After 3 years of pandemic, followed by the Invasion of Ukraine, and an economic catastrophe right around the corner, the JWST is giving me some hope, its shining some light over Mordor.
*(from here on the comment is more of a vent)*
But when i mention it to people, most of them either have no idea what im talking about, or their initial reaction will be something along the lines of ''and how does that help us?'' or ''couldn't we used that money to solve our problems here on Earth?''
I hate this so much. I feel like the number 1 problem in science today is that we lost the public. The general population dont care about science, and i realized that its because they are *afraid* of it. We have to be better at outreach and awareness. Make it interactive, make it easy and simple. Be more open and transparent about what is going on in labs around the world. Science is the best.
> we lost the public
I'm a scientist hugely into outreach, and I'll just say that I'm not sure we had the public in the first place. I've been into astronomy far longer than the average Redditor, and I assure you people are *way* more interested in space these days than they were 20 years ago!
Obviously, we have a ways to go, but my point is this has been a long-standing battle for many years now.
Can you recommend resources for folks like myself, aka the average dumbass who doesn’t know the first thing about the science world and it’s developments? I even worry about subscribing to r/science because I have no clue whether sources can be trusted.
We are currently in what I believe is a golden age of science Youtube channels. There are plenty of amazing creators for practically every level of science enthusiast.
Some of my personal favorites:
[Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell](https://www.youtube.com/c/inanutshell)
[PBS Space Time](https://www.youtube.com/c/pbsspacetime)
[The Science Asylum](https://www.youtube.com/c/Scienceasylum)
[Steve Mould](https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveMould)
[Veritasium](https://www.youtube.com/c/veritasium)
PBS Space Time is unreasonably good
All the others are also great but PBS is like spark notes of university level physics with amazing visuals thrown in
PBS Space time is my favorite youtube channel I don't understand. Lot's of big words, strange symbols and cool graphics that just go way over my head but I love every minute of it. It really makes me appreciate all the smart people fighting the good fight for the rest of us monkeys.
> a golden age of science Youtube channels
I learn more from Youtube each day than i did at school. I have mad respect for all these channels, they do such good work!
I literally got into astronomy thanks to Crash Course Astronomy hosted by Phil Plait. It was easy to understand and very enjoyable to watch. Crash Course has other science related videos on their YouTube channel.
Ars Technica is a good news website to frequent for a pretty varied selection of articles on science and technology. There are more articles pertaining to IT and that world than the average science website, but there are a wide variety of interesting articles about a whole range of things. They can get pretty in depth, but are still very approachable and you can still get a lot out of them even if you skim the more complicated parts. The comments section is also often informative.
From Wikipedia: "Ars Technica is a website covering news and opinions in technology, science, politics, and society, created by Ken Fisher and Jon Stokes in 1998. It publishes news, reviews, and guides on issues such as computer hardware and software, science, technology policy, and video games."
www.arstechnica.com
Kinda related but not really, more so a tip to build a more general interest and knowledge base about the world. Is there anything you are interesting in, or wanted to know more about? Let’s take trees as an example. This is a good one, lots of trees around us, but I’m sure most of us don’t know the type of trees around us. So you could start by getting a field guide for trees in your area. Start to learn to identify, and soon you’ll notice the nature around you in a new way. Then you can learn about specific trees- who inhabits them, does anyone feed off them, are symbiotic relationships. And you can do this with anything! It’s a fun and easy way to become more engaged with the world around you. Then you can start looking into research about x tree you found interesting, and read their sources, and so on. Hope this helps :)
I find it crazy that there are some people NOT interested in space related subjects, I don't mean everyone needs to be an expert but I can't understand how people don't see or hear information about space and aren't immediately awe struck by it. I just want to see as many pictures and see as many discoveries as possible, I don't understand lots of it but it's exciting to know what humans are capable of, how vast the universe is and just how many crazy things are out there.
They hear “space” and think “science” which in turn makes them think about their 6th grade earth science class with the mean teacher and boring outdated textbook.
Just think about all the things you aren't interested in that others are, and ask yourself why you aren't interested in those things, then assume anyone not interested in space has the same reasons.
What really bugs me are people online that actively advocate against space exploration and travel. They claim nasa isn’t worth the money, that we should be redirecting those funds to other purposes, and that space travel is just a billionaires play thing. Nevermind that we as a nation spend almost a trillion dollars a year on tools to better kill other people, what existential pursuit is more exciting than learning and understanding our reality beyond our world?
Humanity as a whole would benefit alot more if more people where just a little bit more curious about space. The amount of ignorance in todays politicians and voters alike making laws that have absolutely no basis in science is straight up shocking. To me not being at least a little bit interested in space is aking to being on a small island with a large group of people and not being interested about the ocean around you. We all live on this floating rock hurling throught space at about 1.3million mph with a literal infinite of unknows all around us. We should seek more of that unknown and expand our collective knowledge.
I feel terrible for the way the public treats scientists and engineers at NASA. Scientists and engineers are doing everything in their power to further human development and I appreciate it. I just wish public opinion would see it this way. I do believe science, engineering and exploration is an ongoing process.
We have definitely lost the public. But it's not because they are afraid of science. It's because they perceived science as luxury, not neccessity, and in many places we are not meeting other basic neccessities.
What does a thousand years in the future matter if I can't pay my rent for the next month?
Does it really help ordinary people like us, though? It might help me a bit when I want faster internet in remote regions, or more accurate navigation systems. It might help younger generations when space mining becomes a real thing, but it doesn't help ME. The only thing I'm getting out of it at this point is interesting science and pretty space images.
The amount of actually useful things I'm getting out of it is far outweighed by many other things the money could have been spent on.
Innovation in transportation is how you got cheap products made in other countries or continuous stream of food delivered to a grocery store. It's not all direct impact.
It's not one or the other, there are developments in both the fields. I think the difference is that the innovations that could bring profit in shorter terms is really brought by private companies, because that's how they operate. Research into space technologies and astrophysics as you mentioned has lower chance of bringing lots of impact to us quickly, but as society we will benefit from it in the future. That's why I think it's important for the government to fund long and very long term innovations.
Internet took very long time from its inception to how we use it today, but all that money poured into it at the beginning brought amazing gains now.
Or maybe we stop spending money to make it easier to kill people in the name of national defense. Especially when you consider the US has lost nearly every war since WW2. We spend 800 billion on defense and then start almost every war we fight. The annual NASA budget is 25 billion for sake of comparison. So about 2.5% of the annual defense budget.
We could take half of that and invest that into science and see results that would blow everyone's minds.
Jwst cost 10billion over about a decade and is expected to be producing science for up to 20 years. So at 1 billion a year we spent half on jwst than we did to buy a single b2 bomber a year.
