James Webb Telescope

Samson · 28th March 2018, 01:56 AM

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html

I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth.

wobs · 28th March 2018, 02:36 AM

Frustrating, but I'd rather it was right.

A bit like waiting for a new album by one of my favourite artists: I'd rather wait for it to be right than get a rushed release and it not as good.

Kid Eager · 28th March 2018, 02:38 AM

Originally Posted by Samson

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html

I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth.

I think you over estimate the efficacy of marching as a solution to any of the problems described in the article.

theprestige · 28th March 2018, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by Samson

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html

I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth.

Thanks for that. I now realize just how unimportant JWST really is.

phunk · 28th March 2018, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by Samson

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html

I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth.

I think you're wrong. This isn't hubble, it won't be serviceable. It has to be perfect the first time, and if they need more time to get it right, then they should have it.

Beelzebuddy · 28th March 2018, 10:57 AM

Quote:

"Simply put, we have one shot to get this right before going into space," explained Thomas Zurbuchen, NASA's associate administrator of science.

I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy?

wobs · 12th January 2021, 06:17 AM

Is this the first time we have been in the same year as a planned launch for JWST?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...pace_Telescope

Pixie of key · 12th January 2021, 09:44 AM

I predict that the James Webb telescope will detect galaxies formed from the center outward ��

No pulling forces are needed to explain any phenomenon. Not on a small scale, not on a large scale.

Black hole vs. Expanding black star which emit dark expanding light / pushing force

https://youtu.be/C7qXyaxK5p8

��

Gord_in_Toronto · 12th January 2021, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by Pixie of key

I predict that the James Webb telescope will detect galaxies formed from the center outward ��

No pulling forces are needed to explain any phenomenon. Not on a small scale, not on a large scale.

Black hole vs. Expanding black star which emit dark expanding light / pushing force

https://youtu.be/C7qXyaxK5p8

��

Surely that should be: Contacting white hole vs contracting white star that sucks in contracting heavy / pulling weakness?

theprestige · 12th January 2021, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy?

Yeah, shame on NASA for not magically tripling, quadrupling the money Congress budgets for them!

3point14 · 12th January 2021, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Yeah, shame on NASA for not magically tripling, quadrupling the money Congress budgets for them!

Yeah, the bastards.

I mean, it's not like they have to spend their money on anything else...

Jim_MDP · 12th January 2021, 04:16 PM

Maybe Biden can pull a "Trump" and steal the funding from Spaaaace Force!

theprestige · 12th January 2021, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy?

Giving this some more thought: I don't think we can justify it. Or if we can, it's only barely. It's definitely in the "nice to have category". If we don't send this up now, we'll send it up later. Or we'll send something else up later. Or someone else will send something up at some point.

And yes, it is possible that this will be the one that finds the cure for cancer or discovers the benevolent aliens or whatever. Maybe it'll turn out that if we'd gotten off our asses and launched seventeen of them a hundred years ago, it would have prevented the Great Depression, avoided WW2 and the Cold War, and stopped the election of Donald Trump. But I doubt it.

Cosmology isn't really something that calls for redunancy at $1bn+ per item. A large part of the justification for throwing even $10bn at it is NASA's promise that they can get it right (or at least make it work) the first time.

Too, how could you do something like the JWST without at least one prototype? Even the Apollo hardware designs went through revisions and improvements as they learned the lessons of each prototype they flew.

What'll really happen is that if/when this prototype proves itself, future researchers will consider use it as a basis for future telescopes of similar principles and design. But it doesn't really make sense to fund half a dozen all at once right now. It barely makes sense to use the one.

I hate to say it, but where investing in redundancy makes sense is in national defense. Ironically, we could probably have had redundant HSTs, as that telescope used many components and design features originally developed for reconnaissance satellites. Apparently there's a couple sets of Hubble-grade optics lying around, that could be put into orbit to replace the HST. But... NASA would rather focus on the JWST right now. And I agree with that priority.

a_unique_person · 12th January 2021, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by 3point14

Yeah, the bastards.

I mean, it's not like they have to spend their money on anything else...

Maybe if they said they want to build a space wall to keep the aliens out.

Mikemcc · 13th January 2021, 09:26 AM

The only thing taking longer is George R.R. Martin finishing off A Song of Ice and Fire!

28th March 2018, 01:56 AM	#1
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,267	James Webb Telescope https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth.
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,267

28th March 2018, 02:36 AM	#2
wobs Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Hull Posts: 2,294	Frustrating, but I'd rather it was right. A bit like waiting for a new album by one of my favourite artists: I'd rather wait for it to be right than get a rushed release and it not as good.
	__________________ "To vowels. They stop consonants sticking together like boiled sweets in a paper bag."

28th March 2018, 02:38 AM	#3
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 6,819	Originally Posted by Samson https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth. I think you over estimate the efficacy of marching as a solution to any of the problems described in the article.
Kid Eager Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 6,819	__________________ What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....

