Slashdot Mirror
NASA Christens the Spitzer Space Telescope
LMCBoy writes "NASA today renamed the Space Infrared Telescope Facility to the Spitzer Space Telescope, after a great scientist. The renaming coincides with the release of the beautiful first science images from the telescope, which was launched in August."
In addition to space astronomy, Spitzer's work greatly advanced knowledge in other fields, including stellar dynamics, plasma physics, and thermonuclear fusion.
He must have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night!
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
Magnification? Nobody cares about magnification.
Only angular resolution (a.k.a. "image clarity"), spectral coverage, and aperture size matter, really. Angular resolution is generally better from space because of the lack of atmospheric distortions (but with adaptive optics, ground telescopes are closing the gap). Spectral coverage is better in space, at least for those regions of the spectrum for which the atmosphere is not transparent (including big chunks of the IR spectrum, which Spitzer will address nicely). Aperture size is better from the ground, because it is so much cheaper to build big telescopes on Earth.
Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
3 observatories in the sky ( the forth 'Great Observatory' Compton has already splashed down), and with each one covering a different part of the spectrum, it'll be interesting to see how NASA plays it out. It is a shame that NASA has to consider pulling their biggest PR success off of station and burn it away, see Hubble to retire. True a replacement is in the works, but Hubble and Chandra, and now Spitzer, are all NASA and the US space program really have going for them right now. Sure it cost mucho $$$ to reload propellant onto these rigs, but maybe someone should find a way to keep these scopes up there. In times when our space program needs dreamers, thinkers, and risk-takers, a good deal of the general public lacks the intestinal fortitude and dedication needed to make progress. Spitzer and the other 2 great observatories help hold the line till we gain momentum. And no, the Space Station cannot accomplish as much with the troubles it is experiencing.
To call angular resolution "image clarity" is greatly oversimplifying things. Angular resolution is a product of the size of the dish and the wavelength of the light observed. (Thus spectral coverage is not distinct from angular resolution). The atmosphere does pose a problem, but building the telescopes at higher elevations can greatly reduce distortion.
Extremely high angular resolution can be achieved on earth by linking up several telescopes. For instance, the VLBI technique created a telescope spanning 5,280 miles- with enough resolving power to, "sit in New York and be able to see the dimples on a golf ball in Los Angeles."
Space telescopes are great, but until it becomes cheaper to get large telescopes into orbit or on the moon nothing beats the basement bargain earth telescope.