[AstroPy] AstroPy Digest, Vol 58, Issue 16

Matthew Turk matthewturk at gmail.com
Tue Jun 14 17:04:32 EDT 2011

Hi Tom,

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Bridgman, William T.
<William.T.Bridgman at nasa.gov> wrote:
> I've been following this while trying to find out how my NASA contractor
> status might impact how I can contribute to this effort.
> However, I'd like to make the point that for a lot of modern visualization
> efforts that we do at the SVS for general public outreach, observations and
> simulations can be integrated into a single viz more easily if the tools can
> play nice together.  I have a strong interest in this area of the
> development.
> Here's some items where I had to integrate very diverse datasets to generate
> the final product:
> http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/goto?3316
> http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/goto?3743
> http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/search/Series/SolarDynamo.html
> I used numpy, scipy, & pyfits for much of it, but also had to convert
> datasets to objects & texture with tools like VTK & PIL.
> If there is a way to have the simulation and observation tools playing nice
> together, it would simplify outreach (and consequently funding) efforts.

These are great visualizations, very communicative and strong.

I have been following this discussion for a while, and tried to
refrain from commenting except where necessary because in some sense I
am an outsider.  The community I come from -- simulations -- has
struggled with data interoperability.  We have developed a project and
de facto community that addresses a number of the issues you have
brought up, which you can find at http://yt.enzotools.org/ ; yt is a
multi-platform, multi-code analysis and visualization package, and we
are increasing participation massively (
https://www.ohloh.net/p/yt_amr ) through hg and vigorous outreach

We'd be very interested in starting a conversation about how to better
interoperate between simulation and observations, particularly as they
touch on the visualizations you have presented -- I would encourage
you to email our developers list; I suspect this kind of discussion is
far enough outside the scope of this thread that we should conduct
such a discussion elsewhere.  There are a number of people involved in
simulated observations and simulation/observation interplay that don't
follow this list as closely, who I have added as CC's on this email to
give a heads up to.


> Tom
> On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:34 PM, Matthew Turk wrote:
>> For what it's worth, in our community we have a large buy-in for
>> mercurial (with a number of extensions and value-adds that directly
>> call the API).  I recognize that the observer and simulation
>> communities do not necessarily need as much direct cross-talk as
>> intra-community collaborations, but I felt I should put this out
>> there.
>> -Matt
> --
> Dr. William T."Tom" Bridgman               Scientific Visualization Studio
> Global Science & Technology, Inc.          NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
> Email: William.T.Bridgman at nasa.gov         Code 610.3
> Phone: 301-286-1346                        Greenbelt, MD 20771
> FAX:   301-286-1634                        http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/
> _______________________________________________
> AstroPy mailing list
> AstroPy at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/astropy

More information about the AstroPy mailing list