Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

What does the Decadal recommended 25 HZ exoplanet spectra mean?

Presentation #102.144 in the session Poster Session.

Published onJun 20, 2022
What does the Decadal recommended 25 HZ exoplanet spectra mean?

The Astro2020 Decadal Survey recommended a “future large IR/O/UV telescope optimized for observing habitable exoplanets and general astrophysics” to be ready by end of the decade and that mission “to search for biosignatures from a robust number of about ~25 habitable zone [exo]planets.” But how can 25 spectra be achieved? What is the potential SNR, spectral resolution and bandwidth of 25 spectra? Can a higher number of earth-sized exoplanets be spectrally characterized with diminished SNR, spectral resolution or bandwidth and what potential lies in an increased quality of SNR, spectral resolution and bandwidth? If a tiered approached is used, as suggested in the LUVOIR final report, to screen exoplanets in a single, 20% bandwidth sub-spectra band for water and then to follow up with broader, higher quality spectra on interesting planets, are those higher quality spectra achievable within reasonable integration times on only a subset of the ‘screened’ targets, and if so, which subset of targets? Does the 800-1000 nm sub-band offer the highest potential number of characterized planets, given the quantum efficiency fall-off of silicon detectors in this band, or would a different sub-band, such as 680-830 nm, which has a tighter inner working angle for coronagraphs as well as a deep oxygen line and a shallow water line, offer a higher potential number of exoplanets? Are there other ways to optimize the tiered ‘reconnaissance’ metric? We evaluate these questions for a 6-m exoplanet direct imaging mission, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.

Comments
0
No comments here
{"cc_re__cc_re__cc_by_4_0": ["n, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.</p><p id=\"r9934412551\"></p></div></main></div><div class=\"side-content\"></div></div><div class=\"pub-bottom-component\"><div class=\"inner\"><div class=\"pub-bottom-section-component pub-bottom-license\"><div role=\"none\" class=\"top-row\"><div class=\"left-title\">License</div><div class=\"center-content\"><div class=\"center-content-item\"><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"license noopener noreferrer\" class=\"license-link\" href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/\"><img width=\"75\" alt src=\"/static/license/cc-by.svg\" class=\"license-image\" />Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License<!-- --> <!-- -->(CC-BY 4.0)</a></div></div><div class=\"right-icons\" role=\"none\"></div></div></div><div class=\"pub-bottom-section-component expanded\"><div role=\"button\" class=\"top-row\" style=\"cursor:pointer\"><div class=\"left-title\">Comments</div><div class=\"center-content\"><div class=\"center-content-item\">0</div></div><div class=\"right-icons\" role=\"none\"><button type="], "copyright__copyright__copyright": ["m, which has a tighter inner working angle for coronagraphs as well as a deep oxygen line and a shallow water line, offer a higher potential number of exoplanets? Are there other ways to optimize the tiered \u2018reconnaissance\u2019 metric? We evaluate these questions for a 6-m exoplanet direct imaging mission, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.\n\nComments\n0\nNo comments here", "m, which has a tighter inner working angle for coronagraphs as well as a deep oxygen line and a shallow water line, offer a higher potential number of exoplanets? Are there other ways to optimize the tiered \u2018reconnaissance\u2019 metric? We evaluate these questions for a 6-m exoplanet direct imaging mission, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.\n\nComments\n0\nNo comments here", "m, which has a tighter inner working angle for coronagraphs as well as a deep oxygen line and a shallow water line, offer a higher potential number of exoplanets? Are there other ways to optimize the tiered \u2018reconnaissance\u2019 metric? We evaluate these questions for a 6-m exoplanet direct imaging mission, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.\n\nComments\n0\nNo comments here", "m, which has a tighter inner working angle for coronagraphs as well as a deep oxygen line and a shallow water line, offer a higher potential number of exoplanets? Are there other ways to optimize the tiered \u2018reconnaissance\u2019 metric? We evaluate these questions for a 6-m exoplanet direct imaging mission, scaling HabEx and LUVOIR to 6m. We evaluate these various potential yield metrics for coronagraph-only, starshade-only, and hybrid coronagraph-starshade architectures.\n\nComments\n0\nNo comments here"]}