Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Technology

SALT Telescope First Light 140

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the man-still-delights-in-star-gazing dept.
carnun writes "On the 1st of September, 5 years after ground breaking, the SALT Telescope released their first light images to the public. Yesterday one of these images was even displayed on NASA's Astronomy Picture of the Day website. The Southern African Large Telescope, built in South Africa, is the largest telescope in the Southern Hemisphere and (depending on how you define it) the equal largest telescope in the world, but built at a budget of only $30 million, about a tenth cheaper than its nearest competitor. The official opening of the telescope is scheduled for the 10th of November, but scientific observations are already a regular occurence. (Disclaimer: I'm the software engineer responsible for the main telescope server.)" Perhaps as an added bonus carnun could even be persuaded to participate heavily in the discussion. Either way, sounds like a cool project to be a part of.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SALT Telescope First Light More

SALT Telescope First Light

Comments Filter:

  • Impressive Telescope! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Nerd Systems ( 912027 ) * <ben&nerdsystems,com> on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:09AM (#13497692) Homepage
    I read some of the details about this, and saw that this telescope can pick up light as small as a candlepower on the moon's surface. That is a pretty impressive light-gathering ability if I have ever seen one... not even the night vision goggles that the military uses has that good of light-gathering. That is a pretty impressive ability to gather light that dim, which is very valuable on a telescope, being able to pick out the faintest of galaxies very far away, as well as seeing the effects that black holes and the like, can have on galaxies in the very distant reaches of space.

    It is amazing how good optics are becoming these days... which doesn't just apply to astronomy, bu can also be applied in other areas... areas that can affect all of us one day, and not just for space exploration. So many technologies that have been honed in the space program, have found their way to our use as public citizens. This is a wonderful thing for all of mankind.

    Imagine the technologies that are honed with this project being released to the mainstream public down the road... such concepts as more efficient fiber-optics, with light beams being no longer needing fibers to travel across large distances, but simply having a transmitter and receiver on each end, using such optics as this telescope uses, and not being bothered by fiber cuts and the like...

    Astronomy is a wonderful hobby, but at the same time, so many things can be contrived from designing technology to see the heavens... which can help out mankind in ways that we have yet to dream of...

    As a sidenote, this server seems very slow, so for those trying to check things out, and not able to see anything as a result of the slashdot effect that I am sure is cripping these servers, check back at a later time to see some wonderful images that this telescope has presented to scientists. Astronomy has always been a wonderful hobby and very valuable scientific tool to the science community.

    • Re:Impressive Telescope! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:20AM (#13497729)
      not even the night vision goggles that the military uses has that good of light-gathering

      Omg, hand-sized gadget can't gather as much light as a huge complex worth tens of millions. How impressing!
    • Imagine the technologies that are honed with this project being released to the mainstream public down the road

      Paparazzi camera lenses that can snapshot celebrities indiscretions from another continent?
    • I haven't been able to get to the site so I'm writing this based on my understanding of regular telescopes. Which can gather lots of light mostly because they're huge. You simply cannot get this kind of light gathering ability in a hand held device, they're too small.
      • I'm in New Zealand, and at the moment, Slashdot and Google are about the only sites that I can access at the moment. I couldn't contact any of the first 6 hosts in something I searched for earlier. I dunno what the hey is going on...
    • with light beams being no longer needing fibers to travel across large distances
      You mean like free-space optics [google.com]? Baked. [halfbakery.com]
    • If this thing can pick up the light of a candle burning on the moon's surface, then someone has been lying to us big time.

  • Obligatory question about the server (Score:5, Funny)

    by Inigo Soto ( 776501 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:10AM (#13497695) Homepage
    I'll let carnun guess it :)

  • FL (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:12AM (#13497700)
    First Light!

  • SALT server supernovas (Score:4, Funny)

    by Mathinker ( 909784 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:13AM (#13497704) Journal
    In other news, an enormous emission of light and radiation is observed from SA as SALT's servers get slashdotted...

  • As I recall, even back in the early 1970s, SALT was one of the key planks of Nixon's presidential strategy. I was under the impression that SALT succeeded and was only finally done away with when GWB took office, but to see that it is still working is very cool.

  • Depending on how we define what? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Greeger ( 912403 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:19AM (#13497726)
    It is the equal largest telescope in the world depending on what measurement? Height? Width? Resolution? I don't like it when news stories use those kinds of boasts because they are so vague. For all we know that could mean that the telescope has the same number of people working for them as the other large telescope.

