Worlds Largest Telescope? 29
AndersBrownworth writes "With a unique take on "Distributed Computing", the PhotonStar Project aims to search for laser transmissions from extra terrestrial life by harnessing amateur astronomers who have an optical telescope with a laser detector, a GPS and a computer with a net connection. I think it would be interesting to get a large number of computer controlled optical telescopes together that have GPS and CCD capabilities and build the world's largest optical telescope. The concept wouldn't be much different from New Mexico's VLA Radio Telescope. Given the falling prices of computer controlled optical telescopes, a project like this might not be far off."
WARNING! (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, it WOULD be different (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, it would be. The VLA works because all the signals are brought together and correlated - they are carefully time synced (to the nanosecond) and then combined.
The same trick in the optical domain is called interferometry, and requires that the actual LIGHT from each 'scope be brought together - you need not only the brightness (which a CCD would record), but the phase and polarization of the signal (which a CCD won't record).
So you cannot use an array of 'scopes world-wide to create a virtual array.
What you can do, and what optical SETI is all about, is to have each scope looking at a different star (or star field) at each time.
In a way, comparing the two is like comparing a 64-way NUMA cluster to a Beowulf cluster - one will work well with one big program of many threads sharing data (NUMA/interferometry), and one will work well with many small independent programs (Beowulf/optical SETI).
Re:virtual array for pulse detection does make sen (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Yes, it WOULD be different (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm no astronomer, but I saw it when I went up there for a tour, and it looks very cool. Really fascinating that, in spite of it's close proximity to the 'light pollution' of Los Angeles, Mount Wilson is still doing Real Astronomy.
Re:Yes, it WOULD be different (Score:3, Informative)
Don't forget about the Square Kilometer Array (Score:4, Informative)
Site are here [skatelescope.org], here [man.ac.uk], and here [csiro.au].
Some technical details are here [csiro.au].
From the later,
The antenna has "...a proposed collecting area at low frequencies (150 MHz to 1.5 GHz) of roughly 1 km2 (or 106 m2) - the equivalent of more than one hundred dishes of 100 m diameter. In contrast, the largest and most sensitive existing array has a physical area approximately one hundred times smaller than this."
That's pretty big.
Re:Don't forget about the Square Kilometer Array (Score:1)
Just to clarify, the SKA isn't built yet, and AFAIK a site has not yet been chosen. I know that at least the U.S/Mexico, Australia, and China would each like to have it in their backyard.
For comparison, 1 sq. km = apx. 100 million amateur telescopes. Doable? In a properly enthusiastic world, yes, but not (yet) with CCDs, because they're just too darn expensive. So how about 2.5 billion digital cameras/webcams pointing up? ;-)
For a fairer comparison, the next rilly big optical telesco
This is a very cool idea (Score:1)
Huge catalogs could be created and used for comparisons that could lead to additional comet discoveries for example. If the system is using gps it is possible to have some time sync though not to the hyper accurate clocks that vlts use. I think it would still be useful information, especially to the amateur astronomy crowd.
I wonder wh
1 foot accuracy of lat-long+altitude required. (Score:3, Insightful)
I do remember quite a while ago NASA developing some statistical method of getting extremely accurate GPS positional data from taking masses of GPS data over many weeks (IIRC it was accurate to something like centimeters). Unfortunately it was just a newspaper article, so the details were lacking. Could this be how they plan on getting the accurate positional data? Anyone know more about this?
Re:1 foot accuracy of lat-long+altitude required. (Score:2)
I mean, if some photons with a slight time difference (1nns) get onto two CCDs in two different parts of the world and they are only read at a rate of 10Hz, there should be information in the jitter of signal that could be used to reconstruct timing by collecting enough data. Or is that impossible?
I'm not making a statement here, rather asking people in this business these questions.
Re:1 foot accuracy of lat-long+altitude required. (Score:3, Informative)
Again, I could just be talking out of my ass here, so if anyone has more experience feel free to correct me.
Re:1 foot accuracy of lat-long+altitude required. (Score:1)
This goes back to the days when the military was still limiting the accuracy of civilian GPS units. They did th
A good way of ruling out false positives (Score:3, Insightful)
The atmospheric turbulence causes 'scintillation' of starlight (a rapid, small variation in stellar brightness), and for the very short exposures they're proposing, it'd be difficult with just one telescope to pull out an ET laser modulated signal from the atmospheric generated scintillation.
Distributed telescopes with accurate positions would pull out a laser signal very easily.
Cute trick.
Dr Fish
Re:A good way of ruling out false positives (Score:1)
Just curious. I don't know and I am not a physicist or astronomer. If someone could explain this to me I sure would appreciate it.
Re:A good way of ruling out false positives (Score:3, Informative)
Red-shifts *could* be important for looking at more distant galaxies, but looking for ET signals from other galaxies is ruled out, partially because the inverse-square law makes the laser beem too dilute over those distances, and the intergalactic medium would cause very sli
Re:Great asset to the perv market... (Score:1)
One telescope looking thru the window and 9999 looking at the walls of the house?! Your request for telescope time is denied!
A couple of unmentioned problems (Score:1)
Unfortunately the refractive index of the atmosphere is not uniform, and turbulence makes it vary fairly quickly and unpredictably. In other words, the same effect that makes stars twinkle should scatter the arrival times by an amount that I'm guessing is much more than a nanosecond. So distributed small telescopes are
Um. How about this probability equation (Score:3, Funny)