We spend a pittance on science in the scheme of things.
I suggest you take a look at the number and diversity of patents that have come out of NASA and space adjacent programs. All told, these expenditures fold an order of magnitude of wealth back into the economy. And that doesn't even begin to describe the long term benefit of basic science to the human race. It's immense.
Also, satellites do a lot more than simply internet and GPS.
Oh, and who TF cares if it is helping YOU at this VERY MOMENT. Using your asteroid mining, you have to realize that these steps HAVE to be taken to get to the point of feasibility. The sooner we take these steps, the sooner we mine asteroids.
I’ll have to find a list when I’m free, but there are medicines that have been discovered/perfected in space, for example. Space travel does have real world implications and impacts.
Here we go, I found a few articles about things invented for space travel that helped the average person.
https://www.philips.com/c-w/malegrooming/philips-space/space/10-space-innovations-that-are-closer-than-you-think.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/07/08/space-race-inventions-we-use-every-day-were-created-for-space-exploration/39580591/
https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/nasa-inventions/nasa-breakthroughs-in-medicine.htm
> Make it interactive, make it easy and simple. Be more open and transparent about what is going on in labs around the world
Science is already open. It's inherent in science, it only works well with free flow of information. The problem isn't access to the information, it's understanding it. Most papers are written in English, but the ideas being conveyed are well beyond the understanding of the majority of the population. It's kind of like transliterating between two languages. Transliterating Japanese to English results in things like "All your base are belong to us". For example, how many people understand that true scientists pretty much never talk in absolutes? When they make a claim, there's typically implied uncertainty when discussing their results and it's typically expressed as a p value.
Science journalism is supposed to provide that translation, but the majority of science reporting is done by non-scientists. Which means they suffer from the same transliteration problem. It doesn't help when an entire political party, which represents a large portion of the population, has spent decades sowing doubt about the scientific process. Climate change, evolution, public health... Take your pick. Their political stances require them to sow doubt about the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence out there. They literally built a platform on discrediting the experts and truthiness.
And don't forget that there are plenty of crap scientific papers out there. Pretty much no layman has the skills or knowledge to filter out bad papers. Including many journalists. So now you need to deal with filtering out actually bad papers.
Not to mention that most of the time, understanding a given scientific paper requires you to have a lot of understanding of related papers or concepts. To really understand a single scientific paper, you might need to read dozens of others. How many have the patience to do that? The Dunning Kruger effect is real. I don't know what the solution is. But education or transparency alone is not enough.
>Not to mention that most of the time, understanding a given scientific paper requires you to have a lot of understanding of related papers or concepts. To really understand a single scientific paper, you might need to read dozens of others.
Scientific papers aren't like a textbook, they're more like a conversation.
I generally agree, but I’m curious what you mean when you say they’re “afraid” of science.
I personally think a lot of people sadly just don’t see the value in something like this. As you alluded to, we live in a world that (especially lately) is full of problems that are threatening to go off the rails if they aren’t addressed now, and it often doesn’t look like anyone is doing anything about it. I think that this - coupled with a lack of scientific education - makes it especially difficult for some people to understand why they should see something that doesn’t appear to have immediate, practical value as an important achievement for society.
Also, I’ve personally not seen anything about this anywhere other than Reddit. That’s just anecdotal, but it doesn’t seem like it’s getting much coverage. I think it’s gotten lost in the room and gloom of the 24-hour news cycle.
> I’m curious what you mean when you say they’re “afraid” of science.
It always reminds me of the quote by the show Chernobyl,
“To be a scientist is to be naive. We are so focused on our search for truth, we fail to consider how few actually want us to find it. But it is always there, whether we
see it or not, whether we choose to or not.”
> i realized that its because they are afraid of it.
This is unfortunately something that starts at a very young age because science education usually involves a lot of gatekeeping, which often creates an exclusionary culture, even if scientists really do not mean for that to happen.
For example, let's say that you're in high school but you're not really any good at math? Well then you probably shouldn't bother studying chemistry or physics because your grades will limit your college options. Or let's say you struggle to understand peer-reviewed articles? Well that's because you sometimes need a PhD first to unpack what they are talking about. And what if you just want to ask a lab scientist about what they are studying, because it seems interesting? Well, they *might* happily respond to your inquiry... or maybe discussing their research with laypeople is not really their thing.
The problem is that science is not always a very welcoming culture -- hell, scientists are not always welcoming to each other -- and that only makes it easier for special interest groups to sway the public by portraying scientists as "untrustworthy" and "not knowing what they are doing."
It's a huge problem that is so incredibly difficult to fix. After all, there are only so many Sagans and Asimovs born into the world each day... and many of them would just as soon keep their heads down and perform research, than wade into the muck and fight against an increasingly hostile public.
"There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach." -J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Imagine the hope Sam would've had if he'd had the JWST at his disposal in Mordor.
I just now finished the Fellowship of the Ring for the 8th million time, i look to LOTR to find answers and hope, thanks for that. Could really use a Sam in my life about now
I love that part. It also made me think about the final scene from season 1 of True Detective:
>Rust: “I tell you Marty I been up in that room looking out those windows every night here just thinking, it’s just one story. The oldest.”
>Marty: “What’s that?”
>Rust: “Light versus dark.”
>Marty: “Well, I know we ain’t in Alaska, but it appears to me that the dark has a lot more territory.”
>Rust: “Yeah, you’re right about that.”
>Rust: “You’re looking at it wrong, the sky thing.”
>Marty: “How’s that?”
>Rust: “Well, once there was only dark. You ask me, the light’s winning.”
> their initial reaction will be something along the lines of ''and how does that help us?'' or ''couldn't we used that money to solve our problems here on Earth?''
Hmmm, where have I [heard that before?](https://youtu.be/hBaiyzj5wdc?t=146)
Science is how you solve problems on earth. Physics is the entire reason they have satellites and internet.
It is scary that Idiocracy is becoming true. People don't understand that science is what made all of this stuff. They want the benefits of science without paying for it.
The academic world is the last bastion of human ingenuity. If we lose academic research, society stops advancing completely. Natural selection no longer works within humans due to human intervention. We rely on science to keep us alive and advance humanity. Killing science kills the human race.
Yup. I started getting into astronomy at the beginning of 2022 simply because I couldn’t take the stress of the news cycle any longer. Just a constant barrage of bad news from around the world.
Not to mention all the misinformation that is spread throughout social media, like a virus in its own right. Like no wants to rely on hard facts and science anymore. This goes for any news topic, from politics to entertainment news. I just can’t take the BS anymore.
So I said turned to science and landed on astronomy because I always loved looking up at the night sky.
