Author Topic: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2  (Read 328236 times)

Offline bolun

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3423
  • Europe
  • Liked: 770
  • Likes Given: 108
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1200 on: 09/01/2022 07:44 pm »
https://twitter.com/NASA/status/1565379747856748545

Quote
Baby’s first exoplanet capture. 🍼

@NASAWebb took its first direct image of a planet outside of our solar system, roughly six to 12 times the mass of Jupiter.

Peek into future possibilities of studying distant worlds with Webb: https://go.nasa.gov/3RptBBH

Offline Oersted

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
  • Liked: 3464
  • Likes Given: 2366
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1201 on: 09/01/2022 10:26 pm »
NASA’s Webb Takes Its First-Ever Direct Image of Distant World

https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2022/09/01/nasas-webb-takes-its-first-ever-direct-image-of-distant-world/

When they write, in the blog post, that "The exoplanet is a gas giant, meaning it has no rocky surface and could not be habitable", I feel they are a being a bit too meat-centric. I mean, it is not inconceivable that some kind of intelligent life could evolve on a gas giant, with communication not based on slapping bits of meat together.... https://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/thinkingMeat.html

...But, OK, the planet is only 15-20 million years old, so I guess that is a big constraint...    :D

Offline Alpha_Centauri

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 758
  • England
  • Liked: 334
  • Likes Given: 157
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1202 on: 09/01/2022 11:12 pm »
NASA’s Webb Takes Its First-Ever Direct Image of Distant World

https://blogs.nasa.gov/webb/2022/09/01/nasas-webb-takes-its-first-ever-direct-image-of-distant-world/

When they write, in the blog post, that "The exoplanet is a gas giant, meaning it has no rocky surface and could not be habitable", I feel they are a being a bit too meat-centric. I mean, it is not inconceivable that some kind of intelligent life could evolve on a gas giant, with communication not based on slapping bits of meat together.... https://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/thinkingMeat.html

...But, OK, the planet is only 15-20 million years old, so I guess that is a big constraint...    :D

Well, that and the atmosphere is hot enough to melt cast iron...

That is after all why it is glowing enough in the IR to spot it.
« Last Edit: 09/01/2022 11:14 pm by Alpha_Centauri »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31172
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55596
  • Likes Given: 25119
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1203 on: 09/02/2022 12:06 pm »
https://twitter.com/exohugh/status/1565667519330910209

Quote
We've now seen incredible #JWST data for 2 transiting planets. But it's even more amazing to think that, from now until ~2042 we will be getting new #JWST data for an exoplanet roughly every week. This plot from @super_knova shows observations in Cycle 1 alone. It's revolutionary

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13368
  • UK
  • Liked: 3680
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1204 on: 09/19/2022 07:35 pm »
Cross posting from the update thread.

New paper alleging that the tools used to interpret exoplanet data just aren’t up to the job and risk producing faulty data.

Quote
But a new MIT study suggests that the tools astronomers typically use to decode light-based signals may not be good enough to accurately interpret the new telescope’s data. Specifically, opacity models —  the tools that model how light interacts with matter as a function of the matter’s properties — may need significant retuning in order to match the precision of JWST data, the researchers say.

If these models are not refined? The researchers predict that properties of planetary atmospheres, such as their temperature, pressure, and elemental composition, could be off by an order of magnitude.

“There is a scientifically significant difference between a compound like water being present at 5 percent versus 25 percent, which current models cannot differentiate,” says study co-leader Julien de Wit, assistant professor in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (EAPS).

“Currently, the model we use to decrypt spectral information is not up to par with the precision and quality of data we have from the James Webb telescope,” adds EAPS graduate student Prajwal Niraula. “We need to up our game and tackle together the opacity problem.”

De Wit, Niraula, and their colleagues have published their study today in Nature Astronomy. Co-authors include spectroscopy experts Iouli Gordon, Robert Hargreaves, Clara Sousa-Silva, and Roman Kochanov of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

Quote
He and his colleagues raise some ideas for how to improve existing opacity models, including the need for more laboratory measurements and theoretical calculations to refine the models’ assumptions of how light and various molecules interact, as well as collaborations across disciplines, and in particular, between astronomy and spectroscopy.

