GIANT Magellan Telescope is Made of 7 HUGE Mirrors & Won't Produce Diffraction Spikes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 окт 2022
- ↓↓↓ Links and more in full description below ↓↓↓
You can buy me a coffee if you enjoyed this and want to support these videos. You don't have to though, no pressure. www.buymeacoffee.com/chrispat...
RELATED VIDEOS:
Spikes in JWST Images: • Why are JWST Stars so ...
How to Image a Black Hole: • The Earth-Sized Telesc...
New Telescopes that should be built: • The Next DECADE of Ast...
NASA Smashed a Spacecraft into an Asteroid: • How Big was the DART I...
LINKS/SOURCES:
GMT Website: giantmagellan.org/
Casting mirrors: www.sciencefriday.com/segment...
GMT Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_M...
GMT RUclips: / giantmagellantelescope
Hey team!
If there is some other cool topic in physics you think we should learn about together, leave a comment down below!
Until next time, stay safe.
Please consider subscribing if you enjoyed the video, and you can also find me on Twitter and Instagram:
/ chrisdpattison
/ chrispattison22
A brilliant description of the giant Magellan telescope’s structure and capabilities. This telescope will be one of the largest earthbound optical telescopes which will reveal astronomical structures with astounding detail. Yet another exciting project which will continue to add to our knowledge of the universe. Many thanks Chris, as always, for a clear, straightforward explanation of a complex scientific artefact
Thanks so much David, it will be really exciting when this telescope comes online. It should be a remarkable thing!
Jwst cmon think this 1 better get real I .just watched a show this biatch was supposed be finished 2016.. Freaking WTF.. Gov waste
The spare mirror idea is really something!
Starlink satellite will block all ground based telescope
lol
Yeah, most people don't get it. Starlink = light pollution. Never, ever, a good ide.
I learned a lot in this video, thank you so much! I never even thought about those spikes or what caused them. 2030 will be stretching it but I might be able to make it, lol.
This was well done! Definitely jumping in on your channel early because I can see you rising quickly to the top!
Thank you so much Daemic!
GMT looks like a stunning instrument.
I agree, it will be awesome when it's all complete!
Thanks. Another awesome video.
Thank you! :)
2030...geeez. we've been waiting for this telescope for soooo long.
Great video! Thanks Chris
Thanks a lot!
Love your videos!
Thanks so much!
Just recently discovered this channel, it's really good!
Thank you so much Mat!
I don't think 'Giant' is right word... how about Ginormous - giant and enormous in same word. Can't wait to see photos this amazing telescope can capture.
Isnt some of the gain in sensitivity over Hubble and JWST lost due to the atmosphere? so what will be the net gain in sensitivity over Hubble and JWST? I suppose it wouldn't make sense to compare to JWST any way since this scope would collect visible light and JWST does IR.
For modern detectors twice the oversvation time = twice the light. A one meter can do a two meter's job twice the time but with less resolution. The real limiting problem with viewing faint objects isn't light but noise.
Like the ISO on a camera. You want more light and lower sensitivity of the detector to get less noise. Earth's atmosphere introduces scatter noise but most of that can be canceled with longer observation time and shorter exposure.
If we wanted just higher resolution that could be accomplished by just having more than one mirror farther apart. More resolution but the same light gathering capability. Resolution is controlled by aperture diameter only. But it's really hard to align mirrors to a fraction of the wavelength of light you are trying to detect.
That's why the VLTi has a 100m aperture using 8.2m mirrors. So VLT will still have a better combined resolution than GMT.
The shorter your exposure the more noise you get with fainter objects. The advantage that JWST and HUBBLE have over ground based telescopes is not resolution, its less noise, greater spectrum range (no air to block some parts of the spectrum.), and exposure time. They can tune their detector sensitivity to exactly what they want and stare at an object for an arbitrary amount of time.
Ground based telescopes need to be so big because they can’t stare for long periods of time. Even think of them catching light and trails from satellites in orbit, plus they can only work at night. They need to be big to catch lots of light in shorter periods of time using shorter exposures.
In theory, yes, you lose a lot of resolution due to the noise caused by the atmoshphere. GMT (as well of other modern, large telescopes) though will have something called "adaptive optics", which will look at the distortion that the atmosphere causes and then deforms the mirrors to compensate and "undo" that distortion. The laser you can see it shooting into the sky in some of the animations is part of this system. The net gain is 4x over webb and 10x over Hubble, thanks to this system.
It's really cool, and I actually have a video coming out about it in a week or two (depending on other releases from JWST etc), so stayed tuned for that :)
The mirrors of the telescope being discussed here would have roughly 80 times the light collecting area of the Hubble telescope. Under clear skies on a mountaintop the atmosphere would not absorb very much light.
Thanks for having legit truthful videos!! … there are a lot of videos out there on RUclips claiming JWST has seen things that is hasn’t… so sad click bait.
Thanks! :)
Hello Chris, another absolutely brilliant video here . Becky Miles (University of Portsmouth)
Thanks so much Becky (or should I call you Test 2?)! :)
@@ChrisPattisonCosmo yeah, I really need to sort out my naming conventions! 😬
outstanding
Thanks! :)
Off axis telescopes are another type
Should be possible to fit one mirror in Starship
WOW
"GIANT Magellan Telescope is Made of 7 HUGE Mirrors & Won't Produce Diffraction Spikes"..... If and when it is finished......
First!
Ayyy!
Completely agree, they did an incredible job!
@@ChrisPattisonCosmo Sorry?
That's weird, that's a reply I left to a different comment on a different video. Sorry about that, not sure what happened here!
@@ChrisPattisonCosmo 😂
This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He does not know anything about telescopes or optics. This became painfully clear listening to him talk about diffraction.