/sci/ - Science & Math

What did you expect from a space telescope?

>>14647126
New daftpunk album in another timeline

>>14647126
Actual deadshit faggot
What did you expect from the telescope?

Stop watching movies, retard

>>14647126
Webb was critically damaged by a meteor even before the first image was taken, new telescope is needed.

What a waste of money. Let's send another trillion to Ukraine instead.

>>14647126
In order to appreciate the quality of this image, it helps to have a comparison to Hubble. The galaxies in this image are extremely far away.

>>14647126
check out this bad boy, then compare to hubble
https://stsci-opo.org/STScI-01G7JJADTH90FR98AKKJFKSS0B.png

>>14647721
but whats the point? Is there any scientific advancement being made thanks to this slightly higher resolution picture?
So much manpower and money went into this, might've been better just researching new antibiotics.

>>14647447
>critically damaged
no

>>14647766
yeah, there's a ton of scientific shit they can do with it. They didn't pour billions of dollars into this shit for pretty pictures. this is just an outreach image.

>>14647766
We/re going to see closer to the beginning of the universe thanks to the James Web Telescope so yeah.

>>14647843
What application does this research have? Genuinely curious, what have we gotten from modern Astronomy?

>>14647721
that and it was done in 12 hours compared to weeks with hubble

>>14647766
they're quite literally looking into the past

>>14647866
https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/1635/chapter/14

>>14647126

your mind can't even comprehend the scope of what's in this picture.

>>14647898
its a bunch of stars and galaxy's ya tard

>>14647755
found Starfox

>>14647942
What the fuck what the fuck theres a man there what the fuck

>>14648009
He's a big guy

>>14647766
taking better measurements IS a scientific advancement
how fucking stupid are you

>>14647866
>duh...science is about inventions and cool new products right???

Does science have anything to offer besides pictures of space? It's kind of a dead meme bro, what we learned in the last century is to give up the dream of space colonization so what's the point.

>>14648028
Well, yes faggot. Why would you waste money on something that has no real life applications? Just cuz muh curiosity?

>>14648042
is the absolute power of the human spirit under capitalism
god fucking bless the government for using YOUR taxes to pay for this

>>14648042
Yeah pretty much once you have enough money to live life however you want maybe you’d understand the value of that

>>14647721
>increases brightness in GIMP
That'll be $10 billion, plus tip!

look at this guy, lmao

he has no idea what he's looking at

>this cost us 12 billions? jesus christ

>>14648089
>Biden complaining about wasting billions
That's fucking rich

>that annoying faggot JJ Abrams lens flare star that is shining right in your eyes when you're trying to spot detail

I hope it's gone supernova already.

>>14647766
It helps to verify the basic and fundamental nature of the universe. The foundations upon which all science has pillars in and which can help to advance the human race. It kinda is simply "ill believe it when I see it" but on a humanity level. As scientists we can make predictions but we never really know whats out there unless we look. And it turns out we are right about a lot of really cool stuff which will go on to change our world.

>>14648012
For (you)

>>14648089
He has no idea what hes looking at when he is doing anything

>>14648042
Hey retard even if you're too much of a brainlet for physics consider the research that went into creating the instruments and their associated cryogenics and whatnot
Even if it exploded on the launchpad its creation would have already advanced science

>>14648042
This I'd rather have nasa to be trying to mine asteroids or scope out the ocean than to take pictures of space.

>>14647165
Advanced alien structures

>>14648228
It's not pretty pictures, it's exploratory. We're looking at exoplanets, and deeper into the origins of the universe than ever before.

>>14647766
>>14647866
>>14648042
You people are such a fucking burden on the rest of the species.

>>14648042
yes, lets throw money at the homeless and inner city communities so we can watch them squander it and be in worse shape then they were before. big events like this are important for morale and allows millions of people/kids to find interest in science.

>>14648042
I'd rather they spend billions for astronomy than for fucking Ukraine

NASA is scanning space all day because they want to find reason to go to space again, currently there is no reason whatsoever to even bother, all that might be just gas giants of nothingburger. I'm sure true earth like planet discovery would start another space race, but now nobody really cares except musk.

>>14648258
>asking what application something has is a burden to society
¿?¿?¿?¿?

