08:02:02 From Nataliea Lowson To All Panelists : 👍 08:02:24 From JJ Hermes : Yes! Good morning/afternoon/etc. everyone! 08:02:34 From Zach Claytor : Good morning! 08:02:41 From Muhammed Shajahan : good evening 08:02:46 From Ekaterina Ilin : Hello all! 08:02:56 From LucĂ­a GonzĂĄlez Cuesta To All Panelists : Hi all! 08:03:00 From Bihan Banerjee : HI all! 08:03:00 From Miriam Rosario Saldana Munoz : Hello from Bristol UK 08:03:01 From Rukmini Jagirdar : Hello all 08:03:12 From David Montes To All Panelists : Hi all 08:03:16 From Alex Binks To All Panelists : Good morning (Pacific)/afternoon (Europe) from Keele University UK 08:03:20 From Stuart F. Taylor To All Panelists : Glad to meet all of you 08:03:21 From Mutlu YILDIZ To All Panelists : Hello 08:03:24 From Muhammed Shajahan : hello from Kerala,India 08:03:28 From Ji-Wei Xie To All Panelists : Hi all 08:03:32 From Rafael Garcia Bustinduy To All Panelists : Hello everyone 08:03:38 From Stuart F. Taylor : Glad to meet all of you 08:03:38 From Adriana Valio To All Panelists : Hello from Brazil 08:04:12 From Nataliea Lowson To All Panelists : Hello from QLD Australia 🇩đŸ‡ș😃 08:05:46 From Clara Oliveira Leal : Hello all, good afternoon! 08:06:16 From Rafael Garcia Bustinduy : Hi everyone! 08:23:01 From Joshua Pepper To All Panelists : If you can obtain absolute flux calibration for an EB target in a single bandpass, will that significantly reduce the systematic uncertainties? 08:23:26 From Tabetha Boyajian : thanks so much for the wonderful talk! 08:23:41 From Muhammed Shajahan To All Panelists : very informative talk 08:23:50 From Lokesh Mishra : Q: Can these methods be extended to longer wavelengths to study planet formation? 08:24:01 From Thirupathi Sivarani To All Panelists : Is there a limitation of the synthetic fluxes 08:24:05 From Carey Lisse To All Panelists : I just learned a lot about the SOTA level of stellar modeling ;) 08:24:11 From Andrew McWilliam To All Panelists : How do distortions of the binry members, due to the binary, affect your Teff? 08:24:36 From Eric Agol : Is there a limit to this approach at the low-temperature end? 08:24:37 From Jennifer Winters To All Panelists : Really nice talk, thank you! Any plans to extend down to the M dwarfs? 08:24:54 From Nataliea Lowson To All Panelists : đŸ‘đŸŒ 08:28:30 From Lokesh Mishra : Just to clarify my question: In early stages of planet formation, planets radiate significantly at longer wavelengths. I was wondering if these early stages of planet formation could be studied by meausring such an early star-planet system? 08:31:26 From Pierre Maxted To All Panelists : In reply to Andrew McWilliam - the oblateness of the stars in AI Phe is <0.1% which is negligible. 08:32:35 From Pierre Maxted To All Panelists : Inr reply to Eric Agol: I don’t think there is a low Teff limit provided you have some measurement(s) of the flux ratio (eclipse depth) near the peaks of the star’s SED. 08:35:15 From Pierre Maxted To All Panelists : In reply to Jennifer Winters: Yes, we are doing some work on M-dwarfs already - https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.tmpL.132S/abstract 08:37:03 From Andrew McWilliam To All Panelists : So, that means the derived abundances will depend on the B field. One might get a spuriously high microturbulent velocity, or at least a scatter. Interesting! 08:37:40 From Thirupathi Sivarani To All Panelists : microturbulence also extend the linear part of curve of growth? what is used in these studies? 08:37:40 From Andrew McWilliam To All Panelists : The broadening will be IN the photosphere, and the lines you are using are likely stron and so high in the photosphere. 08:40:57 From Keivan Stassun : Some M-dwarfs appear to *not* exhibit radius inflation with rotation/activity... is there evidence for two populations of M dwarfs (perhaps in terms of field properties) in any of the rotation-activity relations you have studied? 08:41:15 From Jim Fuller - Coordinator : If the spot filling factor was the saturation mechanism, wouldn't we expect to see larger photometric modulation at low Ro? Is that seen? 08:42:15 From Eric Mamajek : For the Ti I lines, shouldn’t their depths be Teff-sensitive too? (Saha, Boltzmann). How Teff-sensitive are the EWs? 08:42:54 From Andrew McWilliam : Do the line widths change with spots number? 08:43:44 From Steve Kawaler To All Panelists : Jim - wouldn’t heavy spotting reduce the amplitude of photometric variation (I’m thinking cancellation
) 08:43:57 From Phil Muirhead To All Panelists : Jim: possibly, but more spots doesn’t always mean more photometric variation, especially if they are evenly distributed on the star. 08:44:04 From Steve Kawaler : Jim - wouldn’t heavy spotting reduce the amplitude of photometric variation (I’m thinking cancellation
