[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Wow, so this is how the birth of a planet looks like? How can the Hubble get such clean and perfect images? This almost looks like a painting.

https://www.awanireview.com/hubble-witnesses-the-birth-of-a-giant-planet/
>>
>>13075623
that's an illustration

hubble can't photograph exoplanets wirh surface detail directly, instead it can detect planets/planet birth by looking at gravitational anomalies, periodic dimming of stars, and absorption lines
>>
>>13075638
So the birth of a giant planet is not like that? Why do the media post those pics then? Where ate the real Hubble pictures then?
>>
>>13075623
You see artists are the real scientists. (at least the good ones)
Yes, it is true, in order to make a machine working, you need high precision, which you can reach only due to measurements, and mathematics.
But in order to understand what reality is, you need to understand how geometry works.
>>
Fuck off OP
>>
>>13075828
???
>>
>>13075651
Afaik all the data is available to the public. there should be a link to raw data somewhere on the nasa.gov website.
>>
>>13075844
>>13075651
Here you go, anon. I think this is perhaps what you are looking for.
>>
>>13075861
Forgot the link:
>https://hla.stsci.edu/hlaview.html

Hopefully you know what you’re looking at because personally I don’t
>>
>>13075861
Where's the birth of the planet? That pic doesnt look like it was taken by a million dollars telescope...
>>
>>13075885
This is why they spend all this money on generating simulations, 3d graphics and artists. Regular folks would be so disappointed that they would demand the government to stop funding space exploration. It's all a marketing move.
>>
>>13075915
So we can't actually see any of those things they claim are happening in space and that the Hubble is taking pictures of? What the fuck? Is that classic Hubble pic full of galaxies also a fucking fraud?
>>
>>13075885
Like I said, I have no clue what I’m looking at either, or what I’m looking for. But I am also interested in this topic, so perhaps we can work together in this thread and figure it out.

NASA is tax payer funded, right? So isn’t the Hubble data meant to be public domain? I do not know for sure how it works at all, and .gov sites are notoriously difficult to navigate and have really poor UI.
Here’s some (potentially) notable links I found so far from searching "raw data Hubble":
>https://hubblesite.org
Didn’t look around here much, but you might find a lead on this website. There is a sitemap at the bottom of the page.
>https://registry.opendata.aws/hst/
Refers to a dataset containing "calibrated and raw" Hubble data. Appears to be updated hourly
>https://astroquery.readthedocs.io/en/latest/mast/mast.html
Documentation for the dataset mentioned in previous link.
>https://gadgetzz.com/2020/05/21/tutorial-make-your-own-hubble-images-using-data-from-the-legacy-archive/?amp
A guide that seems to describe the process that artists use to render images from Hubble data.

Well, good luck. Let me know if you figure out anything interesting.
>>
File: potw2108a.jpg (120 KB, 1041x899)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
>>13075918
fp here, no

planet and star pictures are usually cg, since they're almost impossible to capture due to their angular size, but galaxies and nebulae have much larger angular sizes (the andromeda galaxy for example, is from edge to edge 5 times the diamater of the full moon when viewed from earth), so they're readily captured

the picture i've posted is of NGC 4862, aka the black eye galaxy, this is a real picture taken by hubble
>>
>>13075918
Space doesnt exist.
>>
>>13076065
that's terrifying. this universe is monstrous and obscene.
>>
>>13076065
space isn't even real so how can that image be real? Something isn't adding up here
>>
>>13076065
kickass dude
>>
>>13076084
This but unironically.
>>
File: PDS 70b.png (114 KB, 1031x443)
114 KB
114 KB PNG
>>13075638>hubble can't photograph exoplanets wirh surface detail directly
Just because it cannot resolve an exoplanet doesn't mean it cannot directly image one. This article is doing exactly that. Here are the Hubble images from the paper.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.13934
>>
File: eso1821a.jpg (64 KB, 1280x1083)
64 KB
64 KB JPG
>>13076519
SPHERE on the VLT took a much better image, ground based telescopes have much better coronagraphs than Hubble.
>>
>>13076065
How do you know all that bro? Got any book recommendations?
>>
>>13076540
Whoa, that's the planet? That's awesone as fuck
>>
>>13076943
The bright spot is the planet, the rest is the protoplanetary disk around the star. The star is in the middle, blocked out by the black circle.
>>
>>13076084
>>13076343
Check between your ears.
>>
>>13077039
How do they block the star?
>>
>>13077604
You calling them galaxy brains?
>>
>>13078198
>Galaxies are mostly empty space
yes



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.