7 ms·

Wow. The NIRCam image is probably going to be the most exciting new photo, but I can't get over how well MIRI reveals the internal structure of the nebula. NIR

Wow. The NIRCam image is probably going to be the most exciting new photo, but I can't get over how well MIRI reveals the internal structure of the nebula. NIRCam: https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Horsehead_Nebula_NIRCam_image https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Horsehead_... MIRI: https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Horsehead_Nebula_MIRI_image2 https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Horsehead_... Comparison: https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Slider_Tool_Webb_NIRCam_and_MIRI_images https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/04/Slider_Too...

dylan604 3y ago
I love that there are multiple sensors that can be compared to like this, but also love when the optical images from Hubble are compared as well. The images that combine all of the frequencies from Chandra X-rays, Hubble's optical, and now Webb's IR make for some truly fascinating images.
- GrumpyNl 3y ago
  Is this image of what the eye would see or is it modified?
  - Sharlin 3y ago
    The JWST, as is well known, is a near and mid infrared telescope, its range (600 to 2850 nm) overlapping with human vision only a little bit in the deep red. So every single JWST image is necessarily in false color.
    - dylan604 3y ago
      Even Hubble images are false color as well. It uses filters and then recombines them to RGB channels. People naturally ask what they would actually see, but they actually wouldn't see much of anything. Using a telescope to look at things, one only sees a black and white image. We've been shown so much from sci-fi with space ships showing nebulas and nova remnants out their view screens, but that' just not what one would see.
      - dekhn 3y ago
        No. A normal visible light telescope absolutely shows color. You can just point a DSLR with a zoom lens and no filters at the sky, take a picture of M42, and confirm that yourself.
        dylan604 3y ago
        I'm sorry, but the last time I checked a DSLR is not my eye. I have plenty of images from my telescope and various cameras. How you can conflate the 2 is beyond me. Comparing a long exposure from a digital sensor to what your eye can see is beyond bonkers and confusion of the topic at hand, or right in front of our eyes to keep it on subject
        dekhn 3y ago
        Maybe I misread your statement "Using a telescope to look at things, one only sees a black and white image". Certainly you can see color when looking at planets (mars, jupiter, saturn). But more importantly: you can see M42 in color with a telescope and eyes, it doesn't need to be a camera or film. If your point is that it's hard for your retina to detect a rich color spectrum from distant objects without either magnification or time-averaging, sure, but that's not how your comment reads. Before you jump to "bonkers" maybe give the people you reply to some credit- I'm an amateur astronomer with facts at his disposal.
        dylan604 3y ago
        > Before you jump to "bonkers" maybe give the people you reply to some credit- I'm an amateur astronomer with facts at his disposal. As am I, and any time I use an eye piece, it is nothing but b&w for DSOs even for something as bright as Orion's Nebula. The spirit of the conversation is if people can see the true color the way images from large telescopes posted in articles like this. They cannot. You take the reaction from the average person that has only seen processed images after looking through a telescope for the first time, and they will almost always have a bit of disappointment in their voice. I have taken my scope to rooftop bars and let patrons look through at whatever can be seen at the time. I have yet to do this and not meet someone that's never looked through a telescope with their own eyes--which is the point of my effort.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
HumblyTossed 3y ago
Crazy how many galaxies are in that one photo (in the background).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- afterburner 3y ago
  Number of stars in the Milky Way: 100 billion Number of galaxies in the universe: 200 billion to 2,000 billion
  - markus_zhang 3y ago
    Is 2,000 billion some theoretical limit or something else? Thanks.
    - sandworm101 3y ago
      Yes. Take the age of the universe, multiple by the rate of expansion to get the total size of the universe, then multiple by the average density of galaxies in the observable universe. There are some further complications, but at the root it is basic algebra.
      - worldsayshi 3y ago
        Is that really the way to see it? As I understand it, the Big Bang didn't happen in "one place". The Universe is expanding from an compressed state - the Big Bang state. But there is no center point. We can only see that there's expansion but it's not from a single point. The only known "center point" is us. And the only reason it's a center point is because we can only see as far away as light has traveled since the Big Bang.
        reactordev 3y ago
        This theory of multiple points supports the big ring and other structures outside the “this shouldn’t exist” bubble. The bubble is the Big Bang + rate of expansion. It was thought that there was nothing outside of the farthest point… but there is!
HenryBemis 3y ago
And when 'zooming in' and seeing the top 2/3 of the photo (https://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2024/04/horsehead_nebula_nircam_image/26010612-1-eng-GB/Horsehead_Nebula_NIRCam_image_pillars.jpg https://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/im...) I am super amazed that all these small discs showing are galaxies. GALAXIES (sorry for the caps). How tiny are we (Humans, Earth, Solar system)... less than a speck of dust in the Sahara. I used to look up in space when I was growing up and there wasn't any light pollution to the small town I was growing up in. At some point I think I started suffering from 'cosmic horror'. In later years I would pay attention only to the moon, and that reduced my stress significantly. Nowadays (like in this bit of news, with photos) when I stick to the small photo in an article, I feel ok. When I see it in full size and I zoom in, and I realize that "sh*t! these 5-10-50 tiny white marks are GALAXIES.. and I have to change topics/tabs to keep the cosmic horror at bay.
- chrisweekly 3y ago
  Interesting. I've also always had a visceral response to particularly clear night skies - but it's only ever been a profoundly positive feeling. It kind of erases the idea that my "problems" have any significance at all.
  - lm28469 3y ago
    The loss of dark skies is so painful, maybe the worst thing modern life brought to us. I remember laying in the grass with my grandma looking at the stars for hours, she would tell me how the whole village gathered around the only TV they had to watch the moon landing live, about sputnik, galaxies, satellites, &c. there aren't many things as mesmerising, maybe watching a fire or the ocean waves, but it doesn't trigger the same emotions in me. I don't travel much but when I go to remote areas star gazing is up there on my list of things to do; watch the stars until you're about to pass out from hypothermia, go back inside, make some tea, enjoy the fireplace, forget about the daily (non) problems, it never gets old
- syspec 3y ago
  Experience that all the time with the same imagery, with the same amazement / horror combination. What's more amazing is when you share this fact to most people "did you know each dot here is a GALAXY, not a star!" they go "heh... interesting" and shrug. For some reason that makes the whole thing even crazier to me

