'Unprecedented' Detail: Vera Rubin Space Telescope Releases First Images from Its 3,200-Megapixel Camera (yahoo.com) 41
Perched in Chile's Andes mountains, "A revolutionary new space telescope has just taken its first pictures of the cosmos," reports National Geographic — "and they're spectacular." Formerly known as the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, it's expected to bring "unprecedented detail" to space photography:
The observatory has a few key components: A giant telescope, called the Simonyi Survey Telescope, is connected to the world's largest and highest resolution digital camera. Rubin's 27-foot primary mirror, paired with a mind-boggling 3,200-megapixel camera, will repeatedly take 30-second exposure images of vast swaths of the sky with unrivaled speed and detail. Each image will cover an area of sky as big as 40 full moons. Every three nights for the next 10 years, Rubin will produce a new, ultra-high-definition map of the entire visible southern sky. With this much coverage, scientists hope to create an updated and detailed "movie" they can use to view how the cosmos changes over time....
For the next decade, Rubin will capture millions of astronomical objects each day — or more than 100 every second. Ultimately, it's expected to discover about 17 billion stars and 20 billion galaxies that we've never seen before... When the observatory begins science operations in earnest later in 2025, its instruments will yield a deluge of astronomical data that will be too overwhelming to process manually. (Each night, the observatory will generate around 20 terabytes of data.) Astronomers expect high-quality observations taken with the telescope will help map out the structure of the universe, find comets and potentially hazardous asteroids in our solar system, and detect exploding stars and black holes in distant galaxies.
The observatory will also examine the optical counterparts of gravitational wave events — ripples in the fabric of space caused by some of the most energetic processes in the cosmos. By studying these events, astronomers hope to uncover the secrets of the invisible forces that shape the universe like dark matter and dark energy.
"Already, in just over 10 hours of test observations, the observatory has discovered 2,104 never-before-seen-asteroids," reports NPR, "including seven near-Earth asteroids, none of which pose any danger..." The basic idea is that the data "should let astronomers catch transient phenomena that they otherwise wouldn't know to look for, such as exploding stars, asteroids, interstellar objects whizzing in from other solar systems, and maybe even the movement of a giant planet that some believe is lurking out in our own solar system, beyond Pluto."
The telescope is a joint project between the U.S. Energy Department and its National Science Foundation — and it will stream a special live broadcast of its first images today at 11 a.m. EDT (1500 GMT) on their official YouTube channel (also simulacast at Space.com).
For the next decade, Rubin will capture millions of astronomical objects each day — or more than 100 every second. Ultimately, it's expected to discover about 17 billion stars and 20 billion galaxies that we've never seen before... When the observatory begins science operations in earnest later in 2025, its instruments will yield a deluge of astronomical data that will be too overwhelming to process manually. (Each night, the observatory will generate around 20 terabytes of data.) Astronomers expect high-quality observations taken with the telescope will help map out the structure of the universe, find comets and potentially hazardous asteroids in our solar system, and detect exploding stars and black holes in distant galaxies.
The observatory will also examine the optical counterparts of gravitational wave events — ripples in the fabric of space caused by some of the most energetic processes in the cosmos. By studying these events, astronomers hope to uncover the secrets of the invisible forces that shape the universe like dark matter and dark energy.
"Already, in just over 10 hours of test observations, the observatory has discovered 2,104 never-before-seen-asteroids," reports NPR, "including seven near-Earth asteroids, none of which pose any danger..." The basic idea is that the data "should let astronomers catch transient phenomena that they otherwise wouldn't know to look for, such as exploding stars, asteroids, interstellar objects whizzing in from other solar systems, and maybe even the movement of a giant planet that some believe is lurking out in our own solar system, beyond Pluto."
The telescope is a joint project between the U.S. Energy Department and its National Science Foundation — and it will stream a special live broadcast of its first images today at 11 a.m. EDT (1500 GMT) on their official YouTube channel (also simulacast at Space.com).
FFS "Space telescope" ? Erm, no. (Score:2)
Does the author of this story about a telescope really not know what a space telescope is ?
They - like the "Editors" here - must be so proud of their work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_telescope
Re:FFS "Space telescope" ? Erm, no. (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, mine is aimed at my neighbors' window.
Re:FFS "Space telescope" ? Erm, no. (Score:5, Funny)
Are you currently laid up with a broken leg?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: FFS "Space telescope" ? Erm, no. (Score:1)
Or "one half". I mean a half is a half why add "one" before it?
Re: (Score:2)
Let me sip my chai tea and ponder this
Re: (Score:2)
horseback riding
If the saddle isn't secured, some people end up riding underneath the horse.
Re:FFS "Space telescope" ? Erm, no. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
FFS, Redundant Redundancy? Uh, yeah. (Score:2)
They - like the "Editors" here - must be so proud of their work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Perhaps those defining “space telescopes” should be more proud of their Department of Redundancy Department, since their definition amounts to a telescope in space designed to observe space. Gee, thanks for the the clarification. Here I thought that telescope on the moon was gonna look for illegal immigrants. * eye roll *
Re: (Score:2)
It is a meaningful distiction.