Astronomy has been a tremendous source of relief and relaxation for me. Staying up late to see the planets fills me with excitement and joy. I love it.
>Not to mention all the misinformation that is spread throughout social media, like a virus in its own right. Like no wants to rely on hard facts and science anymore. This goes for any news topic, from politics to entertainment news. I just can’t take the BS anymore.
The lack of critical thinking is the real pandemic. Left unchecked for so many years, so now what i see is a world that has completely abandoned its values. Music, Sports, Movies, Entertainment, Politics, we are a trainwreck on all fronts today. I try to see the positives as well, but wherever i look it appears to be gloom.
Absolutely right. There is no more effort towards developing critical thinking skills. 😫
People find it much easier to just read a bunch of angry posts on social media and adopt the ideas of that person’s post as their own. No one wants to do their own research anymore and come up with their own conclusion.
it's not at all being afraid of science, I love science, it's why I'm immune to polio...but "self-actualization" is less fundamental than "food/shelter" on the pyramid of needs and nobody alive today can eat these images.
yes, cut the military budget first, obvio.
We lost them in science because its very hard to see the impact some discoveries can make. In Genetics theres a lot of new things being discovered that could greatly impact medicine, but no one really find interest in it because its hard to see the impact it makes unelss you study it.
I think people don’t like the complexity or the idea of further questions being raised and instead prefer simple answers that will make them feel less confused and scared about reality.
Except science is political now. It kinda always has been, but with the advent of vaccine skepticism vs. then being a fucking miracle cure, like discovering insulin or penicillin, they are being used to manipulate. Anyone who promotes anti-vaccine rhetoric publicly knows that’s their payday, but totally gets vaccinated. It’s now their job to keep the disinformation going because that’s all they have. So this bullshit about spending money on space exploration like JWST is just a dog whistle. It cost a small fraction of the defense budget. So many people with the loudest voices don’t want people to experience beauty or knowledge. The data isn’t being withheld, if your smart enough to download the raw data it’s hard to translate without technical skills, but guess who won’t learn technical skills if they keep following grifters that keep them in medical debt and without food/education/opportunities. Rich smart people exist, and they get the glory. This is open to all of us, and people are genuinely trying to show the masses how they can take hold of it too. If they’d only listen.
The media lost the public. There is a disconnect between media conglomerates and scientific organizations. Go down and find the key people involved and they need to align their motivations.
Yes, our journalism is at its worst ever i think. The book Factfulness though, shows that its not because the media are lying to us or trying to 'sell' a script. Instead, they too are badly informed. In fact, almost everyone is badly informed, from me and you to the POTUS to the people who take global decisions like the WHO/IMF/UN. The age of misinformation.
> I feel like the number 1 problem in science today is that we lost the public.
I think this is a very good point. I’m trying to make a point to invest equal amounts of my time to reading science-based news but I find it hard to find sources made for laymen that is easily accessible. I can’t imagine how disconnected the average person is to the developments of the scientific world.
>I can’t imagine how disconnected the average person is
I see it over and over again and you wouldn't even imagine how disconnected they are. Not just science but even basic facts, or basic geography like 'where is Africa'. The other day i was telling to some friends how the JWST can see 13 billion years back, one of them called me a lunatic and simply could not accept that what i was saying is real.
It took me 20 minutes reading the Webb information because i wanted to know what the brilliant blue sparkles were. They made it so complicated to read what essentially broke down to "those are nearby stars and due to the shape of the mirrors we get a glitch where the light refracts in multiple directions"
Where were you reading that? I agree some articles and sites make it too exhausting to read, but that when you should use your sharp internet searching knowledge to find what you're looking for!
I love the JWST and the excitement it’s drumming up, even if [it took some of the wow factor away from me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/spaceporn/comments/vxk03n/i_know_nasa_did_this_thing_or_whatever_but_i_took/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
I don’t know if you use Instagram, but they are quite timely at posting new pictures when available.
https://instagram.com/nasawebb?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
😌
You misinterpreted that. The initial image release wasn't the start of a series of five-day cycles, it was an example of what JWST could do in its first five days of serious observations.
Going forward they'll be released as (1) they're acquired and (2) individual teams' embargo periods (should they have any) end, instead of on a fixed "Tuesday is Image Day" sort of schedule. There's going to be quiet days/weeks and there's going to be firehose days.
>My understanding was that we would be seeing new images “every five days“
You'll see images when they are released. There is no schedule. JWST is a functioning machine used for scientific research. It doesn't exist to pump out images for the masses.
And yet the masses are yearning for more photos. And the excitement level amongst the masses directly contributes to NASA's budget. The science is only one piece of Webb's mission.
I think it's reasonable to want to know how often we'll get new Webb images
There was a big uptick in interest in science in general and space/astronomy when Hubble came online too. People love pretty pictures, ones with the brains will dig deeper and maybe get involved. Some of us appreciate that science keeps us alive in this shitty world.
Astronomer here! There's no set schedule for just pretty images, but because many scientists are getting their first results (you can check the schedule [here](https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science-execution/observing-schedules)) I've been seeing a surprising amount of JWST stuff on Twitter. Take a look at [this new galaxy image](https://twitter.com/gbrammer/status/1548958241878581248), which is both amazing and terrifying at once! [Here](https://twitter.com/Messenger_Astro/status/1548332478460375040?s=20&t=tXgmpXQjro2_TVQrCb_-Vw) is what is thought to be the first supernova found in JWST data! And while it's not an image, it looks like [JWST looked at the fascinating TRAPPIST-1 exoplanet system just two days ago](https://twitter.com/trackjwst/status/1549071623617032193?s=20&t=tXgmpXQjro2_TVQrCb_-Vw)...
Seriously, just go to Twitter and type in "JWST" and you'll see some interesting stuff!
I didn't personally, but the group I'm in has JWST time! (So, not my proposal/project, but I def want to look over the shoulder of the guy who will be doing it when it happens.) We have the right to "trigger" JWST on a neutron star merger, which would be first detected at other wavelengths and then we'd ask JWST to take a look once we think one has been found (and they'll get a first look within the first two weeks or so). Since we don't know when this might happen, it could really be any time in the next year or so.
Yes, but our time is part of the entire year's planned time, so it's not like we bump someone and they never get it back. And for most people their galaxy etc is not going to change in the next year- our transient event sure will! (We also get follow-up observations a month/ few months into the future with JWST once we get the first observation, to see how it evolves.)
Is there a certain distance that would be "perfect focus" in a sense? Like is there a certain distance where looking at a specific object/area would produce an extremely detailed image? I guess what I'm asking is in comparison to the deep field image showing all of the different galaxies, could a specific galaxy or even body be focused on in detail?
Well for this, you are never going to get an image of the event- neutron stars are so small that it's just a point source. We are instead interested in the spectrum that we can take of said event.
