Spectra DM for theoretical spectra?

[Miguel Cerviño]

Hi


> It seems to be the much better approach must be taken - what is  
> doing Frank La Petit is exactly example what it is needed - the  
> result should be after all the spectrum to compare with observation  
> of a nebula !

I almost agree, but again, my use case (the AVO use case of galaxy  
modeling in fact, in 2004?)
it is needed data from "intermediate steps"  that are not directly  
observable or it has not an observational counterpart (Examples: an  
stellar interior and evolution results not related with the  
atmosphere, a PRD ionization structure etc...)


> I am afraid the experts on theory spectra should be consulted before  
> concluding that all is in SDM + provenance.


It is an option, but the "relevant parameters" will depends on the  
focus of the expert.E.j.: I am an expert
in theory spectra of (some kind of) galaxies, but not theory spectra  
of pre-main-sequence stars...
And the way I describe my models, is very linked with in the science I  
do with them (but mine is not the only one way to work even in my own  
field).


I think that most of the issues can be solved if instead to "have  
something that cover all possible cases"
we try to find something that "allows to cover most of cases by adding  
different buildings ups". It is
just the changue from UCD (predefined words that defines concepts) to  
UCD+ (predefined atoms that allow to build words by combination).

Would It be possible a similar approach for DM?


cheers

	m



-------------------------------------------------------------
"Nunca se debe intentar contentar a
quienes nunca se van a dar por contentos"

                        Javier Marias

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20090604/ae2f8d13/attachment-0003.html>