28th March 2018, 08:56 AM	#5
phunk Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,127	Originally Posted by Samson https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth. I think you're wrong. This isn't hubble, it won't be serviceable. It has to be perfect the first time, and if they need more time to get it right, then they should have it.
phunk Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,127

28th March 2018, 10:57 AM	#6
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,018	Quote: "Simply put, we have one shot to get this right before going into space," explained Thomas Zurbuchen, NASA's associate administrator of science. I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy?
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,018

28th March 2018, 04:23 AM	#4
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,609	Originally Posted by Samson https://phys.org/news/2018-03-nasa-n...telescope.html I think we should all march if there is any further delay to the launch. Mankind depends on the results of James Webb and our escape to the stars, because American politicians cannot be relied on to do their duty as protectors of Earth. Thanks for that. I now realize just how unimportant JWST really is.

12th January 2021, 06:17 AM	#7
wobs Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Hull Posts: 2,294	Is this the first time we have been in the same year as a planned launch for JWST? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_...pace_Telescope
	__________________ "To vowels. They stop consonants sticking together like boiled sweets in a paper bag."

12th January 2021, 09:44 AM	#8
Pixie of key Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 2,280	I predict that the James Webb telescope will detect galaxies formed from the center outward �� No pulling forces are needed to explain any phenomenon. Not on a small scale, not on a large scale. Black hole vs. Expanding black star which emit dark expanding light / pushing force https://youtu.be/C7qXyaxK5p8 ��
	__________________ http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l4 "Math without words is meaningless. Words without math can have meaning." by Maartenn100

12th January 2021, 02:04 PM	#9
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 20,172	Originally Posted by Pixie of key I predict that the James Webb telescope will detect galaxies formed from the center outward �� No pulling forces are needed to explain any phenomenon. Not on a small scale, not on a large scale. Black hole vs. Expanding black star which emit dark expanding light / pushing force https://youtu.be/C7qXyaxK5p8 �� Surely that should be: Contacting white hole vs contracting white star that sucks in contracting heavy / pulling weakness?
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

12th January 2021, 02:06 PM	#10
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,609	Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy? Yeah, shame on NASA for not magically tripling, quadrupling the money Congress budgets for them!

12th January 2021, 02:25 PM	#11
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 20,406	Originally Posted by theprestige Yeah, shame on NASA for not magically tripling, quadrupling the money Congress budgets for them! Yeah, the bastards. I mean, it's not like they have to spend their money on anything else...
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 20,406	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

12th January 2021, 04:16 PM	#12
Jim_MDP Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: N.Cal/S.Or Posts: 7,926	Maybe Biden can pull a "Trump" and steal the funding from Spaaaace Force!
	__________________ ---------------------- Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything. "Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust. "Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.

12th January 2021, 04:40 PM	#13
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,609	Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy I really wish NASA would stop doing this prototype-only stuff. If we can justify designing a single sun-shaded telescope operating at a lagrange point a million kilometers from Earth, why not send three and have a bit of redundancy? Giving this some more thought: I don't think we can justify it. Or if we can, it's only barely. It's definitely in the "nice to have category". If we don't send this up now, we'll send it up later. Or we'll send something else up later. Or someone else will send something up at some point. And yes, it is possible that this will be the one that finds the cure for cancer or discovers the benevolent aliens or whatever. Maybe it'll turn out that if we'd gotten off our asses and launched seventeen of them a hundred years ago, it would have prevented the Great Depression, avoided WW2 and the Cold War, and stopped the election of Donald Trump. But I doubt it. Cosmology isn't really something that calls for redunancy at $1bn+ per item. A large part of the justification for throwing even $10bn at it is NASA's promise that they can get it right (or at least make it work) the first time. Too, how could you do something like the JWST without at least one prototype? Even the Apollo hardware designs went through revisions and improvements as they learned the lessons of each prototype they flew. What'll really happen is that if/when this prototype proves itself, future researchers will consider use it as a basis for future telescopes of similar principles and design. But it doesn't really make sense to fund half a dozen all at once right now. It barely makes sense to use the one. I hate to say it, but where investing in redundancy makes sense is in national defense. Ironically, we could probably have had redundant HSTs, as that telescope used many components and design features originally developed for reconnaissance satellites. Apparently there's a couple sets of Hubble-grade optics lying around, that could be put into orbit to replace the HST. But... NASA would rather focus on the JWST right now. And I agree with that priority.

12th January 2021, 06:47 PM	#14
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 42,986	Originally Posted by 3point14 Yeah, the bastards. I mean, it's not like they have to spend their money on anything else... Maybe if they said they want to build a space wall to keep the aliens out.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. “Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos

13th January 2021, 09:26 AM	#15
Mikemcc Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,865	The only thing taking longer is George R.R. Martin finishing off A Song of Ice and Fire!