>>14648460
that guy has it right, you're a fucking retard

shouldn't you be busy watching tiktok while cramming estrogen up your asshole?

stupid motherfucker

>>14647766
with NASA you have to run two kinds of missions- normie crowdpleasers to dance for pennies and science
they promised a particularly powerful congressman they'd put a lander on europa (something totally worthless that his normie brain thought was cool) just to secure a deal for cash to fund the europa clipper (something actually valuable).

>>14647126
Fake

>>14647126
do you know what gravitational lensing is? do you know what theories the first images of "smeared" galaxies led to? This photo literally demonstrates to the masses what dark matter is and how it is detected

>>14647866
to understand the origin of the universe, the nature of space and time, and to understand what *is* "everything". Understanding space and time at the deepest quantum level is the only way humanity can achieve things like fusion energy, interstellar travel, faster-than-light communication, etc, all those sci-fi fantasies we want to make a reality but are currently blocked by due to our partial understanding of the physical model of the universe.

>>14648042
Engineer spotted

>>14648009
gravitational lensing - gravity alters the path of light over great distances as it passes massive objects, and thus the image appears smeared when it reaches our observation

>>14648022
thank you

>>14648112
that is an artifact due to the many hexagonal mirrors that comprise the telescope - it is not actually there

>>14648570
>This photo literally demonstrates to the masses what dark matter is and how it is detected
How? Gravitational lensing isn't specific to dark matter.

>>14647126
This is important but yeah, the forced hype is ridiculous. Normie media are retarded and literally don't understand what they are looking at.I hate NASA for that.

>>14647766
Because, unironically, people are looking for something out of this world to give them some hope. The world is boring, we want magic. It's like in the past people traveled across the ocean, hoping to find something fresh, something exciting. Now we just look deeper into space and do the same with the telescope. Who knows, maybe we'll see something fresh again

>>14647766
This image has literally ZERO scientific interest. It's a just an image for the media.

Do you really think they build a fucking giant telescope just to take random photo?

forgive me but what the fuck is this pic revealing that the previous didn't albeit in worse quality? The magnification doesn't look any more impressive.

>>14647721
Why did the stars develop more lines?

>>14648748

>>14647766
>antibiotics
They cost too much to be worth it.

>>14648573
And a shitty upscale of space photos is going to help with that how exactly..?

>>14647766
I don't really get it either, I'm sure there's something interesting in it for scientists but I just want to see something cool like drones imaging the oceans of Europa

>>14647126
Yeah, no go back to /pol/ you scientifically illiterate retard.

>>14648086
> increases brightness in GIMP
Do you know what resolution is when we talk about a picture ? I know it's highly complicated stuff.

>>14648874
/pol/ is incredibly based for making you I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE plebbitors seethe.

>>14647898
You can't comprehend how many atoms are in an Apple

Your life is forever changed because of that somehow for some reason

a few hours of basic philosophy lessons would do so much more to give people a sense of their place and meaning in the cosmos but no.
Let's spend billions on doubling the dots and giving them more color

>>14648138
Particle physics helps us understand that. Astronomy literally does the opposite lol.

>>14648042
ayo why wypepo gotta climb mountains n shieet

>>14647126
The lensing is incredible, you can actually see tons of detail around the huge elliptical galaxy, it really is a fantastic image, pretty remarkable for a proper first light.

Nerdy faggots don't understand that normal people value scientific advancements by the most easily observable difference. And when they read how much the telescope costs they will bitch, that the money could have gone to the poor and homeless. PR is everything you incels.

If you say world is going to change 12th of july it better does. But all we got is this normal picture comparable to tens of deep field images pictures from Hubble.

If they said "Look we have found 5 planets, that have similar temps and chemical similarities to earth" with some faint pictures of the galaxies and saying that ALIENS are definitely there. Now that would be a glorious PR.
But this??? Eeeeeeeh

Protip: Remember LHC? How many significant scientific advancements it has provided? Can you name them without googling? I follow science every day, and I can name only 2.

>>14648937
There is so much more bullshit research out there getting research grants with zero follow up that things like this should be the last thing to go either way. At least we get pretty pictures to look at.

>>14648042
>why should we be doing basic science when we could be developing NEW PRODUCT
consoomer cumbrain spotted

>>14648584
If you see gravitational lensing where you don't have known matter, you have dark matter

>>14647766
yes, it provides fuckload of data to corroborate theories on how universe works in relativistic dimensions.
We may reach for the stars one day thanks to instruments like this one.

>>14647874
so why dont they just take a couple weeks and make a really good photo

>>14648937
>Nerdy faggots don't understand that normal people value scientific advancements by the most easily observable difference.
The difference is pretty observable to me.