It doesn't apply to terrestrial telescopes, of which there are many.
It doesn't apply to spy satellites, geomapping equipment, and the like, which also have telescopes but are designed to observe the Earth.
So we have a distinct group of items with materially significant differences in properties from the rest. And the definition does need to be available online with citations because even NatGeo will either prefer layman's terms or screw it up.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a meaningful distiction.
It doesn't apply to terrestrial telescopes, of which there are many.
When you start measuring your mirrors in meters, that damn thing ain’t designed to look at anything other than space. Meaningful? No, not really. It’s redundant, and quite obvious when talking about one of the planets largest. That thing ain’t pointed at the ground.
It doesn't apply to spy satellites, geomapping equipment, and the like, which also have telescopes but are designed to observe the Earth.
So we have a distinct group of items with materially significant differences in properties from the rest. And the definition does need to be available online with citations because even NatGeo will either prefer layman's terms or screw it up.
Perhaps NatGeo also implies a certain level of intelligence when speaking about our worlds largest telescopes. Again, exactly none of them are pointed down at Earth. Do we think without clarification people are going to c
Re: (Score:2)
When you start measuring your mirrors in meters, that damn thing ainâ(TM)t designed to look at anything other than space.
I suggest you hit up Wikipedia for "Lacrosse"
Re: (Score:2)
Cough.
https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:1)
The prior crew used it to spy on shapely swimmers.
WD/Seagate (Score:1)
Wut (Score:1)
It takes 30-second exposures at unrivaled speed.
Re: (Score:1)
It takes 30-second exposures at unrivaled speed.
Literally sounds like something Trump would say. :-)
Asteroids (Score:2)
"including seven near-Earth asteroids, none of which pose any danger..."
If they've only just spotted them, how do they know they don't pose any danger? Have they worked out the orbits already?
Re: (Score:3)
We have computers, we feed the data of several observations into them and we get either (1) whew, you safe, buy that luxury condo, or (2) you dead, say your prayers. The fancy computers have a red and a green light on top to indicate your fate.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In order to determine that the dots were asteroids, they probably needed detect that they moved via multiple observations.
And once you have multiple observations, you can start calculating the path.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That would be ironic if a sizeable asteroid proved likely to hit earth, but we are just slightly short of enough nukes to deflect it because we flattened Iran's.
Humanity's last Doh!
Northern Sky, too, please... (Score:3)
[Yes, I know we won't be able to do anything useful in such an event
Mixed analogies (40 golf balls on the Moon) (Score:1)
We read "40 moons". Presumably "the Moon as seen from Earth" or with more precision: about 7 degrees angular diameter or 6 degrees squared (I guess).
Then we learn "that you could spot a golf ball from 24 km". Which is very interesting. But can we return to our "Moon as seen from the Earth" reference? Could we see a golf ball on one of these "40 moons"? No. Could we see a person? Probably not. Could we see a golf course on the Moon?
Apparently math and numbers scare some people. Most prefer "teach me like I'm
Re: (Score:1)
A standard golf ball is 42.67 mm. Average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384 400 km.
If we can see a 42.67 mm ball at 24 km, then can we see a 4.267 m ball at 2400 km and a 683 m ball on the Moon?
Re: (Score:2)
A standard golf ball is 42.67 mm. Average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384 400 km.
If we can see a 42.67 mm ball at 24 km, then can we see a 4.267 m ball at 2400 km and a 683 m ball on the Moon?
A standard 18-hole golf course has a size of about 150 acres, or assuming it's circular, a diameter of about 2800 feet or a bit more than 800 m. So yes, you could just make out a golf course on the moon.
Re: (Score:2)
A standard golf ball is 42.67 mm. Average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384 400 km.
If we can see a 42.67 mm ball at 24 km, then can we see a 4.267 m ball at 2400 km and a 683 m ball on the Moon?
A standard 18-hole golf course has an area of about 150 acres. Assuming it's circular, that would give a diameter of about 2800 ft, or well over 800 m. So yes, you could just make out a golf course on the moon.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry for the near-duplicate post. I was having trouble with my system and browser, and didn't know that the first post went through.
This begs for a poll... (Score:2)
Most of the images (Score:2)
Sadly most of the images are the same pics of what they ordered at restaurants, girls with their tongues out and making the "V" with their fingers, people standing in front of tourist sites, etc.
Miss the Old National Geographic : ( (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
National Geographic was my favorite magazine--but now it's a climate-denier and religious propaganda rag.
Evidence please? Because I can't find any. Quite the opposite, actually. [nationalgeographic.com]
Re: (Score:1)
I remember noticing such in their cable channel, but not so much the print edition.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember noticing [evidence of climate denial or religious propaganda] in their cable channel, but not so much the print edition.
What, specifically? As in what program(s)?