) 08:44:42 From Victor Silva Aguirre - Coordinator : On twitter: use #ExoStar19b 08:45:10 From Adam Jermyn To All Panelists : Steve & Jim - I think that depends on if the star is getting bigger spots or more spots. Bigger spots would increase modulation, more spots would decrease it (I think?). 08:45:53 From Adam Jermyn : Steve & Jim - I think that depends on if the star is getting bigger spots or more spots. Bigger spots would increase modulation, more spots would decrease it (I think?). 08:45:55 From Phil Muirhead To All Panelists : Eric: surprisingly not for these Teffs. If you look at models, these TI lines aren’t that Teff sensitive from 3000 to 3500 K. 08:46:03 From Jamie Tayar To All Panelists : I agree with Steve- a leopard (and other heavily spotted things) have no rotational variability because of cancellation 08:47:04 From Phil Muirhead To All Panelists : Jim, Steve, Jamie: Best would be to monitor these M dwarfs in Y-band during their full rotation. Could model spot filling factor directly. Observationally expensive though. 08:47:07 From Jim Fuller - Coordinator To Steve Kawaler and All Panelists : I think both bigger and more spots increase the photometric modulation until the filling factor is ~50%, which seems ridiculously large. Spot modulation amplitudes scales as sqrt(N), where N is the number of spots, at least for small filling factors. 08:47:13 From Steve Kawaler : True, Adam - geometry kicks in too, as large spots, if polar, wouldn’t produce large amplitude variations. Too many degrees of freedom to work with! 08:50:32 From Jamie Tayar : I agree, there's definitely complexity such that the amplitude of variability doesn't keep increasing with Rossby number 08:57:07 From Steve Kawaler : 50% filling factor may not be crazy - https://link.springer.com/article/10.12942/lrsp-2005-8/figures/10 08:58:22 From Phil Muirhead To All Panelists : Great talk Ruth! 09:06:54 From Eric Agol : Thanks 09:07:13 From Pierre Maxted : In reply to Jennifer Winters: Yes, we are doing some work on M-dwarfs already - https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.tmpL.132S/abstract 09:07:58 From Jennifer Winters To All Panelists : Great! Thanks, Pierre. I'll check out that paper. 09:13:55 From Pierre Maxted : In reply to Eric Agol: I don’t think there is a low Teff limit provided you have some measurement(s) of the flux ratio (eclipse depth) near the peaks of the star’s SED. 09:14:38 From lynne hillenbrand : Regarding Rossby numbers, these of course rely on theoretical models of the stellar interiors. And what we are trying to test with the observations are often different models. I have never been clear on the apples-to-apples involved here (vs apples-to-oranges). Comments from anyone? 09:16:00 From Steve Kawaler : good question, Lynne. I await responses from those who’ve thought through this
 09:17:52 From Jamie Tayar : Rossby number, is not, in my opinion, an actually well defined thing at all. In the example of radial differential rotation, where in the star you calculate the period and where you calculate the convective turnover time matters. and probably the important place for the dynamo is not the surface. which makes comparison to data directly complicated. 09:19:38 From JuliĂĄn David Alvarado GĂłmez : The fundamental activity signature is the magnetic field itself. You should used spectropolarimetry or Zeeman intensification of lines to get B nor proxies or B. 09:19:48 From Zach Claytor : I'll throw in a shameless plug for some software I wrote specifically for model-driven gyrochronology: www.github.com/zclaytor/kiauhoku -- it has several popular model grids implemented, and I've been working with Jamie Tayar to estimate model-to-model systematic uncertainties 09:21:08 From Adam Jermyn : Adding to what Jamie said, depending on where you’re calculating the turnover time you can get answers that are orders-of-magnitude different, and these can have trends with stellar properties. E.g. if you compute the turnover time one scale height below the photosphere you’ll get answers that vary with mass and metallicity. Ditto if it’s an average figure. I’m not sure what the ‘right’ thing to do here is, but it seems like it has to depend on the model you have in mind for the quantity you’re correlating it with
 09:27:31 From Thierry Forveille : Adding to what Jamie and Adam said: for M-dwarfs most people use semi-empirical turnover times, which are "calibrated" so that the behavior of some activity index against Rossby number matches expectations; what those turnover times correspond to in actual stars is rather less than clear to me. 09:29:28 From Steve Kawaler : Thierry - does that sound a bit worrisome to you? 09:35:00 From Thierry Forveille : To Steve: it certainly does ;-) 09:36:03 From Phil Muirhead To All Panelists : Thierry: Yes, we used the Wright et al. Rossby No. equation, which does exactly as you say. It’s a bit worrisome. I wouldn’t say it’s circular logic. It’s more horseshoe-shaped logic :) 09:38:04 From katia Cunha To All Panelists : sorry it is not working for me 09:38:09 From Athanasia Nikolaou : hi!! 09:38:38 From Joshua Pepper : For anyone interested in the SAG 22 effort to assemble a comprehensive catalog of stellar properties for exoplanet missions, see here: https://sites.google.com/view/sag22/home 09:39:00 From Lokesh Mishra : @Joshua: I was just googling for that. Thanks :) 09:39:10 From Athanasia Nikolaou : Thank you for the link Joshua, it is very insteresting! 09:39:34 From JuliĂĄn David Alvarado GĂłmez : At what time are we re-starting? 09:39:51 From Katja Poppenhaeger - Coordinator : At the full hour, which is 10 am local california time. 09:40:05 From Katja Poppenhaeger - Coordinator : (German time 19:00.) 09:40:13 From Jake Clark : Or 3 am local time over here :) 09:40:13 From Nataliea Lowson : In 20 minutes 🙂 09:40:17 From JuliĂĄn David Alvarado GĂłmez : Great. Thanks.