    • Re:Depending on how we define what? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Large telescopes are always compared by the diameter of their main mirror (or what would be the equivalent diameter in case of a more complicated design).
      • If this is the case, then how could there be any doubt as to which has the largest diameter ?
      • Aha! I was wondering what that meant. I thought it meant it was the largest telescope in the southern hemisphere (depending on how you define the southern hemisphere). I was going to make a post asking how there could be ambiguity over the definition of the southern hemisphere. So thankyou for clearing that up.

    • Re:Depending on how we define what? (Score:5, Informative)

      by gilzreid ( 95884 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @04:30AM (#13497927) Homepage
      It is based on the diameter of the primary mirror (~10m for SALT). The equal is the prototype which SALT is based on, the HET in Texas (I think). Resolution depends on diameter so it would also have the best resolution, but the Earth's atmosphere tends to distort things too much. This is why the Hubble Space Telescope (which is a mere 2.4M) is so valuable - no atmospheric disturbance.
      However, having a giant mirror means that the telescope can observe faint objects in less time than anything in space at the moment, so can take much higher resolution spectra.

      The actual telescope can't use the whole mirror at once because of the design. The telescope only moves in azimuth, which saves a huge amount of cost but means that only a small part of the mirror is used at any one time. As the target rotates around the sky the area on the telescope moves across the mirror to allow longer exposures.

      SALT also has very high sensitivity to short wavelengths (blue/UV) which is probably the best of any large telescope, or at least close.
    • Traditonally, the diameter of the mirror (10 m in SALT's case) is used for comparison.

    • Re:Depending on how we define what? (Score:5, Informative)

      by katana ( 122232 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @04:54AM (#13497984) Homepage
      Usually comparisons are based on mirror diameters, so SALT is roughly equal to Keck One or Two, the 10m mirrors on Hawaii. But if you're looking for sharpness of image, then you might be more interested in baselines, where interferometry allows configuration of multiple mirrors to achieve sharper images (by cancelling out interference and unwanted signals), such as the VLT in Chile. Baselines at the VLT can reach 200m, which makes the 10m mirror not quite as impressive.

      To put it in slashdot-friendly terms, you shouldn't just compare processors based on clock speed, because different processors may be optimized for different purposes. Mirror size is kind of like clock speed.

  • Slashdotted (Score:4, Funny)

    by Jarnis ( 266190 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:21AM (#13497731)
    I wonder if the telescope could see the smoldering ruins of the webserver from the surface of the moon - as the server just got slashdotted off the face of the earth...

  • 1/10th cheaper? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:21AM (#13497732)
    Well, i don't think one tenth is _that_ impressive. Are they sure it's not 10 times cheaper or something?

  • Mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by Max von H. ( 19283 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:25AM (#13497743)
    Check the MirrorDot page [mirrordot.com], the original server is already smoking...

  • Cost-saving measures (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mirni ( 856020 )
    about a tenth cheaper than its nearest competitor
    ----

    Definition of 'nearest competitor' aside, I'd be very interested to know in what ways savings of such magnitude were realised. Cheap labour shouldn't account for much, here.

    -m-
    • Is it really 'a tenth cheaper', i.e. 10% cheaper than its nearest competitor? I somehow get the impression that the submitter meant 'a tenth the cost of its nearest competitor, i.e. 90% cheaper.

      Neither seem correct, as Keck [hawaii.edu] cost $ 140M for two telescopes with a similar diameter.

    • Re:Cost-saving measures (Score:4, Informative)

      by carnun ( 91213 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @05:22AM (#13498069)
      One of the big reasons is that SALT's primary mirror is spherical. This means that each of the segments are of exactly the same design. A parabolic mirror, like that used on most other telescopes you general have to have different design for many of the segments. Downside - spherical mirror bring aberations. Upside - they can be compensated for quite by secondary mirrors.

      The SALT primary consists of 91 segments each of which cost $30000, compare this to the estimated cost of having a single 10m primary ~$1 000 000 000.

      Cheap (but highly skilled) engineers do help and then the last contributing factor is that the mirror is fixed in elevation - spherical mirrors mean that this the telescope is not limited to fixed elevation though.
      • SALT is based on a telescope designed and built for a consortium of universities, led by the University of Texas at Austin and Penn State. The telescope, called the HET, is located on top of Mt. Fowlkes in far West Texas. The cost of the HET without instrumentation was about $16MM.
    • Apparently they only can move one axis of the telescope, relying on the rotation of the earth (movement of the heavens for creationists) to get the other axis. Apparently you can actually do pretty well with this method, and save buckets of cash.
    • They started with the engineering plans for a telescope already in operation and tweaked from there.

