 |
| Comparing size of Webb and the Hubble Telescopes . Webb has 18 mirrors , just about the size of one Hubble mirror. Yet the optics are very disappointing . |
Wait, am (1)>>I a conspiracy theorist because I 'think' NASA has been hiding ET evidence for decades?For the last few months since the launch of the JAMES WEBB space telescope . I have been pondering something about the telescope , its unusual properties , that the public , news media has missed . First , (2)>>NASA is releasing data vary SLOWLY to the public at large . Media coverage started at launch , but since the launch , it has faded . We’re not ready for alien life. We can barely tolerate people with different ideologies or religions, we’re not ready for a whole ass sentient lifeform from a different planet. NOW if james webb telescope provides tons and tons of circumstantial evidence of life, we might actually put it thru our thick skull its real that would be badass please let it be so I know most aliens are not hiding, its simply up for better detectors to see them. But no official responses or endorsements are needed to affirm the obvious: the huge volumes of data from NASA’s sprawling network of past and present Earth-observation satellites could be a treasure trove . (3)>>But as far the Webb Telescope images , it appears that they seem to be copies of Hubble Telescope images that were taken years ago , somehow enhanced by digital computer software . When I saw the Webb images I was puzzled that many of the images seem to be copies of Hubble data . I exclaimed like " It's nothing new !" .To maximize the chances for NASA’s study turning up anything of value, though, the space agency will have to successfully attract the right sort of participants—perhaps putting out fraudulent information to the public. NOW WST’s first full-color scientific image was revealed by President Joe Biden on July 11th 0f 2022 as a teaser of what supposed was to come. While Hubble’s deep fields took days (if not weeks) of exposure, JWST was able to capture this image after just 12.5 hours. Looking and comparing the photo's , you need a trained eye to spot what I would say airbrushing a photo . (4)>>Yes, the images were spectacular , but very disappointing . One specific deep field images looked like a duplicate of Hubble's , I mean precisely a duplicate . It contained information that was already obtained by Hubble . It did not reveal anything new to Astronomy . Another was one Hubble’s favorite subjects, the Carina Nebula, 7,200 light-years away. This particular image was released by the Hubble Heritage Project in 2008 and shows a sliver of a star-forming region in a corner of the nebula. Again, WST’s image was a exact copy of Hubble's . Again nothing new . But it's being presented to the Media as amazing and astonishing . With no one questioning the data .
 |
| bright blob of planet HIP 65426 b, froom 400 light years away. Webb's best photo ? |
 |
| Very Large Telescope direct image of a planetary system 300 light years away . From Earth based telescope . |
NOTES AND COMMENTS:
(1)>>I a conspiracy theorist because . From the very beginning I was proud to be called a conspiracy theorist, I got attacked daily with nasty tweets all because I did my homework - now we can honestly say we all have grade A* and the trolls have suddenly all disappeared! I want to know is WHY is anyone who questions it some sort of Conspiracy Theorist®™ because it's not natural & it's absolutely stupid to blindly trust either half of a political Monopoly that all has the same donors?(2)>>NASA is releasing data vary SLOWLY to the public at large . Data from NASA scientists using Webb has been slowly been made public. JWST already has data that are open from the moment they have been taken. This is the ERS (Early Release Science) category. But the researchers who did all the work in proposing and obtaining the data (which is a shit ton of work) should get at least a short period where they can do their work on processing the data without fear that someone is going to come along and poach their work. The world is filled with credentialled frauds and liars posing as experts using appeals to authority to push misinformation. Someone looking over the shoulder is exactly what is needed. This is science, as the motto of the Royal Society goes take no ones word for it.There is scientific data collected by a piece of US federal government property. That data is "born free" in the United States. Born free meaning in the public domain.All it would take is a lawsuit to enforce existing law and precedent to make some lawyer a name and some money and give JWST a bunch of bad press in a case NASA or StSci is bound to lose.