1 / 37

Objectives

Objectives. How should Gemini respond in terms of scientific effectiveness to the the current competition from Subaru, ESO and perhaps even Keck? What does the Gemini Science Staff want to see discussed and proposed at Aspen 2003 What is our vision of the Future?.

kasia
Download Presentation

Objectives

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Objectives • How should Gemini respond in terms of scientific effectiveness to the the current competition from Subaru, ESO and perhaps even Keck? • What does the Gemini Science Staff want to see discussed and proposed at Aspen 2003 • What is our vision of the Future?

  2. The Gemini telescopes are designed to compete by exploiting D/q For background or sky noise limited observations: S Telescope Diameter (D)  N Delivered Image Diameter (q)B Speed =1/Time to given S/Na D2 /q2 . h/B .  Where:is the product of the system throughput and detector QE B is the instantaneous background flux

  3. Gemini South IR Performance and some results 4.7mm R=100,000 Rogers et al (in prep.)

  4. Flamingos / Gemini-S Flamingos on Gemini-S Deep J,H,K images in 1 field south of the Orion Core Total of 4hr integration - 0.4 arcsec images Preliminary ResultsJ,H,K Luminosity Functions show the expected peak near 0.3 M(solar)a slow decline or plateau in the brown dwarf regime (J~14.5 - 17.5 mag) for unreddened objectsA more rapid decline below the deuterium-burning limit and indications of a cut-off at a few M(Jupiter)Observations are complete to well below K=19mag. Lucas et al

  5. IR Optimization works:Gemini-South IR (4 micron) Commissioning Images of Galactic Center • Simons & Becklin 1992 • IRTF (3.6m) - L’ • 16,000 images shift/add • An entire night…. • Gemini South + ABU + fast tip/tilt • Brackett  • FWHM ~ 0.35” • 1 minute integration

  6. 14 mJy/pixel after further IR Optimization Gemini North: M87 jet at 10 mm– Deepest image ever taken in the mid IR Perlman, Sparks, et al. HST/F300W, 0.3 m OSCIR, 10.8 m • Sensitivity (1, 1 h): 0.028 mJy/pix (pix scale = 0.089”) 0.1 mJy on point source

  7. Relative through-put of “Gemini Silver” vs. Aluminum Telescopes (450-1100nm) 1.4 • Ratio of System Transmission • Three Reflecting Surfaces 1.0

  8. Gemini in the Optical – GMOS North comes on-line 60min – 140min per filter Seeing (FWHM) 0.5 – 0.7 arcsec 5 sigma detection limits : g'=27.5 mag r'=27.2 mag i'=26.3 mag GMOS on Gemini 5.5’ x 5.5’ PMN2314+0201 Quasar at z=4.11 Gemini SV PI: Isobel Hook

  9. GMOS Queue Observing 2002A Summary of the completion rates as fraction of programs ========================================================== Band Completion rate >90% >50% <50% ----------------------------------------- 1 10/14=0.71 11/14=0.79 3/14=0.21 2 2/8 =0.25 3/8 =0.38 5/8 =0.63 3 2/8 =0.25 4/8 =0.50 4/8 =0.50 4 1/11=0.09 2/11 =0.18 9/11=0.82 Many observations in band 3 and 4 were taken in poor observing conditions, and the programs in these bands with significant data were programs that could tolerate CC=70% or worse, and seeing of 1arcsec or worse. Gemini North reliability >90% (<10% down time) GMOS Observing efficiency (shutter open/elapsed) ~ 70%

  10. GMOS: Evolution of ages and metalicity in Clusters from z= 1 to present epoch (Jørgensen 2002) The S/N needed for this type of work is 20-40 per Angstrom in the restframe of the cluster GMOS can deliver this. 5.5 hrs sky subtracted wavelength

  11. Example object: N&S subtracted I=23.8 z=1.07 [OII] 3727at 7700Å The GDDS team

  12. GDDS: ultra-super-preliminary results These are just the‘easy’ ones so far! Full 100,000 secswill pound on z=1.5old red galaxiesN&S works! Ultimate ‘sky null’ technique. Could reach I=27 in 106 secs on 30m The GDDS team

