Paper detail

Validation of observations obtained with a liquid mirror telescope by comparison with Sloan Digital Sky Survey observations

The results of a search for peculiar astronomical objects using very low resolution spectra obtained with the NASA Orbital Debris Observatory (NODO) 3 meter diameter liquid mirror telescope (LMT) are compared with results of spectra obtained with the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). The main purpose of this comparison is to verify whether observations taken with this novel type of telescope are reliable. This comparison is important because LMTs are a novel type of inexpensive telescope that are very useful for astronomical surveys, particularly surveys in the time domain, and a validation of data taken with an LMT, by comparison with data from a classical telescope, will validate their reliability. We start from a published data analysis that classified only 206 of the 18,000 astronomical objects observed with the NODO liquid mirror telescope as peculiar. A total of 29 of these 206 objects were found in the SDSS. The reliability of the NODO data can be seen by the results of the detailed analysis that, in practice, less than 0.3% of the 18,000 spectra were incorrectly identified as peculiar objects, most probably because they are variable stars. We conclude that the liquid mirror telescope gave reliable observations, comparable to those that would have been obtained with a telescope using a glass mirror.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.