@Liljo
Those images are really impressive! I would love to find out how long the exposures were for that scope. Hours? a minute? One thing, it doesn't have to move much to keep it on target as opposed to Hubble which has to keep it aimed while taking a 45 minute jaunt across from side of the planet which means it is saddled down with positioning tech to keep it aimed but out there at L2, no such problem, I imagine the orbit around that invisible planet takes months to complete so a MUCH less stressful and much smaller energy budget to control. Besides being about 5 times faster to get the same number of photons on the sensors.
I wonder if and when there will be a successor to the WEBB!
It will be a dozie for sure! But that will be what, 20 years from now.
- Joined
- 28 Feb 16
- Moves
- 4827
@sonhouse saidI'm not certain about the length of the exposures, but the Deep Field shot was done one morning before breakfast, so it certainly wasn't very long at all. Wouldn't it be great to see that thing locked on to a target for a really good while!
@Liljo
Those images are really impressive! I would love to find out how long the exposures were for that scope. Hours? a minute? One thing, it doesn't have to move much to keep it on target as opposed to Hubble which has to keep it aimed while taking a 45 minute jaunt across from side of the planet which means it is saddled down with positioning tech to keep it aimed but ou ...[text shortened]... be a successor to the WEBB!
It will be a dozie for sure! But that will be what, 20 years from now.
From my (very limited) understanding, those were just "teaser images" intended for the public. They'll get down to some brass knuckle science now, and we are sure to see some real wonders before this is all over.
For a LOT more information, check this site:
https://webbtelescope.org/news/first-images/gallery
@sonhouse saidWhat I'd like is a side-by side comparison of, let's say the Carina Nebula, to see how Webby compares to Hubble.
@Liljo
Those images are really impressive! I would love to find out how long the exposures were for that scope. Hours? a minute? One thing, it doesn't have to move much to keep it on target as opposed to Hubble which has to keep it aimed while taking a 45 minute jaunt across from side of the planet which means it is saddled down with positioning tech to keep it aimed but ou ...[text shortened]... be a successor to the WEBB!
It will be a dozie for sure! But that will be what, 20 years from now.
As for a successor, we need to get Hubble hooked up with Webby so they can have a daughter named Hebby.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@bunnyknight saidI saw a site today where they put the images up one over another and you could slide the boundary, but I've mislaid the link. The difference, though, was spectacular. Meanwhile, there's this:
What I'd like is a side-by side comparison of, let's say the Carina Nebula, to see how Webby compares to Hubble.
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/about/comparisonWebbVsHubble.html
@Shallow-Blue
I would like to know how much time was spent with shutters open, one second? Ten? The real work I think will be with exposures measured in days. These photo's are just for public consumption to prove the scope works but that does not change the fact they are GREAT photos with new science even with those quickies.
I like the first one, showing the Einstein rings.
BTW, why would you think I don't do blues? I do Blues, played in an Irish band named Southwind, got a gig on a national TV show back in the day and I said I have 238 tracks on Soundcloud, I lied, now it is 239, a new one I composed just now, fingerpicking tune I called the Pony Express Rag.
If you search that out, please don't put up my name here, I already ran into problems with that when I gave out my ham callsign.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@sonhouse saidI don't have the exact figures ready, but the Hubble deep field took several days and the Webb deep field about the same number of hours.
@Shallow-Blue
I would like to know how much time was spent with shutters open, one second? Ten?
I don't think it would be useful to get Webb to look at the same patch of sky for the time Hubble did. It would get overloaded. Doing so for a proportionally smaller patch would be more useful.
@wildgrass saidsee here (german satiric site):
I want to see an alien.
https://www.der-postillon.com/2022/07/james-webb.html
@ponderable saidLOL!
see here (german satiric site):
https://www.der-postillon.com/2022/07/james-webb.html
@wildgrass
Webb images of Jupiter:
https://phys.org/news/2022-07-nasa-webb-images-jupiter.html
- Joined
- 28 Feb 16
- Moves
- 4827
Very big news among astronomy folk:
"NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has captured the first clear evidence for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of a planet outside the solar system. This observation of a gas giant planet orbiting a Sun-like star 700 light-years away provides important insights into the composition and formation of the planet. The finding, which is accepted for publication in Nature, is also indicative of Webb’s unique ability to detect and measure carbon dioxide in the thinner atmospheres of smaller, rocky planets."
https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/news/1711/webb-sees-carbon-dioxide-in-exoplanets-atmosphere/