so will be a strong
contributor to the CASA Viewer development work C++ Backbone,
•  We will keep all communication channels open for viewer has Qt
this development.
GUI interface
–  CASA Viewer has no capability for plug-in expansion
by users (or us) L
–  STScI has no means of visibility into this
development. L
STScI IFU Development
•  Goals –
–  Provide visualization and analysis tools that will
optimize IFU science return for non-expert
users, to improve impact and usability of the
JWST IFUs. (Incorporate existing visualization
tools whenever possible).
–  At the end of the day, our priorities MUST be for
data visualization and analysis of JWST MIRI
and NIRSpec IFU data products. (But we hope
our efforts will be useful for others).
STScI IFU Development
•  For the first time, in FY11 I officially have a
small allotment (10%) of my functional work
time dedicated to IFU development.
•  Plan of action:
–  Create an internal “STScI IFU Working Group” (meet ~1x per
month – first meeting was in Nov. 2010).
–  Work with STScI developers, get familiar with 3-D datasets and
3-D .fits structures, existing cube viewing/manipulation tools.
–  Work to develop our STScI requirements on IFU datacube
viewing and analysis tools.
–  Complete an exercise similar to ESO – identify an existing tool
that we might be able to expand upon and develop.
TIPS/JIM
December 16, 2010
Agenda:
INS Division News (Danny Lennon)
The Response of COS below 1150 Angstroms (Derck Massa)!
JWST IFUs and IFU Development Plans (Tracy Beck)!
The Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop Summary (Brad Whitmore)!
JWST Presence at the AAS (Jason Kalirai and Matt Mountain)
Next TIPS/JIM: January 20, 2011
Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop
November 15 - 16, 2010
Goals
-  Help prepare a sizeable new segment of the HST user community for grism reductions
-  Help train our own STScI staff likewise
- Transfer of knowledge from ECF
* Thanks to ECF, and to ESA for co-sponsoring meeting
Cycle 18 Grism Usage
•  Large complement of CY18 GO IR Grism observations
•  ~100 orbits in MCT (Riess) TOO for SN1a
ID
PI
Orbits
Title
12177
Van Dokkum
248
3D-HST: A Spectroscopic Galaxy Evolution Treasury
12181
Deming
115
The Atmospheric Structure of Giant Hot Exoplanets
12190
Koekemoer
32
WFC3/IR Spectroscopy of the Highest Redshift Black Hole
Candidates
12203
Stanford
30
Rest Frame Optical Spectroscopy of Galaxy Clusters at 1.6<z<1.9
12217
Lucas
6
Spectroscopy of faint T dwarf calibrators: understanding the
substellar mass function and the coolest brown dwarfs
12230
Swain
18
The effect of radiation forcing on an exoplanet atmosphere
12247
Tanvir
18x3
Identifying and studying gamma-ray bursts at very high redshifts
12251
Berta
24
The First Characterization of a Super-Earth Atmosphere
12283
Malkan
280par
WFC3 Infrared Spectroscopic Parallel Survey WISP: A Survey of
Star Formation Across Cosmic Time
12314
Apai
24
Mapping Brown Dwarfs: The Evolution of Cloud Properties
Through the L/T Transition
Here is the agenda
for the meeting.
Go to the Webcast
page to see
presentations or the
slides.
Followup:
•  Sami Neimi is looking into possibility of
continuing the HLA ACS grism pipeline, and
possibly extending to WFC3.
•  We are considering proposing a mini-workshop
on multi-object spectroscopy for next fall.
•  Howard Bushouse is leading the WFC3 grism
working group.
Searching the Hubble Legacy Archive for ACS G800L GRISM
observations
- Type hla.stsci.edu
in your browser. Click on enter site here.
- Type 0 0 r=180d
ACS
in search box (i.e., all sky search) and
in advanced search box.
- Type
under the Spectral_Elt box and
under Level (color), then click Images
*g800*
4
To look at 47919 ECF ACS grism extractions go back and click on
ACSGrism instead of ACS.
With a specific target (e.g., SN 1987A, Abell 2218) you can look
at footprints.
TIPS/JIM
December 16, 2010
Agenda:
INS Division News (Danny Lennon)
The Response of COS below 1150 Angstroms (Derck Massa)!
JWST IFUs and IFU Development Plans (Tracy Beck)!
The Slitless Spectroscopy Workshop Summary (Brad Whitmore)!
