Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Distributed Astronomy

Posted by michael on from the my-what-a-big-baseline-you-have dept.

prostoalex writes "Scientists at Gemini Observatory are using Internet2 to link telescopes worldwide and receive images that they say are sharper than those coming from Hubble."

15 comments

  1. Using .NET?!?! by baldass_newbie · · Score: 0, Troll

    In April, researchers at Johns Hopkins University announced they had designed a virtual observatory that joined three different astronomy databases using the Internet and Microsoft's .NET Web-services platform.

    Wow, a pro-Microsoft sentence in a Slashdot article.
    Wonder what the temperatures are like down in hell...

    --
    The opposite of progress is congress
    1. Re:Using .NET?!?! by ceejayoz · · Score: 1, Troll

      Not only that, but a pro-Microsoft sentence WITHOUT a snide anti-MS note by an editor.

      As for the temperature... the flying pigs complaining that it's rather chilly.

  2. Link to news item at observatory by PD · · Score: 4, Informative

    right here

    It is worthwhile to note that the internet link is a separate issue from the sharpness. All the internet link does is allow researchers to use the scopes and return a lot of data quickly, reducing the need to travel to the telescope to observe with it. All of astronomy is moving in this direction, because these very expensive instruments must be utilized efficiently.

    The sharpness of this scope comes from the very large mirror (8 meters) and the adaptive optics installed on it. The photos would be just as sharp even without the internet connection.

    --
    If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
    1. Re:Link to news item at observatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't entirely correct.

      Interferometry increases image resolution as a funciton of the size of the reflector(as you stated) or the distance between two or more reflectors.

      That's why they radio array in new mexico works the way it does, they use multiple dishes, separated by distance, to get a lot of gathering power...and to simulate a very large dish(the distance between the dishes) in order to dramatically improve resolution.

    2. Re:Link to news item at observatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nobody listens to AC...
      even if he is absolutely correct. /. community should change this.

  3. I remember something similar. by The_Guv'na · · Score: 1

    It was a group of researchers linking several telescopes at a single site together using very precise optics to gain an image equivalent to that of a telescope with a mirror as big as the area "pegged out" by the separate telescopes. The precise optics is the thing I was thinking of when I read this article; they had to combine the images from their telescopes with extreme precision.

    But seeing as they have managed to at least partly overcome that difficulty here, great :) What I don't understand is why the telescopes have to be far apart. I'm thinking specifically of the optical system used in the system I saw on TV years ago. Why the heck would a few hundred yards between telescopes matter when viewing an object a few hundred [or more] light years away?

    I just get some little inkling it might be related to the principles behind holograms. Can anyone shed some light on this?

    Ali

    --
    Ph33r m3!!!
    1. Re:I remember something similar. by Peter+T+Ermit · · Score: 4, Informative

      By linking multiple observatories, you can do neat tricks like interferometry. One advantage you get is that your effective mirror/antenna size becomes considerably larger than the little mirrors/antennae that make up the array -- it's a function of how far apart the antennae are rather than the size of the individual elements, which is why a few hundred yards of separation can make a huge difference. The VLT uses this idea, as does the VLBI. Holograms are related in the sense that they exploit phase information of light just as interferometers do.

    2. Re:I remember something similar. by zer0vector · · Score: 5, Informative

      Its all based on the Rayleigh Criteria, which describes the resolution of an imaging system. Basically theta=1.22*lambda/diameter. Where theta is the smallest resolvable angular separation, and lambda is the wavelenght you are observing at.

      --

      ----
      Striving to put right what once went wrong, and hoping each time that his next leap, will be the leap ho
  4. CIAO by bgins · · Score: 1

    Chandra Interactive Analysis of Observations (CIAO) also looks like an interesting project:

    http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/

  5. OT: Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Chandra Interactive Analysis of Observations (CIAO) also looks like an interesting project

    CIAO is indeed interesting. Thank you. FWIW, you may wish to know that I have made you my friend in order to make it easier for me to find your posts, which AFAIAC are always worth reading.

    BTW: you are quite justified in applauding Mead, a Real Physicist's physicist. IYCTK, I think the point particle is in the same class as the spherical chicken: the best argument in its favor is that it allows considerable simplification. And, regarding the Transactional Interpretation I will only say that I am far less interested in the so-called physical meaning of a mathematical model than in the correctness of the model itself. But that's probably because, as Breitling (hi, Detlef) pointed out to me, I am not a Real Physicist. ;)

  6. It took till now by TamMan2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it just me or does this seem pretty obvious? Is there some technical difficulty in doing this that I don't understand?

    And on another note:
    If they can get hubble quality images from the ground now, what would we be able to see if we had multiple networked space telescopes in orbit?

    --
    "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...