  13. Wavelength/velocity [OII]3727 structure has two velocity components at +/-400km/s 3C324 3-D data cubeat z = 1.2 Y ( 5 arcsec ) X (7 arcsec) Bunker et al (2002)

  14. CIRPASS early results– first use of anear-IR IFU on an 8m-class telescope. The example from the z=1.2 radio galaxy 3C324. Dispersion runs horizontally, spatial direction is vertical; each of the 500 IFU lenslets produces a spectrum 2 pixels high. The preliminary processing (basic sky subtraction and cosmic ray rejection) of this single 20 minute exposure shows a very clear detection of the redshifted [OIII] 500.7nm emission line (centre of the frame). http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/cirpass/cirpassDemoScience.html GMOS – IFU now available on Gemini North CIRPASS – IR IFU will be available on Gemini South in Service Mode in 2003A

  15. 2012 2015 Gemini N ? Gemini S 2000 2010 Exploring the Gemini context 2000 2010 SIRTF Keck I&II Keck-Inter. ESO-VLTI SOFIA NGST ALMA SIM VLA-upgrade SUBARU UT1,UT2,UT3,UT4 Magellan 1&2 HET LBT CELT LSST OWL VISTA and maybe GSMT… The decade of adaptive optics The era of the “giants”

  16. Exploring the Gemini context- and responding 2000 2010 SIRTF Keck I&II Keck-Inter. ESO-VLTI SOFIA NGST ALMA SIM VLA-upgrade SUBARU UT1,UT2,UT3,UT4 Magellan 1&2 HET LBT CELT LSST OWL VISTA and maybe GSMT… Michelle NIFS 2012 2015 Gemini N ? ALTAIR + LGS GMOS Gemini S GAOS -> MCAO 2000 2010 GNIRS NICI Flam. 2 T-RECS The decade of adaptive optics The era of the “giants”

  17. Our communities have struggled to deliver instruments 1.0 Slip Factor = original schedule + slip original schedule Schedule Performance Data complied by Adrian Russell

  18. Queue Observing Gemini’s queue support threshold Gemini-North Time Distribution New Instrument Mode Tests Above 50% Classical time allocated ALTAIR LGS NIFS ALTAIR (cont.) Hokupa’a-S MICHELLE ALTAIR

  19. Queue Observing Gemini’s queue support threshold Gemini-South Time Distribution Above 50% Classical time allocated New Modes GNIRS (cont) NICI MCAO FLAMINGOS-2 bHROS SCAO GNIRS GSAOI GMOS-S T-ReCS (cont) T-ReCS

  20. Challenges • Instruments, instruments, instruments…… • Gemini South will be without facility instruments until mid 2003 from the user perspective • And instrument delivery schedules constrain science availability of Gemini Telescopes • How do we maximize our science effectiveness? • Should we commission everything we get?

  21. Responding to the Future • MCAO • Building a system • Aspen 2003 Instrumentation Workshop • Planning Gemini instruments for 2007+ • The competition in the next decade (post 2012) • Exploring our “market place”

  22. Exploring the Gemini contextSpace verses the Ground Takamiya (2001)

  23. R = 30,000 R = 5,000 R = 1,000 R = 5 Defining the role of Gemini in the era of a 6.5m NGST Assuming a detected S/N of 10 for NGST on a point source, with 4x1000s integration Time gain GEMINI advantage 1 102 NGST advantage 104

  24. Redefining “wide field” in the 8 – 10m era PMN2314+0201 Quasar at z=4.11 5 sigma detection limits : g'=27.5 mag r'=27.2 mag i'=26.3 mag >1000 objects NICMOS HDF 49”x49” GMOS on Gemini 5.5’ x 5.5’ 235 Objects down to AB mag 28.8 at 1.6 mm