dylan604 3y ago

I love that there are multiple sensors that can be compared to like this, but also love when the optical images from Hubble are compared as well. The images that combine all of the frequencies from Chandra X-rays, Hubble's optical, and now Webb's IR make for some truly fascinating images.

GrumpyNl 3y ago
Is this image of what the eye would see or is it modified?
- Sharlin 3y ago
  The JWST, as is well known, is a near and mid infrared telescope, its range (600 to 2850 nm) overlapping with human vision only a little bit in the deep red. So every single JWST image is necessarily in false color.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    Even Hubble images are false color as well. It uses filters and then recombines them to RGB channels. People naturally ask what they would actually see, but they actually wouldn't see much of anything. Using a telescope to look at things, one only sees a black and white image. We've been shown so much from sci-fi with space ships showing nebulas and nova remnants out their view screens, but that' just not what one would see.
    - dekhn 3y ago
      No. A normal visible light telescope absolutely shows color. You can just point a DSLR with a zoom lens and no filters at the sky, take a picture of M42, and confirm that yourself.
      - dylan604 3y ago
        I'm sorry, but the last time I checked a DSLR is not my eye. I have plenty of images from my telescope and various cameras. How you can conflate the 2 is beyond me. Comparing a long exposure from a digital sensor to what your eye can see is beyond bonkers and confusion of the topic at hand, or right in front of our eyes to keep it on subject
        dekhn 3y ago
        Maybe I misread your statement "Using a telescope to look at things, one only sees a black and white image". Certainly you can see color when looking at planets (mars, jupiter, saturn). But more importantly: you can see M42 in color with a telescope and eyes, it doesn't need to be a camera or film. If your point is that it's hard for your retina to detect a rich color spectrum from distant objects without either magnification or time-averaging, sure, but that's not how your comment reads. Before you jump to "bonkers" maybe give the people you reply to some credit- I'm an amateur astronomer with facts at his disposal.
        dylan604 3y ago
        > Before you jump to "bonkers" maybe give the people you reply to some credit- I'm an amateur astronomer with facts at his disposal. As am I, and any time I use an eye piece, it is nothing but b&w for DSOs even for something as bright as Orion's Nebula. The spirit of the conversation is if people can see the true color the way images from large telescopes posted in articles like this. They cannot. You take the reaction from the average person that has only seen processed images after looking through a telescope for the first time, and they will almost always have a bit of disappointment in their voice. I have taken my scope to rooftop bars and let patrons look through at whatever can be seen at the time. I have yet to do this and not meet someone that's never looked through a telescope with their own eyes--which is the point of my effort.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

