Slashdot Mirror


Hubble Turns 25

Taco Cowboy points out that the Hubble Space Telescope turns 25 today. Hubble was launched on April 24, 1990, aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery from Kennedy Space Center, Florida. Currently, it is flying about 340 miles over the Earth and circling us every 97 minutes. While the telescope itself is not really much to look at, that silver bucket is pure gold for astronomers. Scientists have used that vantage point to make ground-breaking observations about planets, stars, galaxies and to reveal parts of our universe we didn't know existed. The telescope has made more than a million observations and astronomers have used Hubble data in more than 12,700 scientific papers, "making it one of the most productive scientific instruments ever built," according to NASA. ... NASA aims to keep Hubble operating through at least 2020 so that it can overlap with its successor. The James Webb Space Telescope is due to launch in October 2018 and begin observations in mid-2019. NASA celebrated by releasing a new, epic image from Hubble titled "Celestial Fireworks." It is accompanied by an impressive flythrough video. Some nice galleries of Hubble images have been put together at the NY Times and Slate, but a bigger collection is available directly from the official Hubble website.

45 comments

  1. Thanks, Hubble by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Both my scientific curiosity and my desktop backgrounds thank you.

    1. Re:Thanks, Hubble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not bad for a decades old machine with a wonky mirror :)

      (Yeah, I know the mirror itself is fine, the original wonkiness was elsewhere.)

  2. Hubble is not dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hubble was born on the same day as the telescope named after him?

  3. The Best Investment by koan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I love the Hubble, love the pictures and the data, seriously one of the best investment we have made up there.

    The single most mind blowing photo for me?
    Hubble eXtreme Deep Field
    http://www.nasa.gov/images/con...

    Plenty Hubble photos are far more beautiful, but the sheer scale of it, the light of other times.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:The Best Investment by stud9920 · · Score: 2

      The single most mind blowing photo for me? Hubble eXtreme Deep Field http://www.nasa.gov/images/con...

      Too bad the picture was photobombed by Milky Way attention whoring stars.

    2. Re:The Best Investment by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 2

      seriously one of the best investment we have made up there.

      This is one of the reasons funding doesn't always go where it would make science progress the better. Hubble outcome is visually attractive and nice (photos). Other fields, particle accelerators, neutrino research etc... that people hardly understand, may not gather the same amount of enthusiasm.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:The Best Investment by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      Locals Only!

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    4. Re:The Best Investment by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      Other fields, particle accelerators, neutrino research etc... that people hardly understand, may not gather the same amount of enthusiasm.

      While I agree that people hardly understand other fields, sometimes it's not a bad thing that they're not enthusiastic.

      There was plenty of enthusiasm against the LHC. My memory isn't what it used to be, but I don't recall another scientific project of that scale that faced as much public, and even government, concern in my lifetime. Some of those people sounded like they were on the verge of getting out the pitchforks and torches.

      Cassini having plutonium fuel was about as close as I can recall, but even that was a blip by comparison to the LHC.

    5. Re:The Best Investment by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Cassini having plutonium fuel was about as close as I can recall, but even that was a blip by comparison to the LHC.

      The Cassini flyby was before Facebook and Twitter. Seriously, the rise of clickbait journalism has made it very difficult to discriminate between genuine public concern and the meme-of-the-moment.

    6. Re:The Best Investment by Tablizer · · Score: 1
    7. Re:The Best Investment by koan · · Score: 1

      lulz...

      Seems almost blasphemous...

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    8. Re:The Best Investment by Galilee · · Score: 1

      I did not like that picture the first time I saw it because I thought it was an overly busy collage. Then I realized that it was one single picture. Finally I realized that if I stood outside at night and stretched out my arm as far as I can, my thumb nail would cover up enough sky to hold at least a dozen XDF pictures.

      I don't think I've ever felt so small before or since that moment.

    9. Re:The Best Investment by koan · · Score: 1

      I get how you feel, it's jaw droppingly huge, but I don't have the feeling of being small, instead the one feeling that was prominent was "I know there is life everywhere out there" and without a doubt I still believe it.

      I used to get intellectual vertigo thinking of an infinite Universe, so much so I had to think of it as a expanding sphere (and therefore finite) to settle my mind.
      Which then begged the question "What's outside the sphere?".

      So I don't bother any more =D

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  4. Shopped! by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    I always disliked these sort of images because I felt they were closer to an artist's conception than a real image, since they are processed and interpolated so much. Now I regret not looking at the recent /. article on that very subject.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    1. Re:Shopped! by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative

      So you've basically failed to understand why they're necessary for astronomers to make sense of things?

      Hubble isn't up there taking photographs with a camera .. the only way to interpret the images is with the false color stuff.

      The Hubble images aren't artists conceptions, but they're not straight up camera pictures either. They're the actual real things, just processed to make humans be able to understand them.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Shopped! by disposable60 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right on - you can hear what, seven octaves?
      You can _see_ less than one, and there's lots of useful information outside that range. If some fundie complains that it's all lies because it has the word 'false' in it, ask them whether they believe infrared cameras show 'real' image. Same color-mapping principles.

      --
      You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
    3. Re:Shopped! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They *are* cameras taking photographs - it's just that they cover wavelength bands that don't correspond to our own red, green, and blue vision. (If you're lucky you get a camera that covers part of the visual field and you can convince somebody to put a colour wheel in front of it for taking pretty pictures in red, green, and blue, but that's very much the exception.)