  25. The Future and Exploiting our strengths • Image quality • Diffraction limited, near IR AO, thermal IR • Optical – exploiting queue scheduling -- AO enhanced seeing • Efficiency • Minimizing emissivity -- Maximizing through-put • Highly multiplexed spectroscopy • The “automated queue” • Innovation • How do we sustain innovation is such a competitive environment? But let’s look a little further ahead……

  26. Entering the Era of Giants- the Challengers in the post 2012 World ALMA

  27. CELT GSMT Entering the Era of Giants- the Challengers in the post 2012 World The 30m challengers The ~6-8m challenger NGST The 100m challenger OWL

  28. Looking Forward to 2012 Space verses the Ground Ground based territory NGST territory Takamiya (2001)

  29. R = 10,000 R = 1,000 R = 5 Comparative performance of a 30m GSMT with a 6.5m NGST Assuming a detected S/N of 10 for NGST on a point source, with 4x1000s integration GSMT advantage NGST advantage

  30. GSMT: Galaxy Evolution Courtesy of M. Bolte

  31. Resolved Stellar Populations- results from MCAO simulation GSMT/CELT NGST (Simulations 120 sec x 15 coadds)

  32. OWL 100m J Band 80% Strehl 104 sec 0.4’’ seeing Search for exo-biospheres:Solar system @30 light years(Gilmozzi et al 2002) O.1’’ Earth Jupiter

  33. Gemini’s Environment,“Aspen 2003”& our window of opportunity 2000 2010 SIRTF Keck I&II Keck-Inter. ESO-VLTI SOFIA NGST ALMA SIM VLA-upgrade SUBARU UT1,UT2,UT3,UT4 Magellan 1&2 HET LBT CELT LSST OWL VISTA and maybe GSMT… Mid-IR opportunity? Multi-IFU & MCAO++? Michelle NIFS 2012 2015 Gemini N ? ALTAIR + LGS GMOS Gemini S GAOS -> MCAO 2000 2010 Aspen 2003 GNIRS NICI Flam. 2 Extreme AO? T-RECS Seeing enhanced R=1,000,000 spectroscopy? The decade of adaptive optics The era of the “giants”

  34. Gemini’s Environment,“Aspen 2003”& our window of opportunity 2000 2010 SIRTF Keck I&II Keck-Inter. ESO-VLTI SOFIA NGST ALMA SIM VLA-upgrade In this evolving environment, timing as well as performance is key SUBARU UT1,UT2,UT3,UT4 Magellan 1&2 HET LBT CELT LSST OWL VISTA and maybe GSMT… Mid-IR opportunity? Multi-IFU & MCAO++? Michelle NIFS 2012 2015 Gemini N ? ALTAIR + LGS GMOS Gemini S GAOS -> MCAO 2000 2010 Aspen 2003 GNIRS NICI Flam. 2 Extreme AO? T-RECS Seeing enhanced R=1,000,000 spectroscopy? The decade of adaptive optics The era of the “giants”

  35. Conclusions and thoughts • Staying competitive in the 2010 decade is going to be challenging: • We will have to [very thoughtfully] play to our strengths • Gemini: IR performance, image quality Mauna Kea and Cerro Pachon • SUBARU: Extremely versatile high-performance telescope, unprecedented wide field performance, Mauna Kea • ESO…….. ????? • By 2012, in the era of, ALMA, NGST and “the emerging Giants” we must be globally acknowledged, world-class science machines • But probably quite specialized ‘queue based’ machines • And ‘classical’ time will be allocated to Project Teams (and their instruments), not individuals….. • optimum use of “remote observing” to create “virtual teams”

  36. Challenges • Instruments, instruments, instruments…… • Gemini South will be without facility instruments until mid 2003 from the user perspective • And instrument delivery schedules constrain science availability of Gemini Telescopes • Should we commission everything we get?

  37. Conclusions and thoughts • We must understand our respective “market places” – starting today • Can we continue to duplicate facility instruments at $7M - $15M each? • Should we begin to explore time exchange models?

More Related