Proof-reading EG Drashner1 Administrator Posts: 15,271 Threads: 710 Joined: Sep 2012 06-07-2021, 12:27 AM (06-06-2021, 04:58 PM)NexusEye Wrote: On the Argus Array page the figure given for the light gathering capability of the Argus Array, just over 10^27 m^2, is inconsistent with the description of the array as 8000 20 AU diameter spheres. Assuming the array is composed of 8000 20 AU wide bubbles its cross section would be pi*(10 AU)^2*8000 or 5.625*10^28 m^2. This discrepancy seems to be caused by two factors. First what seems to be the original source for the 10^27 figure uses a factor of 2pi for the cross-sectional area calculation instead of just pi, while the surface area that could view an arbitrary portion of the sky would be 2pi*r^2 (as the surface area of one hemisphere would be half of the sphere's total surface area of 4pi*r^2) much of this surface is at an angle and the total cross section and thus effective light gathering area would be still pi*r^2. The other cause seems to be an order of magnitude error. While 2pi*(10 AU)^2*8000 is still not consistent with 10^27 m^2 if 10 AU is substituted with 1 AU then the resulting figure is 1.125*10^27 m^2 or just over 10^27 m^2 which matches what currently appears in the article. In order for the Argus Array page to be self-consistent either the light gathering area must be increased to 5.625*10^28 m^2 (and the necessary photon collection times be recalculated), the number of sensor elements be reduced 160 20 AU telescopes, the number of elements be kept the same but the diameter of each telescope be reduced from 20 AU to 2√2 AU, or some combination of the previous. Thanks for catching this! Given how we roll around here, I can confidently say that our preferred course of action would be to increase the light gathering area and then recalculate the photon collection times. That said - and bearing in mind I've only quickly skimmed the source forum post that you linked to after reading your post this AM and don't have a good sense of the level of math involved - how challenging/labor intensive is recalculating the photon collection times? If this is something you could do, that would be very helpful If that's something you'd rather not/don't have the time or know how to do, then another member may be able to (the original poster from the forum is no longer active with the project, I'm afraid). Or we may be able to adjust the wording in the article to gloss over that particular aspect of things. Thoughts? Todd « Next Oldest | Next Newest »