>>14647126
It was inevitably going to be disappointing when they hyped the release of the image up so much.

>>14648573
>deepest quantum level is the only way humanity can achieve things like fusion energy, interstellar travel, faster-than-light communication,

>fusion energy
We might be able to achieve this in a few centuries

>interstellar travel
Will never happen

>faster-than-light communication
Will never happen

>>14647126

>>14649030
You must be joking. If I had the separated wavelengths, I could easily get very close to the right picture with some easy color manipulation. Just a tad noise reduction and BAM it would look very very close.

Also you clearly state "to me" - you're not the normie here my dear nerdy incel. To 60% of population this is not worth 10 billion dollars.

>>14648874
https://www.reddit.com/r/science/

>>14647721
umm ...isn't jwst like a million miles closer? so it's Hubble but closer, that's it¿!

>>14649030
>spacels think this is important to mankind
thank god we dont have to worry about you reproducing

>>14648791
You really don't understand how the ability to see deeper into the ancient universe than ever before will help us understand the physical origin of the universe? I understand 4chan is filled with literal retards, but I like to think /sci/ is better than that. Such a sad thread.

>>14648879
>/pol/ is incredibly based for making you I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE plebbitors seethe.
They make me seethe out of embarrassment for them, yeah.

>>14649357
Anon the galaxies are 5-10 billion lightyears away

>>14649436
Yeah, clearly Twitter at 40 billion is a more valuable use of money.

>>14648740
>wtf is the point of improving scientific instruments??? how are more precise measurements better???

>>14649444
give Hubble a fighting chance is all I am sayin frfr

>science is for INDUSTRY and CONSOOMER GOODS not astronomy xD

>>14649464
you didn't even comprehend what he said to you

>>14648626
>Do you really think they build a fucking giant telescope just to take random photo?

Wasn't that literally the point of Hubble?

>>14647721
>>14647766
I'm also waiting for something impressive. This new picture isn't even zoomed in at all with more detail.
But I know it takes time for them to collect photons, this is a project that's going to take another year or so before we get really excellent pictures.

>>14649613
Nobody cares about pictures. We want to know if there are other life bearing planets, what is their atmosphere composition and if there are any wacky phenomena we haven't seen before in black holes. Also old galaxies, really really old galaxies.Alien structures maybe?

>>14647766
>might've been better just researching new antibiotics.
They will become useless in few years anyway unless you can force chinese and indians to stop feeding their livestock with them

>>14647866
>Genuinely curious, what have we gotten from modern Astronomy?
First of all, fundamental research does not aim at applications for you to consoom.
Astronomy has brought technical advantage in whatever they are using. Real-time synchronization and datataking of telescopes and other things (like IceCube) around the world, for example. Typically, whenever scientists touch technology, they tweak and improve it. Oftentimes because the state of the art can't do what they need. I am not involved with JWST, so I don't know what they did in detail, but I could imagine that they worked on the solar cells to make them last longer. It's one thing to climb on your roof every 10-20 years and exchange the panels, but in space you really want the things to last. Contributing to the development of imaging sensors is also pretty huge. What's an easy step is to pack similar sensors on satellites and point them towards the Earth to gather precise weather data. That way, one can make more precise forecasts, identify dangers earlier and have more time to evacuate the people in a certain region.
But you don't need these applications. In fact, they are inhibiting R&D, if you constantly have in mind that your telescope also has to make money for BMW, so make sure that your sensors are suitable for LIDAR or whatever. Fund fundamental research, reap whatever falls off and be happy about it.

>>14649621
>Alien structures maybe?
>>>/x/

>>14649621
I care about all of those things in addition to pictures. It's not a dichotomy.

>>14647721
Soul v. Soulless

>>14649316
Everyone should laugh at this post!

MUH GRAIN OF SAND

>>14647126
How did that anon get a leak before the president did? How did that happen?

Reminder that today we're going to get Webb images of the Carina Nebula, which will be fucking crazy.

Pic related is a Hubble image. No imagine the same jump in quality.

>>14649682
Projecting much? He never said anything about products you just assumed it
Maybe he was asking how is the data being used to improve modern physics or something like that
Chill kek

The biggest blackpill for me was learning that every single space picture is fake colour.
I'd always assumed, and I believe most people assume too, that the pics were accurate and would be what we'd see if we were stood in the same spot.
But no, it's just some dumb wagie artist's interpretation.
I haven't given a shit about space since then. Bunch of lying hacks.