      (IANA telescope engineer) The Texas telescope that they copied was already operational and probably largely debugged. So they used those engineering plans, adapted them for local requirements, found out what the problems were that the telescope operators had experienced, and engineered in the fixes. That, in and of itself, is not a cost-saving measure, but could account for their rapid ramp-up to First Lig

  • flame on the moon (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:27AM (#13497751)
    SALT can detect objects as faint as a candle flame on the moon.

    Now, granted I haven't been to the moon myself but I would tend to think a candle flame there would indeed be extremely faint..

  • OMG... nerdy poetry!.. :) (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:29AM (#13497756)
    Did you read the nerd factor 10 poetry on the page? For the ones who can not reach the page:


    praise poem of the
    Southern African Large Telescope

    "At the mountain's top I reach up,
    I fill my haversack with stars."
    - Tatamkhulu Afrika: Nightrider

    when the sun sets
    we stand in the failing light
    stretch our arms,
    catch the falling drops.

    Medupe & Marang cup our CCD,
    save all falling photons,
    deepening into a pool of light
    whose surface reflects:

    stretch marks from the birth of time
    hints of gravity's lenses
    the pulse of stars
    & mating dance of binary suns;

    galaxies digitalized - a heaven
    captured in butterfly nets of circuitry
    red on the readout, disked for storage:
    mysteries, solved and sensuous.

    Keith Gottschalk


    Emphasis added... :)
  • [ben@mail.nerdsystems.com]#traceroute www.salt.ac.za
    traceroute to www.salt.ac.za (192.96.109.50), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 0.698 ms 0.887 ms 0.665 ms
    2 10.52.128.1 (10.52.128.1) 10.187 ms 9.563 ms 7.850 ms
    3 pos5-0.hstntxgra-rtr2.houston.rr.com (24.28.97.213) 9.569 ms 9.916 ms 7.559 ms
    4 srp8-0.hstntxtid-rtr2.houston.rr.com (24.28.101.241) 8.333 ms 8.994 ms 8.143 ms
    5 pos0-0.hstntxtid-rtr1.texas.rr.com (24.93.34.98) 9.892 ms 8.441 ms 10.023 ms
    6 so

  • So... how long till we see other planets? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cool_number_9 ( 825274 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:42AM (#13497800)
    I graduated at the Optical Research Group of my university and while I was doing something completely different, a few people were working on nulling interferometry, a technique used to cancel all the light of the star, thereby allowing the light of the surrrounding planets to filtered through. For this to work, you need telescopes at different places. So they actually want to build an array in space or maybe they already did that.

    With this high sensitivity of this new telescope, I'm just wondering if an array could be built on earth. Then we can really start looking for nice warm little planets...

  • Southern Sky (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RocketRainbow ( 750071 ) <rocketgirl@@@myrealbox...com> on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @03:43AM (#13497803) Homepage Journal
    Mmm... we're looking at the same stars.

    I love my Southern sky. As an Australian, I can't say "I love a sunburnt country", but I love the Magellanic Clouds, the Southern Cross, the Pliades... Looking up is how I know I'm home.

    And of course your photos won't show bizarre things like the upside-down-moon!

    It's about darn time people started putting more effort into the southern sky. You can just survey for a night and show up interesting things down here!
  • Will pick up a pimple on an astronauts ass..
  • Does this also help with my horoscope?

  • South Africa: South African South Africa Telescope (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    [ South Africa ]
    Posted by ScuttleMonkey on 10:07 7th September, 2005
    from the man-we-don't-hear-about-this-place-often-enough dept.
    A South African writes "On the 1st of September, 5 years after ground breaking South Africanism, the South African Telescope released their first South African light images to the South Africa public. Yesterday one of these South African images was even displayed on NASA's Southern Africa Picture of the Day website. The Southern African Large Telescope, built in South Africa, is
  • "My god, it's full of sta...@~0-tw$%^&e" Hmmm, server must be down.

  • Bronson Bodies (Score:3, Funny)

    by GomezAdams ( 679726 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @04:19AM (#13497895)
    This is great news for astronomy. I just hope they keep an eye out for the Bronson Bodies with their new toy.

  • SALT Telescope? (Score:5, Funny)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @04:20AM (#13497900)
    Did they pay for it after getting money from the Automatic ATM Machine? After typing in their PIN Number? I know, I should RTFA the article before posting. I'll STFU up now.
  • We have a tough enough time getting decent bandwidth down here at the Southern tip of Africa, without you bastards Slashdotting our Telescope and taking our undersea cables with it!