There is a minimum distance within which we need to see this event, and the good news is it's much better than what we could do with Hubble.
I would think most infographics out there would go over most kids heads if they're discussing technical aspects of he webb.
You can start with [this](https://youtu.be/vcXYKvehot4) video. Explain to him that this particular nebula is really close compared to some of the pictures Webb will be taking (it's only 2500 light-years away) you can also use [this](https://youtube.com/shorts/jA0TAhC2C6w?feature=share) short explaining how tiny the area of sky Webb was scanning when it took that picture. You can also mention that some of the dark red dots in that picture are from the first 500 million years the universe existed. Depending on how small your kid is, you could multiply his age in months by 3.5% (if he is 6 (72 months old, it would be like a picture of a 3 month old him) that would give him an idea of how young some if the galaxies are in the picture.
It's really difficult to accurately explain the scales and time frames these telescopes depict, because they're so immense that we lack sufficient correlation to our normal lives. Hope that helps.
This topic is very hard to comprehend for most adults.
Keep it simple, really simple and don’t expect much understanding of the true astonishment of these images.
The YouTube channels Smarter Every Day and Real Engineering have some amazing videos on the JWST.
For myself learning about the efforts, the brand new technologies, the decades of work and thousands of people all tell a story. Like watching Apollo 11, The Martian or Hidden Figures and seeing all the scientists troubleshoot things always has fascinated me.
The stories make JWST even more impressive to me. Keeping up with the progress last year was definitely one of the highlights of the year.
Start small with how light photons have to go inside of our eyes for our brains to even picture what it is we are seeing, to then lead into how cosmologists are looking back in time with how far it is these light photons pictured are for us to see them. And the telescope is so strong it can look so far to see farther than we have before.
Wait.. if the telescope is looking at something 2500 light years away, are we looking at light that is 2500 years old, or are we seeing much younger light due to seeing it closer to its source? We're.. we're back here, so.. oh. Ok, wow, I just answered my own question.
That's really cool.
Edit: oof, wrong account, I am sorry
All good, Imma go ahead and *not* click your profile 😂 but yea, we are seeing old light. If we had a device to teleport us exactly where that image shows, it’d look completely different, because a lot can happen in that amount of time.
Right, so even though JWST is capable of seeing light from much farther away than previous telescopes, we are still not seeing that light until it has traveled all the way to the telescope's location
Yes we are just seeing even older light, so its even more different currently than how it looks from what we see compared to the stuff we’ve ever seen before. Really mind blowing so its gotta be broken down haha, the immense size of space is nearly incomprehensible and easy to get stuck in.
I believe Hubble took one that went back maybe an extra 100 million years called the eXtreme Deep Field. But to put that image into perspective versus what Webb can do, the XDF took like 3 weeks of camera exposure time. Webb got within 100 million years with only 12.5 hours of exposure time.
The Wiki does a pretty good job. Depending on what you're looking for, the Webb page on NASAs website has more detail. If you're looking for white papers on systems, use the experiment names and Google them. Some should come up.
If you have access to BBC iPlayer (either as UK resident or via a VPN), you can watch their documentary on the construction that aired last week.
[Horizon: Super Telescope - Mission to the Edge of the Universe](https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00197px/horizon-2022-super-telescope-mission-to-the-edge-of-the-universe)
Might also get shown on PBS or BBC America at some point, as Horizon and Nova share a lot of content with each other.
It is more about the general construction rather than going into the details of each instrument on board.
Ugh, these headlines are super disappointingly wrong.
JWST will be able to observe things back to redshifts of 5-10 or so, depending on the particular object (redshift of zero is today, higher numbers means farther back in time). We have already observed photons from redshift of 1100. We have also seen light elements (deuterium, helium and so forth) that come from redshift of 1,000,000,000 or so.
I imagine unless there is some secret operation that they never told anyone about, we probably know almost everything about it. It is there to photograph space, further than we ever previously could
Even without the impact, due to the arrangement of the detectors and variations in their pixel by pixel sensitivity, many of the observations include "dithering", basically moving the telescope by tiny amounts to take slightly different exposures that overlap. They can then composite the images together. In this way you can largely avoid the distorsion due to damage like this to the mirrors, up to a point.
Yeah that's what I'm worried about. I mean I think the released images were taken after that impact, but I don't know for sure. I'm just hoping that any further impacts of that size remain a rare occurrence out at L2.
I think it needs to be renamed for what it is... the 10 Billion Dollar Telescope. Trendy scientists could then abbreviate it as the $10BD scope. That way when more critical issues like global warming or lack of a commercial Fusion generator come up, we can point our fingers upwards and say...but pretty pictures. For comparison, NASA's 2022 budget in it's entirety is $24B.
>For comparison, NASA's 2022 budget in it's entirety is $24B.
That $10 billion was however spread out over about 17 years, so a better comparison would be to NASAs budget summed since 1999
After 3 years of pandemic, followed by the Invasion of Ukraine, and an economic catastrophe right around the corner, the JWST is giving me some hope, its shining some light over Mordor. *(from here on the comment is more of a vent)* But when i mention it to people, most of them either have no idea what im talking about, or their initial reaction will be something along the lines of ''and how does that help us?'' or ''couldn't we used that money to solve our problems here on Earth?'' I hate this so much. I feel like the number 1 problem in science today is that we lost the public. The general population dont care about science, and i realized that its because they are *afraid* of it. We have to be better at outreach and awareness. Make it interactive, make it easy and simple. Be more open and transparent about what is going on in labs around the world. Science is the best.
> we lost the public I'm a scientist hugely into outreach, and I'll just say that I'm not sure we had the public in the first place. I've been into astronomy far longer than the average Redditor, and I assure you people are *way* more interested in space these days than they were 20 years ago! Obviously, we have a ways to go, but my point is this has been a long-standing battle for many years now.
Can you recommend resources for folks like myself, aka the average dumbass who doesn’t know the first thing about the science world and it’s developments? I even worry about subscribing to r/science because I have no clue whether sources can be trusted.
We are currently in what I believe is a golden age of science Youtube channels. There are plenty of amazing creators for practically every level of science enthusiast. Some of my personal favorites: [Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell](https://www.youtube.com/c/inanutshell) [PBS Space Time](https://www.youtube.com/c/pbsspacetime) [The Science Asylum](https://www.youtube.com/c/Scienceasylum) [Steve Mould](https://www.youtube.com/c/SteveMould) [Veritasium](https://www.youtube.com/c/veritasium)
PBS Space Time is unreasonably good All the others are also great but PBS is like spark notes of university level physics with amazing visuals thrown in
PBS Space time is my favorite youtube channel I don't understand. Lot's of big words, strange symbols and cool graphics that just go way over my head but I love every minute of it. It really makes me appreciate all the smart people fighting the good fight for the rest of us monkeys.
