[HN Gopher] James Webb Space Telescope White House Briefing
___________________________________________________________________
James Webb Space Telescope White House Briefing
Author : jotamon
Score : 75 points
Date : 2022-07-11 21:29 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.youtube.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.youtube.com)
| perihelions wrote:
| It is starting now!
| gmiller123456 wrote:
| Now, let's listen to politicians talk for 45 minutes. The hold
| music was better.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Joke's on us, NASA paid a lot of money for this music loop and
| they're gonna get their money's worth
| gmiller123456 wrote:
| Every time it reaches the end, I feel like it's one of those
| cruel "phone ring" sounds companies do to make you think
| someone is answering the phone while you're on hold.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Your science interest is important to us...
| [deleted]
| sp332 wrote:
| https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=C8CHkd0gX0I&list=RDAMVMC8C...
| anigbrowl wrote:
| There are so many better options for space music, this is
| nearly 30 years old
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6rtzPp0_ew
| SnowProblem wrote:
| Yes, but see NASA is trying to tell us something. The nerds
| thought they would be on the ones pushing space exploration
| forward. And they were, for a time. But then the travel
| vloggers, the instagrammers, the reality tv producers, and
| even the pornographers all saw the advertising money
| floating out there in the cosmos, and space has been
| tropical house ever since.
| cookingrobot wrote:
| Just started
| cyberge99 wrote:
| 6:15 PM EST
| wsinks wrote:
| Just started!
| Izikiel43 wrote:
| The context makes the picture more amazing than what Hubble did.
|
| > Webb's image covers a patch of sky approximately the size of a
| grain of sand held at arm's length by someone on the ground - and
| reveals thousands of galaxies in a tiny sliver of vast universe
| [deleted]
| dougmwne wrote:
| For those expressing disappointment, keep in mind that this
| probably reminds you of the Hubble deep field, but that image
| took 11 cumulative days of exposures and tons of post processing.
| This is a very impressive deep field right out of the gate based
| on only 11 hours of exposure. I don't know any more details than
| that.
|
| It's going to take lots of context and details to be able to make
| apples to apples comparisons on image quality. Consider how hard
| it is to come up with a "WOW" image after decades of Hubble and
| highly advanced image processing techniques from space and
| terrestrial scopes. It'll take many years to get the full value
| from JWST, and this is just the start.
|
| So bravo and keep it coming!
| systemvoltage wrote:
| Not a single comment in this thread has expressed
| disappointment about the image itself. People are disappointed
| about the PR and poorly run press conference.
| dmix wrote:
| It's disappointing because community outreached/education is
| supposed to be a part of NASAs job. It was late, filled with
| cliches, bad image quality, and over far too quickly. A
| squandered opportunity to pay-off the excitement for this
| project to communicate why it's interesting and build
| excitement for what's still to come.
|
| I guess we'll have to stick to Youtube channels with proper
| production and presentation skills to do that...
| ourmandave wrote:
| The ASL interpreter is just delightful.
| gmiller123456 wrote:
| Never seen an interpreter so animated. Way more interesting
| than listening to the dialog so far.
| bostonsre wrote:
| What time will it start?
| [deleted]
| spekcular wrote:
| It was supposed to start at 5:30 ET.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| To celebrate the decade long delay of Webb itself, the start
| time has been indefinitely delayed from 5:00 pm.
| bostonsre wrote:
| > We will begin shortly...
|
| Lies.
| gmiller123456 wrote:
| NASA timescales are in the billions of years.
| savant_penguin wrote:
| I felt it missed a "before/after" comparison
| BudaDude wrote:
| I feel the same way. This picture looks very similar to images
| we have already seen. It would have been nice if they showed
| off the IR capture.
| Arnavion wrote:
| Why would it look any different? It's a deep field image.
| There's nothing to see except galaxies.
|
| Also, this _is_ the IR capture. The telescope can 't see
| anything else.
| perihelions wrote:
| Here's Hubble views of the same object:
|
| https://archive.stsci.edu/prepds/relics/color_images/smacs07...
|
| Here's miscellanous other views:
|
| https://aladin.unistra.fr/AladinLite/?target=07%2023%2011.04...
| cookingrobot wrote:
| "If you hold one grain of sand at arms length".. it would be
| about as big as this image they're showing onscreen.
|
| I don't love this picture-in-picture-in-picture-in-picture
| effect.
