10 ms·

It's not the first space-based observatory, but it's still a _wholly novel_ device, containing instrumentation designed by scientists and engineers in concert t

It's not the first space-based observatory, but it's still a _wholly novel_ device, containing instrumentation designed by scientists and engineers in concert to leverage every piece of bleeding edge technology available at the time, and some throughout the process. Everyone of the flagship observatories is moon shot. It's not a mass-produced helicopter or missile. This project in particular is easily one of the wildest feats of science and engineering _ever_ just like Hubble, Cern, and LIGO. Regarding the bomb, we were trying to end a global conflict, so the comparison couldn't be further off base.

airstrike 5y ago
Plus the bomb was built with the literal opposite purpose of the JWST: blowing up! Worst case scenario it doesn't blow up exactly right and you just build another one?
- cmpb 5y ago
  I see your point, but you could also argue that worst case scenario for atomic bomb malfunction is much more awful than worst case for JWST
  - lazide 5y ago
    With the mindset at the time, the worst case scenario for the atomic bomb would have been it not going off in anyway way, and then they just handed their greatest enemy dud version if a top secret weapon. Since it likely would have just blown up (fizzle) even if it didn’t fully detonate that is a pretty remote possibility. Second worst would be it went off on a base somewhere and nuked a US base. Considering the location of these bases and the nature of the war at that point, it would have been a footnote causality wise, but embarrassing.
- retzkek 5y ago
  The worst case considered at the time was an uncontrolled chain-reaction annihilating the planet. It was calculated to be impossible, but it still weighed on the minds of many scientists involved, even well into the hydrogen bomb era. https://www.insidescience.org/manhattan-project-legacy/atmosphere-on-fire https://www.insidescience.org/manhattan-project-legacy/atmos...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

airstrike 5y ago

Plus the bomb was built with the literal opposite purpose of the JWST: blowing up! Worst case scenario it doesn't blow up exactly right and you just build another one?

cmpb 5y ago
I see your point, but you could also argue that worst case scenario for atomic bomb malfunction is much more awful than worst case for JWST
- lazide 5y ago
  With the mindset at the time, the worst case scenario for the atomic bomb would have been it not going off in anyway way, and then they just handed their greatest enemy dud version if a top secret weapon. Since it likely would have just blown up (fizzle) even if it didn’t fully detonate that is a pretty remote possibility. Second worst would be it went off on a base somewhere and nuked a US base. Considering the location of these bases and the nature of the war at that point, it would have been a footnote causality wise, but embarrassing.
retzkek 5y ago
The worst case considered at the time was an uncontrolled chain-reaction annihilating the planet. It was calculated to be impossible, but it still weighed on the minds of many scientists involved, even well into the hydrogen bomb era. https://www.insidescience.org/manhattan-project-legacy/atmosphere-on-fire https://www.insidescience.org/manhattan-project-legacy/atmos...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]