The Space Thread -

mhardy6647

pitdogg2 wrote: »

No way! That thing would swallow up all of the outer space.....

give it time... give it time.


Remember that the Colorado River started out at the top.

mhardy6647

Tony M wrote: »

The darkness comeith...

https://youtu.be/CrG-lsrXKRM

1) very Seinfeldian.
2) What was Jar Jar Binks doing in that clip?

jdjohn

Interesting thing about Pluto is how it shares a barycentric orbit with its moon Charon. They have a shared center of gravity around which they do a planetary dance. Below are a few GIFs to demonstrate.




And here's actual footage from when New Horizons blew through there.


I think this 'double dwarf planet' situation may be another reason they voted to disqualify Pluto as a single planet on its own.

treitz3

Jupiter has enough gravity that our own sun has the same barycentric orbit with it. Space is truly fascinating!

Tom

verb

Crazy looking aurora seen in Michigan!



https://www.space.com/steve-aurora-glow-above-michigan-image

Tony M

That's cool.

Looks like a bar code.

treitz3

Here is something I found interesting. This concerns some of the photographs already within this thread and is a response to criticism of images presented by the JWST team, with regards to the colors within the images provided -

"I'd like to take a moment to address the unfair criticism about the JWST team providing colors for the JWST photographs, as if they are deceiving people somehow or as if it is not at all representative of reality. Bear with me a moment.

First, I'd like to start off with a statement that many have likely not ever really thought about. And that's that the universe is completely dark. Pitch black. Stars, galaxies, everything. Pitch black. Why? Well, because light isn't actually lighting things up. In fact, if our planet turned out to be the only one with life, then it would be the only place in a 93b ly sphere observable universe that ever saw anything lit at all. But that's only because our brains create this effect. 100% falsified. Our eyes pick up photons, sort them by wavelength, and our brains assign them colors based on those wavelengths. Sound familiar? You think red light is actually red? Or blue light blue? Nonsense. Our brains just decided to make us perceive that part of the electromagnetic spectrum in that color. But in reality those photons aren't colored, nor do they light anything.

In fact, there's no predefined reason why our sight had to be based on photons anyway. Heck, our sight could've been based on sound waves instead. Different pitch could've been assigned color. If sensitive enough, we would still see the world around us, just in a completely different way.
So in reality, our sight at its core is perception, is falsified, is our brains simply interpreting signals and assigning them color and other properties. But photons just do what they do. Their purpose isn't to light things, color things. We gave them that purpose. But to everything else in the universe they light nothing. They have no color. The universe is utterly dark.

So based on that alone, you can already see that by the JWST assigning color in a well thought out, legitimate, scientific and mathematical way, that these photos are no less credible than anything our eyes see. Both are assigning color based on wavelengths of photons. And if there is any illegitimacy at all, it is a glaring flaw that both our eyes and the JWST interpretations share. And that's the fact that we get the full range of colors to begin with.

Think of how many colors your eyes can see. Every possible color that we can imagine. Yet the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum is a minute fraction of the whole. Far less than 1% linearly. So if we in reality wanted photons to represent color, then we shouldn't be jamming the entire range of colors we could possibly perceive into an area of the spectrum that is far less than 1% of the whole. No. We'd need to spread it all out.

What's that mean? It means that technically, if we were to perceive the entire electromagnetic spectrum as color, that what we know as the visible light part of the spectrum would fall somewhere in the cyan range maybe? (no, I'm not doing the math, but you're free to lol). So basically every single thing we see should be that color, with just very tiny variation in the level of cyan. Would be a very similar issue for the JWST photographs as well.

But our brains and evolution chose for us to just see a small range of the spectrum and to assign it all possible colors. But it's still all created and not real. But it's useful, and meaningful, and evolution made things this way for a reason. But the JWST team is going about it in the EXACT same ways. So if you consider your eyes to be a credible source of color than the JWST photographs are no less credible. They are exactly as representative and authentic as anything at all you see with your own eyes with visible light. Period."

Tom

mhardy6647

^^^ Not that it's gonna matter to anyone, but as a biologist (biochemist), I'd say that that's a pretty idiosyncratic assessment by the JWST guy. It's not false, but it strikes me as profoundly misguided, since, at the end of the day, we all wonder what our own senses would detect.

The color (wavelength) of (emitted) light is fundamental in Nature, and proportional to the energy carried by that electromagnetic radiation (by those "photons", which are energy quanta -- a fairly esoteric concept in and of itself). Biochemistry is responsible for transducing that energy into electrical impulses in the neurons that are, yes, ultimately interpreted as color.

One may look at the sky on a clear, dark night, and, with few exceptions, not see the differences in the "color" (emission spectra) of different stars -- but it's quite easy to enhance our own biological transducers' abilities and see it with photographic film or with a CCD imager.