| franknord23 wrote:
| ... in glorious 720p /s
| inostia wrote:
| It was changed to 5:30 ET and is now running late it seems...
| basementcat wrote:
| It took many years for the light to reach the telescope, what's
| a few more minutes?
| inostia wrote:
| Hey, I'm not living on cosmic time here! =)
| asah wrote:
| theories...
|
| An intern photoshopped a middle finger into the Pillars of
| creation and they're busy removing it.
|
| The aliens filed a CCPA request to obscure their presence.
|
| Clearing MAGA supporters wearing tinfoil hats who raided
| the conference room.
| bostonsre wrote:
| Not to sound maga-ish, but its probably biden's fault. I
| assume he is a little busy.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| On-brand for the JWST, to be fair.
| typeofhuman wrote:
| Well that was underwhelming
| bvogelzang wrote:
| Hard to see details of the image on the stream. You can see the
| image here:
| https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/ma...
| stopping wrote:
| You can compare with the pre-JWST images here:
| https://archive.stsci.edu/prepds/relics/color_images/smacs07...
|
| Noticeably better detail, for sure.
| ge96 wrote:
| Wonder can you draw lines/connect things to form volumetric
| depth information not sure if that makes sense. Otherwise I'm
| just looking at pretty dots (don't have the context). Crazy
| though size/how many. Sad, need FTL/warp.
| sgt wrote:
| PNG or TIFF anywhere?
| hturan wrote:
| https://stsci-opo.org/STScI-01G7JJ29QMHNZKDK9JC7M4G47T.tif
| perihelions wrote:
| The image is published now:
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-... (
| _" NASA's Webb Delivers Deepest Infrared Image of Universe Yet"_)
|
| late edit: And now full-resolution versions have been published
| (largest is 4537 x 4630):
|
| https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/038/01G...
| eps wrote:
| Same image, but from Hubble -
|
| https://relics.stsci.edu/data/smacs0723-73/MAST/color_images...
|
| (Found here https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/vwsswt/mega
| thread_pr...)
| stopping wrote:
| You can compare with the pre-JWST images here:
| https://archive.stsci.edu/prepds/relics/color_images/smacs07...
| dmix wrote:
| Link doesn't seem to be working for me sadly
| SnowProblem wrote:
| Is each of those spirals really the size of our whole galaxy?
| And if we were to zoom in 100x more, would there be just as
| many galaxies to see, or is there a perceivable outer edge to
| our universe's expansion?
| dougmwne wrote:
| That and more. Currently we think there are 2 trillion of
| those little dots in the observable universe. There have been
| some very interesting whole sky surveys that have mapped many
| of them. The Sloan Digital Sky Survey has data on location,
| distance and spectroscopy on 50 million of the little
| buggers. They have some neat 3D maps, think milk being
| stirred into the black coffee of the vast.
| dmalvarado wrote:
| Is the light bending around some gravitational point, or is
| that an* artifact of the telescope itself?
|
| If the former, that is astounding.
|
| Edit: nvm I think I figured it out myself. There are objects
| next to smeared galaxies that are not distorted. The distorted
| objects must be behind the gravitational field, and the un-
| distorted objects in front.
| sosodev wrote:
| They said the bending isn't an artifact of the telescope.
| lapetitejort wrote:
| Seems to be multiple objects creating gravitational lensing.
| I assume that is what's causing the weird smudged galaxy.
| nevereveragain wrote:
| From the article: > The combined mass of this galaxy cluster
| acts as a gravitational lens, magnifying much more distant
| galaxies behind it.
| creato wrote:
| It looks like there are undistorted galaxies right next to
| the distorted ones, overlapping even. That suggests it's not
| just a telescope artifact.
| dougmwne wrote:
| It is a gravitational lens. A massive concentration of matter
| in between us and the galaxies behind it that bends the light
| and give us an extra magnification factor. Strange to look
| at, they can also boost the light gathering ability of the
| telescope and give us valuable information about the very
| early universe.
| ASalazarMX wrote:
| > This slice of the vast universe covers a patch of sky
| approximately the size of a grain of sand held at arm's length
| by someone on the ground.
|
| > The image shows the galaxy cluster SMACS 0723 as it appeared
| 4.6 billion years ago. The combined mass of this galaxy cluster
| acts as a gravitational lens, magnifying much more distant
| galaxies behind it
|
| The vastness of it all is mind numbing, it gives me mixed
| feelings of awe, humility, and dread.
