Slashdot Mirror
NASA's Plan To Block Light From Distant Stars To Find 'Earth 2.0'
Daniel_Stuckey (2647775) writes "Over the last five years, NASA's Kepler Space Telescope has found dozens of potentially habitable planets. The only problem is that we can't actually see them, because the glare from those planets' stars makes it impossible to image them directly. A new, audacious plan to completely block out the light from those stars, however, could change all of that. The plan calls for a satellite to be sent out several tens of thousands of miles from Earth. The satellite will unfold a huge, flower-shaped metal shade that will literally block the light of some far-out star to the point where a space telescope, which will directly communicate with Starshade, will be able to image whatever planets are orbiting it directly. It's called Starshade, and, given the name, it works exactly how you might expect it to. If you look directly at the sun, you're not going to be able to see anything in the sky around it. Hold up something between your eyes and the sun to block it, however, and you'll be able to see much better."
Yet one more aspect of our lives that the government wants to control!
SUN !!
We do what we must - because we can!
Neat design - always liked the kind of foil origami that goes into satellite construction. Designs like this are great, because they compete well against heavier designs to create a de-facto specialized GIANT EYE IN SPACE. They're also seem a little, ahem, short-sighted in the sense that they may not last long against various sources of degradation, but as proof of concept, this is great science!
It's always cool to see the science get done, for the people who are still alive!
Ryan Fenton
The existence of some idiot that will complain about the lack of stars in the night sky once this is deployed
If you look directly at the sun, you're not going to be able to see anything in the sky around it
If you look directly at the sun, you're not going to be able to see much of anything for quite a while
It's a good solution, but how good of a resolution will we get out of it? Will we only see something along the lines of the "pale blue dot" image that Voyager took of the Earth?
Is there anything really to be gained or learned about imaging a distant planet in this way? Could we can get finer information about its composition?
JUST KIDDING KIDS DO NOT DO THIS.
staring at the sun can cause permanent damage to your retina and blindness.
The satellite will block the liught coming from the star impinging on the Earth thus reduce the heating of the Earth by 0.00001 %.
As interesting as this stuff is, we really need to be focusing on better propulsion methods. Lets figure out how to visit the planets we KNOW exist here in our solar system, and then get excited about planets in others. Lets get an orbital shipyard in place and start hauling in asteroids for materials. Maybe establish a presence on the moon; something like a radio telescope on the far side. Trying so hard to detect these "earth-like" planets in other systems just seems like the scientific equivalent of playing a lottery that has an uncertain payout. I guess the ultimate "prize" would be something like finding an earth 2.0, and directing our communications to it in hopes of maybe discovering some technological-advancing information, ala Contact. Just seems ironic considering all the mathematicians and scientists and such that laugh at the unwashed masses who play the actual lottery, and call it an idiot tax.
nt
- Ethanol-fueled
there's no way it would unfold properly by the time it got there
remember the Space Tether? http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wtether.html
it failed every time, but now they know why
this space flower won't get a 3rd chance to do it right
just can't see why it's a good idea.
Wouldn't it be far easier, cheaper and more reliable to mount a moveable coronograph directly in front of the telescope aperture?
an artificial stellar eclipse
Table-ized A.I.
It'll never get made. And I say that to deafening silence, knowing you know that I'm right. NASA just doesn't have the funds, support, leadership or vision to make something like this happen any time soon.
So saw-wee!
Seems legit...only issue I'd see is having to change the distance from the shield to the telescope for stars that have drastically different sizes/distances from us. If it's too close then you'll just block the entire solar system and if it's too far it will only partially cover the stars diameter. This distance or (or diameter of the shield even) would need to be "easily" and accurately adjustable which would require either fuel or a very long tow cable of some sort. I think something like this would benefit greatly from ion or solar wind propulsion. Virtually no fuel required and it doesn't need to move very far or fast...relatively speaking. Maybe adjusting the size of the shield itself would be a lot more efficient....going off the video alone it doesn't look very adjustable after deployment just because of the way it is folding.
What I mean is, instead of a shade that looks like a "flower" with "petals" can they make something that looks more like a (very) corrugated sphere?
That way if the spacecraft maneuvers to a new position relative to it, it won't have have to rotate (making it much less complex with no active mechanisms required). Also, multiple telescopes could simultaneously use it from different angles.
It could be a simple inflating balloon (perhaps with a fast setting foam) or something more complex like a "hoberman sphere"(?).
If they put it in geo- sync orbit and made it the appropriate size could multiple ground telescopes use it? With good adaptive optics of course, perhaps firing a laser at it (using it as a reference target) at a different wavelength of course for atmospheric aberration correction.
Dammit, Earth 1.0 is obsolete already. Now I know I am getting old.
Table-ized A.I.
Two spacecraft orbit the Sun in the same path as the Earth, one leading and one following. Each uses a disc to block direct light but capture incredible images of solar events and weather. Stereo A and B. Audacious? No. Science? Si, mon. From NASA: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pa...
https://xkcd.com/975/
I remember from my long ago courses of optics that you can't simply block the light from a pinpoint source: it creates diffusion around the blocking object. How do they work around this ?
Non-Linux Penguins ?
That's what I meant in my original post by having a (very) corrugated sphere. But maybe a "prickly pear" or "cactus" or "sea urchin" shape would be better.
Anyway, the diffraction questions are way beyond my (non-existent) knowledge of optics. Anyone care to chime in? How about using a coating of the new "magic" meta-materials? (Not that I have any idea of that could solve anything).
Just trying to think outside the box.
Why don't they just use the telescope at night time, then they wont have to worry about the sun?
NASA's Plan To Block Light From Distant Stars To Find 'Earth 2.0'
Won't the aliens get cold? Seems a bit harsh.
Alternative post: it got cancelled years ago, and they need to get over it.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
You will damage your eyesight...don't do, it opticians make enough as it is.
If we have the technology to build this kind of giant umbrella, can't we put one somewhere between earth and the sun to provide shadow over the poles and prevent global warming ?
No shit Sherlock.
staring at the sun can cause permanent damage to your retina and blindness.
I keep hearing this, but how long does it actually take?
I've stared at the sun for several minutes, several times, when I was a kid. There's a hell of an after-image for about ten minutes (which was why we did it), but that's it.
Why not make the shade a sphere (or at least sphere-ish)? Then you could have multiple telescopes use it to image different stars simultaneously, then have the telescopes reposition. This way you could also scale it up in the future by adding more telescopes if it proves to be a fruitful enough project.
Why not just using black marker on telescope lense?
The technical term for this type of telescope is "occulting".
Naturally, this term would freak people out, so they circumlocute to avoid using it.
The original idea was to actually drop a probe into the star to stop nuclear fusion and turn it off completely, but before the second round of funding it was realized that there would be no light left for the planet to be visible, so they went for the less spectacular backup plan.
Please tell readers NOT to look at the sun. Permanent eye damage (usually blindness) will result.
Wonderful. When people told me not to stare at the sun because it would cause permanent damage, I thought they were talking about damage to the sun