>>14649832
What time?

>>14649818
Website

>>14649940
Live right now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21X5lGlDOfg

Whats happening there?

i want to download new photos, where

The planetary nebula image is very nice

>>14650282
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_Cross

>>14647766
Fucking retard

>>14650358
> en.wikipedia.org

what a milf

>>14650352
thanks, do you have links for even bigger?

>>14647766
Why can't you just appreciate it for what it is?

>>14650400
https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/033/01G709QXZPFH83NZFAFP66WVCZ
its on the left hand side for the full size download

>>14650358
thanks

>>14648901
if astronomy fucks up your understanding of things then it means your understanding was wrong.

>>14647766
>durr astronomers should just focus on antibiotics instead

Are you guys enjoying the pixels in the background?

>>14647126
10b for that HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>14647126
That's just the cropped picture, this uncropped one is more impressive

Space reminds me of the 80s for some reason. Maybe it’s because of Cosmos.

>>14649940
>>14650300
https://www.nasa.gov/webbfirstimages

>>14647766
subsidizing northrop grumann

>>14650580
what

>>14647866
>What have we gotten out of better optics technology?
t. Your dumb faggot ass

>>14647766
just be glad it isn't spent on niggers

>>14650914
Racism on blue boards is not allowed chud

>>14651313
NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER

>>14648238
(((They))) wont let us know about aliens. And (((they))) know aliens exist.

>>14650352
I fucking hate these gay lens artifacts. Can't they make them go away?

>>14649316
ok now zoom in the OP pic retard

>>14650580
The hell is that Halo ring?

>>14650382
>left-leaning
HAHAHAHAHA
Goddammit shit is so fucked, we never stood a chance. Fuck you McCarthy and fuck you psychopaths regurgitating lies brainwashing all the workers.

>>14650382
Sanger is a lunatic, why does anyone give a shit what he says?

>>14647874
This was fake news. The Hubble image was done in slightly less time.

>>14648584
no, but you need to explain why some places lense more strongly than others despite that not matching the visible galaxy locations

>>14649316
there's a lot more detail in the new one that you couldn't just make up

the new one sure is uglier though

>>14647766
Remember how you kept asking the math teacher what the real life application for everything you didn’t care to learn in class was? Remember how you cheated every exam? Ever notice how you’re poor and a fucking joke to everyone now? Well, turns out all those things are related

>>14648012
How many light
>>14648576
Theres a MAN

I showed the deep space pic to my dad and he said they should send out a telescope to take a picture of our galaxy.

>>14651703
i don't think those people would come to a board like this anon

What would a photo of a person taken by this telescope look like?

Something like this but color corrected to look natural?

>>14651841
it's IR. they aren't "photos", really. It's not visible light. It would not look like something you can see. Get that through your skull.

>>14651857
I know that.
But let's say you put a person in front of the same technology and then do the same color correction to the image that has been done to the pictures we've seen of galaxies.
What would it look like?

>>14651857
>it's IR. they aren't "photos", really.
It's photography.
>It's not visible light.
Doesn't have to be to still fall under the umbrella of photography.
JW can capture visible light btw.

How many years until we have a movie about the black man who singlehandedly built JWST?

>>14651841
They get the colors by using different filters while capturing the image, so like this.

>>14648626
It shows us early galaxies. That were previously unseen. Without inventions like these people would insist more than they already do that our universe has only existed for 6000 years.

>>14652329
yeah, so it's for the public, not for science. scientists already know the earth is older than 6000 years.

>>14652384
You're fucking retarded

>>14652329
people who insist the earth is 6000 years old wouldn't be swayed by evidence like this, not when they can simply call fake news and stop thinking about it.

scientific journalism was a mistake
keep science contained to higher societies and run it off a patronage system instead of public funding where all these projects must have some utilitarian purpose that helps trannies in africa

>>14652694
But this project *doesn't* help the common man and everyone bitches about the price, yet it was still completed

>>14651496
It help differentiate better bettween hubble and webb pics

>>14652694
you are a mistake. keep seething at based public telescope.

>>14652329
>Without inventions like these people would insist more than they already do that our universe has only existed for 6000 years.
/pol/ has been calling the photos CGI since release

>>14648255
>it's exploratory.
Agreed
>not pretty pictures
Disagree. Those pictures are beautiful.

