Foreground stars of our own galaxy. The uninteresting stuff, basically. (In this picture, anyway.
)Astronomy & Space Exploration
- Thread starter MrMarcello
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
)Amazing image.
What's nuts is that it took 13 hours to take. Hubble's ones took weeks!
What's nuts is that it took 13 hours to take. Hubble's ones took weeks!
Foreground stars of our own galaxy. The uninteresting stuff, basically. (In this picture, anyway.
So it's basically dirt on the lens with the beams of light just being a lens effect.Yea, now I get it. Distance vs time not equivalent. So what's the difference between a year time, and a light year?
A year is the orbital period for a planetary body - in our case how long it takes the Earth to go round the Sun.
A light year is the distance light travels in one earth year - 9.46 trillion kilometres.
Full rez pic
mind blowing!
the one on the left
Nice photoshop pic
Pretty amazing images.
If the James Webb telescope can look back to 13.5 billion years ago, what are the chances that one day soon we could build a telescope to look back to the big bang?
If the James Webb telescope can look back to 13.5 billion years ago, what are the chances that one day soon we could build a telescope to look back to the big bang?
I mean obviously the image has been edited to be in RGB for the human eye as the original frames were collected in infrared. That doesn't take anything away from the achievement.
You 'just' need a larger mirror to collect more light. The technology is available now, it just costs a lot and would probably need to be sent up and put together in space piece by piece.
Was just kidding, its freaking amazing
We could theoretically make a telescope the size of the solar system. It would be in many, many parts, obviously. Though I think that would be more for getting really good looks at "closer" things, than necessarily looking as far/far back as possible.
Given how much it cost, why can't they buy a camera that takes newer pictures?
I don't think that would be possible?
Between 240,000 and 300,000 years after the Big Bang was the first time that photons could rest for a second, attached as electrons to atoms. It was at this point that the universe went from being totally opaque, to transparent.
For James Webb? I am not sure we have the ability to service it, and probably won't before it stops working.
A new round of pics supposed to drop soon.
NASA don't spend much on production quality do they?
Such cringe presenting
NASA’s Webb Captures Dying Star’s Final ‘Performance’ in Fine Detail
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/...dying-star-s-final-performance-in-fine-detail
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/...dying-star-s-final-performance-in-fine-detail
Seems to have crashed the NASA Youtube channel.
The UK Space Agency (if we have one) should build the Simon Webbe Telescope, it'd be much like this one, but Blue.
Incredible stuff
That is actually scary
Amazing!
This was such a complicated engineering project! It is unbelievable that everything worked as planned!
One of the greatest engineering Wonders of the World!
This was such a complicated engineering project! It is unbelievable that everything worked as planned!
One of the greatest engineering Wonders of the World!
I like how the stars are actually star shaped.
It looks like a skeletal demon is rising from the gas on the left.
Nebulae are so cool. I wonder of JWST will take a look at the Pillars of Creation anytime soon.
Stupid question, but is it strong enough to peak on nearby solar systems planets in detail?
Is there somewhere we can actually understand the relevance and meaning of these photos rather than them wowing in terms of prettiness? Or that will take time
It's not really that kind of telescope, I think. As far as I know, looking in detail at close things has a lot to do with the actual size of the thing. JWST is big for a space telescope, and significantly bigger than Hubble, but it wasn't really built to look at star systems.
https://www.inverse.com/science/what-will-planets-will-look-like-through-jwst
Seems like it is going to look at star systems, but it confirms you're not really going to get detailed photographs or anything. But apparently it could still be used to find exoplanets and possibly determine if there can be life on them.
I said this earlier too, but in the somewhat distant the future we could build a telescope effectively the size of the solar system. That way we could really get a nice, close look at stuff, in high resolution.
Seems like it is going to look at star systems, but it confirms you're not really going to get detailed photographs or anything. But apparently it could still be used to find exoplanets and possibly determine if there can be life on them.
I said this earlier too, but in the somewhat distant the future we could build a telescope effectively the size of the solar system. That way we could really get a nice, close look at stuff, in high resolution.