Talk:EROSITA
Add topicLatest comment: 4 years ago by Giftzwerg 88 in topic Russians starting it illegally
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the EROSITA article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Replacement for ROSAT?
[edit]ROSAT was decommissioned in 1999. So it is funny to call EROSITA a replacement for ROSAT. Shouldn't it be rather a successor to XMM-Newton?
BernhardSchmalhofer (talk) 12:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
ROSAT is the only all-sky survey that exists at this point. eROSITA will replace it with a new all-sky survey. XMM, Chandra and Swift are all active, have better angular resolution but a much smaller field of view. They cannot survey large areas of the sky. JohannesBuchner (talk) 06:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Russians starting it illegally
[edit]The Russians are restarting the instrument illegally. Should this not be there? Rustygecko (talk) 12:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that is important. However there will be repercussions: The Russian scientists can not legally publish the data. It will also exclude Russian scientists in participating in future space missions, probably for decades. The Russian instrument on the same space observatory is not as fast as EROSITA and has a smaller angular resolution. Erosita is supposed to find new targets for the Russian ART-XC instrument. The ART-XC is not as sensitive and needs longer exposure time. After the complete surveys are done, the time will come to look at the interesting spots for longer exposures. If they use EROSITA to find new targets, the results of ART-XC are also compromised. None of the results can be published legally, and other scientists can not use compromised sources for their own work, so they can not refer to any of the illegally published results. In a way this is like breaking into a laboratory, stealing the instruments and machinery and then doing the experiments on the stolen equipment and publish the results under your own name under the eyes of the world. I am quite sure that this gives any scientist a bad name for the future. I am not sure what the MPI does, but I think they will withhold the results of the for surveys for some time, making the ART-XC almost useless for Russian scientists. They can only guess where the most interesting spots are.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 03:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)