You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Conceptually I had associated v2_ref, v3_ref with the v2/v3 location corresponding to radec_ref. That's what the fields currently mean in Roman.
However, in Webb, the aberration correction is applied after v2/v3 ref, so that instead an "aberrated v2/v3" reference position is what corresponds to ra/dec_ref. This is close to the original v2/v3 ref but scaled by va_scale.
We should consider whether we want to also provide these aberrated v2/v3 reference positions, which would make it so that we are providing the v2/v3 reference positions that actually correspond to ra/dec reference points. Or alternatively add new ra/dec_ref that correspond to the post-aberration locations of v2/v3_ref.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Conceptually I had associated v2_ref, v3_ref with the v2/v3 location corresponding to radec_ref. That's what the fields currently mean in Roman.
However, in Webb, the aberration correction is applied after v2/v3 ref, so that instead an "aberrated v2/v3" reference position is what corresponds to ra/dec_ref. This is close to the original v2/v3 ref but scaled by va_scale.
We should consider whether we want to also provide these aberrated v2/v3 reference positions, which would make it so that we are providing the v2/v3 reference positions that actually correspond to ra/dec reference points. Or alternatively add new ra/dec_ref that correspond to the post-aberration locations of v2/v3_ref.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: