Jwst launches in less than 3 hours

First color images to be released soon.

Im expecting them to have the first clear images of the flying spaghetti monster laughing at us from the far end of the universe.

5pm Eastern time! 

With Joe Biden announcing it!  Wouldn't have been my first choice but whatever.

SCIENCE!!!

5pm Eastern time! 

With Joe Biden announcing it!  Wouldn't have been my first choice but whatever.

SCIENCE!!!

Really, the guy who can't read a teleprompter is going to announce it.

You just have to watch it on Youtube at 2x speed.  He seems like a pretty sharp guy when you do that.

Just mute the broadcast until some scientists start talking.

Overall, I'm super excited. First observations:

- Carina Nebula
- Southern Ring Nebula
- Galaxy group Stephan's Quintet
- SMACS 0723 galaxy cluster
- Planet WASP-96b

Really, the guy who can't read a teleprompter is going to announce it.

Out of the last 4 US presidents, only one can actually do this. So this does not really narrow it down a lot.

Some interesting things in this image.  It almost looks like a super long exposure shot where some of the galaxies have had time to move.  I wonder what the story there is.

Some interesting things in this image.  It almost looks like a super long exposure shot where some of the galaxies have had time to move.  I wonder what the story there is.

I haven't seen the press release but am going to guess those are examples of gravitational lensing.  It's certainly a very long exposure but the JWST will be fixed on one spot and not moving at all.

Here is a full resolution version.
 
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/main_image_deep_field_smacs0723-5mb.jpg

Some interesting things in this image.  It almost looks like a super long exposure shot where some of the galaxies have had time to move.  I wonder what the story there is.

Neat thing is that it's an engineering image, not a scientific image.  It was from the Fine Guidance Sensor test.

This Fine Guidance Sensor test image was acquired in parallel with NIRCam imaging of the star HD147980 over a period of eight days at the beginning of May. This engineering image represents a total of 32 hours of exposure time at several overlapping pointings of the Guider 2 channel. The observations were not optimized for detection of faint objects, but nevertheless the image captures extremely faint objects and is, for now, the deepest image of the infrared sky.

I read that somewhere too, lensing.

I also think I read somewhere that long exposures are involved. Like one of bubbles first images was exposed for 100 hours. I must have that wrong, seems impossible.

But jeepers, look at all of those galaxies. Unreal.

I read that somewhere too, lensing.

I also think I read somewhere that long exposures are involved. Like one of bubbles first images was exposed for 100 hours. I must have that wrong, seems impossible.

But jeepers, look at all of those galaxies. Unreal.

The JWST exposures shown above is about 12 hours long. Hubble needed about 100 hours to give us much worse quality images.

Eat shit Hubble!

Yeah looking at that we can conclude the Hubble is a POS. Time to use it as target practice for an ICBM test

Yeah looking at that we can conclude the Hubble is a POS. Time to use it as target practice for an ICBM test

Hubble's 2 older brothers are pointing down at earth. I dont think they would like it if you shot is small brother down

Like the aspect ratio.  Will probably make it my new desktop background.

Like the aspect ratio.  Will probably make it my new desktop background.

Works really well on a 2 screen set up. Move over Saturn, I have a new desk top image

Hubble VS JWST






Hubble's image on the left took multiple days to create, JWST took a few hours.
And for those that dont know. JWST takes images mostly in the infra red spectrum, which means 2 big things. 1, they alter the colour after the images are taken to better match our colour perception. And 2, it sees things that Hubble could not see.

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

That better not include the Sun!

Stephan's Quintet

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

That will take a really really long time.
JWST has a resolution of 0.01 arc seconds, so if each image took 1 hour, it will take 14 800 years just to image a full circle. Not the whole sphere yet, got to do that 129 million times to get a full sphere.

Quote from: Masalang the Torpedo on July 12, 2022, 01:23:28 PM

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

That will take a really really long time.
JWST has a resolution of 0.01 arc seconds, so if each image took 1 hour, it will take 14 800 years just to image a full circle. Not the whole sphere yet, got to do that 129 million times to get a full sphere.

All good things come to those who wait. They better get a move on!

