James Webb Space Telescope

#1

Post by antr » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 12:41 PM UTC

James Webb Space Telescope
jwst.nasa.gov

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#2

Post by freshyill » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 1:55 PM UTC

As excellent has Hubble has been, the JWST is going to put it to shame. The potential risk, however is that it won't be serviceable, as Hubble famously needed to be very early in its life. If all goes as planned, we're all going to have some really nice new desktop wallpapers in a few years. And, I suppose, a better understanding of the universe will be a nice side benefit.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#3

Post by furyofantares » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 2:07 PM UTC

freshyill wrote: post #2

As excellent has Hubble has been, the JWST is going to put it to shame. The potential risk, however is that it won't be serviceable, as Hubble famously needed to be very early in its life. If all goes as planned, we're all going to have some really nice new desktop wallpapers in a few years. And, I suppose, a better understanding of the universe will be a nice side benefit.

Until this post I didn't realize it wasn't going to orbit Earth in roughly the same spot as Hubble -- it's going to be roughly 4 times further away from Earth than the Moon is, orbiting L2!

http://jwst.nasa.gov/orbit.html

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#4

Post by bgtnhz » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 2:09 PM UTC

Telescope mirrors:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasawebbtelescope/page9/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasawebbtelescope/page11/

JWST vs Hubble: https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4076/4813007838_13c736d9ca_z....

Mirror curvature( large jpg ): https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4114/4813106662_0d3eeddc27_o....

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#5

Post by sanxiyn » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 2:17 PM UTC

freshyill wrote: post #2

As excellent has Hubble has been, the JWST is going to put it to shame. The potential risk, however is that it won't be serviceable, as Hubble famously needed to be very early in its life. If all goes as planned, we're all going to have some really nice new desktop wallpapers in a few years. And, I suppose, a better understanding of the universe will be a nice side benefit.

Interesting tidbit: JWST can't see blue. While Hubble could see entire visible light spectrum, astronomically infrared is more interesting. So JWST can see infrared, but not blue.

Astronomical images always have been heavily edited and it never was "what you may see", but it is more so for JWST.

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#6

Post by sp332 » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 2:29 PM UTC

sanxiyn wrote: post #5

freshyill wrote: post #2

As excellent has Hubble has been, the JWST is going to put it to shame. The potential risk, however is that it won't be serviceable, as Hubble famously needed to be very early in its life. If all goes as planned, we're all going to have some really nice new desktop wallpapers in a few years. And, I suppose, a better understanding of the universe will be a nice side benefit.

Interesting tidbit: JWST can't see blue. While Hubble could see entire visible light spectrum, astronomically infrared is more interesting. So JWST can see infrared, but not blue. Astronomical images always have been heavily edited and it never was "what you may see", but it is more so for JWST.

It's not just that IR is "more interesting" (maybe it is), but it's much more difficult to see through the atmosphere. It's obviously cheaper and easier to build huge optical telescopes on the ground, but to see into the infrared, you need to get above the atmosphere.

Edit: source http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_classroom/ir_tutor...

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#7

Post by mrfusion » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 2:52 PM UTC

furyofantares wrote: post #3

freshyill wrote: post #2

As excellent has Hubble has been, the JWST is going to put it to shame. The potential risk, however is that it won't be serviceable, as Hubble famously needed to be very early in its life. If all goes as planned, we're all going to have some really nice new desktop wallpapers in a few years. And, I suppose, a better understanding of the universe will be a nice side benefit.

Until this post I didn't realize it wasn't going to orbit Earth in roughly the same spot as Hubble -- it's going to be roughly 4 times further away from Earth than the Moon is, orbiting L2! http://jwst.nasa.gov/orbit.html

I never understood how we can launch something into an L2 orbit. Does the rocket just fly out there and stop? Just it get caught at that location?

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#8

Post by josePhoenix » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 3:13 PM UTC

Hey, my job's on HN! I work on JWST (simulation software, among other stuff) and I think it's pretty cool too :)

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#9

Post by noselasd » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 3:14 PM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #7

furyofantares wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until this post I didn't realize it wasn't going to orbit Earth in roughly the same spot as Hubble -- it's going to be roughly 4 times further away from Earth than the Moon is, orbiting L2! http://jwst.nasa.gov/orbit.html

I never understood how we can launch something into an L2 orbit. Does the rocket just fly out there and stop? Just it get caught at that location?

Here's the main reasoning for placing it at L2: http://jwst.nasa.gov/orbit.html

Re: James Webb Space Telescope

#10

Post by mrfusion » Fri, Jan 23, 2015, 3:15 PM UTC

noselasd wrote: post #9

mrfusion wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood how we can launch something into an L2 orbit. Does the rocket just fly out there and stop? Just it get caught at that location?

Here's the main reasoning for placing it at L2: http://jwst.nasa.gov/orbit.html

Right I understand the reason. But as my question says, I don't understand how a rocket inserts it into that orbit.