Five Times Better Than Hubble...!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

qzzq

Guest
From Universe Today: <ul type="square">Radio Telescopes Around the World Combine in Real Time<br /><br /><b>Summary</b> - (Oct 8, 2004) European and US astronomers have linked up their radio telescopes for the first time in real-time, through the Internet. The researchers have created the world's biggest virtual radio telescope by merging observations from instruments in the UK, Sweden, the Netherlands, Poland, and Puerto Rico. The virtual instrument has a resolution which is 5 times better than the Hubble Space Telescope. The team imaged an object called IRC+10420, a star nearing the end of its life; at some point in the near future it'll explode as a supernova.<br /><br />...<br /><br />The recent 20-hour long observations, performed on 22nd September using the European VLBI Network (EVN), involved radio telescopes in the UK, Sweden, the Netherlands, Poland and Puerto Rico. The maximum separation of the antennas was 8200 km, giving a resolution of at least 20 milliarcseconds (mas); this is about 5 times better than the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). This level of detail is equivalent to picking out a small building on the surface of the moon! The inclusion of the antenna at Arecibo, in Puerto Rico, also increased the sensitivity of the telescope array by a factor of 10. Even so, observing at a frequency of 1612 MHz, the signal from the distant star was more than a billion billion times weaker than a typical mobile phone handset!<br /><br />...<br /><br />The emergent technology of e-VLBI is set to revolutionise radio astronomy. As network bandwidths increase, so too will the sensitivity of e-VLBI arrays, allowing clearer views of the furthest and faintest regions of space. Dr Mike Garrett, JIVE Director, commented, "These results provide a glimpse of the enormous potential of e-VLBI. The rapid progress in global communications networks should permit us to connect t</ul> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>
 
Q

qzzq

Guest
Yeah, LBT's are a lot cheaper! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>
 
A

Aetius

Guest
I love your signature line, Qzzq! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
E

erioladastra

Guest
<br />Well this is very exciting but very misleading to say 5 times better than HST.<br /><br />1) The radio telescopes use different wavelengths and have different resolutions. You have to be careful how you compare. Link 5 HSTs and you would be far better than 5 radio.<br />2) While ground based optical telescopes can now, or will soon, do better than HST in many ways such as resolution there are some ways they can't beat HST: HST is in orbit. Therefore you don't have absorption losses so you can see excellent UV, soft X-ray, and excellent optical. In addition, except for scopes based at the south pole (which can only see southern hemisphere objects), HST can observe many targets without interuption. If you want to study variability that is critical. Pretty pictures are nice but the real data comes from variability studies <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br />
 
Q

qzzq

Guest
Well, this is just a nice example of how international cooperation pays off. Right now, there is no orbital alternative to HST, so I'll settle for this initiative to get better data. Yes, space telescopes are more idealy situated, but ground based scopes simply don't cost as much.<br /><br />( <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> @ Aetius ) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>
 
T

thalion

Guest
I'm still waiting for the day that they put a large radio telescope on the Moon, so we can have a 384,000 km-wide "dish." Even one in geostationary orbit would be a quantum leap ahead; I realize, though, that such grand works are a long, long way off. This work is still awesome--with luck, it'll give us our first look at the event horizon of Sgr A* in a decade. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />
 
Status
Not open for further replies.