>>14652329
>Without inventions like these people would insist more than they already do that our universe has only existed for 6000 years.
I mean, the empirical evidence suggests that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees#Trees_with_verified_ages

Meanwhile, pseudoscience like astronomy and model-based theoretical science live radiometric dating says otherwise

>>14652758
>/pol/ has been calling the photos CGI since release
you outed yourself

>>14652777
>it's pseudoscience because it doesn't agree with muh bibble

>>14652822
/r/atheism moment

>>14652758
you must spend a lot of time on /pol/ to be that up to date on the sentiment over there

>>14650352
holy shit it's binary

>>14652785
>>14652841
anyone who's been on this site for more than a week would expect /pol/ to have the dumbest ideas for anything and usually be proven right

>>14652435
Why?

>>14652822
>it's pseudoscience because
because my definition of science includes being testable and falsifiable

>>14649023
because the operating time of the telescope is in high demand by different researchers

I am continually shocked that people don't actually appreciate the pictures we're getting from the new telescope. Like they're good, really good. What do you people fucking expect from it? To peer into God's own nutsack or some shit?

>>14653059
thats retarded. they should just all work together

This is the most impressive part to me.

>>14647898
This. It's fucking CRAZY how much massive shit is in just that "tiny" field-of-view of universe. Fucking batshit.
I was up half the night staring at it.

>>14648268
Imagine how much more advanced we would be as a country if we stopped funding racist social projects and put it all into STEM.
We'd be unstoppable.

>>14648740
Way, way, WAY more spinnies.
Pull it up full-res and just LOOK at all those galaxies.
https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/assets/images/firstImages/SMACS0723_nircam-FullRez.jpg

>>14653130
They literally drew that in in photoshop

>>14648460
pretty much every single major discovery of a new frontier was found 'accidentally' and then later an application was found.

See:
>nylon
>Penicillin
>Plastics
>asprin
>Anaesthesia

>>14653166
I drew your mother in Photoshop cuck

>>14653146
no; we'd be distorting STEM even further into political fads.
just let the private sector do its thing

>>14649073
>>interstellar travel
>Will never happen
shut up, pseud plebbitor

>>14647126
ngl no cap these images gave me a bit of an existential crisis today. i can't look at them anymore, so i'm repressing these thoughts

>>14653251
I hate science fiction so fucking much

>>14653065
Some more than some color correction and a high pass denoising filter followed by the expected /sci/ damage control masquerading as fart huffing

>>14650580
pls explain

>>14653130
SAME I can't believe no one is talking about this more.
It looks like an actual wormhole

>>14653326
it's a galaxy, anon.
I have no idea what I'm talking about but I imagine it's a very redshifted galaxy and is only visible now because larger IR spectrum photography is now possible

>>14650580
It's UNICRON!

>>14651553
Someone tossed the original image into DALLE's AI uncropper/expander and it took a shit and that was the result

What the fuck was his problem?

>>14650580
Did you do this with AI or by hand? Either way it's impressive, though the diffraction spikes on the "extended" stars don't line up with the rest of the image.

How is this "gravitational lensing" and not just coincidence that they are in that shape, or even in this shape from some other force that is not gravity?

What if they are just moving really fast and that's just the exposure stacking up?

Looks like the same type of downward spiral pattern that the Voyager has been doing after escaping the suns gravity, but on a galactic scale

In practical terms the money would have been better spent on a space elevator and or advancement of carbon nanotubes.

>>14653379
Pepe?

>>14653166
no, it was a guy with water colors

>>14653406
the first is fantasy and the second is getting tons of funding anyway

>>14653388
you often see the same galaxy from more than one angle, this smeared out one here is a highly visible example

in the past, it has been used to observe supernovas exactly when they happen even though they are unpredictable, because one lensed direction can be longer than another, so you know the light from the same event is going to arrive again after some time, giving a good way to observe the supernova closely

>>14653497
>the first is fantasy
Why? I genuinely want to know what you think.
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/studies/final_report/472Edwards.pdf

A lot of the issues you may have in mind appear to have solutions.

>>14653517
"solutions" aren't the same thing as "practically possible"

>>14653388
>How is this "gravitational lensing" and not just coincidence that they are in that shape, or even in this shape from some other force that is not gravity?

They take more than one photo of the same thing at different times and see how the shape of the galaxy changes as it moves of the object lenses it moves

>What if they are just moving really fast and that's just the exposure stacking up?

