BYU Astronomy Research Group Joins the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC)
As of January 2021 BYU will be a member of the ARC Consortium (Link to Consortium) with access to the ARC 3.5-m telescope and the 0.5-m ARCSAT telescope. The primary use of the ARC 3.5-m telescope time is for graduate student projects. This provides a wide array of instrumentation that is currently being used to study objects in the solar system all the way to studies of the large scale structure of the Universe.
Other BYU Astronomy Facilities
In addition to our telescope time from the ARC consortium, we operate a number of our own astronomical facilities
West Mountain Observatory (West Mountain)
This is our mountain observatory at about 6600 ft above sea level. This consists of three telescopes: 0.9-m, 0.5-m, and a 0.32-m. It is a 40 minute drive that ends in a 5 miles drive up a dirt road. The mountain itself can be seen from campus. We don't provide any tours of this facility.
Orson Pratt Observatory
The Orson Pratt Observatory is named for an early apostle of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It is our campus telescope facility and contains a wide variety of telescopes for student research and public outreach. We operate a 24" PlaneWave telescope in the main campus dome, plus a 16", two 12", one 8", and a 6" telescope on our observation deck. The telescopes are all fully robotic. Beyond this we have a large sections of telescopes used on public nights.
Royden G. Derrick Planetarium (Planetarium)
This is a 119 seat, 39" dome planetarium with acoustically treated walls to allow it's use as a lecture room. Recently we upgraded to an E&S Digistar7 operating system with 4K projectors. The planetarium is used for teaching classes, public outreach, and astronomy education research projects.
Selected Publications
facility will be used, we examine early results that establish the potential of polarization signatures as a new method of performing Space Situational Awareness (SSA) analysis. We will show ways in which the polarization data supports existing methods for extracting signature features that correlate well with photometric methods. Also, importantly, we will show feature extractions that cannot be done with existing methods. We know that some features in brightness are caused by near-glint reflection off solar panels, while others are small amplitude glints off minor support structures or from facets or edges on the main body of the spacecraft. We see polarization features from all of these constructions. We conclude that polarization studies will significantly aid the detailed interpretation of physical structures such as solar panels, facets, and communications antennae via non-resolved observations. Thus, polarization is an important complement to photometric observations.
Methods. We organized a multiwavelength campaign to take place between March and July of 2012. Excellent temporal coverage was obtained with more than 25 instruments, including the MAGIC, FACT and VERITAS Cherenkov telescopes, the instruments on board the Swift and Fermi spacecraft, and the telescopes operated by the GASP-WEBT collaboration.
Results. Mrk 501 showed a very high energy (VHE) gamma-ray flux above 0.2 TeV of ∼0.5 times the Crab Nebula flux (CU) for most of the campaign. The highest activity occurred on 2012 June 9, when the VHE flux was ∼3 CU, and the peak of the high-energy spectral component was found to be at ∼2 TeV. Both the X-ray and VHE gamma-ray spectral slopes were measured to be extremely hard, with spectral indices < 2 during most of the observing campaign, regardless of the X-ray and VHE flux. This study reports the hardest Mrk 501 VHE spectra measured to date. The fractional variability was found to increase with energy, with the highest variability occurring at VHE. Using the complete data set, we found correlation between the X-ray and VHE bands; however, if the June 9 flare is excluded, the correlation disappears (significance < 3σ) despite the existence of substantial variability in the X-ray and VHE bands throughout the campaign.
Conclusions. The unprecedentedly hard X-ray and VHE spectra measured imply that their low- and high-energy components peaked above 5 keV and 0.5 TeV, respectively, during a large fraction of the observing campaign, and hence that Mrk 501 behaved like an extreme high-frequency-peaked blazar (EHBL) throughout the 2012 observing season. This suggests that being an EHBL may not be a permanent characteristic of a blazar, but rather a state which may change over time. The data set acquired shows that the broadband spectral energy distribution (SED) of Mrk 501, and its transient evolution, is very complex, requiring, within the framework of synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) models, various emission regions for a satisfactory description. Nevertheless the one-zone SSC scenario can successfully describe the segments of the SED where most energy is emitted, with a significant correlation between the electron energy density and the VHE gamma-ray activity, suggesting that most of the variability may be explained by the injection of high-energy electrons. The one-zone SSC scenario used reproduces the behavior seen between the measured X-ray and VHE gamma-ray fluxes, and predicts that the correlation becomes stronger with increasing energy of the X-rays.
