The James Webb Space Telescope

AI Thread Summary
The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is scheduled to launch no earlier than December 24, following a two-day delay, with a critical launch window extending to January 6 due to gravitational concerns. Enthusiasm is high among the community, with many eagerly anticipating the scientific data it will provide, despite concerns over the lengthy wait and significant costs associated with the project. Initial observing time has been allocated for various proposals, including a major project called Cosmos Web, which aims to capture detailed images of the early universe. The mission's success is seen as a gamble, with many previous missions sacrificed for JWST funding, raising questions about the return on investment. As the launch approaches, excitement and nervousness are palpable, with many setting alarms to witness the event live.
  • #301
phinds said:
what's the big deal w/ 4.6 billion years old?
I understand this to be the distance to the SMACS 0723 group, not the faint galaxies in the background.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and BillTre
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #302
Im furious. What is the point of setting a date have this dramatic count down after 198 days of biting our nails then release an image. The night before?

It's kind of tainted it for me. The purity. It's like uncle Barney turning up drunk on Xmas Eve morning and opening one of your kids Xmas presents and handing it to them over toast and marmalade.My day is still as planned. Day off work with the OFFICIAL time of first light.
 
  • Like
Likes Oldman too, Borg and Jarvis323
  • #303
berkeman said:
Yeah, what the heck does Biden have to do with a NASA release? And the news articles say it would happen at 5:30PM US Eastern Time, which was an hour ago and no images anywhere that I can find so far...
Yes not happy. I've barely looked at the image. First light for me is 3.30pm BST.
EDIT. Today!
 
  • #304
[quote of now-banned member deleted by the Mentors]

Nothing to do with that. I am British and actually thought this administration would be more pro Science. That's good.
My point is there was a schedule, a critical path that people have been following for months admiring a MULTI national Scientific collaboration.
ESA, CSA and NASA plus private companies.

If senior members of government or the CIC wanted a private viewing before anyone else that's fine.
Ticker tape parade and huge party afterwards that's fine. I'm sure NASA have already and have plenty more champagne on ice.
11th hour televised viewing for me is hi jacking the event to feed off the publicity.
Probably not his idea.
Anyway this post could get bumped. That's fair enough, the P word is not discussed on this forum.

The ACTUAL event is in a few hours, 199 days of waiting. Day 198 I will forget for now. Time to check Webb to see if the final mode is complete.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #305
This structure stands out as the strangest in the image to me. Any idea what it is?

1657624314958.png
 
  • #306
Whether you like Biden or not its just seems a bit silly to have any president present this.

In any case, i thought it clearly said on NASA website that the galaxy cluster imaged at 4.6 billion years old was gravitationally lensing some background galaxies, of which are far older and sharper than the Hubble images, on less exposure time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes berkeman, Jarvis323, anorlunda and 2 others
  • #307
JLowe said:
Whether you like Biden or not its just seems a bit silly to have any president present this.
It's normal for US presidents to make photo ops out of anything good that happens on their watch. Nothing new or odd about that and certainly not silly, given American politics.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre, Oldman too, protonsarecool and 1 other person
  • #308
phinds said:
It's normal for US presidents to make photo ops out of anything good that happens on their watch. Nothing new or odd about that and certainly not silly, given American politics.
Advisor to Nixon: "Keep it short. It isn't your merit."
 
  • Love
  • Like
Likes Oldman too and pinball1970
  • #309
Jarvis323 said:
This structure stands out as the strangest in the image to me. Any idea what it is?

View attachment 304053
better_main_image_3.jpg
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes DennisN, pinball1970, Jarvis323 and 1 other person
  • #310
The picture looks amazing, the detail is amazing. Of course more (deeper) pictures to come.
Jarvis323 said:
This structure stands out as the strangest in the image to me. Any idea what it is?
Some galaxy distorted due to gravitational lensing I suppose.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and Jarvis323
  • #311
C5FD5EA4-7775-451D-9950-B82E9B5A61D3.jpeg
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, BWV and Oldman too
  • #312
E7AC6549-36F4-438F-9105-7680792913D2.jpeg
 
  • Like
Likes BWV, pinball1970 and Oldman too
  • #314
B6CBFB06-D1BD-4B1F-A841-CE7B6FC9CFAD.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes BWV, Borg, pinball1970 and 1 other person
  • #316
The presentation was beyond cringe. Awful. Absolutely hated it. I'm surprised they did not put in a few adverts for burgers and fries...

