It’s a number that statistically represents how strong the result is in the data basically. As far as I understand it, with astronomy the typical sigma value expected is 3
Whats less than 0 sigma? I kid but only a little Astrochemistry is fantastically difficult, it involves large networks of reactions, many of which have multiple orders of magnitudes of uncertainty on their rates. Different groups can tey to model the same conditions and end up with over a factor of 1000 difference in the abundences of key tracer speices.
That’s why I’m positive but not excited yet. It’s a good sign. We need to see if detecting it can be replicated… although I’m not sure how to do that except with the Webb again.
It’s a number that statistically represents how strong the result is in the data basically. As far as I understand it, with astronomy the typical sigma value expected is 3
Technically, this is astrochemistry, not astronomy. I don’t know what the expected sigma value there is.
It’s 3 plus/minus 1 sigma
Whats less than 0 sigma? I kid but only a little Astrochemistry is fantastically difficult, it involves large networks of reactions, many of which have multiple orders of magnitudes of uncertainty on their rates. Different groups can tey to model the same conditions and end up with over a factor of 1000 difference in the abundences of key tracer speices.
That’s why I’m positive but not excited yet. It’s a good sign. We need to see if detecting it can be replicated… although I’m not sure how to do that except with the Webb again.