Not a great photo -- the arcs are due, of course, to the rotation of the earth during the fairly long exposure in the absence of an 'equatorial mount' tripod to correct for it. Even so, differences in the color of different stars is visible. Those stars are emitting different spectra of energy, which we humans perceive (within a fairly limited range of frequencies) as color.

So, as long as the "JWST Team" own up to the images being false color, I'm fine with it.
Which they do -- but obviously it sticks in some of "their" craws.

audioluvr

Some people just like to complain.

treitz3

A recent image from the JWST - Tarantula Nebula (NIRCam Image)

In this mosaic image stretching 340 light-years across, Webb’s Near-Infrared Camera (NIRCam) displays the Tarantula Nebula star-forming region in a new light, including tens of thousands of never-before-seen young stars that were previously shrouded in cosmic dust. The most active region appears to sparkle with massive young stars, appearing pale blue. Scattered among them are still-embedded stars, appearing red, yet to emerge from the dusty cocoon of the nebula. NIRCam is able to detect these dust-enshrouded stars thanks to its unprecedented resolution at near-infrared wavelengths.

To the upper left of the cluster of young stars, and the top of the nebula’s cavity, an older star prominently displays NIRCam’s distinctive eight diffraction spikes, an artifact of the telescope’s structure. Following the top central spike of this star upward, it almost points to a distinctive bubble in the cloud. Young stars still surrounded by dusty material are blowing this bubble, beginning to carve out their own cavity. Astronomers used two of Webb’s spectrographs to take a closer look at this region and determine the chemical makeup of the star and its surrounding gas. This spectral information will tell astronomers about the age of the nebula and how many generations of star birth it has seen.

Farther from the core region of hot young stars, cooler gas takes on a rust color, telling astronomers that the nebula is rich with complex hydrocarbons. This dense gas is the material that will form future stars. As winds from the massive stars sweep away gas and dust, some of it will pile up and, with gravity’s help, form new stars.

Tom

mrbigbluelight

Regarding the JSWT scientists pictures and the accusation of "false" colors

A marine biologist announces that he's discovered that porpoises communicate with each other...

"Yeah, we know that !"
scoff reporters

The marine biologist agrees but reveals that they do so in English !

"How ? Show us proof !"

So he states that they communicate in the range of 30khz - 40khz , so if you divide that frequency by 4, you can hear them.

The marine biologist then proceeds to play a recording of a tape that had been adjusted by the division method:

"WHAT A PLEASANT SEAT THIS OCEAN HAS THAT PLAYS SO SWEETLY UPON THE SENSES"

The reporters are amazed ! Porpoises speaking in English and ....
...SHAKESPEARE !

One reporter standa up, though, and proclaims
"That's not Shakespeare, he wrote "CASTLE" not "OCEAN" this marine biologist is trying to fool us !"

Same difference with the JSWT pics.
It's data presented in a way that can be readily interpreted, understood, and enjoyed
👍🌌

The original data is there for verification .
Use it directly and stare at a black sheet of paper
Or....

Clipdat

What I don't understand is how back in the 60s on Star Trek they were already visiting these galaxies, but now it's 2022 and we're only able to take photos of them? What the heck happened?

Viking64

Clipdat wrote: »

What I don't understand is how back in the 60s on Star Trek they were already visiting these galaxies, but now it's 2022 and we're only able to take photos of them? What the heck happened?

Budget cuts.

audioluvr

The inner region of the Orion Nebula as seen by the JWST



https://youtu.be/7j2WiyM0za8

mhardy6647

Speaking of false color & image enhancement: In the early days of astrophotography, star images were frequently viewed, and analyzed, as negatives, as the black pinpoints were easire to see on a 'white' (clear) background than are white on black (positives). Also, not printing a positive was one less opportunity for artifacts to arise.



https://www.atnf.csiro.au/outreach/education/senior/astrophysics/photometry_photographicastro.html

treitz3

Gentlemen, meet the largest mountain in our solar system, Olympus Mons.



Olympus Mons is a shield volcano 624 km (374 mi) in diameter (approximately the same size as the state of Arizona), 25 km (16 mi) high, and is rimmed by a 6 km (4 mi) high scarp. A caldera 80 km (50 mi) wide is located at the summit of Olympus Mons. To compare, the largest volcano on Earth is Mauna Loa. Mauna Loa is a shield volcano 10 km (6.3 mi) high and 120 km (75 mi) across. The volume of Olympus Mons is about 100 times larger than that of Mauna Loa. In fact, the entire chain of Hawaiian islands (from Kauai to Hawaii) would fit inside Olympus Mons.

