[HN Gopher] Deepest Infrared Image of Universe ___________________________________________________________________ Deepest Infrared Image of Universe Author : potiuper Score : 95 points Date : 2022-07-11 22:24 UTC (36 minutes ago) (HTM) web link (www.nasa.gov) (TXT) w3m dump (www.nasa.gov) | [deleted] | interestica wrote: | pelagicAustral wrote: | Superb! I just saw this on Sky News and came here first, I just | knew the source was going to be around. | spullara wrote: | I really hate that you can see artifacts from the hex mirrors. | _moof wrote: | They aren't from the mirrors, they're from the struts. | ceejayoz wrote: | Explanation: https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/james- | webb-spikes/ | penneyd wrote: | Hubble had diffractions spikes too, four of them from the | struts holding the secondary mirror. | spullara wrote: | Who is flagging this extremely valid criticism of this photo | release circus? I totally agree with this sentiment and it is | something that science teams will have to reflect on for future | communications. This was absolutely terrible. | | interestica 5 minutes ago [flagged] [dead] | prev [-] | | What a weirdly botched release. 90 min delay with nothing more | than a title screen and a terrible repeating music track. (When | it was at least an opportunity to display material related to the | project for those stopping in due to media coverage). A labyrinth | of a website with interlinking and crosslinking throughout. Web | links that come up blank. And an unprepared accompanying | statement for the image given off the cuff by the director. Weird | press conference -- 'who is this for?' All around, just strange | and poorly executed from a communications/media standpoint. | Completely inexcusable for an organization like this. | gizajob wrote: | Flagging because overly-harsh armchair criticism towards a | piece of the world's most advanced precision engineering | operating in deep space that isn't really even fully | operational yet. President of the world's most powerful country | at least coming out to talk about it. Only really one image to | release because said device is brand spanking new. What exactly | do you want? Kanye West and a load of confetti? | [deleted] | cwkoss wrote: | Can someone with some astronomy knowledge explain why the center | of the images has a bunch of concentric-ish smudges? What does it | mean? | atulvi wrote: | Gravitational lensing | cwkoss wrote: | So, are the smudges' light coming from behind the objects in | the center? | skykooler wrote: | Yes, they are being warped and magnified by the central | cluster of galaxies. | ehsankia wrote: | Wow, you can really see the gravitational lensing on that one. | | I was wondering which of the 5 photos [1] they'd tease today | (remaining 4 are coming tomorrow). My guess was also gonna be the | deep field one, especially since it maps nicely to the well known | Hubble photo. But now it begs the question, how does this one | compare to the Hubble one in terms of scale/angle. | | [1] https://petapixel.com/2022/07/08/nasa-shares-the-5-cosmic- | ta... | aosaigh wrote: | Is the lensing the result of a single large galaxy in the | middle that is "closer" or many galaxies? | rbanffy wrote: | Some of those arcs seem concentric, so I would assume a mass | in that direction. More likely there are multiple masses | distorting multiple objects into multiple arcs, but I am not | an astronomer and my guess is as good as anyone else's (who's | not an astronomer) | dprice1 wrote: | According to | https://www.newscientist.com/article/2328132-james-webb- | spac..., "This first image is a region of space called SMACS | 0723, which contains what astronomers call a gravitational | lens. In areas like this, a massive object relatively close | to Earth behaves like a magnifying glass, distorting space | and stretching the light of anything behind it." and "The | gravitational lens in SMACS 0723 is particularly strong | because the nearby object distorting space-time is not one | galaxy, but a large cluster of galaxies." | yrgulation wrote: | From the link in ops post: | | "The combined mass of this galaxy cluster acts as a | gravitational lens, magnifying much more distant galaxies | behind it." | Temporal_Trout wrote: | Higher Resolution Images available here: | https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2022/038/01G... | | Full-Res 4537x4630 PNG (28.51 MB): https://stsci- | opo.org/STScI-01G7JJADTH90FR98AKKJFKSS0B.png | nabla9 wrote: | It would be nice to see comparison to the Herschel space | observatory images from the same location. | | https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Hersch... | ceejayoz wrote: | Here's a Hubble comparison: | https://twitter.com/erinbiba/status/1546624746598563840 | dredmorbius wrote: | I'm impressed that one of the first Webb images was a deep-field | view. | | Hubble's own Deep Field image required about 140 hours of imaging | (divided amongst 4 bandwidths and ~150 separate imaging events). | Webb's own view took a little over 12 hours. I was expecting | nearer and brighter objects to be first targets. Impressive as | heck. | | Though of course, Hubble paved the way and showed that deep-field | imaging is useful and provides insights. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field | | For comparison the SMACS 0723 image used for reference in the | JWST image target selection nnouncement recently: | | https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2022/07/hlsp_relics_hst... | b0sk wrote: | Something to drive home how impressive this is - "If you held a | grain of sand up to the sky at arm's length, that tiny speck is | the size of Webb's view in this image." | seedees wrote: | Webb's view of the universe? And how do we know :-/ | yrgulation wrote: | And in that view there are thousands of galaxyes each with | billions of stars orbiting around. I so badly wish i had the | money and time to spend it all on exploring the universe. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-07-11 23:00 UTC)