Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

citznfish t1_iz2pkua wrote

Honestly I would be shocked if this wasn't true. How many decades of advancement was there between Hubble and JWT? It better show us more, lol.

106

McKavian t1_iz325am wrote

Why is anyone surprised that a more advanced telescope is showing more detailed images?

In 20/30 years, there will be another telescope that will make JWT look like the Hubble.

I am not downplaying the JWT in the slightest, I am sure it will do great things.

7

DrMaybeDead t1_iz33ocv wrote

Not finding anything different, just better detail

−5

the_fungible_man t1_iz35d2q wrote

Stupid headline. It's a different instrument observing at different wavelengths. Hubble can see plenty that Webb is blind to.

41

CosmicRuin t1_iz3aiko wrote

Oh yay, another misleading and factually incorrect headline/article.

JWST literally sees wavelengths of light that Hubble is blind to and vice versa. Yes, JWST has higher resolution, but visible light =/= infrared light.

7

the_fungible_man t1_iz3ec1s wrote

Replying to TheRealOsciban (#869,165)

Anything that primarily radiates in the UV spectrum.

Hubble can image from far UV through near IR. Webb can make observations in orange light through mid-IR. Hubble is blind to light longer than 2500 nm. Webb is blind to light shorter than 600 nm. The instruments are not competitors. Their observations complement one another.

56

DrSendy t1_iz3tcrl wrote

All that money to see green powerpoint arrows.
Sheesh!

−1

Properjob70 t1_iz3xwte wrote

Replying to citznfish (#868,151)

In terms of the JWST instruments? Not actually that long, maybe 15 years? JWST was already on the "drawing board" when Hubble was launched. The decades between JWST & Hubble were mostly working out the proving of the engineering origami i.e. folding it up into a rocket fairing, surviving the launch vibration of the solid rocket boosters, then unfurling successfully after parting company from the launch vehicle. The mirror on JWST gives a huge advantage in speed of observation, so tens of days for Hubble to collect light is now half a day & the things it can resolve are a fair bit better (witness the observations of planets in the solar system for example, or the Ultra Deep Field).

But mostly it operates in a different part of the spectrum, which is a game changer when comparing what JWST can reveal when looking at the same area of the sky as Hubble did.

12

krichard-21 t1_iz4vvrj wrote

Anything longer than just a year or two would make a big difference.

Tech is evolving so very quickly.

0

deadindead t1_iz5iutp wrote

Replying to McKavian (#868,686)

Is anyone saying they’re surprised? I think we’re just amazed by the level of detail they achieved with JWST. It just so happens that it’s a lot more detail than the ~30 year old Hubble

0

deadindead t1_iz5odo5 wrote

Replying to McKavian (#872,816)

I mean factually speaking, hubble didn’t see those things. Should they sugarcoat it to spare Hubbles feelings? I’m confused what you’re upset about 😂

−1