    Mutter, mutter, mutter...

  • Perhaps as an added bonus carnun could even be persuaded to participate heavily in the discussion.

    Yeah, right. After that electric-universe clusterfuck yesterday, why would anyone remotely affiliated with legitimate, mainstream science want to come within a mile of this place? And even if someone did - I'm guessing this submission's been in the queue for a bit - do we have time to fit it in, in between our daily doses of kookery?

    Hey, on the plus side, I now know for sure that not subscribing was absol

  • Cheap telescope (Score:5, Interesting)

    by photonic ( 584757 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @07:00AM (#13498429)
    The nice thing about this telescope is that the whole design is aimed at keeping it cheap. To start with it is almost a direct copy of the Hobby-Eberly [utexas.edu] telescope, so go there if SALT is slashdotted. Reusing a design of course saves a lot and there will not be a lot of redundant science since HET is located at the northern hemisphere and SALT at the southern. The project has a lot of international partners, but obviously the South African astronomy community is the big winner here.

    Then the design of the telescope, this is very uncommon to keep costs down: First of all the telescope cannot cover the whole sky, it has a fixed elevation (something like 40 degrees?) and can only rotate around its vertical axis. This saves of course a lot of mechanics and has as an added benefit that the structure will have a constant sagging due to gravity. The cost you pay is of course a limited view of the sky, but there is plenty to see in the part that is visible.

    The second innovation is that the shape of the mirror is not parabolic, as in most telescopes, but spherical. This has two benefits: first, all the mirror segments can be produced with the same curvature, which is cheaper than custom segments as for Keck [hawaii.edu]. Secondly, you can change the elevation of your telescope (over a limited range) without moving the main mirror by rotating the rest of the optics from a point in the center of the sphere (this is possible because of spherical symmetry of the mirror). The downside of the spherical optics is that the optical aberations of the system are more severe than for a parabolic mirror, so you need to add some extra optics to compensate. This is no big problem since HET and SALT are not built for making nice pictures, but primarily for spectroscopy, for which a big light collecting area is more important than the best possible imaging system.

  • "...(Disclaimer: I'm the software engineer responsible for the main telescope server.)"

    Okay, so unlikely to be responsible for the web server too, but surely professionalism or general comradeship would warn againt submitting your servers to a Slashdotting...
  • What does this sentence from TFA mean? (especially the second half of the sentence)

    "the best frames produced by SALT and SALTICAM show star images as small as 1 arcsecond (1/3600 degree), despite being taken when the seeing was 0.9-1.0 arcseconds"

    • Seeing [wikipedia.org] is a measure of the blurring of the images of stars due to movement of air in the atmosphere above the telescope. If you think of the blurring as a gaussian filter applied to the image, then the number quoted is the width of the gaussian (bell) curve at half its height - so the actual size of the blurred image would be rather larger as the gaussian curve flares out at the bottom.

      Which means that (thanks to adaptive optics) they've managed to achieve images of stars which are perhaps 2-3 times sharp

    • seeing is a measurement of how the atmosphere is degrading the images of stars. So if the seeing is 1.0 arcseconds, this means that after the light from the star passes through the atmosphere, its full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) intensity has an angular size of 1.0 arcseconds. Telescopes and the domes that they are mounted in usually cause the seeing to get worse, so even though the atmosphere is only blurring the image of a star to an angular size of 1.0 arcsecond, when the image is recorded in a camer

  • 404 errors, Here is a better link: (Score:4, Interesting)

    by qualico ( 731143 ) <[worldcouchsurfer] [at] [gmail.com]> on Wednesday September 07, 2005 @09:47AM (#13499719) Journal
    Getting 404 errors on the main page when trying to view the images?
    Alternatively, they can be viewed here:

    http://www.saao.ac.za/news/salt_light.html [saao.ac.za]

    Using, my Celestron 9.25" last night here in the north, sure gives you an appreciation of these images and what bigger light buckets nets you.

    Showed my wife M57, (Ring Nebula), for the first time.
    Albiet, it was washed and faint, its a worthy experience to see things with your "God's Eye".

    Can anyone here, who has toured a large telescope, comment on how the captured images compare to the live views?
  • from the article: SALT can detect objects as faint as a candle flame on the moon.

    If we can look that closer to the moon, why hasn't anybody just taken photographs of the US flag left at the moon during the Apollo missions? That should at least satisfy some of the skeptics out there. Of course, people will then say that the flags were planted using other methods or that the pictures were altered... ah, the human brain...

Slashdot Top Deals

Time is the most valuable thing a man can spend. -- Theophrastus

Close