Slashdot Mirror
The Hubble's Fate In Debate at NASA
FortKnox writes: "Well, it looks like NASA is trying to determine what to do with the Hubble. 2004 is supposed to be the last transmission, but NASA might keep'er up till 2010. Also, they are considering maybe putting it in higher orbit. If they are going to retire it, I say we need a replacement. It has really shown the beauty of space, and given scientists closer looks into the cosmos. We can't just let that "die", we need to continue studying!"
Would you use the mirror for combing your hair or something??? It's history.... significant history. It should be brought back to earth and put in a museum.
Sell parts of Hubble on eBay. I bet they could recover a substantial amount of the cost. Ok, maybe 10%.
I dunno, the Russians couldn't hock their shuttle.
Maybe NASA will crash the Hubble and sell exclusive publicity rights to Taco Bell.
Promote proofreading. Don't mod up sloppy posts.
http://www.ngst.stsci.edu/
it was tested with something like a foucault tester. But it was not "star tested", optically speaking, by mounting it on a structure, point it to the sky, etc
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
The comment about not having a replacement isn't accurate, here are a few of the NGST (Next Generation Space Telescopes), that NASA wants to loft:
http://sim.jpl.nasa.gov/beyond/
http://tpf.jpl.nasa.gov/
http://lisa.jpl.nasa.gov
How that thing ever got into orbit without being tested is beyond me.
My understanding was that the mirror was tested - the test was just miscalibrated (one piece of the test optics was a few centimetres out of place). They needed to test the mirror continuously while grinding it.
Sell parts of Hubble on eBay. I bet they could recover a substantial amount of the cost. Ok, maybe 10%.
They will have to keep Hubble going till at least 2010 though, cause most of the aforementioned missions aren't till 2004-2007 (at the earliest).
Ok. It costs money to operate. Ok. It had initial problems. But why must we bring it down or discontinue it's use as long as it is functioning properly without consuming tooo many resources? I love astronomy, and I would love to see any of a variety of next generations telescopes floating around up there, but if ain't broke why fix it? Didn't we fix it already anyway?
Helloooo....Newman.
All the cool pictures in Time and Newsweek from the HST while in highschool. Though those where sehr cool photos of distant galaxies. After they first discovered the glitch in the optics, I was very surprised they managed to correct that. Was also very glad as an amatuer astromner that NASA fixed it. If they can increase the lifespan then bring it down to the Air & Space Muesum, that would be really cool, and I would wanna see that exhibit. (Yea, I have a few spelling errors, but I'm tired & need sleep ;)
Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction.
it'S true, myself I have never understood how they send it into space without tested it on earth?!?
There's 100% amateur that polish themselves their 30" mirror in their garage and there are of better quality, and they can do some star test with their dob to correct thing.
How the HST mirro got into space without test is really beyond me either...
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
Lets take 400nm (a nice blue, my favorite color) .0000004m or .0004mm
i hope im doin this right... .0004mm goes into 1mm 10000 times.
multiply that by 4 and you get 40000 1/4 wavelengths..... i think, heh.
Correct me if my math is wrong.
I thought it was more around a milimeter or less of innacuracy... either way, it was tested.
That's exactly the story I recall from Eric Chaisson's "Hubble Wars." It's a rather good book, if you're into what goes on behind the scenes. Basically, the story was that the deviced the tested the shape of the mirror was broken. They wedged a roll of tape inside the machine to "fix" it, but not surprisingly, this didn't result in the accuracy required (1/10 of a wavelength on the surface).
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
haha, I love it when you fucking foreigners try to post in english. you're so lovably incomprehensible! although I do wish you would shut the fuck up before I lose my patience with you, and your little schtick stops being so amusing.
thanks.
Hi, I'm a pretentious cock who will make some gay comment about ignoring AC posts here.
In this case, incompetence is probably the answer. As I recall, they ran their budget something like 6 times over thier bid, and still recieved a bonus for a job well-done. All in all, these guys were awful. Happily, they are no longer in business (Raytheon bought them out, I believe).
The flaw in the Hubble mirror was about 1/50th of a millimeter. Do you think an amateur (and not too many amateurs are polishing their own 30 inchers) could spot that? When you have to account for what shape the mirror will be in microgravity? When you have to account for launch stresses?
According to Eric Chaisson's Hubble Wars (Chaisson is the author of a popular introductory astronomy text and was the first director of educational outreach of StSci), yes, a simple test performed by amateur mirror grinders WOULD have revealed the flaw. What's worse is that the manufactor knew of the flaw. There exist holograms of the mirror that show an interference pattern indicating the problem.
Hubble, foobarred or not, is the single most productive optical system in use in astronomy. Even before it was supplied with conatct lenses, it yielded some of the most spectacular imaging that had ever been obtained. Why suggest retiring such a system until there is a functioning replacement?
--
The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+ 1 politicians.
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
...send a probe out to the focal point of the Sun's gravitational lensing effect (about 550 AU from the Sun) and use the Sun as a *gigantic* gravitational lens to observe distant parts of the universe at super hi res.
-- SIGFPE
Retireing the Hubble before sending up a replacement, just seams, well, like people really arnt all that interested in learning about space anymore.
There is so much sky that if the observers spent from now untill they die without stopping, they still would not cover more then a fraction.
When I was a kid the only thing I thought would be more exciting then living in the past to watch discoveries be made, was to live in the future after many more had been made. I wanted to learn to my brain exploded.
Everyone I knew was like that. There was a time when the people of america all were behind the space projects. Now we all hear about the money being spent as though investing in the human race isn't cost effective.