JWST Presence at the AAS (Jason Kalirai and Matt Mountain)
Next TIPS/JIM: January 20, 2011
JWST and the AAS
The Plan for the AAS
-  A new JWST Backdrop
-  A 50” 3D TV
-  A 42” plasma TV
-  “Pieces” of JWST at booth
-  Take home informational material
- Brochures
- Education material
- Science media guide
-  Link to social media and websites
-  Take home items to increase “word of mouth”
Dec 16th, 2010
TIPS Meeting
JWST Community and Public Outreach
JWST Exposure is Growing!
Dec 16th, 2010
TIPS Meeting
The Super Conducting Super Collider
- courtesy Robert Smith
•
•
•
To rising cost estimates; there was a widespread and corrosive perception
that the initial cost had been a crude buy-in. I think it was approved at around
$4.4 Billion and within months extra billions were added. This perception
helped `frame' the later debates and discussions and the cost at the end had
gone up to at least $11 billion.
The perception of poor management. Hence by the time of cancellation, not
only was the cost rising endlessly (or so it seemed), the management
performance to date by the DOE and physicists gave no confidence things
could be got back on track.
By the time of the SSC's death the broad domestic political debate was largely
centered on the deficit and deficit reduction (e.g., Perot's run for President in
1992). Thus the new Congress that met in 1993 was a very different beast
from the one that approved the SSC in 1987 and was seriously eyeing cuts
–  the SSC ended up directly against the Space Station. By 1993, the Congress had decided
there had to be a symbolic sacrifice to appease the deficit gods and it came down to the SSC
vs the Space Station. Only one winner in that fight.
•
Very hard to make a clear and punchy public case for the science of the SSC:
What the heck is the Higgs Boson and why should we care?
The Super Conducting Super Collider
- courtesy Robert Smith
•  Enemies: Scientist opponents of the SSC were willing to speak
out very publicly against the SSC. It's bad when a Princeton
Nobel Prize winner testifies on the Hill against your project. A
widespread fear that the SSC would eat everyone's lunch +
some opponents were angry at the hype (SSC would cure AIDs
etc).
•  The high energy physicists did a poor if not inept job of
constructing a strong `coalition' of supporters. They certainly
seem to have started woefully late.
•  With the end of the Cold War, high energy physics was just not
as prestigious by 1993 as it had been earlier. Molecular biology
had eclipsed it (e.g. the Genome Project)
nature
THE TELES
CO
PE THAT AT
E
New York Times, 10 November 2010
ASTRONOM
Y
NATURE | EDITORIAL "
Scope for change "
Nature 468, 346 (18 November 2010) "
Tough lessons must be learned if NASA
is to avoid repeating a costly accounting
error. "
“Given Hubble's transformational impact on astronomy — and on the
wider public's engagement with science — the case for a nextgeneration, all-purpose space observatory seems as strong as ever.
That makes it all the more urgent to launch the JWST in a timely
manner. Once Hubble is retired, the JWST will become the crucial
tool with which astronomers can follow up on discoveries made by
wide-field survey telescopes on the ground and in space.”!
NATURE | CORRESPONDENCE
rt
Space telescope is worth the effo
mel
Matt Mountain, John Grunsfeld & Heidi
Nature 468, 508 (25 November 2010)
Ham
pe that ate astronomy' could more
Your sensationalist headline 'The telesco
pe
e of NASA's James Webb Space Telesco
appropriately have highlighted the promis
, 1028–1030; 2010).
(JWST) for astronomy's future (Nature 467
called for in the recent US decadal
are
or
—
et
plan
this
off
or
on
t
exis
s
litie
No faci
finding the first galaxies or for detecting
for
—
s
ysic
oph
astr
and
my
ono
astr
of
survey
n part
other stars. These capabilities have bee
liquid water on habitable planets around
n.
of the JWST science plan since its inceptio
The Super Conducting Super Collider
- courtesy Robert Smith
•  Enemies: Scientist opponents of the SSC were willing to speak
out very publicly against the SSC. It's bad when a Princeton
Nobel Prize winner testifies on the Hill against your project. A
widespread fear that the SSC would eat everyone's lunch +
some opponents were angry at the hype (SSC would cure AIDs
etc).
•  The high energy physicists did a poor if not inept job of
constructing a strong `coalition' of supporters. They certainly
seem to have started woefully late.
•  With the end of the Cold War, high energy physics was just not
as prestigious by 1993 as it had been earlier. Molecular biology
had eclipsed it (e.g. the Genome Project)