Space
How to prevent the earth from being baked by the scorching sun?
Published
5 months agoon
How to prevent the earth from being baked by the scorching sun?
One day, the sun will enter a stage where life on Earth will no longer be possible and our planet will simply turn into a mass of iron and nickel. The good news is that if we do our best, we can keep our home livable even after the sun gets too hot.
Waking nightmare
The Sun will gradually become brutally brighter, hotter, and larger over time. Billions of years ago, the Sun was 20 percent dimmer than it is today when a series of molecules danced together to form living things. At that time, even the dinosaurs faced a fainter and smaller star.
Today, the sun is halfway through its hydrogen life and is still 4 billion years away from entering the death phase. However, in the next few hundred million years, the temperature and brightness that is giving life to our planet today will lead to its destruction. A few hundred million years is like a blink of an eye on a cosmic scale.
The sun is getting bigger and brighter day by day.
The sun sows the seeds of its destruction based on its fundamental physical properties. In the current conditions, our star consumes 600 million tons of hydrogen every second; So the atoms collide with each other in a nuclear inferno with a temperature of more than 15 million degrees Celsius. Of these 600 million tons, 4 million tons of hydrogen are converted into energy, which is enough to light up the entire solar system.
The fusion reaction is not completely clean and the resulting product is helium. Helium has nowhere to go because the deep convective cycles that continuously churn up the material inside the Sun do not reach the core, where helium is formed; Therefore, helium remains there in an unused, motionless, and stagnant form.
The sun consumes 600 million tons of hydrogen every second
At the present time, the Sun has not reached the high temperature and pressure in its core for helium fusion; So the helium stays there, increasing the overall mass of the nucleus without giving it anything else to fuse with. Fortunately, the sun can compensate for this process through hydrostatic balance.
The Sun is in constant equilibrium on the edge of a nuclear knife. On the one hand, energy is released from the fusion process, which, if left unchecked, can cause the sun to explode or at least expand. In front of this force, there is the gravitational weight of the sun, which exerts an inward force. If this force is released, the sun’s gravity will cause it to collapse and turn it into a black hole the size of an average city.
So what happens when an unstoppable force meets an irresistible force? A pleasant balance is established and the sun can continue to exist for billions of years. If for any reason the temperature of the inner nuclear inferno increases randomly, other parts of the star will also heat up and its outer layers will swell. In this way, the gravitational pressure decreases and the nuclear reactions slow down. If the Sun randomly contracts, more material will force itself into the core, where it will participate in the nuclear dance. The energy released as a result of this event causes the star to re-inflate to normal proportions.
The sun will destroy the earth before it dies.
On the other hand, helium, which is a nuclear product, replaces hydrogen and disturbs the balance. In this state, the sun has no choice but to pull internally, because gravity is unyielding. Meanwhile, nuclear reactions intensify and increase the temperature, which eventually causes the sun’s surface to glow and expand.
Slowly, as helium continues to accumulate in the core of the Sun, or any star of similar mass, the Sun grows larger and brighter in response to this process. It is difficult to predict exactly when this glow will become catastrophic for the Earth, this issue is strongly related to the relationship between the rays, the atmosphere, and the ocean; But the general estimate is that we have about 500 million years before life on Earth becomes impossible.
The burning sun will increase the temperature of the earth’s surface. It evaporates at higher ocean temperatures. Since water vapor is an important greenhouse gas, a large part of it remaining in the Earth’s atmosphere leads to higher surface temperatures. Higher temperatures lead to more evaporation of the oceans, setting the stage for the greenhouse cycle. Finally, we will witness the escape of a large part of the earth’s waters into the atmosphere.
Without water to lubricate tectonic activity, tectonic plates stop moving. Without tectonic activity to pull carbon out of Earth’s atmosphere, the planet’s air density would increase dramatically. As a result, in a few hundred million years, we will become Venus, the twin planet of Earth, which experienced the same fate billions of years ago; Two dead worlds in the hands of their parent star.