It would have to be moving at well beyond faster-than-light speeds to cover that distance, plus it would be much blurrier on the picture.

>>14653529
>They take more than one photo of the same thing at different times and see how the shape of the galaxy changes as it moves of the object lenses it moves
stop making shit up lmao

>>14653527
okay what are three things that make it practically impossible

>>14653536
It's fucking big bro

How is it that the colors of galaxies are real but they wouldn't really look that way to our eyes but we can't go and confirm it because they're too far away and galaxies don't even exist anymore but the light of them not existing hasn't arrived yet?

>>14653529
>well beyond faster-than-light speeds to cover that distance

>>14653536
it's too big, it's too hard to make, it's too hard to maintain

>>14653539
they'd all be the same color from up close, some of them are more red because they are farther away

>>14653539
>filtered at the concept of infrared
have you ever seen a TV remote before, anon?
>and galaxies don't even exist anymore
literally what

>>14653538
>>14653543
Agreed, but the estimated cost of an SE is between $8bln and $20bln.

>>14653539
>How is it that the colors of galaxies are real
They are real in that if we shift down the wavelengths into visible light, that's what color they are
>but they wouldn't really look that way to our eyes
We can't see infrared
>but we can't go and confirm it because they're too far away
They are 5-10 billion lightyears away
>and galaxies don't even exist anymore but the light of them not existing hasn't arrived yet?
We are seeing what they looked like over ~5 billion years ago, who knows what they're up to now.

5 billion years is how long until the Milky Way and Andromeda merge.

>>14653406

Space elevator is big brains. How would it be made? There's a lot of different designs out there

And what could we use them for?

>>14653573
>And what could we use them for?
putting shit into space without having to go 10x the speed of sound on a rocket, even though a rocket is cheaper, more practical and becoming more and more reusable.

>>14653587
If I'm not mistaken (altough hypothetical) the SE rate would be $100/kg, in comparison SpaceX is at $5,5k/kg currently

>>14653587
>putting shit into space

Can we build a Dyson sphere with enough space elevators and take over the universe?

>>14653587
>even though a rocket is cheaper, more practical and becoming more and more reusable.

Its like polishing a turd though, its still a turd. I'd rather see space elevators

>>14653573
>And what could we use them for?
You know who could use them? A lil monkey fella

>>14648035
This. This is the biggest nothing burger of the century. Like wow this isn't the 50's anymore. Spend that money on faster internet or something. Who cares we ain't going there ever.

>>14652841
>go to /sci/ and see the usual suspects shitting on the latest scientific discovery
>click on over to /pol/ and see threads about this very subject
Took a matter of seconds desu

Can we just use hydraulics to build a space elevator?

Dig a 100+ mile deep tunnel, construct the elevator inside it, then pump it up with hydraulics. How much hydraulic force would it need?

>>14653664
do you mean one of those centrifugal guns

I enjoy this because it's making soifaced lefty redditors uncomfortably have to confront hordes of gibmedats PoC on social media who are calling this a waste of money that would be better spent on them

>>14653694
JWST is a pointless welfare project for people with otherwise worthless university degrees.

>>14652841
Ever since /pol/ became /x/-lite it's pretty much much guaranteed that any batshit insane posters are /pol/ migrants.

>>14653675
Don't those things blow themselves and their cargo up every time they fire?

>>14649357
>>14649464
Bloody plebs.

>>14652758
Those are the well poisoning kikes and glowies. The same degenerates that spam flat earth and hollow earth bullshit.

>>14653948
They're genuine trailer park boomers that all poured into the site due to conspiracy nonsense regarding amerifat politics.

>>14653065
They want to see something like picrel. They have been watching too much Hollywood. Also most people these days are city fags. They don't have the habit of looking at the night sky. So they don't comprehend the significance of these images.

>>14649462
>such an amazing leap yet it reveals nothing that wasn't visible before for the mere cost of 40 billion dollars.

>>14653975
Do you really believe that?
>>14653130

>>14654007

Memes mostly

>>14649316
>take original image
>downscale x20
>compress 10% quality .jpeg
>IT'S LITERALLY THE SAME!!!

>>14653508
>it has been used to observe supernovas exactly when they happen even though they are unpredictable
that's nuts, to think about gravity bending the photons through multiple paths and sending you snapshots of the same thing at different moments.

>>14648042
Yes, all the cool stuff you have that has real life applications started because someone was curious about something that didn't seem useful at first.