That said the images were amazing and all that data will be making the science community very excited.
 
Last edited:
  • #317
Jarvis323 said:
This structure stands out as the strangest in the image to me. Any idea what it is?

View attachment 304053
"A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away"
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #318
BillTre said:
"A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away"
There is nothing. Absolutely nothing. Drive there and have a look!
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970
  • #319
A tiny portion of the full sized image to give some idea of the resolution:

1657641602843.png
 
  • Wow
  • Love
  • Like
Likes MevsEinstein, DennisN, collinsmark and 5 others
  • #320
Check out Google today.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes MevsEinstein, phinds and BillTre
  • #321
Borg said:
Check out Google today.
LOL, forgot to remove the lens cap! :smile:
 
  • Haha
Likes pinball1970
  • #322
Screen Shot 2022-07-12 at 9.25.59 AM.png

Teamwork is a force multiplier.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes 2milehi, DennisN, collinsmark and 4 others
  • #323
...it hadn't sunk in how big the thing is until I saw that photo. I presume that's a 1:1 scale model.
 
  • #324
Wow, that pic brings back memories. Not of the Webb but of GSFC where I worked for 16 years.
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, DennisN, berkeman and 1 other person
  • #325
Ibix said:
...it hadn't sunk in how big the thing is until I saw that photo. I presume that's a 1:1 scale model.
Tennis court!
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre and Ibix
  • #326
Ibix said:
...it hadn't sunk in how big the thing is until I saw that photo. I presume that's a 1:1 scale model.
Yes, it's a full scale model
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre and Ibix
  • #327
No point in launching a small telescope.
 
  • #328
Vanadium 50 said:
No point in launching a small telescope.
Sure. It was just one of those moments of difference between knowing the dimensions and grokking them, if you see what I mean.
 
  • #329
I think that now is the time to declare JWST as an outstanding success. Bravo to the JWST team.

The James Webb Space Telescope is an international collaboration among NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA).
  • NASA: Overall responsibility for the mission
  • ESA: Provides the Near Infrared Spectrograph, Mid-Infrared Instrument Optics Assembly, and the Ariane Launch Vehicle
  • CSA: Provides the Fine Guidance Sensor/Near Infrared Imager and Slitless Spectrograph

As an engineer, I was very skeptical that they could make such a long chain of critical steps succeed on the first and only try. I'm delighted to be proven completely wrong.

JWST deserves it's place in my earlier thread.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/bold-monster-engineering-successes.1003708/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lord Crc, DennisN, BillTre and 5 others
  • #330
I wonder if someone can answer a question for me. Probably a silly question but I am looking at the "star death" image, the planetary nebula. It looks like we are looking through a big hole in a spherical object, or is it a flat ring around the star we are looking at from above? The main reason for my question is that you can see the gas and dust inside the nebula that looks like behind the star it is a solid wall. I imagine when the star explodes it blows stuff out in all directions.
 
  • #331
Kevin the Kiwi said:
I wonder if someone can answer a question for me. Probably a silly question but I am looking at the "star death" image, the planetary nebula. It looks like we are looking through a big hole in a spherical object, or is it a flat ring around the star we are looking at from above? The main reason for my question is that you can see the gas and dust inside the nebula that looks like behind the star it is a solid wall. I imagine when the star explodes it blows stuff out in all directions.
It is a spherical shell, but you are looking through less material in the center as along the edges (see sketch), so it makes it look like an annular ring. The material you say is "behind the star" is both in front of and behind the star.

Screen Shot 2022-07-13 at 10.30.43 AM.png
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Kevin the Kiwi, BillTre and Oldman too
  • #332
phyzguy said:
It is a spherical shell, but you are looking through less material in the center as along the edges (see sketch), so it makes it look like an annular ring. The material you say is "behind the star" is both in front of and behind the star.

View attachment 304135

Ah yes, that makes complete sense, I honestly never would have thought of that. Thank you for your reply.
 