By shifting the earth’s orbit, it can be saved from the sun.
Change the position of the planet
The habitable zone is the region around a star where the temperature is suitable for the flow of liquid water on the surface of a planet. Temperatures near the star are too high to prevent any atmospheric complexity so that water exists only as vapor. Outside this range, the temperature is very low.
Earth is now roughly in the middle of the Sun’s life belt, Venus is on the inner edge, and Mars is almost outside. As the age of the sun increases and its brightness increases, the life belt will reach more distant parts of the solar system; So if we want the Earth to survive this process, we have to move it.
Moving a planet will not be an easy task; But fortunately, we are dealing with vast astronomical time scales and we don’t need to move the earth today. In fact, we have hundreds of millions of years to plan this transition. To do this, we can use the same stabilizing force that keeps the planets in orbit around the sun, and that force is nothing but gravity.
The first thing we need to do is find an energy source. Raising the earth’s orbit requires a lot of energy, and this energy has to be supplied from somewhere. Fortunately, we can use the planet Jupiter. Since this gaseous world is 318 times heavier than Earth, its simple movement through the sky provides a surprising amount of kinetic energy, and a small amount can be borrowed.
We are almost 500 million years away from the destruction of the earth by the sun
Jupiter’s energy can be transferred to Earth through orbital interactions. To better understand this issue, suppose you are standing inside a wheeled platform on a railway track and a train is moving towards you. You can’t step out of the way of a train (because then the analogy wouldn’t be fun); So your only chance to survive is to move at least as fast as the train. Of course, if you simply let the train hit the counter, then your speed will match the speed of the train, but not in the way you’d expect.
Instead, you can reach into your pocket and pull out a bouncing meatball. Suppose, this ball is durable and indestructible. You throw the ball at the train. The ball hits the train and bounces back. Then you grab it and move forward a bit. With just a little practice, and through simple conservation of momentum, you’ll find that you can steal some of the train’s energy and give it to yourself and the rolling platform. The train barely notices these collisions, but you do. If you get enough power you can move on without facing disaster.
Now let’s return to the example of Earth and Jupiter. The above analogy is suitable for preventing Jupiter from colliding with our planet, except we use asteroids instead of bouncing balls. We can send asteroids on long orbits around Jupiter. In this scenario, the gravitational interaction between the planet Jupiter and the asteroid leads to an increase in the speed of the asteroid and, in turn, a slight decrease in the speed of the giant Jupiter. Then we can bring the asteroid back to Earth, rotate it in the opposite direction, and achieve the desired force by slowing down its motion.
Running the above process once doesn’t have much effect; So we have to repeat it for hundreds of millions of years so that the Earth can reach higher orbits and thus escape from the wrath of the sun. If our descendants can control this process, they can move the Earth into a safe zone of the habitable zone.
The Sun loses mass through the solar wind or particle stream.
Star setting
If you are not interested in changing the arrangement of the planets, but have the ability for super-engineering projects, we have another solution for you. The main problem with the sun is that helium is a natural product of our star’s fusion process. The hydrogen fusion ratio is defined based on the total mass of the Sun; The bigger a star is, the faster it burns, and in the same way, smaller stars burn at a slower rate; Therefore, if we want to limit the amount of helium production, we must slow down the fusion reactions. The easiest way is to reduce the total mass of the Sun.
Fortunately, the sun is naturally decelerating, but not fast enough. The surface of the Sun continuously emits an endless stream of tiny charged particles, which we call the solar wind. In terms of human-scale statistics, the amount of mass that the Sun loses through the solar wind is 1 to 2 million tons per second, which is an incredibly high rate; But this speed should be increased a little.
The Sun loses one to two million tons of mass every second through the solar wind
One way to speed up the mass loss of the Sun is to heat its surface with lasers or special rays, strong magnetic fields, or whatever mechanism our descendants choose. Heating the surface of the sun leads to an increase in the production of solar winds, and thus the speed of the sun’s mass loss increases; But high-energy particles that are released at high speed are not suitable for habitability on Earth, so they must be transported to a safe place.
One way to control the solar wind is to build a series of particle accelerator stations in orbit around the Sun’s equator. These stations continuously exchange charged particles and create a loop of current in the shape of the solar belt. This current loop creates a torus (donut-shaped) magnetic field that can transform the solar wind into polar outflows in the direction of the sun’s rotation axis and safely remove harmful particles from our planet.
The torus magnetic field can be used to compress the star. According to this method, first, the stations are turned off and thus the particles fall into the sun. Then, by turning on the stations, the magnetic field is interrupted and the falling process is reversed. The magnetic field surrounding the sun’s equator is compressed, forcing particles to be repelled from the sun’s poles.
If our descendants are advanced, they can capture the elusive solar wind and use it for other purposes, such as fusion reactor systems to power an entire facility, and if they are creative, they can direct the outflow of the solar wind in one direction and use it as a booster rocket. use solar to guide the solar system to new points in the Milky Way or even outside the galaxy.
Of course, the technique of moving the star reduces the brightness of the sun; Because despite the lower mass, the fusion reactions take place in a quieter atmosphere, which reduces the power and dimensions of our star. In this way, the life belt moves to an inner part. We may not realize this at first, because the things we do are in opposition to the natural tendency of the life belt to move outward; But eventually, after the Sun has lost 10-20% of its mass, we have to move the Earth to the inner part of the life belt to keep it in the right spot.
In the end, we are left with a smaller, long-lived star. The smallest red dwarfs with a mass of a little more than one-tenth of the Sun can live for trillions of years; But at the same time, it has a more chaotic nature, because due to their low mass, they are subject to stellar explosions that periodically double their brightness. If our descendants want to take this path to increase the life of the sun, they must definitely prevent these explosions.
All in all, if humanity can survive for billions of years, it will probably become an interplanetary or interstellar entity. In this situation, there will be no need to save the land. Perhaps our distant descendants can preserve the land from which they sprang as a mark of respect. Perhaps this is necessary because no other world is as suitable for life as Earth. Ultimately, perhaps, it is an art project, an opportunity to create beauty and wonder on an interplanetary scale, before the fires of nuclear fusion die out and our star breathes its last. The last chapter of the story ends the billions of years of life of the solar system.
You may like
-
Dark matter and ordinary matter can interact without gravity!
-
James Webb Space Telescope deepens cosmology’s biggest controversy
-
James Webb vs. Hubble
-
There is more than one way for planets to be born
-
Why is Jupiter one of the first targets of the James Webb Space Telescope?
-
Why is Jupiter not a star due to its large size?
Space
Dark matter and ordinary matter can interact without gravity!
Published
7 days agoon
01/10/2024Preposition: For each; per.
Noun: A topology name.
Noun: which has mass but which does not readily interact with normal matter except through gravitational effects.
Adverb: Beyond all others.
Preposition: For each; per.
Noun: A topology name.
Dark matter and ordinary matter can interact without gravity!
Why is dark matter associated with the adjective “dark”? Is it because it harbors some evil forces of the universe or hidden secrets that scientists don’t want us to know? No, it is not. Such fanciful assumptions may sound appealing to a conspiracy theorist, but they are far from the truth.
Dark matter is called dark because it does not interact with light. So when dark matter and light collide, they pass each other. This is also why scientists have not been able to detect dark matter until now; it does not react to light.
Although it has mass and mass creates gravity, this means that dark matter can interact with normal matter and vice versa. Such interactions are rare, and gravity is the only known force that causes these two forms of matter to interact.
However, a new study suggests that dark matter and ordinary matter interact in ways other than gravity.
If this theory is correct, it shows that our existing models of dark matter are somewhat wrong. In addition, it can lead to the development of new and better tools for the detection of dark matter.
Read more: There is more than one way for planets to be born
A new missing link between dark and ordinary matter
Dark matter is believed to have about five times the mass of normal matter in our universe, which helps hold galaxies together and explains some of the motions of stars that don’t make sense based on the presence of visible matter alone.
For example, one of the strongest lines of evidence for the existence of dark matter is the observation of rotation curves in galaxies, which show that stars at the outer edges of spiral galaxies rotate at rates similar to those near the center. These observations indicate the presence of an invisible mass.
Also, for their study, the researchers studied six ultra-dim dwarf (UFD) galaxies located near the Milky Way. However, in terms of their mass, these galaxies have fewer stars than they should. This means they are mostly made up of dark matter.
According to the researchers, if dark matter and normal matter interact only through gravity, the stars in these UFDs should be denser in the centers and more spread out toward the edges of the galaxies. However, if they interact in other ways, the star distribution looks different.
The authors of the study ran computer simulations to investigate both possibilities. When they tested this for all six ultra-dim dwarf (UFD) galaxies, they found that the distribution of stars was uniform, meaning that the stars were spread evenly across the galaxies.
This was in contrast to what is generally observed for gravitational interactions between dark matter and normal matter.
What causes this interaction?
The results of the simulations showed that gravity is not the only force that can make dark matter and normal matter interact. Such an interaction has never been observed before, and it could change our understanding of dark matter and dark energy.
However, this study has a major limitation. What caused the interaction between the two forms of matter is still a mystery. While the current study provides tantalizing hints of a novel interaction, its exact nature and underlying causes remain unknown. Hopefully, further research will clarify the details of such interactions.
This study was published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters.
Space
James Webb Space Telescope deepens cosmology’s biggest controversy
Published
2 weeks agoon
26/09/2024How the James Webb Space Telescope deepens cosmology’s biggest controversy
Summary of the article:
- Almost a century ago, Edwin Hubble discovered the expansion of the universe and calculated the expansion rate or the cosmic constant.
- Since Hubble, many groups have tried to measure the expansion rate of the universe. However, the values they obtained differed from the theoretical predictions. This difference is called Hubble tension.
- Scientists today use three methods to measure the expansion rate of the universe: Cephasian variable stars, TRGB red giant stars, and JAGB asymptotic giants.
- However, the Hubble tension still exists, indicating that the methods for calculating the Hubble constant suffer from a systematic flaw.
- Researchers hope to be able to use the James Webb telescope in the coming years to achieve more accurate measurements of the universe’s expansion rate and thus resolve the Hubble tension.
Almost a century ago, Edwin Hubble discovered that the universe was getting bigger. However, today’s measurements of how fast the universe is expanding are contradictory. These discrepancies show that our understanding of the laws of physics may be incomplete. On the other hand, everyone expected the sharp eyes of the James Webb telescope to bring us closer to the answer to the riddle; But a new analysis of the telescope’s long-awaited observations once again reflects inconsistent expansion rates from different types of data, while pointing to possible sources of error.
Two competing groups have led efforts to measure the rate of expansion of the universe, known as Hubble’s constant, or H0. A group led by Adam Reiss of Johns Hopkins University, relying on the known constituents of the universe and the governing equations, has consistently calculated the Hubble constant to be approximately 8 percent higher than the theory predicts the universe’s expansion rate. This discrepancy, known as the Hubble tension, indicates that the model of the cosmological theory may have missed some elements such as raw materials or effects that speed up the expansion of the universe. Such an element can be a clue to a more complete understanding of the world.
This spring, Reiss and his team published new measurements of the Hubble constant based on data from the James Webb Telescope and found a value consistent with their previous estimates. However, a rival group led by Wendy Friedman of the University of Chicago warns that more precise measurements are needed. The team’s measurements of the Hubble constant are closer to the theoretical estimate than Riess’ calculations, suggesting that the Hubble stress may not be real.
