Gap Analysis¶
A clear-eyed audit of what's settled versus what's still an open question. Organized by domain.
DECIDED — These questions are answered¶
Technical Architecture¶
- API protocol: REST (polling), not gRPC. Fire-and-forget model. Sites poll
/targetsevery ~60s, POST to/observationswhen done. Heartbeat every 30s for abort signalling. - Server language: Python + FastAPI
- Database start: SQLite for MVP → PostgreSQL at scale
- Schema: Designed in detail (
Details on componets.md) — sites, targets, observations, campaigns, alerts tables with UUIDs - Hardware control: ASCOM Alpaca (REST, Windows) or INDI (Linux)
- Image format: FITS with WCS headers; photometry in magnitudes
- Plate solving: astrometry.net or local solver as fallback for every FITS
- Scheduling: Greedy priority scoring with Astropy altitude calculations — no ML needed at MVP
- Hosting: Hetzner VPS ~€5.49/month to start; Backblaze B2 for image storage
- Cost estimate: ~$15/month operating cost for Phase 1
Science Priorities¶
- Why distribution matters: Geographic distribution is the architectural advantage that professional telescopes cannot replicate — settled with detailed evidence (
Value we bring.md,Projects.md) - Top science cases (ordered): Stellar occultations > TTVs > Microlensing > GRB/kilonova follow-up > NEO astrometry
- Heterogeneous stacking approach: WCS reprojection + SNR-weighted flux-normalized co-addition — algorithm is designed
Build Stages (HIGH-LEVEL)¶
- Stage 1: Existing archival data (AAVSO, MPC, etc.) — no live network needed
- Stage 2: Volunteer telescope network
- Stage 3: OpenAstro-owned low-cost hardware network
OPEN — These questions are unresolved¶
Stage 1: Existing Data Pipeline¶
| Question | Status |
|---|---|
| Which public data sources to ingest first? | AAVSO is obvious first; MPC for asteroids; AstroBin possible. Priority not locked |
| First science target for paper/proof of concept? | Not chosen. Candidates: Mira variable period refinement, exoplanet TTV from ETD, AGN variability |
| Instrument registry design? | Concept clear but structure not finalized |
| How does the reverse n-body problem fit in? | Open — TTV data from multiple systems could allow reverse n-body inference of unseen planet masses/orbits. This is the mathematical backbone of TTV science but hasn't been written up here yet |
| Where does data go after calibration? | Architecture diagram exists conceptually but not documented in vault yet |
Science — Unresolved¶
| Question | Status |
|---|---|
| Which system to target first for TTV campaign? | Not chosen. Need a system with known transiting planet, long observing history, suspected perturber |
| What telescope aperture is the minimum useful for which science cases? | Discussed in NewOpenAstro/Science/Gaps/Telescope classes and their uses.md — not fully resolved |
| FRB optical counterpart: feasibility with amateur gear? | Open. Models suggest possible magnitude ~9 for ms flash under specific conditions; needs upper-limit analysis |
| Asteroid simultaneous multi-band photometry (spectral classification): who does this first? | Unassigned |
| Is the 2m telescope problem (they're oversubscribed) a collaboration target? | Discussed in Resources but no concrete plan |
Tech — Unresolved¶
| Question | Status |
|---|---|
| Client distribution format? | PyInstaller for Windows mentioned but not confirmed |
| Raspberry Pi kit: will we build/sell these? | Proposed in friction file, not decided |
| Quality control automation: how do we flag bad data? | Mentioned (quality_flags field in schema) but algorithm not designed |
| Cloud-scale infrastructure (FaaS/NoSQL/BOINC) | Architecture mapped in dump.md — not a current priority, Phase 3+ |
| Alert ingestion (ZTF, Gaia, GCN, TNS)? | API endpoints defined but ingestion service not designed |
| Weather API integration per site? | Mentioned, not designed |
Logistics — Unresolved¶
| Question | Status |
|---|---|
| Project name: "OpenAstro" vs other? | Idea Capture/naming.md exists — unclear if resolved |
| Co-authorship policy formalized? | Draft exists in NewOpenAstro/Non Tech/ but not finalized |
| First beta sites identified? | Outreach strategy in Logistics and Marketing/ but no sites confirmed |
| Legal entity / non-profit structure? | Not addressed |
| Data licensing and openness policy? | Policy doc started in NewOpenAstro/Non Tech/Public-PR/Open astro policy.md — status unclear |
People — Unresolved¶
| Question | Status |
|---|---|
| Solo vs. team build? | Team/ folder exists — team structure unclear |
| Skills gaps in current team? | Team/organization_system.md may cover this |
| Funding path? | Not addressed anywhere |
KEY OPEN QUESTION: The Reverse N-Body Problem¶
This deserves its own note. The core TTV science case is:
If a transiting planet's transit times deviate from a perfect period, there is a gravitational perturber. The pattern of deviations encodes the perturber's mass, orbital period, and eccentricity.
This is mathematically a reverse n-body problem: given timing residuals (observations), infer the hidden planet's orbital parameters. The forward problem (given a planet, predict TTVs) is solved. The inverse problem requires MCMC or neural-network-based inference over a high-dimensional parameter space.
Why this matters for OpenAstro: Building a TTV pipeline that can do this inference — not just measure timing, but recover planet parameters — would be a genuine scientific and engineering contribution beyond what most amateur networks do. The computation is the bottleneck, not the data collection (hence BOINC/distributed compute relevance).