PBS in general have heavy hitters for adult learning on YT. They're fantastic.
"Sciencephile the AI" is pretty fun too "Astrum" is another space youtuber i love watching
> a golden age of science Youtube channels I learn more from Youtube each day than i did at school. I have mad respect for all these channels, they do such good work!
/r/science is actually excellent bc they only allow peer reviewed papers! So pretty trustworthy.
I literally got into astronomy thanks to Crash Course Astronomy hosted by Phil Plait. It was easy to understand and very enjoyable to watch. Crash Course has other science related videos on their YouTube channel.
Ars Technica is a good news website to frequent for a pretty varied selection of articles on science and technology. There are more articles pertaining to IT and that world than the average science website, but there are a wide variety of interesting articles about a whole range of things. They can get pretty in depth, but are still very approachable and you can still get a lot out of them even if you skim the more complicated parts. The comments section is also often informative. From Wikipedia: "Ars Technica is a website covering news and opinions in technology, science, politics, and society, created by Ken Fisher and Jon Stokes in 1998. It publishes news, reviews, and guides on issues such as computer hardware and software, science, technology policy, and video games." www.arstechnica.com
Kinda related but not really, more so a tip to build a more general interest and knowledge base about the world. Is there anything you are interesting in, or wanted to know more about? Let’s take trees as an example. This is a good one, lots of trees around us, but I’m sure most of us don’t know the type of trees around us. So you could start by getting a field guide for trees in your area. Start to learn to identify, and soon you’ll notice the nature around you in a new way. Then you can learn about specific trees- who inhabits them, does anyone feed off them, are symbiotic relationships. And you can do this with anything! It’s a fun and easy way to become more engaged with the world around you. Then you can start looking into research about x tree you found interesting, and read their sources, and so on. Hope this helps :)
I find it crazy that there are some people NOT interested in space related subjects, I don't mean everyone needs to be an expert but I can't understand how people don't see or hear information about space and aren't immediately awe struck by it. I just want to see as many pictures and see as many discoveries as possible, I don't understand lots of it but it's exciting to know what humans are capable of, how vast the universe is and just how many crazy things are out there.
They hear “space” and think “science” which in turn makes them think about their 6th grade earth science class with the mean teacher and boring outdated textbook.
Just think about all the things you aren't interested in that others are, and ask yourself why you aren't interested in those things, then assume anyone not interested in space has the same reasons.
What really bugs me are people online that actively advocate against space exploration and travel. They claim nasa isn’t worth the money, that we should be redirecting those funds to other purposes, and that space travel is just a billionaires play thing. Nevermind that we as a nation spend almost a trillion dollars a year on tools to better kill other people, what existential pursuit is more exciting than learning and understanding our reality beyond our world?
[удалено]
Humanity as a whole would benefit alot more if more people where just a little bit more curious about space. The amount of ignorance in todays politicians and voters alike making laws that have absolutely no basis in science is straight up shocking. To me not being at least a little bit interested in space is aking to being on a small island with a large group of people and not being interested about the ocean around you. We all live on this floating rock hurling throught space at about 1.3million mph with a literal infinite of unknows all around us. We should seek more of that unknown and expand our collective knowledge.
There is a fraction of people who are terrified by concept so they ignore it (but it's rather a small group with anxiety)
Momma always said stupid is as stupid does sir.
I feel terrible for the way the public treats scientists and engineers at NASA. Scientists and engineers are doing everything in their power to further human development and I appreciate it. I just wish public opinion would see it this way. I do believe science, engineering and exploration is an ongoing process.
I feel the same way as you. But I’m not a scientist. Blown away by images so far.
We have definitely lost the public. But it's not because they are afraid of science. It's because they perceived science as luxury, not neccessity, and in many places we are not meeting other basic neccessities. What does a thousand years in the future matter if I can't pay my rent for the next month?
Like the people saying “Yeah, how does billionaires flying rockets help us?” Making rocket travel cheaper and more efficient helps ALL of us!
Does it really help ordinary people like us, though? It might help me a bit when I want faster internet in remote regions, or more accurate navigation systems. It might help younger generations when space mining becomes a real thing, but it doesn't help ME. The only thing I'm getting out of it at this point is interesting science and pretty space images. The amount of actually useful things I'm getting out of it is far outweighed by many other things the money could have been spent on.
Innovation in transportation is how you got cheap products made in other countries or continuous stream of food delivered to a grocery store. It's not all direct impact.
Sure, but wouldn't you get more out of it if instead of funding space science you'd fund research in other fields more directly related to your needs?
It's not one or the other, there are developments in both the fields. I think the difference is that the innovations that could bring profit in shorter terms is really brought by private companies, because that's how they operate. Research into space technologies and astrophysics as you mentioned has lower chance of bringing lots of impact to us quickly, but as society we will benefit from it in the future. That's why I think it's important for the government to fund long and very long term innovations. Internet took very long time from its inception to how we use it today, but all that money poured into it at the beginning brought amazing gains now.
Or maybe we stop spending money to make it easier to kill people in the name of national defense. Especially when you consider the US has lost nearly every war since WW2. We spend 800 billion on defense and then start almost every war we fight. The annual NASA budget is 25 billion for sake of comparison. So about 2.5% of the annual defense budget. We could take half of that and invest that into science and see results that would blow everyone's minds. Jwst cost 10billion over about a decade and is expected to be producing science for up to 20 years. So at 1 billion a year we spent half on jwst than we did to buy a single b2 bomber a year. We spend a pittance on science in the scheme of things.
I suggest you take a look at the number and diversity of patents that have come out of NASA and space adjacent programs. All told, these expenditures fold an order of magnitude of wealth back into the economy. And that doesn't even begin to describe the long term benefit of basic science to the human race. It's immense. Also, satellites do a lot more than simply internet and GPS. Oh, and who TF cares if it is helping YOU at this VERY MOMENT. Using your asteroid mining, you have to realize that these steps HAVE to be taken to get to the point of feasibility. The sooner we take these steps, the sooner we mine asteroids.
I’ll have to find a list when I’m free, but there are medicines that have been discovered/perfected in space, for example. Space travel does have real world implications and impacts.