  5. Best 25 Pictures as Video by rtoz · · Score: 2

    We can watch this video to see the best 25 of Stunning Images taken by Hubble Space Telescope in 25 Years.

    1. Re:Best 25 Pictures as Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would I want to watch a video to see low res versions of still images?

  6. PerkinElmer by Needs2BeSaid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why on Earth is PerkinElmer still in business after knowingly messing up the mirror? They only had to pay $25 million for their "mistake". How much did all the investigation, training, preparation and the actual flight to Hubble cost the tax payers?

    --
    Some things need to be said...
    1. Re:PerkinElmer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you want to hire the guy who screwed up once, and isn't gonna do it again. Experience - the most expensive ingredient known...

    2. Re:PerkinElmer by Needs2BeSaid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Screwing up is one thing, hiding it and letting NASA launch it into space... well... that's a whole different thing.

      --
      Some things need to be said...
  7. Time is relative. by b0r0din · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hubble only feels like 24.99996 years old.

    1. Re:Time is relative. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Hubble only feels like 24.99996 years old.

      Isn't it the other way? 25 years on the surface of the earth would mean MORE time has passed for something that's in Earth's orbit - time slows the deeper you are in a gravity well.

      So technically, Hubble more than 25 years old by now, even though on the surface of Earth, only 25 years has passed.

    2. Re:Time is relative. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Hubble is moving much faster than us. Relativity says it experiences less time, not more.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:Time is relative. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      First the lens error, and now we find it has a Pentium.

    4. Re:Time is relative. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just FYI, you also need to consider general relativity, not just special relativity. For example, at GPS altitude, general relativity has a far greater impact making the clocks tick faster (a weaker gravitational field) compared to on the ground. The Hubble is a lot closer - I just did this for something else a few months ago but don't know off the top of my head if the general relativity effects on time still outweigh the special relativity effects at the Hubble altitude.

  8. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You, apparently.

  9. Thank You! by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For anyone who was paying attention at the time when it was launched, the fact that Hubble has stayed functional this long is a pretty big deal. The drama that unfolded after it was launched, with the mirror problems and subsequent corrective missions, was an amazing feat of engineering.

    Politicians and others jumped on the anti-Hubble bandwagon pretty quickly, and at the time it was another bad day for science in the early 90's as the SCSC(Desertron) was decommissioned.

    Then the mirror was fixed... and we saw the pictures.

    In all of human history, no one could have imagined that mankind would be able to peer back in time and deep into the depths of space as Hubble has allowed us to.

    In all the imaginings of the earliest self aware humans, to the priests of ancient Babylon who studied the stars, to Galileo and Edwin Hubble himself, the images and knowledge that Hubble has bestowed on us are riches beyond compare.

    Thank you Hubble and all who have been involved in the project.

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  10. And to think ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    .... NASA nearly had to rename it 'Magoo'.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:And to think ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The photos that were taken with the uncorrected lens and sharpened in software were still better than anything taken from earth at the time.

  11. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    Hubble is a prime example of why we space nutters want to get people out there. When we sent Hubble up into its 375-mile orbit, it was nothing but a paperweight until we were able to send a crew up there to fix it.

    Not to mention that it was carried into orbit using Space Shuttle as its "first stage."

  12. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

    Who gives a shit?

    How about "Civilization." It's hard to think of other modern projects that have advanced the knowledge base of humankind as far as the Hubble Space Telescope. Not bad for being a "multi-billion dollar flop" when launched.

    Of all the things NASA has accomplished, this is one of the big ones.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  13. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by itzly · · Score: 1

    Of course, without the cost for the manned space program, we could have launched a dozen replacement telescopes, and still have money left over for a cake.

  14. What exactly ARE we seeing in that "flythrough?" by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    Flythrough video -- I have no objection to enhanced pictures but I do want to understand exactly what I am looking at. There can't possibly be enough parallax for any traditional stereo imaging.

    Where does the depth information in a video like this come from, and what has happened here--has the image been basically digitized and then completely regenerated by shifting every image pixel in it according to its distance from the virtual "camera" position?

  15. The Hubble by tquasar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Create an account at Heavens-Above to get time and direction to see space objects. http://www.heavens-above.com/ It's a great resource.

  16. Re: What exactly ARE we seeing in that "flythrough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can combine images over time to recover depth information.

  17. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We did launch several more of these... as spy satellites.

  18. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Kooonsty · · Score: 1

    The cake is a lie.

  19. The Sky by tquasar · · Score: 1

    I have a small 'scope but my area has become too light polluted for me to see. I could see Andromeda and other objects but can't now. I would drive 45 miles to a remote, dark location but haven't done that in a few years.

  20. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure what civilization you are referring to, but here in the good ole' US-of-A everyone is primarily concerned about buying beer, their heroin addiction, and gay marriage.

  21. Re:What exactly ARE we seeing in that "flythrough? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    To simplify, consider parallax between "now" and where earth was 6 months ago

  22. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by Convector · · Score: 1

    Given that it's in a 375-mile orbit, Hubble was also (and still is) a pretty lousy paperweight.

  23. Re:TURNS 25!?!?! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Not sure what civilization you are referring to, but here in the good ole' US-of-A everyone is primarily concerned about buying beer, their heroin addiction, and gay marriage.

    The price of admission for us geeky folks to support the infrastructure responsible for the bread-and-circuses is that they have to throw a little bone (less than 1% of GDP) to things we think are cool. Otherwise we would all be cyberterrorists and commies.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!