• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

James Webb Space Telescope News

It's fully aligned now
The mirrors are fully alligned but the instruments have their own optical systems that aren't aligned yet.
 

Attachments

  • 52061788279_3eecae882b_o.png
    52061788279_3eecae882b_o.png
    993.7 KB · Views: 139
I'm really pleased that the JWT telescope is such a resounding success. Look forward to some great science from it.
 
The JWT is epic. I'm so glad it's a resounding success.

This achievement is all the greater, because space-living devices like this can't be designed, developed and tested like normal things such as a car, no matter how complex. This is the equivalent of the first prototype going out into the field, live. Just how does one develop that and ensure it works first time? Astounding! What a superb achievement by everyone involved. :cool: :cool:

And now the whole world gets to benefit from the increased scientific understanding about the universe that this will bring. Can't wait. :)
There is no assurance that it will work. It's a game of probabilities and risk tolerance.

Remember that Mars lander that died on impact because some design measurements (Imperial vs. metric) were screwed up? And there have been plenty of astronaut casualties. Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia are the best known to Western space exploration fans.

If you look at film footage of early rocket development, there are tons of failed launches, explosions, etc.

These missions have a number of targets and milestones. Until the telescope starts generating real scientific data, it's really just warming up. If it dies a day after it starts recording real scientific data, it's not a success.

Success for the Watt telescope will be measured in years after it is fully operational. Like Hubble.

Hubble is considered fabulously successful despite its bungled deployment because it was ultimately fixed and continues to operate far beyond its original mission.

Look at the Space Shuttle Orbiter. Six were built, five were deployed as manned operational craft (the Enterprise never made an operational mission, ended up being a prototype). Of those five, two were destroyed during missions killing their crew. If there are degrees of success, where would you place the Space Shuttle program? Some people referred to it as a delivery van.

I am not certainly belittling the achievements of the people involved in the Space Shuttle program but I'm not convinced it was one of NASA's best efforts when compared to other programs.

In the same way I'm not denigrating those involved in the JWT, I'm just saying that it's way to early to light the fireworks and hold a victory parade. I'm sure the scientists and engineers actively involved in the project would largely agree that it is WAY too early to declare JWT a "resounding success" when it hasn't yet sent a single byte of scientific data as part of its mission. It's mostly just sending deployment activity telemetry.

You might be proud of your toddler who stands up on his/her own legs the very first time, but it's not like winning the Olympic marathon. There's a lot more work to reach that accomplishment.

That's what NASA missions are: marathons.
 
Last edited:
Please stick to the topic, which is the JWST and not a general discussion about NASA. Thanks.
 
Please stick to the topic, which is the JWST and not a general discussion about NASA. Thanks.
Yes, sure.

The main point here is that it's a little premature to declare success for JWST since it hasn't started its actual mission (the one American taxpayers are funding.) If you are Scottish you didn't fund this mission.

Using the analogy of a toddler learning to walk is a very useful illustration where JWST is in its progress.

Declarations of JWST success concerning its science mission really need to be shelved for 5-10 years. Like I said, if the telescope dies a month after sending its first scientific data back to Earth, it's not a success based on the program's budget and anticipated mission duration.

Trust me, I paid my tax obligation to the IRS so some of my dollars sent this thing into space. I want it to succeed. But declaring victory now is crazy.
 
Last edited:
I follow this thread just to know when more pictures will come along. I can't wait, seriously I can't wait for all the calibration to complete and they start turning it around taking more pictures. I checked on the telescope's website and if I understand correctly the last stage is ongoing. I wonder if they will point it to "close" objects as well.
 
I follow this thread just to know when more pictures will come along. I can't wait, seriously I can't wait for all the calibration to complete and they start turning it around taking more pictures. I checked on the telescope's website and if I understand correctly the last stage is ongoing. I wonder if they will point it to "close" objects as well.
I want to see the pictures too.

The easiest way to stay up to date is to follow one of JWST's social media accounts (Twitter, Instagram, whatever) not this TPU thread.

I'm following the JWST on one of their social media channels but the science mission won't start for months so I muted notifications for a month after the last update.

If you follow any general science/astronomy content authors on social media, they will do a pretty good job at highlighting key moments in JWST's progress: Neil deGrasse Tyson is one such online character. He is American, if there are any notable Bulgarian astronomers you admire, you may want to follow them as well.

From the JWST website


you can see that there are Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr and Instagram feeds. Most of these should provide more timely updates than this thread.

The last major update (within the past 24 hours) was that the telescope passed an alignment test.

Per NASA's news bulletin:


It will take a couple of months for the JWST to prep and test science instruments, what NASA refers to as instrument commissioning, before Webb releases its first photos.
 
Last edited:
There is no assurance that it will work. It's a game of probabilities and risk tolerance.

Remember that Mars lander that died on impact because some design measurements (Imperial vs. metric) were screwed up? And there have been plenty of astronaut casualties. Apollo 1, Challenger and Columbia are the best known to Western space exploration fans.

If you look at film footage of early rocket development, there are tons of failed launches, explosions, etc.

These missions have a number of targets and milestones. Until the telescope starts generating real scientific data, it's really just warming up. If it dies a day after it starts recording real scientific data, it's not a success.

Success for the Watt telescope will be measured in years after it is fully operational. Like Hubble.

Hubble is considered fabulously successful despite its bungled deployment because it was ultimately fixed and continues to operate far beyond its original mission.