“In order to reliably interpret spectra from the diverse exoplanetary atmospheres, we need an extensive campaign for new accurate measurements and calculations of relevant molecular spectroscopic parameters,” says study co-author Iouli Gordon, a physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. “These parameters will need to be timely implemented into reference spectroscopic databases and consequently models used by astronomers."

“There is so much that could be done if we knew perfectly how light and matter interact,” Niraula adds. “We know that well enough around the Earth’s conditions, but as soon as we move to different types of atmospheres, things change, and that’s a lot of data, with increasing quality, that we risk misinterpreting.”

https://news.mit.edu/2022/astronomers-models-planetary-data-0915

Related paper:

The impending opacity challenge in exoplanet atmospheric characterization

Abstract
With a new generation of observatories coming online this decade, the process of characterizing exoplanet atmospheres will need to be reinvented. Currently mostly on the instrumental side, characterization bottlenecks will soon appear at the models used to translate spectra into atmospheric properties. Limitations stemming from our stellar and atmospheric models have already been highlighted. Here, we show that the current limitations of the opacity models used to decode exoplanet spectra propagate into an accuracy wall at ~0.5–1.0 dex (that is, three- to tenfold) on the atmospheric properties, which is an order of magnitude above the precision targeted by James Webb Space Telescope Cycle 1 programmes and needed, for example, for meaningful C/O-ratio constraints and biosignature identification. We perform a sensitivity analysis using nine different opacity models and find that most of the retrievals produce harmonious fits owing to compensations in the form of >5σ biases on the derived atmospheric parameters translating into the aforementioned accuracy wall. We suggest a two-tier approach to alleviate this problem, involving a new retrieval procedure and guided improvements in opacity data, their standardization and optimal dissemination.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-022-01773-1

Offline Orbiter

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Florida
  • Liked: 1457
  • Likes Given: 1350
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1205 on: 09/19/2022 07:47 pm »
Amazing that the telescope might be too good for some of the data analysis techniques.
« Last Edit: 09/19/2022 07:47 pm by Orbiter »
Astronomer & launch photographer

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31172
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 55596
  • Likes Given: 25119
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1206 on: 09/22/2022 08:01 am »
https://twitter.com/lars_0/status/1572854844125335555

Quote
JWST is so stable and sensitive that it can not only detect transits of exoplanets in front of stars, it can detect the decrease when the planet goes BEHIND the star and you can't see the reflected light from the planet. 🤯

Really? 🤯 indeed!

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8539
  • Highway Whatever
  • Liked: 58070
  • Likes Given: 1130
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1207 on: 09/22/2022 03:51 pm »
 If the MIRI filter wheel is something they can't do anything about, would they just use it until it breaks, assuming potential breakage wasn't a threat to other stuff?
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2405
  • Arizona USA
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1208 on: 09/22/2022 07:30 pm »
Still waiting to hear anything back regarding the Alpha Centauri A study.  Is that something we have to wait a year for or would it be released publicly like these other observations?  It's cute when a planet 400 light years is noticed but I'd rather know what our neighbor(s) 4 light years away has in its backyard.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline Hobbes-22

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 849
  • Acme Engineering
    • Acme Engineering
  • Liked: 478
  • Likes Given: 405
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1209 on: 09/22/2022 08:10 pm »
If the MIRI filter wheel is something they can't do anything about, would they just use it until it breaks, assuming potential breakage wasn't a threat to other stuff?
'use it until it breaks' means the filter wheel can get stuck in any position, and that's the only filter that can be used for all MIRI observations from then on. I suspect they would want to move the filter wheel to a neutral position instead, which gives them more options (makes all filters on the other filter wheel available).

Offline meekGee

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12785
  • N. California
  • Liked: 11994
  • Likes Given: 1332
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1210 on: 09/23/2022 03:15 am »
If the MIRI filter wheel is something they can't do anything about, would they just use it until it breaks, assuming potential breakage wasn't a threat to other stuff?
'use it until it breaks' means the filter wheel can get stuck in any position, and that's the only filter that can be used for all MIRI observations from then on. I suspect they would want to move the filter wheel to a neutral position instead, which gives them more options (makes all filters on the other filter wheel available).
If they can replicate and model the failure, they may get confident that they can sense impending doom with enough confidence to keep using it.