A number of such transformations exist within the astronomical community for stellar objects. However, the Spectral Energy Distributions (SEDs) of stars are not the same as those of satellites. Reflection for spacecraft can be modeled based on diffuse and specular reflection components, where the diffuse components’ reflected spectrum may have spectral characteristics of the material off which it reflects, thereby altering the SED from that of the Sun. While the SEDs of stars are largely static, the SEDs of satellites are not. Specifically, their SED may change with phase angle (e.g., solar panel contributions are phase angle dependent and typically make the SED bluer). To investigate the transformation between Johnson-Cousins and Sloan for satellites, we performed the following analysis. We observed four satellites sequentially in Johnson-Cousins filters (B, V, R, and I) and Sloan filters (g, r, i, and z), covering a large range of phase angle. We then empirically derived transformations between Johnson-Cousins and Sloan for each satellite’s observed data and for all of the observed satellite data as a whole, and juxtaposed these with an astronomical transformation. We found mixed results for the transformation relations. The r – V as a function of V – R relation provides a great fit for all of the observed satellite data with low root mean square (RMS) error and is exactly the same as the astronomical transformation. The r – z as a function of R – I relation provides a great fit for all of the observed satellite data, but has large RMS scatter and is distinct from the astronomical transformation. Thus, we do not recommend transforming historical satellite photometry observed in Johnson-Cousins to Sloan to compare to observations of satellites taken in the Sloan filters. Since the transformations are dependent on the SED of the satellite, and the satellites’ SEDs are variable, transformations generally yielded poor results for the two photometric systems we studied here, i.e. Johnson-Cousins and Sloan. Moreover, our supposition is that such attempts with any two photometric systems may yield similarly poor results.Cousins to Sloan is the obsolescence of the historical Johnson-Cousins satellite photometry. To compare photometry between the Johnson-Cousins and Sloan systems, a transformation needs to be made to convert data from one photometric system to another.
A number of such transformations exist within the astronomical community for stellar objects. However, the Spectral Energy Distributions (SEDs) of stars are not the same as those of satellites. Reflection for spacecraft can be modeled based on diffuse and specular reflection components, where the diffuse components’ reflected spectrum may have spectral characteristics of the material off which it reflects, thereby altering the SED from that of the Sun. While the SEDs of stars are largely static, the SEDs of satellites are not. Specifically, their SED may change with phase angle (e.g., solar panel contributions are phase angle dependent and typically make the SED bluer). To investigate the transformation between Johnson-Cousins and Sloan for satellites, we performed the following analysis. We observed four satellites sequentially in Johnson-Cousins filters (B, V, R, and I) and Sloan filters (g, r, i, and z), covering a large range of phase angle. We then empirically derived transformations between Johnson-Cousins and Sloan for each satellite’s observed data and for all of the observed satellite data as a whole, and juxtaposed these with an astronomical transformation. We found mixed results for the transformation relations. The r – V as a function of V – R relation provides a great fit for all of the observed satellite data with low root mean square (RMS) error and is exactly the same as the astronomical transformation. The r – z as a function of R – I relation provides a great fit for all of the observed satellite data, but has large RMS scatter and is distinct from the astronomical transformation. Thus, we do not recommend transforming historical satellite photometry observed in Johnson-Cousins to Sloan to compare to observations of satellites taken in the Sloan filters. Since the transformations are dependent on the SED of the satellite, and the satellites’ SEDs are variable, transformations generally yielded poor results for the two photometric systems we studied here, i.e. Johnson-Cousins and Sloan. Moreover, our supposition is that such attempts with any two photometric systems may yield similarly poor results.