Discussion Overview
The discussion centers on the comparison between Coude spectrographs and Cassegrain spectrographs, specifically focusing on the concept of flux throughput and its implications for performance. Participants explore the complexities of spectrograph design, including resolution, sensitivity, and the effects of stray light.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Conceptual clarification
- Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- One participant questions the clarity of the original question regarding flux throughput, suggesting that it may not be answerable without further context.
- Another participant emphasizes the importance of understanding the signal-to-noise ratio in spectrographs, noting that more light collected leads to a stronger signal.
- Concerns about stray light are raised, with a mention of methods to correct for it in spectrographs.
- The relationship between resolution and the size of wavelength bins is discussed, indicating that smaller bins can lead to lower light levels in each bin.
- Participants mention that early spectrographs used diffraction gratings and discuss the impact of focal length on resolution and stray light.
- The use of double monochromators for improved resolution is proposed, along with the advantages of using detector arrays for simultaneous measurements.
- Clarifications are made regarding the definitions of Cassegrain and Coude designs, with emphasis on the stationary nature of the Coude focus.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding flux throughput and its implications, with no consensus reached on the original question. Multiple viewpoints on the complexities of spectrograph design and performance remain present.
Contextual Notes
Participants note that classical spectrograph design involves trade-offs between resolution, sensitivity, and spectral range, which may not be fully addressed in the discussion.