Humble Hubble a star that will not fade

[Ivan Seeking]

THIS weekend the most sophisticated space telescope ever built will be put into orbit around Earth.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7039989%255E401,00.html

 

[BiologyForums]

Finally a space exploration mission worthwhile.

There are two things I think should be a focus

1. Looking for life strategically
2. Idenitifying events at the center of the universe.

I'm sick of NASA looking at stupid moon rocks!

 

[marcus]

Originally posted by BiologyForums
Finally a space exploration mission worthwhile.

There are two things I think should be a focus

1. Looking for life strategically
2. Idenitifying events at the center of the universe.

I'm sick of NASA looking at stupid moon rocks!

In which direction is the center of the universe?

 

[marcus]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7039989%255E401,00.html

Your article mentions the alternative that astronauts might
replace the gyros in the HST and extend its useful life
to 2020.

The telescope has been of inestimable value beyond all expectation as your article says. Have you got any other
article about the technical possibility and cost of extending
its life? I would like to hear both sides of the issue if possible.
If there is reliable assurance this could be
done at a cost commensurate with comparable-benefit scientific
missions, then where is the petition to sign?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by marcus
Have you got any other article about the technical possibility and cost of extending its life?

No but I will stay alert to any such information and post accordingly.

 

[stuffy]

Originally posted by marcus
In which direction is the center of the universe?

No picking on the Biologist. ;)

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by marcus

The telescope has been of inestimable value beyond all expectation as your article says. Have you got any other
article about the technical possibility and cost of extending
its life?

Don't know the numbers, but I do know that one reason NASA's bean counters are reluctant to spend more on the Hubble is because the James Web Space Telescope is scheduled for launch around the time Hubble will be de-orbitting. NASA wants to focus its budgetary concerns on that.

Seems a bit risky to me, though. I don't think the Hubble should be de-orbitted until after the JWST is up and running. Seems to me that the least expensive option is to leave Hubble where it is, postpone the expense of attaching boosters to bring it down, until we have seen if the new 'scope is going to work. When the JWST is shown to be functioning properly, then would be the time to decide whether to repair or de-orbit the Hubble.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by marcus
Your article mentions the alternative that astronauts might
replace the gyros in the HST and extend its useful life
to 2020.

The telescope has been of inestimable value beyond all expectation as your article says. Have you got any other
article about the technical possibility and cost of extending
its life? I would like to hear both sides of the issue if possible.
If there is reliable assurance this could be
done at a cost commensurate with comparable-benefit scientific
missions, then where is the petition to sign?

Some related information:
http://www.astrobio.net/news/article544.html

http://www.floridatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1999b/110699a.htm

I was not sure if this addressed an extended lifespan or not:
http://www.pha.jhu.edu/groups/hst10x/pdffiles/HST10X_Technical.pdf

"NASA should extend the Hubble Space Telescope's lifetime with a second space shuttle service mission in 2010, says a panel of astronomers commissioned by the agency. The upgrade would extend its lifetime well into the next decade."
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994061

 

[Phobos]

Originally posted by BiologyForums
Finally a space exploration mission worthwhile.

There are two things I think should be a focus

1. Looking for life strategically
2. Idenitifying events at the center of the universe.

I'm sick of NASA looking at stupid moon rocks!

1. This is one of NASA's current goals. Their current focus is on the search for liquid water (e.g., Mars, moons of Jupiter).

2. As marcus suggested, modern cosmology shows that there is no center (or edge) to 3D space.

rocks - They're not doing this much lately (if at all - - the moon rocks have been thoroughly studied already). Regardless, those rocks are hardly stupid. The tell volumes about the composition and formation of the moon (and by extension, the early formational period of the Earth during which Earth-life was developing).