News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by Kaxo on Friday October 02, 2026 @03:53PM (#49937830)
The noise from the blocked-out star noticably decreases in 2017. Is that due to changes in the stars' activity cycle, or is that due to better processing/capture technology?
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by rietta on Friday October 02, 2026 @04:02PM (#49937951)
I do not know, but my best guess would be an improved post processing algorithm was introduced.
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by teekert on Friday October 02, 2026 @06:05PM (#49939192)
Wouldn't you just post-process all images again at that point?
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by ajcp on Friday October 02, 2026 @04:40PM (#49938343)
I believe it's because the star's brightness does fluctuate, so activity cycle based?
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by wthomp on Saturday October 03, 2026 @02:18PM (#49946485)
Not stellar activity — a flare wouldn’t be visible on this scale of image. The main concerns are the observatory —- how aligned all the many dozens of optics are — and the earths atmosphere on the nights the target was observed.
Re:A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four... by wthomp on Saturday October 03, 2026 @02:17PM (#49946475)
In 2017 we captured five nights worth of images and averaged them. Some early years only had one night.

Around 2019 we also figured out some better observing strategies— all the later data is taken without a coronagraph. Turns out the coronagraph was hurting more than it helped, close in. Not to say coronagraphs aren’t useful, but some aspects of the observatory control software aren’t in place to get the benefits out of the coronagraph.