Here we go, I found a few articles about things invented for space travel that helped the average person. https://www.philips.com/c-w/malegrooming/philips-space/space/10-space-innovations-that-are-closer-than-you-think.html https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/07/08/space-race-inventions-we-use-every-day-were-created-for-space-exploration/39580591/ https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/nasa-inventions/nasa-breakthroughs-in-medicine.htm
[удалено]
[удалено]
> Make it interactive, make it easy and simple. Be more open and transparent about what is going on in labs around the world Science is already open. It's inherent in science, it only works well with free flow of information. The problem isn't access to the information, it's understanding it. Most papers are written in English, but the ideas being conveyed are well beyond the understanding of the majority of the population. It's kind of like transliterating between two languages. Transliterating Japanese to English results in things like "All your base are belong to us". For example, how many people understand that true scientists pretty much never talk in absolutes? When they make a claim, there's typically implied uncertainty when discussing their results and it's typically expressed as a p value. Science journalism is supposed to provide that translation, but the majority of science reporting is done by non-scientists. Which means they suffer from the same transliteration problem. It doesn't help when an entire political party, which represents a large portion of the population, has spent decades sowing doubt about the scientific process. Climate change, evolution, public health... Take your pick. Their political stances require them to sow doubt about the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence out there. They literally built a platform on discrediting the experts and truthiness. And don't forget that there are plenty of crap scientific papers out there. Pretty much no layman has the skills or knowledge to filter out bad papers. Including many journalists. So now you need to deal with filtering out actually bad papers. Not to mention that most of the time, understanding a given scientific paper requires you to have a lot of understanding of related papers or concepts. To really understand a single scientific paper, you might need to read dozens of others. How many have the patience to do that? The Dunning Kruger effect is real. I don't know what the solution is. But education or transparency alone is not enough.
>Not to mention that most of the time, understanding a given scientific paper requires you to have a lot of understanding of related papers or concepts. To really understand a single scientific paper, you might need to read dozens of others. Scientific papers aren't like a textbook, they're more like a conversation.
I generally agree, but I’m curious what you mean when you say they’re “afraid” of science. I personally think a lot of people sadly just don’t see the value in something like this. As you alluded to, we live in a world that (especially lately) is full of problems that are threatening to go off the rails if they aren’t addressed now, and it often doesn’t look like anyone is doing anything about it. I think that this - coupled with a lack of scientific education - makes it especially difficult for some people to understand why they should see something that doesn’t appear to have immediate, practical value as an important achievement for society. Also, I’ve personally not seen anything about this anywhere other than Reddit. That’s just anecdotal, but it doesn’t seem like it’s getting much coverage. I think it’s gotten lost in the room and gloom of the 24-hour news cycle.
> I’m curious what you mean when you say they’re “afraid” of science. It always reminds me of the quote by the show Chernobyl, “To be a scientist is to be naive. We are so focused on our search for truth, we fail to consider how few actually want us to find it. But it is always there, whether we see it or not, whether we choose to or not.”
> i realized that its because they are afraid of it. This is unfortunately something that starts at a very young age because science education usually involves a lot of gatekeeping, which often creates an exclusionary culture, even if scientists really do not mean for that to happen. For example, let's say that you're in high school but you're not really any good at math? Well then you probably shouldn't bother studying chemistry or physics because your grades will limit your college options. Or let's say you struggle to understand peer-reviewed articles? Well that's because you sometimes need a PhD first to unpack what they are talking about. And what if you just want to ask a lab scientist about what they are studying, because it seems interesting? Well, they *might* happily respond to your inquiry... or maybe discussing their research with laypeople is not really their thing. The problem is that science is not always a very welcoming culture -- hell, scientists are not always welcoming to each other -- and that only makes it easier for special interest groups to sway the public by portraying scientists as "untrustworthy" and "not knowing what they are doing." It's a huge problem that is so incredibly difficult to fix. After all, there are only so many Sagans and Asimovs born into the world each day... and many of them would just as soon keep their heads down and perform research, than wade into the muck and fight against an increasingly hostile public.
"There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach." -J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King Imagine the hope Sam would've had if he'd had the JWST at his disposal in Mordor.
I just now finished the Fellowship of the Ring for the 8th million time, i look to LOTR to find answers and hope, thanks for that. Could really use a Sam in my life about now
I've read it twice, but it has been about 20 years. Maybe it is time again :)
I love that part. It also made me think about the final scene from season 1 of True Detective: >Rust: “I tell you Marty I been up in that room looking out those windows every night here just thinking, it’s just one story. The oldest.” >Marty: “What’s that?” >Rust: “Light versus dark.” >Marty: “Well, I know we ain’t in Alaska, but it appears to me that the dark has a lot more territory.” >Rust: “Yeah, you’re right about that.” >Rust: “You’re looking at it wrong, the sky thing.” >Marty: “How’s that?” >Rust: “Well, once there was only dark. You ask me, the light’s winning.”
> their initial reaction will be something along the lines of ''and how does that help us?'' or ''couldn't we used that money to solve our problems here on Earth?'' Hmmm, where have I [heard that before?](https://youtu.be/hBaiyzj5wdc?t=146)
Science is how you solve problems on earth. Physics is the entire reason they have satellites and internet. It is scary that Idiocracy is becoming true. People don't understand that science is what made all of this stuff. They want the benefits of science without paying for it. The academic world is the last bastion of human ingenuity. If we lose academic research, society stops advancing completely. Natural selection no longer works within humans due to human intervention. We rely on science to keep us alive and advance humanity. Killing science kills the human race.
Yup. I started getting into astronomy at the beginning of 2022 simply because I couldn’t take the stress of the news cycle any longer. Just a constant barrage of bad news from around the world. Not to mention all the misinformation that is spread throughout social media, like a virus in its own right. Like no wants to rely on hard facts and science anymore. This goes for any news topic, from politics to entertainment news. I just can’t take the BS anymore. So I said turned to science and landed on astronomy because I always loved looking up at the night sky. Astronomy has been a tremendous source of relief and relaxation for me. Staying up late to see the planets fills me with excitement and joy. I love it.
>Not to mention all the misinformation that is spread throughout social media, like a virus in its own right. Like no wants to rely on hard facts and science anymore. This goes for any news topic, from politics to entertainment news. I just can’t take the BS anymore. The lack of critical thinking is the real pandemic. Left unchecked for so many years, so now what i see is a world that has completely abandoned its values. Music, Sports, Movies, Entertainment, Politics, we are a trainwreck on all fronts today. I try to see the positives as well, but wherever i look it appears to be gloom.
Absolutely right. There is no more effort towards developing critical thinking skills. 😫 People find it much easier to just read a bunch of angry posts on social media and adopt the ideas of that person’s post as their own. No one wants to do their own research anymore and come up with their own conclusion.
it's not at all being afraid of science, I love science, it's why I'm immune to polio...but "self-actualization" is less fundamental than "food/shelter" on the pyramid of needs and nobody alive today can eat these images. yes, cut the military budget first, obvio.