HumblyTossed 3y ago

Crazy how many galaxies are in that one photo (in the background).

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
afterburner 3y ago
Number of stars in the Milky Way: 100 billion Number of galaxies in the universe: 200 billion to 2,000 billion
- markus_zhang 3y ago
  Is 2,000 billion some theoretical limit or something else? Thanks.
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    Yes. Take the age of the universe, multiple by the rate of expansion to get the total size of the universe, then multiple by the average density of galaxies in the observable universe. There are some further complications, but at the root it is basic algebra.
    - worldsayshi 3y ago
      Is that really the way to see it? As I understand it, the Big Bang didn't happen in "one place". The Universe is expanding from an compressed state - the Big Bang state. But there is no center point. We can only see that there's expansion but it's not from a single point. The only known "center point" is us. And the only reason it's a center point is because we can only see as far away as light has traveled since the Big Bang.
      - reactordev 3y ago
        This theory of multiple points supports the big ring and other structures outside the “this shouldn’t exist” bubble. The bubble is the Big Bang + rate of expansion. It was thought that there was nothing outside of the farthest point… but there is!

HenryBemis 3y ago

And when 'zooming in' and seeing the top 2/3 of the photo (https://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2024/04/horsehead_nebula_nircam_image/26010612-1-eng-GB/Horsehead_Nebula_NIRCam_image_pillars.jpg https://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/im...) I am super amazed that all these small discs showing are galaxies. GALAXIES (sorry for the caps). How tiny are we (Humans, Earth, Solar system)... less than a speck of dust in the Sahara. I used to look up in space when I was growing up and there wasn't any light pollution to the small town I was growing up in. At some point I think I started suffering from 'cosmic horror'. In later years I would pay attention only to the moon, and that reduced my stress significantly. Nowadays (like in this bit of news, with photos) when I stick to the small photo in an article, I feel ok. When I see it in full size and I zoom in, and I realize that "sh*t! these 5-10-50 tiny white marks are GALAXIES.. and I have to change topics/tabs to keep the cosmic horror at bay.

chrisweekly 3y ago
Interesting. I've also always had a visceral response to particularly clear night skies - but it's only ever been a profoundly positive feeling. It kind of erases the idea that my "problems" have any significance at all.
- lm28469 3y ago
  The loss of dark skies is so painful, maybe the worst thing modern life brought to us. I remember laying in the grass with my grandma looking at the stars for hours, she would tell me how the whole village gathered around the only TV they had to watch the moon landing live, about sputnik, galaxies, satellites, &c. there aren't many things as mesmerising, maybe watching a fire or the ocean waves, but it doesn't trigger the same emotions in me. I don't travel much but when I go to remote areas star gazing is up there on my list of things to do; watch the stars until you're about to pass out from hypothermia, go back inside, make some tea, enjoy the fireplace, forget about the daily (non) problems, it never gets old
syspec 3y ago
Experience that all the time with the same imagery, with the same amazement / horror combination. What's more amazing is when you share this fact to most people "did you know each dot here is a GALAXY, not a star!" they go "heh... interesting" and shrug. For some reason that makes the whole thing even crazier to me