(3)>>But as far the Webb Telescope images , it appears that they seem to be copies of Hubble Telescope images. I am NOT CALLING or saying that Webb's images are fake . They are REAL IMAGES , but my issue is that many of the released images look like exact copies of Hubble's . Plus , Webb's deep field images look spectacular , but they did not show anything that was already shown by Hubble . Some of the Webb images were combined with Hubble's with some computer enhancement that made the image of a galaxy for example to look more sharper .It just seems a bit fishy to me that they have been able to see galaxies 4.6 billion years ago, just how is that possible, what's not to say it's cgi , am not just putting this through .They are money laundering NASA scams and those images are just Astro-photography from either highly photoshopped for added fakery like everything else NASA does.(4)>>Yes, the images were spectacular , but very disappointing . This was my initial response as well. While the additional details like the short capture time etc. do make it more impressive, i think it's more a testament to how incredibly good Hubble has been during it's lifespan, especially considering it's 80's tech. But its nothing NEW .(5)>>Now the optics of this thing , having 18 mirrors , each mirror is about the size of one Hubble mirror . This is a vary large Telescope , there is no hidden thing about it. I guess my critical view is this can do a lot more in astronomy than the average Earth based telescope . Calibration is particularly challenging for projects that require precise measurements of the brightness of astronomical objects, such as faint, faraway galaxies. For several weeks, some astronomers have been cobbling together workarounds so that they can continue their analyses. The mirrors have to be aligned all 18 of them , remember they are the size of one Hubble telescope mirror .Basically, they will still be focusing the light all at that one point, but they'll slightly (with an accuracy of less than 1 wavelength) change their distance from the receiver reflector so that the interference pattern doesn't form. So it retains the same sharpness for the central image, but the interference is all destructive so no interference patterns. (6)>>Honestly the Webb image is vary poor , if you compare the image from a Earth based telescope using SPHERE instrument on the Very Large Telescope. The First planet imaged by Webb was nothing but a blob , as I argued Earth based telescopes already imaged planets in much better resolution , even multiple planets around a star . Webb optics did do vary well . It should have done better Nevertheless, future JWST observations could search for such planets. HIP 65426b was a good target because we already knew the planet around it could be detected (it was discovered in 2017) how ever it should have been better .(7)>>telescope had been damaged by a piece of space debris . I know that a meteroid is name only for asteroids which enter (Earth's) atmosphere but I don't see the word micro-asteroid being used anywhere so please forgive me if I used the wrong term.If a simple 10km wire will statistically get hit and cut by a micrometeoroid within a mere 5 hour time period how come that the Hubble Space Telescope and other optical telescopes don't get their mirrors damaged by these collisions? In the case of Hubble we are at least talking about a semi-closed off tube but the James Webb Telescope is going to have it's mirror completely exposed to open space. Are the mirrors build to withstand such collisions that can cut wires? Or is the damage so small that even with the extreme precision requirements we put on telescopes today we can still operate them well for years and years of collisions? (8)>>they've photo-shopped all of images well enough to hide what they caught?We've been blown away by the images coming in from faraway galaxies taken by the Webb Space Telescope. The vivid colors are lovely, but how real are they? The telescope only collects infrared and near-infrared light, and humans can't see infrared light, so where are all those colors coming from? Which is to say, there are a lot of images with flashy lights and pretty colors but the end result is basically the same kinda stuff as what we regular folks get when we look at normal space photos. And that's cool and all, but it still doesn't entirely make sense why the images are exciting enough to spur international headlines. Comments on Highsnobiety's Instagram post called out the photos as "AI," "Photoshop," and the rest. Which, I mean, sure, there's probably some editing going on here — a team of scientists selected these photos from a larger selection and I'd bet the photos were at least touched up before being published — (9)>>What is the purpose of this conspiracy ? er, conspiracy theorists— There’s a wide range of inane theories and speculations about the new Webb images’ origins, with some claiming that the pictures were created by CGI, Photoshop, Hollywood special effects, or some combination of all of the above.
No comments:
Post a Comment