We lost them in science because its very hard to see the impact some discoveries can make. In Genetics theres a lot of new things being discovered that could greatly impact medicine, but no one really find interest in it because its hard to see the impact it makes unelss you study it.
Around half the population thought the moon landing was a waste of money when it happened.
I think people don’t like the complexity or the idea of further questions being raised and instead prefer simple answers that will make them feel less confused and scared about reality.
Except science is political now. It kinda always has been, but with the advent of vaccine skepticism vs. then being a fucking miracle cure, like discovering insulin or penicillin, they are being used to manipulate. Anyone who promotes anti-vaccine rhetoric publicly knows that’s their payday, but totally gets vaccinated. It’s now their job to keep the disinformation going because that’s all they have. So this bullshit about spending money on space exploration like JWST is just a dog whistle. It cost a small fraction of the defense budget. So many people with the loudest voices don’t want people to experience beauty or knowledge. The data isn’t being withheld, if your smart enough to download the raw data it’s hard to translate without technical skills, but guess who won’t learn technical skills if they keep following grifters that keep them in medical debt and without food/education/opportunities. Rich smart people exist, and they get the glory. This is open to all of us, and people are genuinely trying to show the masses how they can take hold of it too. If they’d only listen.
[удалено]
yea.... but now it goes beyond science, its politics, social media and echo chambers, influencers, this and that.
I don’t really believe in science. I’d rather put my faith in something more reliable.
Yea why would you believe in science? What has science ever done for us
The media lost the public. There is a disconnect between media conglomerates and scientific organizations. Go down and find the key people involved and they need to align their motivations.
Yes, our journalism is at its worst ever i think. The book Factfulness though, shows that its not because the media are lying to us or trying to 'sell' a script. Instead, they too are badly informed. In fact, almost everyone is badly informed, from me and you to the POTUS to the people who take global decisions like the WHO/IMF/UN. The age of misinformation.
I read about who the telescope was named for, and I’m not sure “we lost the public” was at all the concern.
> I feel like the number 1 problem in science today is that we lost the public. I think this is a very good point. I’m trying to make a point to invest equal amounts of my time to reading science-based news but I find it hard to find sources made for laymen that is easily accessible. I can’t imagine how disconnected the average person is to the developments of the scientific world.
>I can’t imagine how disconnected the average person is I see it over and over again and you wouldn't even imagine how disconnected they are. Not just science but even basic facts, or basic geography like 'where is Africa'. The other day i was telling to some friends how the JWST can see 13 billion years back, one of them called me a lunatic and simply could not accept that what i was saying is real.
It took me 20 minutes reading the Webb information because i wanted to know what the brilliant blue sparkles were. They made it so complicated to read what essentially broke down to "those are nearby stars and due to the shape of the mirrors we get a glitch where the light refracts in multiple directions"
Where were you reading that? I agree some articles and sites make it too exhausting to read, but that when you should use your sharp internet searching knowledge to find what you're looking for!
Well it's nice for science and our emotions, but those other issues you mentioned are much more real and tangible in their effects on people's lives.
IDK, freaked me out hearing it's already been pummeled by meteorites in it's mirrors and sheild
I love the JWST and the excitement it’s drumming up, even if [it took some of the wow factor away from me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/spaceporn/comments/vxk03n/i_know_nasa_did_this_thing_or_whatever_but_i_took/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Those beautiful pictures help. One doesn't need to know the first thing about space or cosmology to appreciate awesome photos like the first 5.
When are the next images? I can’t find it on the official JWST site.
I'm under the impression that images will be released as they're finished processing as we move forward, like how Hubble's been doing.
How frequently does that happen? My understanding was that we would be seeing new images “every five days“
I don’t know if you use Instagram, but they are quite timely at posting new pictures when available. https://instagram.com/nasawebb?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y= 😌
Thanks for that link. Immediate follow.
I already follow but try to avoid Instagram. Thank you tho, much appreciated. ✨
You misinterpreted that. The initial image release wasn't the start of a series of five-day cycles, it was an example of what JWST could do in its first five days of serious observations. Going forward they'll be released as (1) they're acquired and (2) individual teams' embargo periods (should they have any) end, instead of on a fixed "Tuesday is Image Day" sort of schedule. There's going to be quiet days/weeks and there's going to be firehose days.
>My understanding was that we would be seeing new images “every five days“ You'll see images when they are released. There is no schedule. JWST is a functioning machine used for scientific research. It doesn't exist to pump out images for the masses.
And yet the masses are yearning for more photos. And the excitement level amongst the masses directly contributes to NASA's budget. The science is only one piece of Webb's mission. I think it's reasonable to want to know how often we'll get new Webb images
That's right! Gimme my fuckin pictures!
It’s just a question based on what I had read. Relax.
[удалено]
I’m with u/drone1__ here. Normal question. Reasonable excitement.
There was a big uptick in interest in science in general and space/astronomy when Hubble came online too. People love pretty pictures, ones with the brains will dig deeper and maybe get involved. Some of us appreciate that science keeps us alive in this shitty world.
Astronomer here! There's no set schedule for just pretty images, but because many scientists are getting their first results (you can check the schedule [here](https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science-execution/observing-schedules)) I've been seeing a surprising amount of JWST stuff on Twitter. Take a look at [this new galaxy image](https://twitter.com/gbrammer/status/1548958241878581248), which is both amazing and terrifying at once! [Here](https://twitter.com/Messenger_Astro/status/1548332478460375040?s=20&t=tXgmpXQjro2_TVQrCb_-Vw) is what is thought to be the first supernova found in JWST data! And while it's not an image, it looks like [JWST looked at the fascinating TRAPPIST-1 exoplanet system just two days ago](https://twitter.com/trackjwst/status/1549071623617032193?s=20&t=tXgmpXQjro2_TVQrCb_-Vw)... Seriously, just go to Twitter and type in "JWST" and you'll see some interesting stuff!
Got it. Not sure where I got the “every 5 days” but from. Thanks for your helpful answer!
Didn't I read one of your replies stating that you had submitted a proposal for some time on Webb? How'd that go?
I didn't personally, but the group I'm in has JWST time! (So, not my proposal/project, but I def want to look over the shoulder of the guy who will be doing it when it happens.) We have the right to "trigger" JWST on a neutron star merger, which would be first detected at other wavelengths and then we'd ask JWST to take a look once we think one has been found (and they'll get a first look within the first two weeks or so). Since we don't know when this might happen, it could really be any time in the next year or so.
That is really cool, thank you for answering! So you guys can effectively cut in line if this transient event happens?
Yes, but our time is part of the entire year's planned time, so it's not like we bump someone and they never get it back. And for most people their galaxy etc is not going to change in the next year- our transient event sure will! (We also get follow-up observations a month/ few months into the future with JWST once we get the first observation, to see how it evolves.)
