How can't we see that?

alteadeo · Jul 30, 2005

We discovered an object that could be a 10th planet. Ok. We're not sure of what it is, or such. I'm a total newbie to these kind of matter, so, I'm asking... WHY? Why can't we "see" that planet, when Hubble can send us images of galaxies far away?

ehs40 · Jul 30, 2005

because the the size and distance of the object it is so small and far away hubble cant take a picture

alteadeo · Jul 30, 2005

woooaww... We're making telescope that can take pictures of nebulas at X millions of X type of distance, yet, can't take clear and cool pictures of our own solar system... Sometime, I like the dark ages... <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

Saiph · Jul 30, 2005

and even though galaxies are so far away, they're, as my sister once put it, ginormous! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Jul 30, 2005

but the planet is small, and very dim. It'll appear like a random small star to hubble, and unless your looking for it, you won't find it. A lot of asteroids, and comets and such have been photographed long before they were "discovered". People just didn't notice them, as they don't appear much different from the background stars. Also remember the total number of researching astronomers is probably around 5,000 (less than 10,000 I'm sure). That's all the people that make a living studying things off of this planet. A lot of space, and a lot of material to study, and few people to do it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

lunatio_gordin · Jul 30, 2005

not to mention the galaxies are giving off their own generated light, while this thing is only reflecting a small amount of incredibly faint sunlight.

nexium · Aug 2, 2005

My guess is 14 inch is not sufficient even with an 8 hour exposure of a photographic plate. A long exposure with a CCD = charge coupled device may be sufficient. The slightly elongated dots for the stars will be at a slightly different angle due to the "proper motion" of the 10 th, 11th, or 12th "planet" More than slightly elongated means you are not detecting stars or "planets" dimmer than about 25 th magnetude. Please embellish, correct and/or comment. Neil

CalliArcale · Aug 2, 2005

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />A lot of asteroids, and comets and such have been photographed long before they were "discovered". People just didn't notice them, as they don't appear much different from the background stars.<hr /></blockquote> Interesting factoid: the first person to record a sighting of Neptune was.....Galileo Galellei! He observed a faint "star" in his telescope and dutifully recorded the sighting. Unfortunately, it was cloudy on subsequent viewing opportunities and he never had a chance to spot it again, or he might have noticed its motion against the background of "fixed" stars and realized that it was a planet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Search

How can't we see that?

alteadeo

Guest

ehs40

Guest

alteadeo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

lunatio_gordin

Guest

nexium

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page