[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.14649610 [View]
File: 1.89 MB, 1226x1103, comparison2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14649610

>>14648989
You can make them easily, or view them together with an image viewer that supports syncing between windows like nomacs. I posted some in >>14647281

>> No.14647582 [View]
File: 1.89 MB, 1226x1103, comparison2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14647582

>>14647543
Yeah, I read that too. In theory JWST should get 7 times worth of Hubble's exposure time and more. But it seems odd to me for some reason, all un-embargoed publications are comparing this to HST's deepest fields (such as XDF, with 22 days of exposure time), talking about the 2-weeks, but in some it's not clear they're talking about its version of SMACS 0723. I'm just curious how different it really is and haven't found a definitive answer yet. Guess there'll be an answer soon.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]