Is a Radio Telescope Less Sensitive on the Galactic Plane?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the sensitivity of radio telescopes when observing the galactic plane, exploring whether they are less sensitive in this region and the reasons behind it. The scope includes technical explanations and conceptual clarifications related to radio astronomy.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that radio telescopes may be less sensitive on the galactic plane due to increased noise from various sources in that direction.
  • One participant notes that the sensitivity of radio receivers is affected by noise, which can complicate the detection of desired signals amidst unwanted interference.
  • Another participant mentions that the resolution of radio telescopes is lower compared to optical telescopes due to the longer wavelengths of radio waves.
  • There is a comparison made between trying to communicate in a noisy environment versus a quiet one, illustrating the challenges faced by radio telescopes in high-noise areas like the galactic plane.
  • Technical differences in the construction of optical mirrors and radio telescope dishes are highlighted, with radio dishes being less finely tuned than optical mirrors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the sensitivity of radio telescopes on the galactic plane, with some agreeing that noise is a significant factor, while others provide different perspectives on the implications of wavelength and resolution. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the extent of sensitivity differences.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of specific definitions of "sensitivity" in this context and the dependence on various noise sources that may not be fully explored. The discussion does not resolve the complexities involved in measuring and defining sensitivity in radio astronomy.

Sanjay87
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Is a radio telescope less sensitive on the galactic plane? If so, why?

/San
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
A radio telescope is no different than an optical telescope aside from the frequency band observable.
 
So in that case, the answer mist be "yes". But why is it less sensitive? I am a newbie, so my question might sound a little strange.

Thanks,
San
 
Sanjay87 said:
So in that case, the answer mist be "yes". But why is it less sensitive? I am a newbie, so my question might sound a little strange.

Thanks,
San
Mostly wavelength. You have less resolution with longer wavelengths. Radio waves are huge compared to optical wavelengths.
 
Hi

Many things affect the sensitivity of radio receivers, either radio telescope, RADAR or just plain old radio. The biggest culprit is usually noise as this can have a very large impact on what you are trying to receive. It does follow that if you are looking into a field where there are lots of noise sources its going to be harder to define and filter out only the part you are interested in, and in some cases more sensitive receivers are even more adversely affected simply because they pick up too much junk along with the desired signal.

I guess if you are on the plane, looking towards the centre, then you have the most potential for undesired noise sources, a bit like trying to have a conversation in a loud night club, you can still do it, its just a lot harder than trying to have a conversation in a quiet room for example.

Hope this helps.

Utwig
 
Optical mirror are figure to fractions of a wavelength [nanometers]. Radio telescope dishes are figured to about a quarter inch.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
13K