MalcolmNathaniel
Posts: 1394
Joined: 9/20/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterG2kTR First Hubble is a visual telescope and these are RADIO telescopes. To answer why these will be so much better than anything before is because it's being built in a high altitude of the DRIEST desert on earth. This greatly reduces the amount of water vapor they have to see through, that might otherwise distort or diminish the incoming signals. Okay...now I get it. quote:
First Hubble is a visual telescope and these are RADIO telescopes. To answer why these will be so much better than anything before is because it's being built in a high altitude of the DRIEST desert on earth. This greatly reduces the amount of water vapor they have to see through, that might otherwise distort or diminish the incoming signals. Just to be a little more pedantic (because it's so unusual for an engineer to be pedantic): Radio telescopes use separated antennae to allow for better detection of a vast spectrum of wavelengths of radiation. Calling them radio-telescopes isn't quite accurate, they are better called Very Large Arrays (VLA*.) While difficult to explain in the form of a text post, they basically use mathematics to imitate a very large lens. The Hubble telescope has a lens that had to fit in to a shuttle bay. It's only 7.9 feet wide (2.4 meters.) By contrast a VLA is often hundreds of meters in size. The one in question uses dishes that are 12 Meters (39.4 feet) in diameter. And there are 66 of them - about 3 miles higher than the heavy atmosphere at sea level - and there are going to be between 50 and 66 of them**. So while the Hubble is higher, the Atacama Array is just so much fracking bigger that the elevation advantage is dwarfed. Also, to divert from the rest of my post, this is freaking cool. * Not to be confused with _the_ VLA in New Mexico. ** Reports vary. Politics and money are involved. Edited to remove excessive quoting.
< Message edited by MalcolmNathaniel -- 7/16/2012 11:15:06 PM >
|