If they can't, then it's most likely exactly as you say.
ABCD - Always Be Counting Down

Offline hoku

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • Liked: 486
  • Likes Given: 274
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1211 on: 09/23/2022 07:58 pm »
If the MIRI filter wheel is something they can't do anything about, would they just use it until it breaks, assuming potential breakage wasn't a threat to other stuff?
'use it until it breaks' means the filter wheel can get stuck in any position, and that's the only filter that can be used for all MIRI observations from then on. I suspect they would want to move the filter wheel to a neutral position instead, which gives them more options (makes all filters on the other filter wheel available).
If I understood NASA's "operations update" correctly, the issue is not with the filter wheel, but with one of the two Dichroic/Grating Assembly (DGA) wheels A and B in the Medium Resolution Spectrograph (MRS). For full spectral coverage, these wheels have to move to three different positions (called A, B, and C in the attached graph). Thus the imaging, low resolution spectroscopy, and high contrast modes of MIRI should not be affected.

Still, I don't know the answer to Nomadd's question...
« Last Edit: 09/23/2022 08:01 pm by hoku »

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
  • USA
  • Liked: 1044
  • Likes Given: 1524
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1212 on: 11/07/2022 03:06 pm »
Should Webb telescope’s data be open to all?

Quote from: Science
The $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been observing for less than 4 months, but already a storm is brewing over access to its data. Webb images and spectra all end up in an archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, yet most of them aren’t freely available until 1 year after the data were collected. This gives the researchers who proposed the observations time to analyze them and publish results without being scooped.

But some astronomers question the practice, arguing that data from federally funded projects should be free for all to use. NASA, Webb’s primary backer, is facing an open data push from the White House and may soon end the restriction. Having so much Webb data locked away “doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just not right,” says astronomer Garth Illingworth of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who from 2009 to 2017 chaired a committee advising STScI on Webb’s future science operations.
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

You cannot correlate this to the journal issue, because federal research published in journals is permanently locked behind a paywall. JWST data is only embargoed for like a year. The two issues are not at all alike.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36113
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20459
  • Likes Given: 10613
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1213 on: 11/07/2022 03:16 pm »
Should Webb telescope’s data be open to all?

Quote from: Science
The $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been observing for less than 4 months, but already a storm is brewing over access to its data. Webb images and spectra all end up in an archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, yet most of them aren’t freely available until 1 year after the data were collected. This gives the researchers who proposed the observations time to analyze them and publish results without being scooped.

But some astronomers question the practice, arguing that data from federally funded projects should be free for all to use. NASA, Webb’s primary backer, is facing an open data push from the White House and may soon end the restriction. Having so much Webb data locked away “doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just not right,” says astronomer Garth Illingworth of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who from 2009 to 2017 chaired a committee advising STScI on Webb’s future science operations.
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

You cannot correlate this to the journal issue, because federal research published in journals is permanently locked behind a paywall. JWST data is only embargoed for like a year. The two issues are not at all alike.
Wrong on all counts. Starting with posting discussion in an Updates thread.
« Last Edit: 11/07/2022 03:17 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline deadman1204

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
  • USA
  • Liked: 1044
  • Likes Given: 1524
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1214 on: 11/07/2022 03:38 pm »
Should Webb telescope’s data be open to all?

Quote from: Science
The $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been observing for less than 4 months, but already a storm is brewing over access to its data. Webb images and spectra all end up in an archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, yet most of them aren’t freely available until 1 year after the data were collected. This gives the researchers who proposed the observations time to analyze them and publish results without being scooped.

But some astronomers question the practice, arguing that data from federally funded projects should be free for all to use. NASA, Webb’s primary backer, is facing an open data push from the White House and may soon end the restriction. Having so much Webb data locked away “doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just not right,” says astronomer Garth Illingworth of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who from 2009 to 2017 chaired a committee advising STScI on Webb’s future science operations.
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

You cannot correlate this to the journal issue, because federal research published in journals is permanently locked behind a paywall. JWST data is only embargoed for like a year. The two issues are not at all alike.
Wrong on all counts. Starting with posting discussion in an Updates thread.
The initial comment was not an update, nor is yours (neither of which you take issue with). This is just gatekeeping.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36113
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 20459
  • Likes Given: 10613
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1215 on: 11/07/2022 03:43 pm »
Should Webb telescope’s data be open to all?

Quote from: Science
The $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been observing for less than 4 months, but already a storm is brewing over access to its data. Webb images and spectra all end up in an archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, yet most of them aren’t freely available until 1 year after the data were collected. This gives the researchers who proposed the observations time to analyze them and publish results without being scooped.

But some astronomers question the practice, arguing that data from federally funded projects should be free for all to use. NASA, Webb’s primary backer, is facing an open data push from the White House and may soon end the restriction. Having so much Webb data locked away “doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just not right,” says astronomer Garth Illingworth of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who from 2009 to 2017 chaired a committee advising STScI on Webb’s future science operations.
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

You cannot correlate this to the journal issue, because federal research published in journals is permanently locked behind a paywall. JWST data is only embargoed for like a year. The two issues are not at all alike.
Wrong on all counts. Starting with posting discussion in an Updates thread.
The initial comment was not an update, nor is yours (neither of which you take issue with). This is just gatekeeping.
Posting a news article about James Webb is an update.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13368
  • UK
  • Liked: 3680
  • Likes Given: 220
NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1216 on: 11/07/2022 04:49 pm »
Should Webb telescope’s data be open to all?

Quote from: Science
The $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been observing for less than 4 months, but already a storm is brewing over access to its data. Webb images and spectra all end up in an archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, yet most of them aren’t freely available until 1 year after the data were collected. This gives the researchers who proposed the observations time to analyze them and publish results without being scooped.

But some astronomers question the practice, arguing that data from federally funded projects should be free for all to use. NASA, Webb’s primary backer, is facing an open data push from the White House and may soon end the restriction. Having so much Webb data locked away “doesn’t pass the smell test. It’s just not right,” says astronomer Garth Illingworth of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who from 2009 to 2017 chaired a committee advising STScI on Webb’s future science operations.
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

You cannot correlate this to the journal issue, because federal research published in journals is permanently locked behind a paywall. JWST data is only embargoed for like a year. The two issues are not at all alike.

As it says in the article the period should be reduced to six months. A year is an excess amount of time to hold the data back for a publicly funded instrument.

Quote
After often-heated debate, the Webb advisory committee that Illingworth chaired before the telescope’s launch urged that its proprietary period last just 6 months. Any longer, the committee concluded, and most of the data collected during the first year of observing, known as cycle 1, would be unavailable to astronomers trying to plan what to look for in cycle 2, or even some of cycle 3. For a mission then expected to only last 5 years, that was unsupportable in the view of some committee members.
« Last Edit: 11/07/2022 04:51 pm by Star One »

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3174
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2234
  • Likes Given: 1895
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1217 on: 11/08/2022 06:18 am »
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

It can be. In other cases, the suggestion is obvious and anyone in the field would have proposed it when asked "what should we do with this big IR bucket?" I think the mistake is having a one-size-fits-all embargo, whether it's 12 months or something else. It should depend on the specifics of the proposal, the type of data being acquired. Sometimes it's just acquiring samples of a type, where early publishing increases science by allowing many eyes and minds to find many stories to tell. In other cases, it's very specific to the work of the proponents, the culmination of their prior work to prove that the specific observation will serve the result.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13368
  • UK
  • Liked: 3680
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1218 on: 11/08/2022 06:52 am »
No, this is a horrible idea that will hurt the quality of work done. The data also become fully and freely available after a year. However, these scientists put in HUGE amounts of work to design and create their proposals and observations, and everything involved. They should get first pick at the data. This isn't just spending 5 minutes picking what you're gonna point the telescope it. Its months to years of work,

It can be. In other cases, the suggestion is obvious and anyone in the field would have proposed it when asked "what should we do with this big IR bucket?" I think the mistake is having a one-size-fits-all embargo, whether it's 12 months or something else. It should depend on the specifics of the proposal, the type of data being acquired. Sometimes it's just acquiring samples of a type, where early publishing increases science by allowing many eyes and minds to find many stories to tell. In other cases, it's very specific to the work of the proponents, the culmination of their prior work to prove that the specific observation will serve the result.
Wouldn’t that just needlessly complicate the system and add to the bureaucratic costs. 

Offline matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1746
  • Liked: 2080
  • Likes Given: 1864
Re: NASA - James Webb Space Telescope - Discussion Thread 2
« Reply #1219 on: 11/08/2022 12:25 pm »
The group that proposed an observation will have a leg up on others because they know what they are looking for and can have processing and what not ready to go when the data comes in.

If that is not enough, if a one year embargo is absolutely necessary, use a different telescope. 

This one is property of the American tax payers, the data should be open.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0