Telescope Reviews: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point?

· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt

· Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

You are not logged in. [Login]

Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online
FAQ · Calendar

Speciality Forums >> Science! Astronomy & Space Exploration, and Others

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point?
#4954940 - 12/07/11 12:58 PM

I thought the point of the James Webb and Terrestrial Planet Finder was to take over Kepler once candidates exoplanets were found. But now with these project canceled, we'll get an ever growing list of potential liquid water bearers among thousands of exoplanets and no means to have the resolution necessary to image them. This is even more frustrating that not knowing these exosystems exist.
It was ten years ago when i read about this great project of space interferometry with small telecopes flying in formation at a Lagrange point, using wave nulling techniques to cancel the star glow, and now that we know the planets are there, nothing. It can't be. There must be a project to reach the exoplanet resolution in space, right?

Post Extras:

InterStellarGuy
professor emeritus

Reged: 06/25/08

Loc: Nebraska

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4955270 - 12/07/11 03:46 PM

Yeah cancelling TPF is really a bad idea. With all these thousands of exo planets a mission is needed to analyze them, to be able to take the light these planets give off, analyze the spectrum and tell us about the planet. Maybe even tell us whether or not the planet is inhabited.

I really hope NASA has some idea of what to do after Kepler to get more information.

Post Extras:

EJN
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 11/01/05

Loc: Highway 61

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4955295 - 12/07/11 04:00 PM

Quote:

But now with these project canceled

The James Webb Space Telescope is not canceled. A House committee
voted to de-fund it last summer, but the Senate restored funding.
The compromise budget also funded it, and it was signed into
law recently. It could still be canceled in the future, but is safe for
the next fiscal year.

Post Extras:

InterStellarGuy
professor emeritus

Reged: 06/25/08

Loc: Nebraska

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: EJN]
#4955297 - 12/07/11 04:01 PM

Quote:

Quote:

But now with these project canceled

The James Webb Space Telescope is not canceled. A House committee
voted to de-fund it last summer, but the Senate restored funding.
The compromise budget also funded it, and it was signed into
law recently. It could still be canceled in the future, but is safe for
the next fiscal year.

Yeah but JWST wont be able to do analysis of exo planet spectra like TPF was going to do

Post Extras:

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: InterStellarGuy]
#4955403 - 12/07/11 05:18 PM

The ISS could prove itself usefull by installing a couple of Celestron14 at each end of its structure and do some interferometry. For a $100+ billions project, it could at least be credited of a memorable success to remember for the posterity, if it was able to image the first exoplanet.
Instead of that, I don't even know of any scientific achievement of the iss, and worse, if there is one, it could probably have been done by a $1 billion Skylab or a $10 million Soyouz or chinese station.

Post Extras:

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4955844 - 12/07/11 09:24 PM

actually i am listening to R Zubrin right now and he just mentioned that NASA is still spending 2 billions/years for the ISS...what for?

Post Extras:

EJN
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 11/01/05

Loc: Highway 61

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4955993 - 12/07/11 10:57 PM

Quote:

NASA is still spending 2 billions/years for the ISS...what for?

More cowbell.

Post Extras:

Kobayashi
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 07/10/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: EJN]
#4956141 - 12/08/11 01:28 AM

I don't think the technology exists for TPF at this point, at least not at the TRL (technology readiness level) required for a major satellite mission. But I'm sure technology development will continue until TPF becomes a reality. JWST will establish some of the necessary techniques (lightweight beryllium mirrors, deployable optics, thermal control at the L2, etc) and there are other missions that establish other technologies (e.g. the Proba-3 satellite which will demonstrate precision formation flight).

Post Extras:

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Kobayashi]
#4956484 - 12/08/11 09:49 AM

Pardon me to quote Zubrin again, but the 'lack of technology' is precisely why NASA needs to set goals. You set a goal with a deadline and you develop the technology within the deadline and within the budget. Then, when the deadline comes, you go with the best solution you've got so far.
I guess i am just frustrated that all these announcements of exoplanets will stay flat for the next 20 years or maybe more.

Post Extras:

InterStellarGuy
professor emeritus

Reged: 06/25/08

Loc: Nebraska

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4956487 - 12/08/11 09:51 AM

Quote:

Pardon me to quote Zubrin again, but the 'lack of technology' is precisely why NASA needs to set goals. You set a goal with a deadline and you develop the technology within the deadline and within the budget. Then, when the deadline comes, you go with the best solution you've got so far.
I guess i am just frustrated that all these announcements of exoplanets will stay flat for the next 20 years or maybe more.

I hope not . I hope that the discovery of an Earth twin will come about, and spark a mad dash to get information on it.

I am 29 now, I'd like to think that before I die we will get some more substantive information re: The habitable exo planets.