| daviding wrote:
| Link to the released image
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/ma...
| bridanp wrote:
| Everyone should zoom into this image on your own because it is
| just absolutely amazing! I don't care politically either way,
| but I'm sure/hopeful NASA's presentation tomorrow will actually
| do a better job of showing just how important these visual
| discoveries really are.
| gmiller123456 wrote:
| Been watching NASA TV for the last hour (got on early before the
| first delay). It would be nice to have some update of when it's
| actually going to happen.
| zanethomas wrote:
| You expect the government to treat you like a customer?
| perihelions wrote:
| What's the least-effort, code-golf way to set up a push
| notification for the moment the event *actually* starts? This
| hold music is going to [omitted for politeness].
| wsinks wrote:
| Just started! hopefully that's no-code enough for ya :)
| sp332 wrote:
| A Twitter search for "Webb starting"?
| sixstringtheory wrote:
| We need an automated solution so a bot can Tweet that.
| Otherwise some noble soul has to wait and watch to tell
| everyone else, who will then have to contribute to their
| patreon/soundcloud.
| reiziger wrote:
| I had expected something better than the bulk of pictures from
| Hubble. It honestly just looks like a picture captured by Hubble.
|
| Edit: clearly, I was wrong
| [deleted]
| sosodev wrote:
| I wouldn't say you're wrong. It does _look_ very similar to a
| Hubble deep field image because there isn 't much of a
| difference visually between the different scales.
| loktarogar wrote:
| The scale is much, much different. This is a fraction of the
| space Hubble photographed. This is a tiny bit of space shown
| with the clarity that Hubble had for areas far bigger
| reiziger wrote:
| Thanks for the explanation. I was clearly wrong! Honestly,
| not sure what "better" I had expected.
| PopePompus wrote:
| Gosh, what a crappy news conference. 40 minutes late, about 5
| minutes long, and they didn't even show the released image full-
| screen at any point.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| NASA used to do these on their own with no politicians there.
| Much better IMO.
| PopePompus wrote:
| Webb was hugely expensive, so I understand why they had Biden
| and Harris there, but if their time was very limited, they
| should have exited and brought up some scientists to further
| describe the image, and answer press questions. Imagine how
| the press pool felt going through all the hassle of a
| Whitehouse visit for _that_.
| glitcher wrote:
| Maybe the one scheduled for tomorrow will be better.
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/nasalive
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Let's goooooo
|
| So excited to finally see some big tech payoff in my lifetime.
| Our parents had the shuttles, we get the telescope!
| dekhn wrote:
| When I was growing up, fairly young still (13), the shuttle
| blew up shortly after liftoff. It set the whole program back by
| many years, crushing many of my dreams for rapid expansion into
| space (it was also fairly traumatizing to watch the repeated
| coverage). To be honest, except for a few great wins and unique
| missions, I don't think the shuttle was truly a big tech
| payoff.
| drumhead wrote:
| The current generation also had CERN which gave us confirmation
| of Higgs and LIGO which confirmed Gravity Waves, two of the
| biggest discoveries of the century.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| tbqh confirmations aren't exciting unless you're in that
| scientific field. Most people just hear 'we spent $10 billion
| and found that our predictions about something too small to
| detect any other way were correct.' Sure there are downstream
| benefits in everything from heavy engineering to database
| design, but that's too abstract for most people.
|
| That's why people make up conspiracy theories instead about
| how the LHC is pulling the earth into a different timeline
| and changing the facts of the past. It's paranoid nonsense
| but it's interesting seems like the sort of exciting outcome
| you should get in return for $10b. I kinda think CERN should
| lean into it, sponsor Half Life 3 or something.
| [deleted]
| alphabetting wrote:
| I thought we weren't getting first look until tomorrow. This
| rules.
| [deleted]
| l2p wrote:
| Official Source:
|
| https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/#public
|
| Running late currently
| eddyg wrote:
| The White House stream is 1080p vs 720p for the NASA stream.
|
| The pictures will show up here though:
| https://www.nasa.gov/webbfirstimages
| jdnier wrote:
| Yep, the first image just dropped:
| https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-
| webb-...
| jdnier wrote:
| It's like the Hubble Deep Field only with a lot of obvious
| gravitational lensing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-11 23:01 UTC)