>>14654128
Bruh, newspapers don't put large scale pictures on their websites. Instagram, Facebook and tik-tok neither. That was my point - how a normie plebe would see it.

>>14654152
Who gives a fuck what Johnny Lumberjack sees or cares about, he is not the one using the new data JWST provides for research.
This is like the government develops a new gun, and shoots it at some gel targets to show it off to the public,
and you complained that the whole program was a waste of time because most people just watch the promo at 480p on their phones.

>>14653948
>Those are the well poisoning kikes and glowies.
No, those are things /pol/ and the alt-right at large actually believe.

>>14648078
>once you have enough money to live life however you want
Billions of people barely have enough to survive paycheck to paycheck, yet we spent 10 billion on this.
Fuck your science.

>>14654951
If you're going after government spending, you should probably start with the defense budget. NASA budget is peanuts.

>>14654951
yeah sure let's all give them 10 dollars

>>14654951
Good. They're all NPC hylic subhumans anyway lol

>>14654962
>endless excuses for why MY theft and waste isn't as bad as others'

>>14655362
>excuses
Is this just what you call being reasonable?

>>14647766
There's no reason to have music, yet it's great to listen to it and even better to make music.

Cut the bullshit. Nobody complaining about the cost of space missions gives a fuck about people starving.

>>14649035
>It was inevitably going to be disappointing
It isn't though. It only is for some scientifically illiterate people with retarded expectations.
Pretty sure I saw some people expecting to see details on the surface of some exoplanets and things like that.

>>14656361
those expectations were CREATED BY PEOPLE AT NASA TALKING HYPE ABOUT THE GODDAMN TELESCOPE FOR YEARS AND YEARS! IF THEY KEPT QUIET NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.
>FCK NASA

It's a comparison image with the hubble
It's not meant to contain ayys lol

>>14647447
How exactly did they take these pictures then?

>>14648573
>are currently blocked by due to our partial understanding of the physical model of the universe
These things are blocked by the United Nations and foreign aid to developing countries.

>>14654810
I HATE DEMIURGE WORSHIPPERS

>>14653188
>a post with zero substance.
bateman?

>>14652329
we knew for a fact that there are infinite galaxies, this picture shows us nothing new

JWST has some great new abilities; but just as many Limitations.
It's kind of a "special purpose" telescope sensing far-distant objects using infrared, and cannot see most Visible light, or UV light... and does not "replace" Hubble abilities.

Consider: JWST can not even LOOK in certain directions. (and keep heat shield toward sun)
Photos of JWST show the dish/reflector in nearly fixed position relative to the heat shield.
It appears that the dish/telescope cannot change angle/elevation to point independently from the base & heat shield. This would mean that you have limited ability to make observations where you want, and can NOT point directly away from the sun. (just pointing, within a fixed/narrow range of angles)

JWST may only be able to point within an "observation cone" of directions, relative to the L2 position for any given month. If you consider the orbital plane of Earth/L2 orbit, NASA would be able to look UP+Down from that plane, and could look "to the side"; but not In or Out very much.
To point at many objects, JWST may have to wait *months*, (for Earth/L2 orbit to move around the Sun) until the JWST orbit makes it possible to observe in that direction.

This would mean that JWST observations need to be pre-planned and scheduled months in advance... and when "interesting" celectrial events happen without notice, JWST may not be able reposition and view them. (as Hubble can do, when desired) With ANY huge science project like Hubble, JWST, CERN, the research schedule is planned well in advance, and approved by a management team - so JWST pointing limitations may not be much of an issue, and simply be one of many scheduling considerations... but I have not noticed many other people commenting about this design limitation.

While I DO like the new JWST abilities -- JWST is not designed to last half as long as Hubble, and has notable limitations... so don't just consider Hubble "old" and ready for retirement. Let's keep it running, even if it means finding new ways for Space-X to perform service missions.
Once Hubble is gone, we may not ever see something like it again.

>>14657832
The entire structure of the JWST can rotate 135 degrees upwards without sun exposure. At a given moment it can turn/rotate/whatever and see 39% of the sky. Over a 6 month period it can see 100% of the sky.

https://jwst-docs.stsci.edu/jwst-observatory-characteristics/jwst-observatory-coordinate-system-and-field-of-regard

>>14648035
It's to advance the understanding of the beginnings of our universe. The Webb can effectively see further back in time than any telescope before it.