  • #333
jupiter_hi_res_atmo-1.png


“Jupiter, center, and its moon Europa, left, are seen through the James Webb Space Telescope’s NIRCam instrument 2.12 micron filter. Credits: NASA, ESA, CSA, and B. Holler and J. Stansberry (STScI)”
https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2022/07...and-more-now-available-in-commissioning-data/

james-webb-jupiter-nasa.png

“Two photos of Jupiter taken by the James Webb Space Telescope. The left image was taken using a NIRCam (near infrared camera) to examine the planet’s short wavelengths of light. The right image was taken with a filter that highlights long wavelengths. NASA”

https://globalnews.ca/news/8987398/james-webb-space-telescope-pictures-jupiter-why-you-missed-them/
 
  • Like
Likes Oldman too, DennisN and BWV
  • #335
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Oldman too, russ_watters and anorlunda
  • #336
  • #337
  • #338

Webb telescope suffered ‘uncorrectable damage’ in micrometeoroid hit, NASA report says​

https://thehill.com/policy/technolo...amage-in-micrometeoroid-hit-nasa-report-says/

At 21 feet, Webb’s gold-plated, flower-shaped mirror is the biggest and most sensitive ever sent into space. It’s comprised of 18 segments, one of which was smacked by the bigger than anticipated micrometeoroid in May. Micrometeoroids are fragments of asteroids that are usually smaller than a grain of sand, according to NASA.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/webb-telescope-suffered-uncorrectable-damage-030948640.html
 
  • Sad
  • Wow
  • Informative
Likes Oldman too, DennisN, vanhees71 and 2 others
  • #339
Here's a new video from the Royal Institution:
(I haven't seen it yet, but I wanted to share it)

Solar system science from the James Webb Space Telescope – with Naomi Rowe-Gurney (RI)
What is the JWST, and what big science questions can it answer? Join NASA scientist Naomi as she discusses the new JWST images, along with her research into the ice giants, Uranus and Neptune, and the many other areas that JWST can help with.


Edit: And the Q&A is here:

Q&A: Solar system science from the James Webb Space Telescope – with Naomi Rowe-Gurney (RI)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Oldman too, collinsmark, vanhees71 and 2 others
  • #341
11-Untitled-27.jpg

12-Untitled-26.jpg

13-Untitled-24.jpg

14-Untitled-20.jpg

15-Untitled-29.jpg

16-Untitled-54.jpg

17-Untitled-63.jpg

18-Untitled-80.jpg

19-Untitled-83.jpg

20-Untitled-123.jpg
 
  • #342
21-Untitled-12.jpg

22-Untitled-8.jpg

23-Untitled-18.jpg

24-Untitled-25.jpg

25-Untitled-35.jpg

26-Untitled-42.jpg

27-Untitled-46.jpg

28-Untitled-47.jpg

29-Untitled-49.jpg

30-Untitled-112.jpg
 
  • #343
31-Untitled-1.jpg

32-Untitled-2.jpg

33-Untitled-52.jpg

34-Untitled-50.jpg

35-Untitled-56.jpg

36-Untitled-60.jpg

37-Untitled-75.jpg

38-Untitled-79.jpg

39-Untitled-86.jpg

40-Untitled-91.jpg
 
  • #344
41-Untitled-36.jpg

42-Untitled-19.jpg

43-Untitled-48.jpg

44-Untitled-44.jpg

45-Untitled-69.jpg

46-Untitled-73.jpg

47-Untitled-77.jpg

48-Untitled-78.jpg

49-Untitled-97.jpg

50-Untitled-132.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes Oldman too and Buzz Bloom
  • #349
I was surprised at the nomenclature -- Population III stars in the oldest galaxies. I would have guessed that the numbering would run the other direction. I looked it up and learned that my understanding was backwards.

Every day on PF I get to learn something new. :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Oldman too and Astronuc
  • #350
Astronomy has the interesting practice that nothing ever gets re-defined. Hipparchus defined the magnitude scale almost 3000 more than 2000 years ago, and called the brightest stars 1st magnitude, the next brightest 2nd magnitude, and so on. So we are stuck with a magnitude scale that runs backwards - where brighter stars have a smaller magnitude than dimmer stars.

Population I and Population II were defined before anyone knew why they were different and that Population II came before Population I.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and anorlunda

Similar threads

Back
Top