First image from the James Webb Space
Telescope released: It shows thousands
of galaxies
USA Today,
by
Doyle Rice
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
7/11/2022 6:44:24 PM
It's finally here.
Literally decades in the making, the first image from NASA's $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope was released Monday evening by President Joe Biden at a White House briefing.
The first image shows thousands of galaxies – including the faintest objects ever observed – which have appeared in Webb’s view for the first time. This is the deepest view of the cosmos ever captured.
"Today is an historic day" said President Biden. "The first image from the Webb Space Telescope represents a historic moment for science and technology," he said. "For astronomy and space exploration."
"And for America and all humanity," he added.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
czechlist 7/11/2022 6:57:28 PM (No. 1213336)
"It's not an image. It's a new world view...?"
For crying out loud - yes, it is thevresult of impressive accomplishments and hopefully will lead to advancements in sciences -but, IT IS AN IMAGE!
8 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
MissNan 7/11/2022 6:57:37 PM (No. 1213337)
This buffoon has no business representing such a historic moment.
15 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
chumley 7/11/2022 7:03:54 PM (No. 1213342)
Yeah. We're the only ones out here.
5 people like this.
I was all excited about the images, then he provided what I believe the young people call a "buzzkill."
11 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
itsonlyme 7/11/2022 7:19:52 PM (No. 1213357)
The Demented Fuhrer
Lost In Space
8 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Safari Man 7/11/2022 7:30:08 PM (No. 1213363)
I wonder why there appears to be a fish eye lens effect, or maybe barrel distortion?
6 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
red1066 7/11/2022 7:54:49 PM (No. 1213373)
That's an expensive photo. It looks like a photo from Hubble which is still working. I wonder if funds were diverted from the cost of building a new launch vehicle so that we didn't have to hitch a ride on a Russian spacecraft in order to get to our space station so that another roaming telescope could be built?
2 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Flyball Dogs 7/11/2022 7:57:02 PM (No. 1213377)
I wonder why a committee had to select the “images” to be released?
7 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
thefield 7/11/2022 7:58:33 PM (No. 1213379)
Just as the music plays, how great thou art.
11 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
kono 7/11/2022 8:30:00 PM (No. 1213395)
Pretty amazing stuff; but just a couple of points:
First, I saw this "news" at least three days ago, not posted on Lcom. (It's still worth posting; but the image has been circulating the net for days already, and USA Tabloid is a bit late to the party.)
Second, the Hubble and Spitzer telescopes have produced deep-field imagery for several years showing thousands of galaxies.
5 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
jerrodmason 7/11/2022 8:36:49 PM (No. 1213399)
This retired rocket surgeon (Guidance System specialist) wants to know how this could possibly be a wise expenditure of taxpayers' money, especially at such precarious economic times.
Answer that and I'll next ask if it's even wise in better times.
I'm prepared for flak. Bring it on.
3 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Dreadnought 7/11/2022 8:48:32 PM (No. 1213406)
The obvious distortions in the image are are the artifacts of galaxy induced gravitational lensing.
6 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
DVC 7/11/2022 8:57:53 PM (No. 1213413)
And when you look at those sort of images, and see all those "stars" and then realize that almost all of those myriad of "stars" are actually galaxies, each with 100 million stars......it kind of shows how truly immense (a word that fails....) the universe actually is.
12 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Mauigirl 7/11/2022 9:40:58 PM (No. 1213456)
#11
Good thing you weren't around in 1492
or 1969.
6 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Venturer 7/11/2022 10:20:04 PM (No. 1213480)
So what's actually new.
We knew space was vast. We have always known that.
Does it really matter that there is proof?
There is no way we will ever reach any of these galaxies, Global Warming is destroying us. That's what they tell us.
I suppose some religion would say that in all that vastness we are the only people we can actually say that exists. Is that a proof there is a God?
1 person likes this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Bur Oak 7/11/2022 10:24:39 PM (No. 1213483)
How is this better than what Hubble has provided?
0 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
synchronicity 7/11/2022 11:19:41 PM (No. 1213518)
If you closely look at Hubble's deep field photo and this photo there is a lot more detail in this one. The gravitational lensing (caused by large numbers of other galaxies between us and the further objects) allows objects to be seen from much further away, the circular distortions are much more pronounced in this photo - each circular distortion represents an object whose light has been spread out into a circle which can be analyzed in detail with a proper understanding of physics. Everything in the photo without a starburst feature is actually another galaxy, and each of these have on average between 100 billion to 400 billion stars with globular clusters having up to a billion each. There are more stars in this universe than grains of sands on all the beaches and in all the deserts on planet Earth, probably by a factor of 10,000 to 1. Currently there are only two main theories that attempt to explain how all of this came out of "nothing": (1) An infinite number of quantum mechanical "choices" every instant coupled with an infinite number of inflation events each instant, neither of which are really understood by physicists they are just things they need to make their preconceived notions work mathematically, for reasons no one knows other than it would exclude a Creator, or (2) a Creator. Occam's Razor is definitely going with option #2.
6 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
synchronicity 7/11/2022 11:59:44 PM (No. 1213530)
PS - there are around 360 fine-tuning constants having to do with the strength of various forces (atomic, gravitational, etc.) making up our physical Universe that allows for life to exist. If any of these varied by a tiny amount, whether stronger of weaker, life couldn't exist. Hence the need for infinity x infinity (number of new universes being created each instant) that materialist scientists posit to explain the accidental tuning of all those forces by random "blind" chance that accidently allowed us to come into existence. Someone once said that if you have a theory that can explain anything it really doesn't explain anything.
0 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
jerrodmason 7/12/2022 1:36:23 AM (No. 1213570)
#18: I believe that the number of key fine-tuning constants is 6, not 360. See "Just Six Numbers" by Martin rees for detail.
#14: I was indeed around in 1969, working on guidance systems. I supported Apollo, but for psycho-political reasons, not scientific or military. You apparently think that no justification is needed for spending any amount of money for pure research. I don't, and think you would have a hard time defending such a notion.
0 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
ARKfamily 7/12/2022 6:13:03 AM (No. 1213621)
#15, it points me to one thing - God sure is awesome!
2 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
MickTurn 7/12/2022 9:00:34 AM (No. 1213761)
What about the Billions of Universes?
0 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
kono 7/12/2022 12:10:24 PM (No. 1214057)
No flak for #11 -- just a reminder that the development and deployment of this telescope took years, and the economy has gone through several ups and downs since the project was funded. (I.e. it wasn't bought under Dementia Josef's economic trainwreck...)
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)