 Some new work we're doing, revisiting stars that were studied from the Kepler mission. This is a point of area from the Kepler mission, revisiting them with tests. And this is the work, especially being done at D-Dub with some grad students, especially at the Institute of Art in Mendoza and then Spencer Wallace and others. So for those who don't know, the test mission here featured in an official tweet from Tom Barkley. The test mission revisited the Kepler footprint recently this year. And so actually two of the test sectors, like 14 and 15, and I think 26 will come back around in the overlap again, are giving us a really interesting baseline for revisiting the stars that were well studied by the Kepler mission. And so if you ignore everything else, and maybe you should from this talk, it's just that I want to advertise this idea that this overlap, this parameter space where we're studying stars with both of these missions, is a unique opportunity, and so I would encourage everyone in this audience to consider what we can do with this interesting baseline with these two missions. So for the rest of this talk, I'm mostly just going to talk about this one star, which most of you guys can hear me babble about for the last decade, which is GK1243. It's a very active, rapidly rotating M-Corp. It was the most active flare star in the original Kepler field. We spent a long time studying it with Kepler and lots of fun stuff with it. So here I've just stitched together a Kepler one minute light curve with the test two minute light curve for the same star, with, of course, the lights in the middle. It looks good. And there's a lot of things you can take away from this. First off, the Kepler signal noise is really good. This is a bright star for Kepler. The one minute sampling means the flares are very well defined. It's very high signal noise. And we have 11 months of data with Kepler. This is a tremendous, interesting, and challenging data set to understand. In tests, it's a little more modest. It does not appear to be an incredibly active star in tests. The flares are a little less well resolved with two minutes. The signal noise is not great. And we only have roughly two months of data. So it's a little more challenging. There's also interesting features. So the star spot that we saw in Kepler is still there. That's good. It's still in phase while I lie about stitching together. The phasing is correct. It has not changed its rotation period in 10 years. But the amplitude is a little smaller. You can see these modulations are a little smaller. This test has here a slightly redder wave, like the band pass. The star spot here is a phase map. I won't unpack this in five minutes. This is a phase map. If you know how to read this, it's great. Here's time, a decade of time in rotation phase. And the primary spot is still exactly where we thought it would be, which is great. But more interesting to me is that flares are still present. Even though they're a little more modest, and it seems like there's fewer of them per day, there are still tons of flares in this test, two minute light curve. The amplitude is also lower again for the redder wavelength. And the lower signal noise means there are a lot of little flares in here that we can't reliably pick out. So by eye maybe you can go up to this one, but we don't know what to do with things like this. So it's a little harder to pick out all these little flares that just popped out in Kepler very easily. So instead we turn it to a statistical distribution of the flares. Here is the sort of figure of merit for flair, or flair frequency distribution where we have flair, there are bent energies on the x-axis, and an accumulative number of flares from big to small on the y-axis. What we expect to see from the sun is a power law. We expect to see that there's lots of little flares and a few big flares. And indeed, that's what we see with Kepler in tex. We see that in Kepler it's very nicely defined, this beautiful power law over several orders of magnitude. We have error bars here that are capital statistics, so they're not very many big ones, but we have the rate of them here. And we have very big errors here because we're at the signal noise limit of the observatory, so the errors are two-dimensional, which are a little difficult to deal with. Tests, we have worse county statistics, we only have two months of data, and worse signal noise, perfect. But the point is these two lines essentially completely overlap, which is great. And so my takeaway from this is this diagram is extremely boring, and that's interesting. That means that after 10 years observing the star, or the cumulative distribution, or however you want to quantify this, the specific number of flares per day at a given energy has not changed. We don't think it should have changed. This is a very active, young, fully saturated emporth. But this opens an opportunity. 10 years of observation that we can do this opens an opportunity. We can look for these changes in flare rate. Okay, the most active star didn't change. Maybe that's expected. The more modest the active stars may have changed. On the sun, here's the same kind of flare frequency distribution for the sun. We see almost an order of magnitude variation in the flare rate on the sun between active maximum and active minimum, and there are other metrics for this as well. And so this kind of activity cycle behavior is now available to us, I think, on a decade timescale. And with Tests alone, if Tests moves up to our expectations of living for possibly decades and operating, we can go after these flare rates seasonally or annually and look for slow variations. So we can look for slow variations in this flare frequency distribution across activity cycles. And in fact, we even have one candidate that you can ask me about, and we have a research note on it. And with that, I will say Tests and Kepler continue to provide, I think, the best stellar data that we've had in a generation. And, you know, and it does have some kind of stuff, which is fine.