3 ms·
Even if we can't reliably compare a time series of images today, wouldn't it be useful to start scanning now, for use as baselines in several years once the sta
by stevesimmons 7y ago
Even if we can't reliably compare a time series of images today, wouldn't it be useful to start scanning now, for use as baselines in several years once the state of the art improves?
In the same way astronomers can make new discoveries by digitizing photographic plates from a century ago.
- mattkrause 7y agoNope. Really, it's a question of priorities. Scanners cost a lot: ~4M for a 3T (the current 'standard') and much more for higher field strengths. We just got a 7T and, with all the trimmings (scanner, console, coils, the shielded room to hold it all, training, etc), it's in the $10-15M range. As a result, time on these things is already in pretty high demand, even at facilities that are used only for research. The projects could be reprioritized, of course, but most of the on-going research is much less speculative than "someday, this can be training data for something." It's not even clear to me that old MRI data will be particularly worthwhile. Photographic plates were, until recently, about as good as digital sensors. New MRIs are much, much better than old ones, and the tech will only improve more. Longitudinal data is useful in both fields, but for astronomy, there's no way to rewind time, so old plates are the only possible source for events from the past. We get new old people, however, every day!
- copperx 7y ago> We just got a 7T Where is that? Might be worth the trip in some cases.
- mattkrause 7y agoI'm in Montreal, but 7Ts are popping up all over, especially now that Siemen's Magnetom Terra got FDA approval. I know Yale also has a 7T, as does the NIH, Stanford, and MGH (I think--it's somewhere in Boston). The University of Minnesota has THREE which is crazy.