• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The James Webb Space Telescope

This is still bothering me. "First light" of any telescope is when it's set up and pointed at a stellar object. In the case of the Webb, "setting up" is a very protracted process BUT it comes after first light: they're using the LMC (a small nearby galaxy) uh, HD 84406, a common star ... to calibrate the mirrors.

(There's another puzzle: why would they choose a star with high proper motion, instead of a distant galaxy? The more you know, I guess)

I think NASA have underestimated the public interest in watching a fuzzy blob gradually resolve into a super-sharp picture of a galaxy. Maybe it would be too slow to hold some people's interest, but I'd love to check in from time to time on the fuzzy blob!
 
Last edited:
It will take about a month for the JWST to reach its destination: orbit around the sun at the L-2 lagrange point. Then it needs to unfold the 18 gold-coated segments of its hexagonal mirror and the huge sun shade.

Ah. I see your problem. Your source is out of date. Webb was launched about a month ago, it unfolded on the way, and it's there now.
 
Ah. I see your problem. Your source is out of date. Webb was launched about a month ago, it unfolded on the way, and it's there now.

My post you quoted is from December 25, 2001. Your snarky post is from today.

Much happens in the span of over a month.
 
Back
Top Bottom