[HN Gopher] Deepest Infrared Image of Universe
___________________________________________________________________
Deepest Infrared Image of Universe
Author : potiuper
Score : 95 points
Date : 2022-07-11 22:24 UTC (36 minutes ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nasa.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nasa.gov)
| [deleted]
| interestica wrote:
| pelagicAustral wrote:
| Superb! I just saw this on Sky News and came here first, I just
| knew the source was going to be around.
| spullara wrote:
| I really hate that you can see artifacts from the hex mirrors.
| _moof wrote:
| They aren't from the mirrors, they're from the struts.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Explanation: https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/james-
| webb-spikes/
| penneyd wrote:
| Hubble had diffractions spikes too, four of them from the
| struts holding the secondary mirror.
| spullara wrote:
| Who is flagging this extremely valid criticism of this photo
| release circus? I totally agree with this sentiment and it is
| something that science teams will have to reflect on for future
| communications. This was absolutely terrible.
|
| interestica 5 minutes ago [flagged] [dead] | prev [-]
|
| What a weirdly botched release. 90 min delay with nothing more
| than a title screen and a terrible repeating music track. (When
| it was at least an opportunity to display material related to the
| project for those stopping in due to media coverage). A labyrinth
| of a website with interlinking and crosslinking throughout. Web
| links that come up blank. And an unprepared accompanying
| statement for the image given off the cuff by the director. Weird
| press conference -- 'who is this for?' All around, just strange
| and poorly executed from a communications/media standpoint.
| Completely inexcusable for an organization like this.
| gizajob wrote:
| Flagging because overly-harsh armchair criticism towards a
| piece of the world's most advanced precision engineering
| operating in deep space that isn't really even fully
| operational yet. President of the world's most powerful country
| at least coming out to talk about it. Only really one image to
| release because said device is brand spanking new. What exactly
| do you want? Kanye West and a load of confetti?
| [deleted]
| cwkoss wrote:
| Can someone with some astronomy knowledge explain why the center
| of the images has a bunch of concentric-ish smudges? What does it
| mean?
| atulvi wrote:
| Gravitational lensing
| cwkoss wrote:
| So, are the smudges' light coming from behind the objects in
| the center?
| skykooler wrote:
| Yes, they are being warped and magnified by the central
| cluster of galaxies.
| ehsankia wrote:
| Wow, you can really see the gravitational lensing on that one.
|
| I was wondering which of the 5 photos [1] they'd tease today
| (remaining 4 are coming tomorrow). My guess was also gonna be the
| deep field one, especially since it maps nicely to the well known
| Hubble photo. But now it begs the question, how does this one
| compare to the Hubble one in terms of scale/angle.
|
| [1] https://petapixel.com/2022/07/08/nasa-shares-the-5-cosmic-
| ta...
| aosaigh wrote:
| Is the lensing the result of a single large galaxy in the
| middle that is "closer" or many galaxies?
| rbanffy wrote:
| Some of those arcs seem concentric, so I would assume a mass
| in that direction. More likely there are multiple masses
| distorting multiple objects into multiple arcs, but I am not
| an astronomer and my guess is as good as anyone else's (who's
| not an astronomer)
| dprice1 wrote:
| According to
| https://www.newscientist.com/article/2328132-james-webb-
| spac..., "This first image is a region of space called SMACS
| 0723, which contains what astronomers call a gravitational
| lens. In areas like this, a massive object relatively close
| to Earth behaves like a magnifying glass, distorting space
| and stretching the light of anything behind it." and "The
| gravitational lens in SMACS 0723 is particularly strong
| because the nearby object distorting space-time is not one
| galaxy, but a large cluster of galaxies."
| yrgulation wrote:
| From the link in ops post:
|
| "The combined mass of this galaxy cluster acts as a
| gravitational lens, magnifying much more distant galaxies
| behind it."
| Temporal_Trout wrote:
| Higher Resolution Images available here:
| https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/038/01G...
|
| Full-Res 4537x4630 PNG (28.51 MB): https://stsci-
| opo.org/STScI-01G7JJADTH90FR98AKKJFKSS0B.png
| nabla9 wrote:
| It would be nice to see comparison to the Herschel space
| observatory images from the same location.
|
| https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Hersch...
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Here's a Hubble comparison:
| https://twitter.com/erinbiba/status/1546624746598563840
| dredmorbius wrote:
| I'm impressed that one of the first Webb images was a deep-field
| view.
|
| Hubble's own Deep Field image required about 140 hours of imaging
| (divided amongst 4 bandwidths and ~150 separate imaging events).
| Webb's own view took a little over 12 hours. I was expecting
| nearer and brighter objects to be first targets. Impressive as
| heck.
|
| Though of course, Hubble paved the way and showed that deep-field
| imaging is useful and provides insights.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field
|
| For comparison the SMACS 0723 image used for reference in the
| JWST image target selection nnouncement recently:
|
| https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2022/07/hlsp_relics_hst...
| b0sk wrote:
| Something to drive home how impressive this is - "If you held a
| grain of sand up to the sky at arm's length, that tiny speck is
| the size of Webb's view in this image."
| seedees wrote:
| Webb's view of the universe? And how do we know :-/
| yrgulation wrote:
| And in that view there are thousands of galaxyes each with
| billions of stars orbiting around. I so badly wish i had the
| money and time to spend it all on exploring the universe.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-11 23:00 UTC)