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on July 12, 2022, 09:05:26 PM

Quote from: Masalang the Torpedo on July 12, 2022, 01:23:28 PM

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

That will take a really really long time.
JWST has a resolution of 0.01 arc seconds, so if each image took 1 hour, it will take 14 800 years just to image a full circle. Not the whole sphere yet, got to do that 129 million times to get a full sphere.

All good things come to those who wait. They better get a move on!

We may need more telescopes

Quote from: Masalang the Torpedo on July 12, 2022, 09:10:21 PM

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on July 12, 2022, 09:05:26 PM

Quote from: Masalang the Torpedo on July 12, 2022, 01:23:28 PM

Given that image only takes a few hours, I hope they get the JWST to give as (as best as possible) a full 360 degree panoramic deep field view of the universe!

That will take a really really long time.
JWST has a resolution of 0.01 arc seconds, so if each image took 1 hour, it will take 14 800 years just to image a full circle. Not the whole sphere yet, got to do that 129 million times to get a full sphere.

All good things come to those who wait. They better get a move on!

We may need more telescopes

Let's see, assuming a worst case of each of those images being the full 4 megapixels, that's a 500 billion megapixel image. Minimum size of 1548 TB. Not too bad actually. 

Amazon has a 12TB drive on sale for $250 so you could store that image for only $32 thousand.

I'm going to need a bigger RAID array...

Let's see, assuming a worst case of each of those images being the full 4 megapixels, that's a 500 billion megapixel image. Minimum size of 1548 TB. Not too bad actually. 

Amazon has a 12TB drive on sale for $250 so you could store that image for only $32 thousand.

I'm going to need a bigger RAID array...

Dont worry about it too much, It will take so long, by the time there is 1Tb worth of images they will have 2000TB worth of storage built into your socks.

Quote from: JJA on July 13, 2022, 04:29:03 AM

Let's see, assuming a worst case of each of those images being the full 4 megapixels, that's a 500 billion megapixel image. Minimum size of 1548 TB. Not too bad actually. 

Amazon has a 12TB drive on sale for $250 so you could store that image for only $32 thousand.

I'm going to need a bigger RAID array...

Dont worry about it too much, It will take so long, by the time there is 1Tb worth of images they will have 2000TB worth of storage built into your socks.

Socks? Where we're going we won't need socks!

Like the aspect ratio.  Will probably make it my new desktop background.

I'm trying to come to terms with the scale of what we are seeing.

The average adult human body has about 7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms

The observable universe? 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms

And that picture? Awesome as it is, it only represents a fraction of a poofteenth of the observable universe. Somewhere closer to 7²⁷atoms  then it is to 10⁸⁰ atoms.  So, not a big of a leap as I imagined

A number I did think could blow my mind was just how many Planck length units could fit inside the universe. But that number is only ~10¹⁸⁶.

Or how about getting pi accurate to within a Planck length measuring the size of the observable universe. It only takes around 63 decimal places.

Depending on how you look at it, the universe can indeed seem like a pretty small place.

Quote from: Crouton on July 12, 2022, 08:39:54 AM

Like the aspect ratio.  Will probably make it my new desktop background.

I'm trying to come to terms with the scale of what we are seeing.

The average adult human body has about 7,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms

The observable universe? 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms

And that picture? Awesome as it is, it only represents a fraction of a poofteenth of the observable universe. Somewhere closer to 7²⁷atoms  then it is to 10⁸⁰ atoms.  So, not a big of a leap as I imagined

A number I did think could blow my mind was just how many Planck length units could fit inside the universe. But that number is only ~10¹⁸⁶.

Or how about getting pi accurate to within a Planck length measuring the size of the observable universe. It only takes around 63 decimal places.

Depending on how you look at it, the universe can indeed seem like a pretty small place.

The issue is, your looking at numbers and saying, hey look, these squiggles still fit on the screen, cant be that big. Humans are not actually that good at visualising numbers in physical space.
Googleplex - one word representing 10^^{10^100.} The expression easily fits on a page. But you could probably fill every gap in the observable universe (all the space between stars ext) with sand, and still not have a googleplex worth of sand grains.


I look at that picture and feel pretty small. Most dots we see in the black back ground are entire galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars and trillions of planets. The scale is huge, even if you can write it out.

Like I said, depends how you look at it.

You and I are closer in relative size to the entire observable universe than we are to a single Planck length.