Kepler Channel Noise Problem

Ah, thanks, Borislav. I don't suppose they could apply this to the rest of the Kepler target stars at once and still get back the hordes of data that was expected.

That leaves me with a final question before I'm satisfied (and upset v_v), what about the graphic showing the labels of the channels in the Kepler field? It seems to suggest that each channel gets used on only one section of the star field of view.

Thanx Borislav.

Also note that during the calibration period only a tiny fraction of stars were selected for data download.

Once in automatic mode its a Hot Jupiter machine.

Sirius_Alpha wrote:That leaves me with a final question before I'm satisfied (and upset v_v), what about the graphic showing the labels of the channels in the Kepler field? It seems to suggest that each channel gets used on only one section of the star.

I do not know. But if mens of the project speak of need of the alteration of the whole algorithm, that see problem global.

If they knew how to fix it it would have been fixed by now.

I suspect they don't know how to flag or separate the data yet. Which is why the dates are so tentative.

TheoA wrote:If they knew how to fix it it would have been fixed by now.

I suspect they don't know how to flag or separate the data yet. Which is why the dates are so tentative.

Possible tests of new software already go

http://kepler.nasa.gov/about/manager.html

2009 October 14. Mission Manager Update

Last week, the team performed two semi-weekly spacecraft contacts. This “engineering” contact utilizes the vehicle’s X-Band transmitter and the omni-directional antennas to give us a relatively low bandwidth connection (typically ranging from 2 to 8 kbps). Although insufficient to downlink the extensive science data being collected and stored onboard, this connection has the benefit that we do not have to leave the science attitude and hence can continue to collect science data as the operations team checks out the vehicle. These contacts typically last about 8 hours, during which time onboard logs are downlinked, along with a small portion of the science targets that have been chosen to give us a quick look at the instrument performance in case any adjustments need to be made. These contacts also give us the opportunity to upload new command sequences, software patches or parameter updates, if required.

Afterwards passed two weeks, but reports on successful issue scientific given no Oct. 17-19, 2009.
Oh, I remember well waiting for this news to note that Kepler COROT overtaken by duration of continuous observation, but now there is no joy ...

Borislav,

Those tests were to check the logs on the RAD750 safe mode issue. Not the algorithm.

While the patch may potentially be done in-flight, they should not do that as it will affect the integrity of the data being collected.

Ideally they should do it at a quarterly roll so they start from scratch.

As I read the internet blogs, its pretty clear everyone is completely confused as the Kepler team is deliberately trying to obscure the problem.

Its been a long time since I've seen a science team do this. Very disappointing.

Alright, I concede. I seem to have been mistaken about the whole thing.

Very disappointed now. Lazarus? Can you save me?

In the mean time, surely the Kepler team can get some energy drinks and pizza and stay up all night writing code. I've done it plenty of times.

I'm still of the opinion they do not know how to fix this.

I know a couple of guys who worked on the rover missions and no one on this planet can pull the all nighter's they do.

I repeat, if they knew how to fix it, it would be fixed by now.

I would think accusing the Kepler team of fraud is going too far. Even if Jupiters or the occasional Neptune are all Kepler uncovers, that will still indeed tell us valuable information about the efficiency of giant planet formation around a variety of stars. I am sure good science will come from Kepler, even if it isn't the science we all wanted. They say they can get it fixed later.

Yes, much good science will come.

Except for Priorities 1,2 &,3 for the mission, we should be good.

TheoA wrote:Except for Priorities 1,2 &,3 for the mission, we should be good.

Great, going to be waking up every night crying because of this. Kepler broke, CoRoT broke, TPF and SIM are financially broke, and Darwin is on the chopping block.

I guess it [will] pays to be a radial-velocity user these days [even in the coming years].

Sirius_Alpha wrote:

TheoA wrote:Except for Priorities 1,2 &,3 for the mission, we should be good.

Great, going to be waken up every night crying because of this. Kepler broke, CoRoT broke, TPF and SIM are financially broke, and Darwin is on the chopping block.

I guess it pays to be a radial-velocity user these days.

TESS is cancelled.

I hope that the team Kepler still give more information about the scale problem.

If problem really spreads on practically all data, that it is necessary to stop the collection scientific data and immediately go to test operation of the new algorithm. More so that fuel on board for correcting not infinitely.

Borislav,

I agree.

looks like they are going to shovel a ton of Jupiters down our throats.

And then any Earth type detections will be attempted.

Actually that is a misnomer. Right now the performance is degraded
enough that there very well could be no rocky planets in this survey.

Thinking some more, if they shut it down right now one other solution might occur to them.

Right now the 4 corner modules are used for star tracking. So obviously
they have a way to shut down modules and retask them. They should pick
these 3 modules and permanently retask them.

This would save much of the mission but would destroy the science value of the last 6 months of data
meaning the science team could not publish anything next year.

Hopefully they do the right thing.

Maybe we should put some pressure on them.

You know rather than relying on various press releases and posting wild demands for severed heads, it might be worth contacting them directly. There are contact addresses on the Kepler website you know.

But hey, don't let me ruin the fun of accusing William Borucki and the Kepler team of fraud in an internet forum

Pressure .... isn't that a bad thing when careful analysis is in call for? Even if they do shove hundreds of hot Jupiters down my throat, I will gladly digest them, surely they'll find intermediate and long-period Jovians too. What about finding Neptunes around K-type stars?

If they can't find earth-like planets in 1 yr orbits, what about earth-like planets in the HZ of mid K-type stars, orbital periods of a couple months or whatever. M dwarfs? While a 1 M_e planet at 1 AU around G star is sought, I would settle for a 2 M_e planet at 0.3 AU around a K star.

Edit: Lazarus's idea is valid. I'll contact them and see if I can get a response.