Since the commissioning of the James Webb Telescope in 2022, the astrophysical community has been waiting for Friedman’s multidimensional analysis based on telescope observations of three types of stars. The results are now as follows: the two-star types provide estimates of the Hubble constant that are in line with the theoretical prediction; While the results of the third star, which is the same type used by Reiss, are consistent with his team’s higher estimates of Hubble’s constant. According to Friedman, the fact that the results of the three methods are contradictory does not mean that there are unknown physical foundations, but that there are some systematic errors in the calculation methods.
Contradictory world
The difficult part of measuring cosmic expansion is measuring the distance of space objects. In 1912, American astronomer Henrietta Levitt first used pulsating stars known as Cephasian variables to calculate distances. These stars flicker at a rate proportional to their intrinsic luminosity. By understanding the luminosity or radiant power of a Cephasian variable, we can compare it with its apparent brightness or dimming to estimate its galaxy’s distance from us.
Edwin Hubble used Levitt’s method to measure the distances to a set of galaxies hosting the Cephasian variable, and in 1929 he noticed that the galaxies that are farther away from us are moving away faster. This finding meant the expansion of the universe. Hubble calculated the expansion rate to be a constant value of 500 km/s per megaparsec. In other words, two galaxies that are 1 megaparsec or approximately 3.2 million light years apart are moving away from each other at a speed of 500 km/s.
As progress was made in calibrating the relationship between the pulsation frequency of Cepheids and their luminosity, measurements of the Hubble constant improved. However, since the Cephasian variables are very bright, the whole approach used has limitations. Scientists need a new way to measure the distance of galaxies from each other in the infinite space.
In the 1970s, researchers used Cephasian variables to measure the distance to bright supernovae, and in this way they achieved more accurate measurements of the Hubble constant. At that time, as now, two research groups undertook the measurements, and using supernovae and Cephasian variable stars, they achieved contradictory values of 50 km/s per megaparsec and 100 km/s per megaparsec. However, no agreement was reached and everything became completely bipolar.
Edwin Hubble, the American astronomer who discovered the expansion of the universe, stands next to the Schmidt telescope at the Palomar Observatory in this photo from 1949.
The launch of the Hubble Space Telescope in 1990 gave astronomers a new and multi-layered view of the universe. Friedman led a multi-year observing campaign with Hubble, and in 2001 he and his colleagues estimated the expansion rate to be 72 km/s/Mpa with an uncertainty of at most 10%.
A Nobel laureate for the discovery of dark energy, Reiss got into the expansion game a few years later. In 2011, his group found the Hubble constant to be 73 with a three percent uncertainty. Soon after this, cosmologists excelled in another way. In 2013, they used Planck’s observations of light left over from the early universe to determine the exact shape and composition of the early universe.
In the next step, the researchers connected their findings to Einstein’s theory of general relativity and developed a theoretical model to predict the current state of the universe, up to approximately 14 billion years into the future. Based on these calculations, the universe should be expanding at an approximate rate of 67.4 km/s per megaparsec with an uncertainty of less than one percent.
Reese’s team measurement remained at 73, even with the improved accuracy. This higher value indicates that the galaxies today are moving away from each other at a faster rate than theoretically expected. This is how the Hubble tension was born. According to Reiss, today’s Hubble tension shows us that something is missing in the cosmological model.
The missing factor could be the first new element in the universe to be discovered since dark energy. Theorists still have doubts about the identity of this agent. Perhaps this force is some kind of repulsive energy that lasted for a short time in the early universe, or perhaps it is the primordial magnetic fields created during the Big Bang, or perhaps what is being missed is more about ourselves than the universe.
Ways of seeing
Some cosmologists, including Friedman, suspected that unknown errors were to blame for Hubble’s tension. For example, Cephasian variable stars are located in the disks of younger galaxies in regions full of stars, dust, and gas. Even with Hubble’s fine resolution, you don’t see a single Cephasian variable, according to George Afstatio, an astrophysicist at the University of Cambridge. Rather, you see it overlapping with other stars. This density of stars makes measurements of brightness difficult.