Look at the Space Shuttle Orbiter. Six were built, five were deployed as manned operational craft (the Enterprise never made an operational mission, ended up being a prototype). Of those five, two were destroyed during missions killing their crew. If there are degrees of success, where would you place the Space Shuttle program? Some people referred to it as a delivery van.

I am not certainly belittling the achievements of the people involved in the Space Shuttle program but I'm not convinced it was one of NASA's best efforts when compared to other programs.

In the same way I'm not denigrating those involved in the JWT, I'm just saying that it's way to early to light the fireworks and hold a victory parade. I'm sure the scientists and engineers actively involved in the project would largely agree that it is WAY too early to declare JWT a "resounding success" when it hasn't yet sent a single byte of scientific data as part of its mission. It's mostly just sending deployment activity telemetry.

You might be proud of your toddler who stands up on his/her own legs the very first time, but it's not like winning the Olympic marathon. There's a lot more work to reach that accomplishment.

That's what NASA missions are: marathons.
It has returned test data showing that it's working even better than expected, so yes, that shows that it's a resounding success. The probability that it will keep working well into the future is therefore very high.
 
Well, things COULD go wrong at any time, so fair enough if we're cautious to call it a resounding success yet, but everything is going swimmingly so far. Let's hope it keeps up for actual missions.

Here they are:

I'm personally most excited about possible exoplanets data, it's so hard to get tons of data on such relatively small objects so far away. Superior parameters of JWST could be real game changer here!
 
Yes, sure.

The main point here is that it's a little premature to declare success for JWST since it hasn't started its actual mission (the one American taxpayers are funding.) If you are Scottish you didn't fund this mission.

Using the analogy of a toddler learning to walk is a very useful illustration where JWST is in its progress.

Declarations of JWST success concerning its science mission really need to be shelved for 5-10 years. Like I said, if the telescope dies a month after sending its first scientific data back to Earth, it's not a success based on the program's budget and anticipated mission duration.

Trust me, I paid my tax obligation to the IRS so some of my dollars sent this thing into space. I want it to succeed. But declaring victory now is crazy.
And his point was that this is a NEWS thread, not a "meritless silly option" thread. Take your nonsense elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Yes, sure.

The main point here is that it's a little premature to declare success for JWST since it hasn't started its actual mission (the one American taxpayers are funding.) If you are Scottish you didn't fund this mission.

Using the analogy of a toddler learning to walk is a very useful illustration where JWST is in its progress.

Declarations of JWST success concerning its science mission really need to be shelved for 5-10 years. Like I said, if the telescope dies a month after sending its first scientific data back to Earth, it's not a success based on the program's budget and anticipated mission duration.

Trust me, I paid my tax obligation to the IRS so some of my dollars sent this thing into space. I want it to succeed. But declaring victory now is crazy.
Thanks for taking a big steamy piss all over everyone else's excitement here.
You're not saying anything new or that anyone here doesn't know already for themselves.

As they say in hippie culture, "Stop harshing our mellow".
Let us enjoy it - We'll worry about the rest if and when that time comes.
 
It's space. Things can go wrong at any time, practically goes without saying... nothing is a victory until the end etc. That being said things are looking positive thus far.
 
For US residents, this coming Wednesday July 13 at 9pm PBS will premiere a NOVA episode "Ultimate Space Telescope" about the James Webb Space Telescope.

 
It's an amazing photo, but there's a ton of distortion going on. They still have some work to do.

That's not distortion as such, but gravitational lensing. One can correct it, but it's something the telescope will not do.
 
Here is the uncompressed image of the first image:

The first image was actually this. Same part of the sky but another image sensor, which is monochrome.

That's not distortion as such, but gravitational lensing. One can correct it, but it's something the telescope will not do.
Apart from that, the only distortion I see are the spikes. I'm wondering if they can reduce them in software.

The spikes also aren't simple white lines, they contain some kind of colourful diffraction patterns. It's possible that the scientists can extract some useful information regarding the spectrum of light.

Also, this is infrared, so it's false colour. Do we know what wavelengths was this image taken in?
 
That's not distortion as such, but gravitational lensing.
I am very familiar with gravitational lensing. However if you look closely, there are areas of the image where distorsions are taking place but not where they should be and not where there is an apparent source.
 
I am very familiar with gravitational lensing. However if you look closely, there are areas of the image where distorsions are taking place but not where they should be and not where there is an apparent source.

I would wager it’s due to the image being a wide field and the center of the image is where the focal point is, it looks like it’s had a bubble filter applied.

The spikes may be simply due to the wavelength of light that sensor picks up VS the infrared wavelengths the deep field sensors use, or just an expected abberation from multiple diffraction angles for objects not in the center of the focus.
 
Seems NASA may think this is 'gravitational lensing'.

Last Updated: 12th July, 2022 18:37 IST
James Webb Space Telescope's Image Distortion Explained; What Is Gravitational Lensing?
According to NASA, which has tirelessly worked with its partners - the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) - in commissioning the Webb telescope, this picture shows the SMACS 0723 as it was 4.6 billion years ago. Moreover, it is made from images at different wavelengths in 12.5 hours and if seen carefully appears to be weirdly distorted, something which cannot be blamed on the $10 billion telescope but on the featured galaxies that warped the space around them and the phenomenon of 'gravitational lensing'.
 
Back
Top