Skip to main content

Kepler 2: Photometry, With a Vengance

The highly successful NASA Kepler Mission was a beautiful thing, and its beauty was primarily in its simplicity. The mission is based on a 1-meter Schmidt camera in space that resides in an orbit about the Sun with a semimajor axis slightly larger than the Earth's. This "Earth-trailing" orbit allowed it to maintain a continuous gaze on a single target field near the constellations Cygnus and Lyra, just off of the Galactic plane.

Once Kepler reached its orbit, it blew away a dust shield that covered the front of the telescope and from that point onward there were very minimal moving parts. On the space telescope there is only a single instrument: a 340 megapixel CCD imager of epic proportions. There are no other instruments to swap in and out of the light path, no filters, not even a shutter. For four years Kepler measured the brightnesses (relative fluxes) of ~150,000 target stars searching for periodic eclipses of planetary companions.
One of Kepler's infamous reaction wheels.

The Kepler telescopes only major moving parts were four "reaction wheels," which used the principle of the conservation of angular momentum to keep the telescope precisely aimed at the target field. Early in the mission, one of these wheels failed. Fortunately, only three wheels were needed, and Kepler soldiered on past its expected mission lifetime of 3.5 years and was poised to enter into a glorious extended mission, with a target list modified to include thousands of additional red dwarfs, the stars my group and I love so much. However, on the eve of the extended mission, a second reaction wheel failed, leaving Kepler without the ability to maintain precise pointing. Cue sad trombone.

However, there were rumors and stirrings that there may be a way to operate the telescope using only two reaction wheels. The space-flight and control-theory wizards at NASA Ames Research Center have been working tirelessly since Kepler's death was announced. Using creativity, grit and the power of engineering and science, the wizards have come up with a viable plan. Instead of a third reaction wheel to stabilize the telescope, they'll use radiation pressure supplied by the Sun. That's right, the Sun will be Kepler's third wheel!

Light can be thought of as a wave or particle phenomenon. Light doesn't care which, but if you think of light as discrete particles, their collision with, say, a spacecraft imparts a bit of an impulse. Not much, mind you. But there are many, many photons streaming out of the Sun, and their individual momenta adds up. And since the Kepler spacecraft has a nice house-roof-shaped ridge along its back solar panels, the spacecraft can be oriented like a rudder in the stream of photons coming from the Sun. Viola!

Now let's hope that the preliminary tests show that this is truly viable, and then let's hope that NASA has the funding and will to make K2 a reality.


Popular posts from this blog

An annual note to all the (NSF) haters

It's that time of year again: students have recently been notified about whether they received the prestigious NSF Graduate Student Research Fellowship. Known in the STEM community as "The NSF," the fellowship provides a student with three years of graduate school tuition and stipend, with the latter typically 5-10% above the standard institutional support for first- and second-year students. It's a sweet deal, and a real accellerant for young students to get their research career humming along smoothly because they don't need to restrict themselves to only advisors who have funding: the students fund themselves!
This is also the time of year that many a white dude executes what I call the "academic soccer flop." It looks kinda like this:

It typically sounds like this: "Congrats! Of course it's easier for you to win the NSF because you're, you know, the right demographic." Or worse: "She only won because she's Hispanic."…

Culture: Made Fresh Daily

There are two inspirations for this essay worth noting. The first is an impromptu talk I gave to the board of trustees at Thatcher School while I was visiting in October as an Anacapa Fellow. Spending time on this remarkable campus interacting with the students, faculty and staff helped solidify my notions about how culture can be intentionally created. The second source is Beam Times and Lifetimes by Sharon Tarweek, an in-depth exploration of the culture of particle physics told by an anthropologist embedded at SLAC for two decades. It's a fascinating look at the strange practices and norms that scientists take for granted.
One of the stories that scientists tell themselves, whether implicitly or explicitly, is that science exists outside of and independent of society. A corollary of this notion is that if a scientific subfield has a culture, e.g. the culture of astronomy vs. the culture of chemistry, that culture is essential rather than constructed. That is to say, scientific c…

The subtle yet real racism of the Supreme Court

Judge Roberts, a member of the highest court in the land, which is currently hearing the sad story of mediocre college aspirant Abigail Fischer, recently asked, "What unique ­perspective does a minority student bring to a physics class? I’m just wondering what the benefits of diversity are in that situation?" 
Did you catch the white supremacy in this question? If not, don't feel bad because it's subtly hidden beneath the cloaking field of colorblind racism. (As for Scalia's ign'nt-ass statements, I'm not even...)
Try rephrasing the question: "What unique perspective does a white student bring to a physics classroom?" The answer is, of course, absolutely nothing! Why? Because race isn't biological, and is therefore not deterministic of cognitive abilities. Did you perhaps forget that you knew that when considering Roberts' question? If so, again, it's understandable. Our society and culture condition all of us to forget basic facts …