When the James Webb Telescope launches in 2021, Reiss and his colleagues will use its powerful infrared camera to peer into the crowded regions that host the Cephasian variables. They wanted to know whether the claims of Friedman and other researchers about the effect of the area’s crowding on the observations were correct.
The 6.5-meter multi-section mirror of the James Webb Space Telescope at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. This mirror passed various test stages in 2017.
When the researchers compared the new numbers to distances calculated from Hubble data, they saw a surprising match. The latest results from the James Webb telescope confirmed the Hubble constant measured by the Hubble telescope a few years ago: 73 km/s/Mpa with a difference of one kilometer or so.
Concerned about crowding, Friedman turned to alternative stars that could serve as distance indicators. These stars are found in the outer reaches of galaxies and away from the crowd. One of those stars belongs to the group ” Red Giant Branch ” or TRGB for short. A red giant is an old star with a puffy atmosphere that shines brightly in the red light spectrum. As a red giant ages, it eventually burns helium in its core, and at this point, the star’s temperature and brightness suddenly decrease.
A typical galaxy has many red giants. If you plot the brightness of these stars against their temperature, you reach a point where the brightness drops off. The star population before this brightness drop is a good distance indicator; Because in each galaxy, such a population has a similar distribution of luminosity. By comparing the brightness of these star populations, astronomers can estimate their relative distances.
The Hubble tension shows that the standard model of the cosmos is missing something
Regardless of the method used, physicists must calculate the absolute distance of at least one galaxy as a reference point in order to calibrate the entire scale. Using TRGB as a distance index is more complicated than using Kyphousian variables. MacKinnon and colleagues used nine wavelength filters from the James Webb telescope to understand how brightness relates to their color.
Astronomers are also looking for a new indicator: carbon-rich stars that belong to a group known as the “Jay region asymptotic giant” (JAGB). These stars are far from the bright disk of the galaxy and emit a lot of infrared light. However, it was not possible to observe them at long distances until James Webb’s launch.
Friedman and his team have applied for observation time with the James Webb Space Telescope in order to observe TRGBs and JAGBs, along with more fixed spacing indices and Cephasian variables, in 11 galaxies.
The vanishing solution
On March 13, 2024, Friedman, Lee, and the rest of the team meet in Chicago to find out what they’ve been hiding from each other. Over the past months, they were divided into three groups, each tasked with measuring distances to 11 galaxies using one of three methods: Cephasian variable stars, TRGBs, and JAGBs.
These galaxies also host related types of supernovae, so their distances can calibrate the distances of supernovae in many more distant galaxies. The rate at which galaxies move away from us divided by their distance gives the value of the Hubble constant.
Wendy Friedman at the University of Chicago is trying to fit the James Webb Telescope observations into the Standard Cosmological Model.
Three groups of researchers calculated distance measures with a unique, random counterbalancing value added to the data. During the face-to-face session, they removed those values and compared the results.
All three methods obtained similar distances with three percent uncertainty. Finally, the group calculated three values of Hubble’s constant for each distance index. All values were within the theoretical prediction range of 67.4. Therefore, Hubble’s tension seemed to be resolved. However, they ran into problems with further analysis to write the results.
The JAGB analysis was good, But the other two were wrong. The team found that there were large error bars in the TRGB measurements. They tried to minimize the errors by including more TRGBs; But when they started doing this, they found that the distance to the galaxies was less than they first thought. This change caused the value of Hubble’s constant to increase.
Friedman’s team also discovered an error in Cephaus’s analysis: in almost half of the pulsating stars, the term crowd was applied twice. Correcting this error increased the value of Hubble’s constant significantly. Hubble’s tension was revived.
Finally, after efforts to fix the errors, the researchers’ paper presents three distinct values of Hubble’s constant. The JAGB measurement yielded a result of 67.96 km/s/megaparsec. The TRGB result was equal to 69.85 with similar error margins. Hubble’s constant was obtained at a higher value of 72.05 in the Kyphousian variable method. In this way, different hypotheses about the characteristics of these stars caused Hubble’s stress value to vary from 69 to 73.