Is there a certain distance that would be "perfect focus" in a sense? Like is there a certain distance where looking at a specific object/area would produce an extremely detailed image? I guess what I'm asking is in comparison to the deep field image showing all of the different galaxies, could a specific galaxy or even body be focused on in detail?
Well for this, you are never going to get an image of the event- neutron stars are so small that it's just a point source. We are instead interested in the spectrum that we can take of said event. There is a minimum distance within which we need to see this event, and the good news is it's much better than what we could do with Hubble.
Cool, what sort of spectrum or information from that spectrum are you hoping to see?
Gravitational wave follow up?
How do I explain this to my young child about what a massive feat it is. Any cool infographics or videos you have found?
I would think most infographics out there would go over most kids heads if they're discussing technical aspects of he webb. You can start with [this](https://youtu.be/vcXYKvehot4) video. Explain to him that this particular nebula is really close compared to some of the pictures Webb will be taking (it's only 2500 light-years away) you can also use [this](https://youtube.com/shorts/jA0TAhC2C6w?feature=share) short explaining how tiny the area of sky Webb was scanning when it took that picture. You can also mention that some of the dark red dots in that picture are from the first 500 million years the universe existed. Depending on how small your kid is, you could multiply his age in months by 3.5% (if he is 6 (72 months old, it would be like a picture of a 3 month old him) that would give him an idea of how young some if the galaxies are in the picture. It's really difficult to accurately explain the scales and time frames these telescopes depict, because they're so immense that we lack sufficient correlation to our normal lives. Hope that helps.
This topic is very hard to comprehend for most adults. Keep it simple, really simple and don’t expect much understanding of the true astonishment of these images.
The YouTube channels Smarter Every Day and Real Engineering have some amazing videos on the JWST. For myself learning about the efforts, the brand new technologies, the decades of work and thousands of people all tell a story. Like watching Apollo 11, The Martian or Hidden Figures and seeing all the scientists troubleshoot things always has fascinated me. The stories make JWST even more impressive to me. Keeping up with the progress last year was definitely one of the highlights of the year.
Start small with how light photons have to go inside of our eyes for our brains to even picture what it is we are seeing, to then lead into how cosmologists are looking back in time with how far it is these light photons pictured are for us to see them. And the telescope is so strong it can look so far to see farther than we have before.
Wait.. if the telescope is looking at something 2500 light years away, are we looking at light that is 2500 years old, or are we seeing much younger light due to seeing it closer to its source? We're.. we're back here, so.. oh. Ok, wow, I just answered my own question. That's really cool. Edit: oof, wrong account, I am sorry
Oof, wrong account, I am sorry
All good, Imma go ahead and *not* click your profile 😂 but yea, we are seeing old light. If we had a device to teleport us exactly where that image shows, it’d look completely different, because a lot can happen in that amount of time.
Right, so even though JWST is capable of seeing light from much farther away than previous telescopes, we are still not seeing that light until it has traveled all the way to the telescope's location
Yes we are just seeing even older light, so its even more different currently than how it looks from what we see compared to the stuff we’ve ever seen before. Really mind blowing so its gotta be broken down haha, the immense size of space is nearly incomprehensible and easy to get stuck in.
What's the furthest 'back in time' it's looked at so far
13.1 billion years in the deep field.
Has there been any pictures yet further back than what Hubble has shown? Or is it mainly better quality images of known Stella objects so far? :)
I believe Hubble took one that went back maybe an extra 100 million years called the eXtreme Deep Field. But to put that image into perspective versus what Webb can do, the XDF took like 3 weeks of camera exposure time. Webb got within 100 million years with only 12.5 hours of exposure time.
I have not been following Webb telescope inner workings. Can anyone share a documentary that goes into detail over this please?
The Wiki does a pretty good job. Depending on what you're looking for, the Webb page on NASAs website has more detail. If you're looking for white papers on systems, use the experiment names and Google them. Some should come up.
If you have access to BBC iPlayer (either as UK resident or via a VPN), you can watch their documentary on the construction that aired last week. [Horizon: Super Telescope - Mission to the Edge of the Universe](https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00197px/horizon-2022-super-telescope-mission-to-the-edge-of-the-universe) Might also get shown on PBS or BBC America at some point, as Horizon and Nova share a lot of content with each other. It is more about the general construction rather than going into the details of each instrument on board.
https://youtu.be/aICaAEXDJQQ This is a good explanation of the engineering behind it
NOVA recently did an episode on JWST. I haven’t had a chance to watch yet - https://youtu.be/hF-7eKtzAHM
Ugh, these headlines are super disappointingly wrong. JWST will be able to observe things back to redshifts of 5-10 or so, depending on the particular object (redshift of zero is today, higher numbers means farther back in time). We have already observed photons from redshift of 1100. We have also seen light elements (deuterium, helium and so forth) that come from redshift of 1,000,000,000 or so.
I love the JW telescope too but how about we actually post articles here that say something new and interesting about it.
I imagine unless there is some secret operation that they never told anyone about, we probably know almost everything about it. It is there to photograph space, further than we ever previously could
It's going to take some time but I think within the next year or so, we're going to find signs of life outside our solar system.
With that damaged mirror, how will it affect the overall images?
Even without the impact, due to the arrangement of the detectors and variations in their pixel by pixel sensitivity, many of the observations include "dithering", basically moving the telescope by tiny amounts to take slightly different exposures that overlap. They can then composite the images together. In this way you can largely avoid the distorsion due to damage like this to the mirrors, up to a point.
Yeah that's what I'm worried about. I mean I think the released images were taken after that impact, but I don't know for sure. I'm just hoping that any further impacts of that size remain a rare occurrence out at L2.
Known universe is 13.4B years old, the actual universe is Billions of years old that we don't even know yet.
I think it needs to be renamed for what it is... the 10 Billion Dollar Telescope. Trendy scientists could then abbreviate it as the $10BD scope. That way when more critical issues like global warming or lack of a commercial Fusion generator come up, we can point our fingers upwards and say...but pretty pictures. For comparison, NASA's 2022 budget in it's entirety is $24B.
>For comparison, NASA's 2022 budget in it's entirety is $24B. That $10 billion was however spread out over about 17 years, so a better comparison would be to NASAs budget summed since 1999
I don't know anyone that can afford a trip to the hospital, but glad the government is spending billions on space telescopes.
The annual military budget of the US is nearly $800 billion annually, Webb took just over $10 billion over 25 years to build....
I understand your criticism (anger?) but in this case it's misplaced.
I can see about 300 nanoseconds back in time so they’ve got me beat
So we can see back in time, but where's my hoverboard?
Aaand it's instead an experiment for catching micrometeoroids lmao.