>>14657832
>It's kind of a "special purpose" telescope sensing far-distant objects using infrared, and cannot see most Visible light,
This is wrong, btw. It can see visible light, which is how it has taken pictures of objects that emit visible light.

>>14647126
you lack the technical expertise to even understand what you're looking at

>>14659214
IS IT..... SPACE ANON?

This may help:

JWST and Hubble have a very similar angular resolution. Meaning that the same area imaged by Hubble will look similar to that area when looked at by JWST. The difference between the telescopes is NOT like changing your monitor from 1080p to 4k.

So what gives? How come we paid all this money just for a new telescope that is not going to give us better deep field papes?

The answer is the wavelength of EM that is imaged by JWST. JWST images capture infrared, not the visible light spectrum. Recall that infrared has a longer wavelength than visible light; this is why, to capture the same resolution, JWST's primary mirror must be much larger than Hubble's!

Why infrared? When galaxies are very far away and very old, they are moving very fast relative to us (because they have had more time to accelerate). This means that the EM that comes off of them is redshifted -- the wavelengths are elongated. So visible light from a very old galaxy gets essentially stretched out of the visible and into infrared. This was sort of hinted at by >>14653130. The galaxy that is visible to JWST but not to Hubble is so old and so far away that nearly all of its emissions have been shifted from visible to infrared, which is why it is visible to the one but not the other.

So building this new telescope will probably answer some questions that we have about the early part of the universe's formation, which is very cool and very worthwhile imo. Now, of course, it's a government project so obviously it has to cost like a bajillion dollars more than required.

I do think it will give us better papes because while it's a similar resolution the optics are a lot sharper, and since it looks at infrared, it can also "cut through" a lot of dust and shit that often gets in the way when looking at nebula and planets and shit like that.

>>14647766
Are all these posts I'm seeing serious? Just fucking googling it would have told anybody the point of the JWST. It's an IR telescope. It's for seeing through shit we can't see through, and for seeing farther than we've ever seen before because better at taking in infrared light and thus seeing red shifted objects.

Are zoomers seriously just going
>TELESCOPE TELESCOPE UHHH TELESCOPE SEE PICTURE NEWS CYCLE SOCIAL MEDIA CLICKCLICKCLICK GOTTA COMMENT UHHH LOOK AT TWO PICTURES UHH THAT'S IT THAT'S NOT THAT DIFFERENT CLICKCLICKCLICK REPLY

Wouldn't it take LESS effort to just google it

>>14647766
just counting the number of galaxies in the picture tells you the star formation rate of the early universe, and that's just the lowest hanging fruit. we're not even talking about data collection related to exoplanets.

>>14661118

And also: EVERY image that comes in, either from Hubble or from JWST, is a "false color" image.

The sensor itself just gives you a giant array of numbers. To make a pape, you actually go into photoshop (yes, at NASA, they literally make these images using photoshop!) and define a "map", that maps the raw pixel value to a color value. These maps are chosen by a human being, arbitrarily, so that they look good and provide good contrast between pixel values. An image where empty space is mapped to white and space with galaxies maps to black faithfully represents the same data, but we obviously don't do that because we expect empty space to be black.

In addition, because JWST only images infrared, the data coming into its sensor represents wavelengths that we literally cannot perceive. Can you tell the difference between an object that is 20 degrees from one that is 50 degrees by eyesight alone? Of course not, but that's what JWST is doing.

This might seem to ruin the whole thing. Are you kidding? These images are all made by human beings in photoshop??? But remember that digital cameras do this too; your sony or iphone or whatever has a "map" in it, that turns the array of numbers from the camera, into a "realistic" looking image. This "realistic" image is one that "looks right" to the engineers and technicians who work on those cameras. Consider that an image from your iphone looks much different to someone who is colorblind or someone with a visual impairment!

So really, when it comes to papes, it's all just perceptual anyway. However, the raw data from the sensor does faithfully capture "the truth," because we can make predictions and hypothesis with it that line up with our physical understanding. The fact that we are making subjective determinations when we create these images does not diminish their majesty, imo.

>>14647942
After finding your image they aimed the telescope slightly to the right and saw this

>>14661143
The colors chosen are through color filters and are not chosen arbitrarily at all. You're talking out of your ass.

>>14648573
>where are the time travellers?

>>14647721
This confirms that it's shit because Hubble looks better

>>14656345
It doesn't cost billion of dollars to make music

>>14647766
>justify materialism