By combining the aforementioned methods and uncertainties, the average Hubble stress value equal to 69.96 was obtained with an uncertainty of four percent. This margin of error overlaps with the theoretical prediction of the expansion rate of the universe, as well as the higher value of Tim Reiss.
Tensions and resolutions
The James Webb Space Telescope has provided methods for measuring the Hubble constant. The idea is simple: closer galaxies look more massive; Because you can make out some of their stars, while more distant galaxies have a more uniform appearance.
A method called gravitational convergence is more promising. A massive galaxy cluster acts like a magnifying glass, bending and magnifying the image of a background object, creating multiple images of the background object when its light takes different paths.
Brenda Fry, an astronomer at the University of Arizona, is leading a program to observe seven clusters with the James Webb Space Telescope. Looking at the first images they captured last year of the G165 cluster, Fry and his colleagues noticed three spots that were not previously seen in the images. These three points were actually separate images of a supernova that was located in the background of the aforementioned cluster.
After repeating the observation several times, the researchers calculated the difference between the arrival times of the three gravitational lensing images of the supernova. This time delay is proportional to Hubble’s constant and can be used to calculate this value. The group obtained an expansion velocity of 75.4 km/s/Mpa with a large uncertainty of 8.1%. Fry expects the error bars to correct after several years of similar measurements.
Both Friedman’s and Reiss’ teams predict that they will be able to get a better answer with James Webb’s observations in the coming years. “With improved data, the Hubble tension will eventually be resolved, and I think we’ll get to the bottom of it very quickly,” Friedman says.
James Webb vs. Hubble; Comparing the images of two space telescopes
The James Webb Space Telescope is now the flagship of the world of space telescopes. James Webb uses the largest mirror of any telescope launched into space and orbits the Sun at a distance from Earth (approximately 1.5 million kilometers). This telescope is supposed to make a big change in astronomy and astrophysics by looking at the farthest parts of the world and unveiling new secrets.
However, in the past three decades, the Hubble Space Telescope has been the main player in the field of space telescopes. Launched in 1990, this telescope has recorded many epic images of planets, stars, galaxies, nebulae and many other astronomical wonders.
Since Hubble was in near-Earth orbit, it could take accurate pictures of the universe without the Earth’s atmosphere interfering with its operation. The telescope captured amazing images during its prolific career and continues to serve its mission. According to NASA, over the past 32 years, Hubble has made 1.5 million observations and contributed to more than 19,000 scientific papers.
Now James Webb is going to take the flag from Hubble and further enhance our understanding of the universe. In a blog post comparing the two space telescopes, NASA called James Webb the “scientific successor” to Hubble. Without Hubble’s observations of the cosmos, researchers would not have prioritized building a telescope that could go beyond Hubble’s field of view. Continue with Zoomit to have a closer look at the images of celestial targets in both telescopes.
Deep field
The top right photo is the deep Hubble wallpaper taken in 1995 and released in 1996. At the time of recording, this photo was considered the deepest image taken of the universe. In order to make it, the researchers took 342 photos during 10 days with a total of 100 hours of exposure. The final result revealed more than three thousand scattered galaxies in a very small part of the sky. Over the next few decades, Hubble operators took better pictures of this type and looked much deeper into space.
The Hubble Ultra Deep Image or XDF was released in 2012.
The photo above is the Hubble Ultra Deep Wallpaper released in 2012. More than 5500 galaxies are visible in this photo. Over the course of a decade, the researchers collected 50 days of observations from a concentrated area, resulting in two million seconds of exposure (over 23 days).
Then along came James Webb. The first full-color scientific photo by James Webb was released on Tuesday morning Iran time by US President Joe Biden as a preview for the first set of telescope images. While capturing Hubble’s deep fields required days, if not weeks, of exposure, James Webb managed to capture this image after just 12.5 hours of exposure.