Status: Concept identified, not yet in any vault document. Needs its own Science/Projects entry.
Additional Open Questions (from NewOpenAstro/Science/Gaps/injest.md and injest 2.md)¶
Data Gaps That OpenAstro Can Specifically Address¶
| Gap | Why Hard | OpenAstro Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| Variable star aliasing (24-hour gaps) | Earth rotation creates periodic blind spots | Greedy handoff across longitudes eliminates daylight gaps |
| Exoplanet long-period baselines | TESS only stares for 27 days per sector | Continuous multi-year monitoring through coordinate campaigns |
| AGN reverberation mapping (decadal) | Human lifetimes too short relative to black hole timescales | Long-term monitoring campaigns; a note flags this as a Stage 4–5 project |
| Supernova first-hour shock breakout | No telescope can watch everywhere at once | Wide geographic distribution increases probability of being on-target when a supernova ignites |
| Continuous asteroid slow-rotator coverage | Single sites can only observe for 8 hrs/night | Global relay provides full rotation coverage |
The Rubin Alert Broker Opportunity¶
Rubin/LSST will generate ~10 million alerts per night. Broker software (ANTARES, ALeRCE) filters these algorithmically. OpenAstro's role is downstream of the broker — receiving curated follow-up targets and providing dense photometric coverage that Rubin itself cannot. This is a concrete integration point to plan for in Phase 2. Marked as #come-here in injest 2.md.
Network Comparison: LCO Model¶
Las Cumbres Observatory (LCO) is the professional analogue — a global network of robotic telescopes at consistent longitudes providing seamless coverage. LCO nodes are: Chile, Hawaii, Australia, South Africa, Texas, Canary Islands. OpenAstro's citizen-science version fills the same longitudinal gaps but with lower per-node cost and broader geographic density.
EHT Analogy (Timing Precision Context)¶
From NewOpenAstro/Science/Dumpppp.md: The Event Horizon Telescope required atomic clock synchronisation (nanosecond precision) because it uses VLBI interferometry — combining light waves. OpenAstro's reverberation mapping and handover use image-level synchronisation (seconds to minutes), not wave-level. NTP/GPS at millisecond precision is sufficient for all current OpenAstro science cases.
Broader Observational Deserts in Modern Astronomy (from NewOpenAstro/Science/Gaps/Info Dump.md)¶
This section documents gaps in current astronomical observations that provide context for where OpenAstro fits in the broader observational landscape. Most of these are beyond amateur network capabilities but are useful for framing the project's position relative to upcoming facilities.
Gaps OpenAstro Can Help Address¶
Multi-Messenger EM Follow-up Gap: Gravitational wave detectors (LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA) localise events to error boxes of hundreds of square degrees. Small FoV optical telescopes must tile these boxes with hundreds of pointings to find the kilonova. OpenAstro's geographically distributed wide-field coverage is a direct architectural response to this field-of-view mismatch.
Variable Star Continuous Coverage Gap: Ground-based astronomy has 12-hour daylight gaps. Stars with ~24-hour periods can be completely aliased by single-site observations. A global network provides the uninterrupted photometric record to detect and correctly characterise these periods.
Exoplanet Long Baseline Gap: TESS sectors are 27 days. True Earth-analogs have ~365-day periods. PLATO (launching ~2026) addresses this for bright nearby stars; OpenAstro complements by providing dense follow-up of TESS/PLATO candidates with precisely timed transits for TTV analysis.
Rubin Follow-up Bottleneck: Rubin/LSST will generate ~10 million alerts per night. No existing infrastructure can follow up more than a small fraction. OpenAstro's value is precisely here — as a responsive, distributed photometric follow-up network.
Gaps That Require Facilities Beyond OpenAstro's Scope¶
- Hubble Tension / Dark Energy (H₀ gap): Requires space-based coronagraphs (Habitable Worlds Observatory), LISA (mHz gravitational waves), and microcalorimeter X-ray spectrometers (NewAthena). Amateur networks cannot contribute.
- Cosmic Dark Ages / 21-cm signal: Blocked by Earth's ionosphere at frequencies <30 MHz. Requires lunar-far-side radio arrays. Not addressable from ground.
- Missing Baryons / WHIM: Requires high-resolution X-ray spectroscopy (R>2000) with large effective area — beyond any current instrument. NewAthena/LEM are the proposed solutions.
- IMBH mergers: Radiate in mHz gravitational wave band, inaccessible from ground. LISA fills this gap.
- Exoplanet biosignatures / direct imaging: Requires 10⁻¹⁰ contrast ratios at small angles — far beyond amateur or even current professional capability. Habitable Worlds Observatory is the proposed solution.
Key Upcoming Facilities (Context for OpenAstro Positioning)¶
| Facility | Launch | Gap It Fills | OpenAstro Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rubin/LSST | Operational now | Supernova shock breakout, asteroid surveys | OpenAstro is the follow-up network for Rubin alerts |
| PLATO (ESA) | ~2026 | Earth-analog exoplanet long baselines | OpenAstro provides TTV follow-up of PLATO candidates |
| Nancy Grace Roman (NASA) | ~2027 | Cold/rogue planet microlensing | OpenAstro potentially provides optical confirmation of microlensing events |
| ULTRASAT | ~2026 | UV shock breakout early warning | OpenAstro is the optical follow-up after ULTRASAT alerts |
| LISA | ~2030s | IMBH mergers (mHz GW) | No overlap; different physics |
| NewAthena | ~2030s | WHIM X-ray spectroscopy | No overlap |