8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Surely doesn't include all the extra distance because it was closer when it started.
Ie. it started closer and then got closer and closer while the start became further away.
All while never going backwards.
James Webb: A $10bn machine in search of the end of darkness
- Thread starter weltweit
- Start date
Surely doesn't include all the extra distance because it was closer when it started.
Ie. it started closer and then got closer and closer while the start became further away.
All while never going backwards.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Classic case of “put the code live then run off on holiday”.
WouldBe
Dislicksick
If space is expanding faster than the speed of light then the light will never catch up with us.
Signal 11
also programmed for conversational english
Some light will never reach us, hence... Cosmological horizon - WikipediaIf space is expanding faster than the speed of light then the light will never catch up with us.
paul mckenna
Bellend
never deploy on a Friday!
weltweit
Well-Known Member
So, it is intended to look way way back to just a 100 million years after the big bang. It can't look any earlier than that because we believe there was no light before that.
So, will there be evidence of God?
Let their be light
Let there be sound
Let there be drums
and Let there be guitar!
Has the church made any comments on the James Webb Telescope?
So, will there be evidence of God?
Let their be light
Let there be sound
Let there be drums
and Let there be guitar!
Has the church made any comments on the James Webb Telescope?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
So if it blows up will it be the most expensive explosion ever?
I don't think I care much either way. I think my belief in science for the sake of science (especially when it's expensive) has eroded a bit over the years. We're fucking our planet not because of problems in the science but because power relations means science can't be deployed in the right ways. In the face of that it's hard to care about learning more - it seems likely to be wasted effort.
I don't think I care much either way. I think my belief in science for the sake of science (especially when it's expensive) has eroded a bit over the years. We're fucking our planet not because of problems in the science but because power relations means science can't be deployed in the right ways. In the face of that it's hard to care about learning more - it seems likely to be wasted effort.
WouldBe
Dislicksick
Make sure you don't take Santa out in the process.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Brainaddict the scientists responsible for this telescope can't be held responsible for global warming or mass extinctions, they can only focus on their small bit of responsibility.
I don't think it will be a wasted effort, why do you say that?
I don't think it will be a wasted effort, why do you say that?
paul mckenna
Bellend
They've already snookered themselves by putting creation at ~6000 years ago but no doubt they'll be wading in with some insanity
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
There's this big project to increase our knowledge forever, which is sort of okay as a hobby I guess. But I think there's a kind of underlying assumption to it that this increase of knowledge will benefit us.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Brainaddict it might increase the sum of human knowledge, but how it will help us now or in the immediate future I agree is debatable.
And, why does India have a space program when they have millions of citizens below the poverty line?
And, why does India have a space program when they have millions of citizens below the poverty line?
Signal 11
also programmed for conversational english
Why is it always India that gets singled out for this question?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Give me a different example that shows such a juxtaposition of poverty and expensive projects?
Signal 11
also programmed for conversational english
How about every other country starting with the most obvious.
Give me a different example that shows such a juxtaposition of poverty and expensive projects?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
Millions of children in the richest countries in the world, such as the US and UK, don't have enough to eat. In some ways it's actually a worse situation than India because even if India pulled out all the stops it would be difficult to end poverty there in any near-future time frame. Whereas the US and UK could end poverty (of the not-having-food-to-eat type) in their own countries within a year if they wanted. The budget of one of these telescopes would nearly do it in the UK.
Give me a different example that shows such a juxtaposition of poverty and expensive projects?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
At least in the UK there is UC, what does a family who isn't working with two kids get on UC? The US I can believe has a worse situation even than the UK, but yes it is scandalous if in the UK there are kids going hungry.
Nevertheless, the James Webb telescope will allow humanity to learn more about the cosmos.
PTK
Paul Kegan
Both the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church accept human evolution and cosmic evolution. A Roman Catholic priest was one of the first people to come up with what is not known as the Big Bang theory.
PTK
Paul Kegan
India launches satellites for communication, to monitor the weather, and to look at environmental degradation. Satellites are an important tool for developing an economy.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
This is quite a good page
Where Is Webb? NASA/Webb
During Webb's launch, deployment and commissioning, 'WhereIsWebb' tracked Webb's 'flight' to L2 orbit, its state and progress during its deployment and commissioning process, and finally the release of its first images. This process is now complete. During this process, the page constantly...
jwst.nasa.gov
ferrel_hadley
New Member
Cool there are many threads on celebrity gossip.
Most of the dollars an euros that went into JWT where high skilled, high wage technicians and designers who put it together.
There is no argument here. Curiosity driven science has delivered so much to the world that it should be ashamed to not want to expand it, it is also is an endeavour that provides high end jobs for people. JWT is estimated at about $15 billion for the project since 1993ish. So about $500 million a year. But the NIH, the National Institute for Health get $42 billion a year.
There may be projects that can produce better science for $500 million a year though I cannot think of them.
Its a good program and part of a broad project to expand the most useful human endeavour in history.
Go live in a "science for sciences sake is bad" country. Let us all know how great it is compared with Scandinavia, Germany or the UK.
PTK
Paul Kegan
Yes, it includes the "extra distance", because we were moving away as the light was coming towards us.
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Not keen on the jobs argument. Just looks like an instrumental justification for the bean counters.
Quite aside from the fact that the high tech weapons industry is always justified on a similar basis.
I mostly find a lot of peoples total lack of curiosity quite perplexing, though I do get that things feel a little fraught right now and it might be worth focusing a bit more on patching up the old homestead than far flung exploration.
Last edited:
2hats
Dust.
After the flight readiness review, held Tuesday, launch has been retargeted to 25 Dec, due to adverse weather concerns. The launch window runs 1220-1252UTC.
Launch early in that window is preferred as this minimises energy cost to the ideal Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) L2 libration point orbit (the ideal science mission trajectory is defined as being located in a volume a little more than 800,000 x 500,000 x 500,000 km centred on SEM L2 and the less you expend on mid-course corrections to achieve it, the more fuel you have for executing station keeping, ie prolonging mission lifetime).
Launch can target every two days in three as every third day the launch system cryogenics will need to be replenished. Other constraints on launch are due to Sun-Earth-Moon geometry. It's important to avoid eclipse conditions (risks loss of electrical power and threatens thermal stabilisation) and also undue lunar gravitational influence whereby the JWST experiences sufficient gravitational perturbation (both assist or "de-assist") such as would either result in L2 overshoot into heliocentric orbit or exceeding the mid-course correction delta-V budget for achieving the required LPO science orbit whilst still preserving primary mission lifetime.
Launch early in that window is preferred as this minimises energy cost to the ideal Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) L2 libration point orbit (the ideal science mission trajectory is defined as being located in a volume a little more than 800,000 x 500,000 x 500,000 km centred on SEM L2 and the less you expend on mid-course corrections to achieve it, the more fuel you have for executing station keeping, ie prolonging mission lifetime).
Launch can target every two days in three as every third day the launch system cryogenics will need to be replenished. Other constraints on launch are due to Sun-Earth-Moon geometry. It's important to avoid eclipse conditions (risks loss of electrical power and threatens thermal stabilisation) and also undue lunar gravitational influence whereby the JWST experiences sufficient gravitational perturbation (both assist or "de-assist") such as would either result in L2 overshoot into heliocentric orbit or exceeding the mid-course correction delta-V budget for achieving the required LPO science orbit whilst still preserving primary mission lifetime.
Last edited:
Similar threads