The recorded area of the sky in the image above is incredibly small; So small that it is about the size of a grain of sand on a person’s hand on the ground. In that part of the sky, a galaxy cluster called SMACS 0732 is located 4.6 billion light-years away. This cluster is so large that it bends space-time around it and, like a cosmic microscope, reveals faint galaxies far behind it. Some of these galaxies are considered to be the faintest infrared objects ever observed, and scientists are eagerly waiting to learn more about them.
Shahabhi Nebula (Karina)
The image above shows one of Hubble’s most popular targets, the Carina Nebula, at a distance of 7,200 light years from us. The image on the right, released by the Hubble Heritage Project in 2008, shows part of the star-forming region in the corner of the nebula.
The picture looks like an impressionist landscape with hills, valleys, and columns of gas and dust scattered around, with only a few bright stars behind the nebula. Now James Webb’s updated image shows the same stunning landscape in much greater detail and clarity. In the photo, there are stars that were previously hidden behind gas and dust.
Read more: Why is Jupiter one of the first targets of the James Webb Space Telescope?
Stephan’s quintuplets
This group of five galaxies is stunning in a Hubble image taken in 2009 after the telescope’s camera was upgraded earlier that year. That year, the space shuttle made its fifth and final visit to Hubble and applied a major upgrade. In addition to the new camera that took this photo, the telescope was also upgraded and repaired. The ability of astronauts to rendezvous with Hubble in near-Earth orbit kept the space telescope operational for a very long time.
However since James Webb is so far from Earth, he will not have the advantage of meeting astronauts. However, the spacecraft has enough fuel for at least 20 years; This means that in the future we will see many more images like the one above.
The photo above shows a group of galaxies that were first observed in 1877. The upper left galaxy is considered the alien mass of the group and is much closer to Earth than the other four members. However, the other four galaxies are so close that James Webb can see the shock waves from the interaction between them as they kill each other.
Stephen’s quintuplet is the largest image taken by the James Webb Telescope and is actually a mosaic made up of more than a thousand separate images captured by the telescope’s two instruments: the Near Infrared Camera (NIRCam) and the Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI). Both cameras collect infrared wavelengths of light and help James Webb see through gas and dust; But as their names suggest, both collect different wavelengths of infrared light.
Southern Ring Nebula
The last image is the Southern Ring Nebula, which was imaged by Hubble in 1998. The “ring” is the dying star particles (the faintest of the two bright spots in the center of the image). The little white dwarf causing all this chaos was a star the size of our Sun. At some point, the star ran out of fuel and ejected its outer layers, creating the ring seen in the image. The diameter of the ring is about half a light year and the gases are moving outward at a speed of nearly 14.5 km/s.
On the left, the Southern Ring Nebula is seen through the eyes of James Webb’s two instruments, Nirkem and Miri. The image we have chosen for comparison was captured by Nirkam’s near-infrared camera. Another version of the image is also recorded in mid-infrared.
The wonderful world of ultrasound
How to solve the problem of slow charging of the Android phone?
Why does Everest get higher every year?
The new version of Copilot was unveiled; Microsoft artificial intelligence
Dark matter and ordinary matter can interact without gravity!
Why is the loneliness epidemic so hard to cure?
Google brand story; From a small startup to ruling the web world
How to hide a file or directory in Linux?
How does loneliness affect the brain and body?
Can telescopes see astronaut footprints on the moon?
Popular
-
Technology1 year ago
Who has checked our Whatsapp profile viewed my Whatsapp August 2023
-
Technology1 year ago
Second WhatsApp , how to install and download dual WhatsApp August 2023
-
Technology1 year ago
How to use ChatGPT on Android and iOS
-
AI2 years ago
Uber replaces human drivers with robots
-
Technology1 year ago
The best Android tablets 2023, buying guide
-
Technology1 year ago
The best photography cameras 2023, buying guide and price
-
Humans2 years ago
Cell Rover analyzes the inside of cells without destroying them
-
Technology1 year ago
How to prevent automatic download of applications on Samsung phones