The main difference between the volcanoes on Mars and Earth is their size; volcanoes in the Tharsis region of Mars are 10 to 100 times larger than those anywhere on Earth. The lava flows on the Martian surface are observed to be much longer, probably a result of higher eruption rates and lower surface gravity.



Another reason why the volcanoes on Mars are so massive is because the crust on Mars doesn't move the way it does on Earth. On Earth, the hot spots remain stationary but crustal plates are moving above them. The Hawaiian islands result from the northwesterly movement of the Pacific plate over a stationary hotspot producing lava. As the plate moves over the hotspot, new volcanoes are formed and the existing ones become extinct. This distributes the total volume of lava among many volcanoes rather than one large volcano. On Mars, the crust remains stationary and the lava piles up in one, very large volcano.

If you were to photograph this while on Mars? - "Due to the size and shallow slopes of Olympus Mons, an observer standing on the Martian surface would be unable to view the entire profile of the volcano, even from a great distance. The curvature of the planet and the volcano itself would obscure such a synoptic view. Similarly, an observer near the summit would be unaware of standing on a very high mountain, as the slope of the volcano would extend far beyond the horizon, a mere 3 kilometers away."

Tom

NotaSuv

WOW this will be a space nerds dream day

Thursday Sept. 29th at 8pm local will be historic.
According to the Space Launch Schedule app, there will be simultaneous launches of the SLS, two Falcon-9s, and an Atlas V.
It will be AMAZING!!! I sure hope they don't bump into each other. 😜

mhardy6647

Lest any of all y'all think I am a total space-curmudgeon

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2022/new-webb-image-captures-clearest-view-of-neptune-s-rings-in-decades

NotaSuv

Good crowds in town for the manned launch which happens in 4 minutes............beautiful day here..............

Tony M

Just watched it.

ken brydson

SeleniumFalcon

treitz3

I can only imagine how many light years that is across. Cool!

Tom

SeleniumFalcon

What always amazes me is that those gamma rays started moving towards that telescope 2.4 billion years ago to strike whatever that telescope uses for a detector ( thallium-activated sodium iodide detector) and make that image.

mrbigbluelight

I agree.
2.4 BILLION light years away

Light travels at 186,282 miles per second.

31,556,952 seconds in a year.

So in one year light travels
31,556,962 X186,282 =

5,878,492,132,464 E12 miles

But we're talking 2.5 X that so:

11,756,984,264,928 E13 miles

For one year. One...year. 😳

Now, multiply that times a BILLION and.....
😯😲😳😱🤯

And that a pod of nerds with slip sticks and pocket protecters ciphered out all the mechanics needed to detect those gamma rays from that distance is....
Beyond words. 🤯

Now if you'll excuse me I need to go figure out how many seconds I need to microwave my strawberry Pop Tart.

mhardy6647

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

I agree.
...
Now if you'll excuse me I need to go figure out how many seconds I need to microwave my strawberry Pop Tart.

So -- do be careful. If you slip a decimal point, you run the very real risk of creating a black hole ab initio right there in your microwave.

SeleniumFalcon

As I understand it, from the gamma ray's point of view no time has passed from when it emerged from the supernova explosion and smacking the telescope.

mhardy6647

SeleniumFalcon wrote: »

As I understand it, from the gamma ray's point of view no time has passed from when it emerged from the supernova explosion and smacking the telescope.

Well, umm, yes, from a relativity standpoint. It gets weird, though, when we consider that the speed of light does vary depending on the medium in which it travels -- which leads to some interesting effects such as Cherenkov Radiation

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-is-cherenkov-radiation#:~:text=Cherenkov radiation is a form,light in a specific medium.

The old gedankenexperiment for this is to imagine the image of a clock (maybe an illuminated one ) that says, say 12:00 noon. The photons that constitute the information in that image will always "look like" a clock face that says 12:00 noon, even billions of years after they start on their journey.

mhardy6647

BTW the refraction of light as it passes through a piece of glass is a direct consequence of the lower speed of light in glass compared to in air (or in a vacuum).

https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/introductorygeneralphysics2phys1207/chapter/25-3-the-law-of-refraction/

Mind-f**k!

treitz3

Meet J1407b – an exoplanet 20 times more massive than Saturn. The rings of this Super Saturn span 180 million kilometers wide. That’s larger than the Earth-Sun distance of 150 million kilometers and 200 times bigger than Saturn’s rings! Make no mistake, J1407b is the true Lord of the Rings. It was discovered in 2012 by its unusual eclipses.

Please keep in mind that this photo (above) is an artists rendering of J1407b and not an actual photograph.

If you are interested, read more here >>> https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/gigantic-ring-system-around-j1407b/

Tom