popularmechanics.com
Are you excited to see its launch sometime in 2018? What new discoveries can we expect from it?
James Webb
Zachary Cruz
Other urls found in this thread:
Matthew Edwards
It won't show anything more than what the chinese will reveal with their big ass space scope. I'm more excited about that :o)
Gabriel Bennett
>plz dont blow up plz dont do a Hubble
Ryan Smith
The FAST telescope and James Webb telescope are made with different purposes in mind
Benjamin Long
James Web won't show anything new.
Another bunch of wasted money.
Should have gone optical.
Samuel Green
Euros are making the E-ELT.
Parker Hall
cost way too much and took way too long
Jacob Flores
My roommate from undergrad works on James Webb at Northrup.
Anyone have any questions I should ask him?
He has a clearance but I dont think any part of his Webb work is classified. Northrup publicizes a lot of it because they are proud to have a project that isnt spying on people.
Gabriel Brooks
>flight gets "rescheduled" (aka bribed) as a "way to get experience for young, dynamic and innovate companies" like SpaceX
how would you react?
Isaiah Ortiz
another waste of money. Its not going to outdo hubble because it has to look through the atmosphere of shit
Dominic Martinez
>discoveries can we expect
Christian Jenkins
It can correct for atmospheric distortion and provide a much sharper image than Hubble.
eso.org
Juan Foster
With adaptive optics ground based telescopes already exceed the resultion of Hubble by a factor of 4. E-ELT will have more than 6 times the resolution of JWST. Also resolution isn't everything, collecting area is important and JWST doesn't do visible. Ground based telescopes are more sensitive than Hubble in spectroscopy, E-ELT will have the same advantage. Ground based telescopes also do things to complex for space like very wide field integral field spectroscopy or high resolution spectroscopy.
Liam Foster
Would it even need to be able to correct for atmospheric distortion if it's going to be in space?
Isaiah Morris
E-ELT will be a ground based telescope.
Adrian Lopez
Ah I thought we were still talking about webb
Lincoln Murphy
Would there be an advantage to having a lunar based telescope.
Oliver Wilson
Not for optical or infrared telescopes no. There is dust, more limited access to the sky that in space and you have to block out stray light from the bright surface. Landing is also an issue. In some of the permanently shadowed craters it would be very cold which is good for the infrared but you can do better with a sunshade in space with less complexity than a lander.
A radio telescope on the far side would have a significant advantage in sensitivity with the noisy earth blocked out. Most of the effect would be at very long wavelengths. There are genuine proposals for that.
In terms of normal visible telescopes the telescope that would have an advantage on the Moon compared to just in space is a liquid mirror telescope, they need gravity to form the parabolic mirror. Liquid mirror telescopes are horrible but you they can be cheap and large.
Michael Ward
Also if you have a radio telescope that far away from earth, you could make an array with the largest effective diameter by far.
Alexander Cook
Yes, but you can do the same thing in space (like RadioAstron). The Moon itself offers nothing unique in that regard.
Jace Robinson
I looked it up. The far side of the moon is actually slightly further away than Skectr-R, by about 12,000 miles. So it would be better than what we currently have. Also, if we put a radio telescope on the moon it would just add to the resolution of the system that RadioAstron is currently apart of. It's less of a replacement and more like an improvement.
Juan Stewart
You can have an orbit wider than the Moon, nothing prevents that. Again, the Moon doesn't offer any advantage in this regard.