ST Alpha - "a few ?'s and observations concerning B2's comment on the maybe not existance earth-like planet..." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

a few ?'s and observations concerning B2's comment on the maybe not existance earth-like planet...

Posted by i'm not Undead yet ! (aka pacrat) Oct 15 '10, 09:04

have scientists used the Hubble telescope on any of these exoplanet sightings? surely they have... i mean, HUbble can snap awesome pics of things 1000's of light years away, so what's the problem with using it to snap a pic of something only 20 light years away? surely it's not "so close" that the pic will be fuzzy or something. i mean, it's 20 lightyears away for crying out loud...

and isn't there another telescope they've put in orbit around the earth that's as good or better than Hubble? is a fuzzy pic from 20 light years that may or may not be a habitable planet the best we can do?

Responses:

It's simply not possible to resolve something as small as a planet around a star several light years away. -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:17 13
- at this time -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:19 12
  - or ever, really. It's a consequence of optics. -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:20 11
    - at this time, 100 years after Zefram Cochrane we'll be able to pop over there in about an hour snap a cell phone photo and be back in another hour -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:26 5
      - Crash, I have something need to tell you about Star Trek... -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:28 4
        
        my point being, we'll have telescopes but they won't be stationary/orbital, they'll be on moving platforms - now what about Star Trek? -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:30 3
        
        According to Star Trek, Khan was supposed to be in power in 1996 - amoxy Oct 15, 09:35
        
        Also, I have some things to tell you about Santa. -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:33 1
        
        You're confusing me, man. Santa isn't real. Where are you going with this? -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:34
    - the better hubble don't use optics :) -- nm - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:23 4
      - that sort of defeats his initial request. -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:23 3
        
        the real question is about funnyness - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:24 2
        
        OK, I guess Hubble 2.0 is going to use your ass as a gravitational lens, then. : ) -- nm - Beryllium Oct 15, 09:25 1
        
        yep but hubble 3.9 is installed on the moon (about same size) after the atomic explotion there - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:27
I wonder why they haven't thought of that?? -- nm - mara Oct 15, 09:11
[deleted] 4
- Angelina Jolie, star - Kathy Griffin, planet -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:16 3
  - Angelina Jolie, star - Lady at the deli counter at your local safeway, planet. -- nm - Beryllium Oct 15, 09:21 2
    - It's a good thing D isn't working in the Deli anymore. - Trish Oct 15, 09:37
    - now we're getting into dwarf planets and asteroids -- nm - crash davis Oct 15, 09:27
Well, planets are quite small compared to suns/galaxies so they can't directly observe it. My understanding was that they detected extra-solar planets - oblique Oct 15, 09:08 2
- all we need is significantly better Hubble - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:11 1
  - ...with a lens the size of the moon. -- nm - Reagen Oct 15, 09:18
Sons emit light...Huble registers light, planets don't have any light - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:06 1
- Suns even -- nm - Danedukenuuk Oct 15, 09:06

Post a message top

a few ?'s and observations concerning B2's comment on the maybe not existance earth-like planet...

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.