Post Extras:

Kobayashi
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 07/10/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4956827 - 12/08/11 01:44 PM

Quote:

Pardon me to quote Zubrin again, but the 'lack of technology' is precisely why NASA needs to set goals. You set a goal with a deadline and you develop the technology within the deadline and within the budget.

Basic technology development doesn't work that way, you can't set a deadline and budget for something you don't know how to make.

Post Extras:

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Kobayashi]
#4956945 - 12/08/11 03:07 PM

Interferometry is OLD news. I have a recollection of early interferometry experiments of the 70s by a french pioneer, Antoine Labeyrie.
He has a web page now
http://www.oamp.fr/lise/index.html
and in english
http://www.oamp.fr/lise/Antoinesspecialpage.html

or at NASA
http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/TPF/tpf_index.cfm

(I don't work for Labeyrie in any ways) but i bet if you give him a deadline and a budget, he, or others, would have 'some ideas' how to set an interferometer in space. Plus, i suggested to use the iss for that, to avoid space flight in formation.

Post Extras:

Rick Woods
Postmaster

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Kobayashi]
#4957158 - 12/08/11 05:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Pardon me to quote Zubrin again, but the 'lack of technology' is precisely why NASA needs to set goals. You set a goal with a deadline and you develop the technology within the deadline and within the budget.

Basic technology development doesn't work that way, you can't set a deadline and budget for something you don't know how to make.

Oh, yes you can. That's what Kennedy forced NASA to do with Apollo. Necessity (or a deadline) is the mother of invention.

Post Extras:

Rick Woods
Postmaster

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4957166 - 12/08/11 05:45 PM

Quote:

actually i am listening to R Zubrin right now and he just mentioned that NASA is still spending 2 billions/years for the ISS...what for?

I just said this on another thread, but since it came up; the ISS will be worth its weight in gold if we ever do a Mars sample return mission. We really need to be sure there are no dangerous biologics on Mars before bringing them into our biosphere.

There is no possible safe way to bring Martian samples to Earth until we know for sure. We wouldn't get a second chance. Earth's climate is a heck of a lot more comfortable than Mars', and a tough, pathogenic organism could conceivably move right in and take over.

Zubrin is a visionary, but sometimes he's a bit myopic.

Post Extras:

Shadowalker
Apocaloptimist

Reged: 11/23/04

Loc: Bay Saint Louis, Mississippi, ...

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Kobayashi]
#4957180 - 12/08/11 05:58 PM

Quote:

I don't think the technology exists for TPF at this point, at least not at the TRL (technology readiness level) required for a major satellite mission. But I'm sure technology development will continue until TPF becomes a reality. JWST will establish some of the necessary techniques (lightweight beryllium mirrors, deployable optics, thermal control at the L2, etc) and there are other missions that establish other technologies (e.g. the Proba-3 satellite which will demonstrate precision formation flight).

Ken, what kind of technology would be needed to mature for a TPF mission, aside from those JWST will demonstrate?

Post Extras:

dickbill
professor emeritus

Reged: 09/30/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Shadowalker]
#4957212 - 12/08/11 06:22 PM

The James Webb wouldn't have the resolution to resolve exoplanets anyway.
If you read Labeyrie, he says that many small mirrors (he said inches size) are better than fewer big ones. His concept of hypertelescpe imagines hundreds of small mirrors that, i guess, would have to be independantly controled by their own AI and flight control systems.

Rick, the ISS doesn't have the structural strenght to sustain the accelerations to go to MArs.

Post Extras:

Sgt
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 12/17/05

Loc: Under the southern horn of the...

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: dickbill]
#4957356 - 12/08/11 08:00 PM

I think Rick meant use the ISS as a quarantine and initial analysis base for Martian samples before sending down to earth, not boost the whole thing to mars orbit.

Post Extras:

Rick Woods
Postmaster

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Sgt]
#4957394 - 12/08/11 08:23 PM

Quote:

I think Rick meant use the ISS as a quarantine and initial analysis base for Martian samples before sending down to earth, not boost the whole thing to mars orbit.

Thank you - that's just what I meant.

Post Extras:

Kobayashi
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 07/10/08

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Shadowalker]
#4957511 - 12/08/11 10:15 PM

Quote:

Ken, what kind of technology would be needed to mature for a TPF mission, aside from those JWST will demonstrate?

TPF will need either a deployable structure stable enough to do interferometry, or formation flying with similar stability. I don't believe either has been demonstrated.

Post Extras:

FeynmanFan
sage

Reged: 02/18/11

Loc: N Colo front range

Re: No James Webb, No TPF, what's the point? new

[Re: Kobayashi]
#4957640 - 12/08/11 11:55 PM

Neither has been demonstrated because, as far as I know, no one has tried.

Post Extras:

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)

Extra information

1 registered and 3 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator: LivingNDixie, Jarad, WaterMaster

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Thread views: 1172

Jump to

CN Forums

Home

Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics