I live about 50 km southwest of the observatory. In fact, in certain days, you can actually see the Gemini South Observatory from here, which is just next to the former LSST. I'm definitely visiting it in the future if possible. Thanks for the video.
@@dbjt6466 That will be hard to do, since I would need a good camera, move 5 km northwest from where I live and then take a picture in a specific day or time of the day when it is visible.
@Rand Kocher No, there isn't, because the only entrance to the observatory is on the route that connects La Serena and Vicuña as you mention. It would be shorter if I would go from Ovalle to Hurtado, and then go to the observatory, but there are no entrances to it from that valley.
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each and every time. I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
Love your channel and videos. The music selection and the way in which you present your videos is fantastic, that keeps the mysterious feeling that's so inherent to space. Please don't change that, and keep up your excellent work! 🙂
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each and every time. I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
It was first known as the LSST (Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) and was renamed in honor of the late Vera C Rubin who did pioneering work on the rotation of galaxies and who was an enthusiastic mentor for young women astronomers.
Honestly why are people complaining about this to begin with? It's a difficult thing to get right, and you sure as hell don't want to get it wrong. The payoff of waiting is not only worth it, it's necessary.
@@nizarch22 People are complaining because of the assumption it's too far out to be serviced, so it is about to get launched unserviceable, outmoded and parked in the same orbit with a space tourist hotel by the time it arrives. Or parked in a space industrial park.
@@tsamuel6224 The orbit is necessary for it to function, it will be used 24/7, unlike the hubble. It has to be at one of the lagrangian points, which are 2.5 million km away (away from most satellites), so nobody ever expected it to be serviceable. Plus, everyone I see is complaining about the time, not anything else.
Folks here should understand this is a survey telescope. The short exposures aren’t meant to create colorful high resolution images like those made by Hubble or other large telescopes. Its unique feature is the huge field of view. Basically it will make a detailed mosaic image log of the entire sky ever few days. It’s goal is to spot transient or unexpected objects as soon as possible. It sounds routine but it will be a very, very busy instrument.
I've been observing the night sky since being a kid in Wyoming, and doing astrophotography since 1986. Yes, the massive low Earth satellites will be a problem, but there is one aspect which will reduce their impact on astrophotography - the Earth's shadow. The SpaceX constellation of satellites orbit at 370 miles. Anyone who observes the night sky from dark places knows that once the satellites pass into earth's shadow, they no longer reflect sunlight and are not visible. When taking astrophotographs, satellites are only a problem right after sunset and just before sunrise. The problem is the worst in the summertime when the earth's axis is tilted towards the sun and less in the winter when it is tilted away.
I live in Wyoming too! But I'm not happy about the satellites amazon just got permission for like 20,000 more so there will be even more and more the night sky will crawl, no more night time photos with wide angle either.
My understanding is they may still be 11-12th magnitude, presumably just reflecting the moon and earth lights. More than enough to ruin images with this massive, fast scope.
Just a small question, i was pleased to know that there are so many people like yourself who have been observing the sky at night for so long. I have recently sent some DVDs to mufon that were taken using two night vision cameras that take about three minute of video at a time and do this for about four hours, i managed to catch rather a lot of objects in transit that were not supposed to have been there and clearly controlled flight i wonder if you have during your time come across anything like this. I also use a mac telescope six inch but with very good optics, i mainly studied the moon but have used it elsewhere going a little deeper into space, i agree its a very much time consuming hobby but i love it.
@@davidmacphee3549 Don't worry. The Ariane 5 is a good choice with a solid track record. The only hassle is to transport the telescope all the way to French Guiana from the U.S.
"We'll go through everything you want to know about the Vera C. Rubin Observatory." How is the mirror made? How is it coated? What are the filters made from? What are they using as the camera's sensor? How do the move the telescope so precisely? How to they power the telescope. How was the high speed internet made? Is it glass fiber? How many people need to be on site to run the telescope? I could go on for a while. I don't mind not having all these questions answered in a video, I just mind the assumption we don't want to know more. (Yes, I'm being a bit unreasonable.)
The mirrors are made at the University of Arizona's Stewart Mirror Lab and are made by spin casting. That is to the glass is put in an oven that spins at a rate that produces the desired base parabolic shape for a given mirror. The back of the mirror in the oven is made of ceramic honeycomb pieces that are blasted out with high-pressure water (by hand) to leave honeycomb voids, thus making the mirror lighter. The mirror's surface is then precisely figured using computer-driven grinding and polishing. The telescope has 3 mirrors: the primary and tertiary mirrors are one-piece, with that piece figured differently for two different zones: an annular, outer zone is the primary, and then the. inside circular area is the tertiary mirror. The other mirror, the secondary stands on its own and is also an annular mirror. The hole in its center allows light to pass to the camera. For the record, the primary mirror is 8.4m in diameter, while the tertiary mirror is 5m in diameter. Both are concave. The secondary mirror is convex and has a diameter of 3.42m, making it the largest convex mirror ever made. If you are into big mirrors, you might want to check out the LBT (Large Binocular Telescope) observatory's page. It's a binocular telescope made with 2 8.4m diameter primary mirrors. Also check out GMT's page (Giant Magellan Telescope). Its primary mirror will be made up of 7 8.4m diameter mirrors. The primary mirrors for LBT and GMT were also made at the Stewart Mirror Lab. As it stands those 8.4 mirrors are the largest monolithic mirrors in the world. Fun fact: on those 8.4 mirrors, the largest "bumps" or "holes" are only 30nm high (or deep). To get a feel for how small that is, if one of those 8.4 mirrors were as wide as the US, the biggest bump would only be 1 inch tall. Is that the best they can do? No. For mirrors of that size and the design wavelengths though, finishing the mirrors more perfectly wouldn't result in better images.
I feel like we will learn a lot about space in 2021 - 2025 thx for all the likes guys I love that other people also think that we will learn a lot during those times!!!!!!!!
Your voice is very appealing 😹😹😹. It sounds like you're smiling while talking and it helps prolong my attention span. Ever considered going into teaching???
in the future we need telescopes being built on the moon, because the sky is getting more polluted every day, and if the same rhythm of countries going into space will soon be the moon and Mars covered in satellites in a large web where astronomy goes every day to further away, in fact.
Why the moon? the point of building telescopes on earth is because of easy maintenance and lower costs, but with the moon, we have no access. This is why we have telescopes in space
What advantage does the moon have compared to a telescope in orbit around Earth (like Hubble) or in a Lagrange orbit (like JWST)? It limits where the telescope can look, and takes an ENORMOUS amount of fuel to land things on the moon compared to getting something into orbit.
I feel for Duane Degn's impatience to know more, but this was a good overview of a subject I've not followed at all, and now I want to know more. I did, however, study physics many years ago and it's interesting seeing, with LIDO, the principles and design of the celebrated Michelson-Morely experiment of the late 19th Century which played a crucial role in the development of Special Relativity in 1905. Thanks for this, we'd like to see more, I'm sure.
NASA’s compass program has created blueprints for a liquid mercury telescope on the moon, this would top even the James Webb telescope. Edit: for the record this was just something I read and I don’t want to misinform anyone so please do some personal research on this if it’s a topic that interests you.
I have a spectacular starscspe here, on the Atherton Tablelands in North Queensland, Australia; Low population density, large allotments and no street lights.
I don't know. Plan to put a building in front of my house and spoil my view? I'm going to give you hell. Launch 40000 satellites for what amounts to internet access and the world doesn't get to see the stars. Screw the telescopes in space. We want uninterrupted views from here on Earth.
The Rubin Observatory is going to produce so much data - It will be an amazing telescope the communication networking alone must be an amazing technological achievement to capture all that data for open analysis.
You should do audible book or something, your voice is very soothing, helps me sleep a lot (I usually can’t sleep n scoured the youtube at night), don’t get me wrong your videos r great n i love space.
I kind of understand why the Webb is more hyped, because its pictures will be astonishing! The Vera observatory will generate a lot more data, but harder to comprehend and interpret. I am excited about both of them, but I cannot lie James Webb gives me chills :) - Also, the launch will be so complex we are all having high expectations about it!
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each and every time. I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
The space junk cube sat problem is a real issue. Right now it is just SpaceX but Facebook, Google and a couple of Chinese companies are also going to jump in the fray. In 10 years we might be looking at 5-10x the number of satellites in LEO
@@James-le8gd I think ultimately they took the right decision. ELT was a waste of time and money doomed to fail from the beginning. Don't get me wrong, the Extremely series was an interesting concept but they rushed things and the final design was extremely (pun intended) flawed. It's best to redirect the resources that would be required to solve all the technical problems, that would surely arise, towards the Stupidly Large Telescope program. Now that will be a real breakthrough once completed.
Just heard about this observatory from a geographic's episode on "planet X" (planet 9) and had to know more!!!! Fascinating and CAN'T WAIT to see what this observatory produces! What AMAZING technological times we live in! Oh to have been born a decade later than I was, to see what further advances are coming in space and explorations in the next 40 years!
Hey astrum-I was wondering if there is any plans to build a telescope in the polar regions? If not why / what is stopping that from happening? I am aware of the logistics like food water internet and transfer speeds but would those problems be negated for a clear sky with no man-made objects? Or would the magnetic field/radiation be another factor that prevents them from being built?
There are already quite a few observatories on Antarctica. That said, placing telescopes near the poles limits how much of the sky they can see. One near the equator can see everything over the course of a few months (depending on how close it can be pointed towards the Sun) but one at either pole would only be able to see a bit more than half the sky, with rest being blocked by Earth.
@@pseudotasuki Can I ask you the meaning of this affirmation :' but one at either pole would only be able to see a bit more than half the sky, with rest being blocked by Earth'? I think that we should see only different stars at the poles.
Yup, north of Chile is great for this kind of projects and also for amateur astronomers. You can even get guided tours to many of the biggest Observatory.
Ooh! The telescope with the giant lens that Physics Girl made a video about! (Though that was back when it was still called the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) Thank you for this great video!
These are great videos. It is dissapointing that mainstream television cannot produce information on a cool subject like astronomy as well as this. Mainstream TV would over hype and sensationalise an already amazing subject about where/what we really are and where we are going. Keep up the great videos and never become too commercialised.
With how many times it had been delayed so far, I won't be surprised if Rubin is finished before James Webb 😂 Thanks Alex, good to have one more thing to be excited about. We all need it in this dark year.
Okay, Alex, I really enjoy your videos; in fact, I hear them almost every day to relax, specially the ones on astronomy,, on .7 speed. Having said that, you really need to watch *all* of PBS Space Time before making videos that involve modern/contemporary physics, whether it's quantum physics or general relativity. I don't blame you; not at all. I don't doubt you got sources for all of these claims. But many times--most of the time--journalists just aren't as well-versed in their topic as they think they are. PBS Space Time is written by an astrophysicist, a university professor and a researcher, who even corresponds with colleagues if there's a subject where he specifically doesn't feel comfortable being completely accurate. There have been a bunch of *grave* errors in some of your videos, I can usually just remove them from my playlist but I decided to come here and explain it all today. At about 3:50 you say that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, and that, therefore, there is light accompanying it. That is not at all true. You 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 to watch PBS Space Time's "The Speed of Light is NOT about Light". The universe doesn't care at all about the speed of light. Light is just electromagnetism, and that's not even fundamental. But within general relativity there is a maximum speed, which got called speed of light because light travels at it, at the time it was the only known thing that traveled at it, and it happens to be the maximum speed. Today, we know that 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙡𝙚 not only can, but 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙫𝙚𝙡 𝙖𝙩 𝙘. So c is more properly known as the 𝙘𝙤𝙨𝙢𝙞𝙘 𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙡𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙩, or the speed of causality. Causality itself travels at the speed of light, and one of the things that are related to causality is gravitational influence. When gravity in a given space changes in a specific manner (which it outside of the scope of this post, but it has to do with quadrupoles--search for it), it leads to 𝙜𝙧𝙖𝙫𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙬𝙖𝙫𝙚𝙨. That's what LIGO measures. When two black holes merge, they create gravitational waves, but no electromagnetic radiation (if any is created, it is gobbled and doesn't reach us). When neutron stars collide, however, they may well create EM radiation that flee before the resulting black hole has a chance at gobbling it (the neutron stars collide first at their edges, but the black hole is formed from their nucleus), that's when you can expect to look and see them colliding. But often this burst is very short--indeed, most of it is gobbled by the resulting black hole. So neutron star collisions are (relatively) rare, the EM radiation is a short burts, and the universe is enormous. The chance of someone happening to have a telescope pointed at the right neutron star binary at time of collision is short. Now, gravitational waves travel faster than light, in effect. They aren't affected by anything that's in the way. So they do give you advance warning that some light is coming. Unfortunately, the first time this happened, the advance warning was, well, 1.7s. Which is why this telescope is immense help. It will be looking at A LOT of the sky at once, and even after the event we may see pictures of them.
As a photographer nerd: Anybody knows what the focal length of the telescope is? And does it need to change focus from infinity to get the moon in sharp focus?
@@jesperlett The difference between the focal plane for the Moon and the objects at infinity will be 0.3 micrometers. This is negligible compared to the non-flatness of the sensor and size of the pixels -- both of which are 10 micrometers.
A question about light LEO objects: those are visible only in night sky while they are still sunlit. So, they ruin only a part of field of view for a fraction of time. How large that "ruined portion" is? How much can changes of observation schedules for V.C.Rubin telescope mitigate that? Also: even when having satellites or orbital debris in field of view, can knowing their orbital parameters precisely make it possible to "subtract" them from images? Or is their light so strong that is saturates the camera? Something in between?
This telescope takes two images of the same patch to compare and dismiss the cosmic ray blips. It surely will do the same with any pesky leo satellites.
I’ve read an article about that a while ago. You can remove the trail via algorithm , however it takes quite a long time for the computer to figure that out, due to the sheer size.
@@DavidOfWhitehills Cosmic rays last micro-seconds. Satellite "trains" last for minutes on end and are MUCH brighter. These satellites are a huge problem for astronomy.
@@michisob1 It is not always possible, in particular for Rubin observatory the current Starlink satellites will saturate the CCD camera pixels, meaning that information behind the trail cannot be recovered.
@@jerometremblay7128 In the dark of night satellites are invisible, the leo ones intruding the least into post-sunset pre-dawn. I do sometimes wonder if this is irrational panic or anti-Musk that motivates comments like yours. But I'm no astronomer.
I can't envision working telescopes on the moon for decades. Plus, I think they've come to the conclusion that telescopes on the moon don't provide any advantage over telescopes they can place in orbit, Langrange points, or here on earth.
moon has a few advantages i can think of. 1 shielding for ultra low radio waves [earth is largest radio pollution source and no telescope can carry a radio shield large enough to block it] 2 physical mounting location is inherently superior to thrusters/reaction wheels in terms of reliability, speed, precision. 3 excuse for base.
I've been talkin about this telescope for quite some time.washing them make the mirrors has taught me how to actually find tune and grind and focus my own mirrors. Before anybody gets excited I have not succeeded.still though learning how they're making these giant sections of mirror is quite impressive. I can't wait to see the first images this thing turns out,especially since James Webb will be infrared and this will be visible light. With other packages available.
I don't know if I'm mistaken though, were they using a solid mirror on the Rubin observatory because I thought they was so big they had to do it in sections but I might be incorrect. PS I've probably answered my own question buy now but I would encourage everybody to do the research as well.
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each and every time. I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
I'm very excited I'm a junior associate for this telescope. So I get access to the data as soon as it comes out. My work is on dwarf galaxies so the amazing depth of the telescope is going to be ground breaking.
Eggbert08 honestly the scale of the data coming out of the telescope will be astronomical. The only way to get though the data and classify galxies will be though machine learning. Machine learning will dominate astrophysics in they coming years
This is an awesome project. On a side note, one other great side-effect of all the satellites being launched is that they will fund development of Starship, which is going to dramatically lower the cost of getting stuff to orbit. Space-based telescopes are going to get a lot cheaper once that comes online.
@@lamontcranston8181 and NASA has been mulling around the idea of a massive Moon based observatory! Kind of like the Arecibo design just in a big crater
Great video but one comment. Around 5:20, one LIGO can not define the location of an object, but there are several LIGO built or being built and they allow for the triangulation of a rough area in the sky... Which you can then observe with telescope to correlate the signals :)
I am so excited. I try to tell others about this.... But I get blank stares. But then I have no one to talk to about the things that truly interest me....quantum, cosmos, meta physics, theology, history...
So true. When I talk about space, space exploration, new technologies, etc. people's eyes glaze over and you can tell that they would rather be doing anything else at that point.
Religious people make up 84% of earth's population and for the most part do not enjoy discussions which are science related in my experience. This blanket statement has many many exceptions. If I listed only the ones I know about this would be a 10,000 word essay. Takes them out of their belief bubble and the end result is anxiousness and fear. Cheers, John Noe
If trump loses it is game over. It will never get launched. Fortunately, he will win with a huge margin. The scope will be in orbit by the time the demorats get another chance to cancel it.
Gravitational lensing would be fun to see...and whole milky galaxy map would be important for future interplanetary travel. Good to see Astro society funding it, hope it completes its use👍🏻👍🏻
Vera Rubin is my favorite Scientist. She decided to look where no one expected to make any discoveries, the 'unexciting' outer edges of Galaxies. She discovered 'Sigma' the anomalous rotational speed of the outer edges of our Galaxy relative to the Black hole at the center!
Saw a presentation on this instrument, the presenter was unable to answer my question, so I pose it here: How can such fast optics be used with interference filters, which only work properly with light from a limited range of angles? The light cone from such a fast system would have very steep marginal rays, which would totally screw up a normal interference filter. The only way around this I know of is to use very wide band filters, but my understanding is that is not the case here.
I live about 50 km southwest of the observatory. In fact, in certain days, you can actually see the Gemini South Observatory from here, which is just next to the former LSST. I'm definitely visiting it in the future if possible. Thanks for the video.
ZioDres lucky you.
@Sam Santana 😂
@Konstanley Jerknov ✅✅
@@dbjt6466 That will be hard to do, since I would need a good camera, move 5 km northwest from where I live and then take a picture in a specific day or time of the day when it is visible.
@Rand Kocher No, there isn't, because the only entrance to the observatory is on the route that connects La Serena and Vicuña as you mention. It would be shorter if I would go from Ovalle to Hurtado, and then go to the observatory, but there are no entrances to it from that valley.
I think about the JWST almost everyday
Lsn. Let's just get married. we can spend the rest of our lives wondering the solar system ans watching planets. Ps. Im pretty rich
But do you talk about it?
I just started
@@WindRipples- lol...
Likewise. It's been a lot of days now, hasn't it?
prof at my university is working on this!! he talked about it this week. it’s pretty badass. we’re gonna discover so much.
Yuuuuuuuuup! Discover how stupid so many astronomy "theories" have been.
@@AncientFlight1 What?
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact
telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent
resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the
obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of
the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics
manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each
and every time.
I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
Vaporware at it's most expensive you guys are gonna feel so stupid when NASA flees to the Cayman islands with all your stupid money
what was his name? I think I know him
True, this one is often overlooked because everyone waits for either JWST or, in my case, the 30m class ground based telescopes.
Love your channel and videos. The music selection and the way in which you present your videos is fantastic, that keeps the mysterious feeling that's so inherent to space. Please don't change that, and keep up your excellent work! 🙂
I've been an amateur astronomer for 35 years, and I haven't heard of this telescope until this video.
Can't wait to see it's images.
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact
telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent
resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the
obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of
the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics
manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each
and every time.
I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
“What can a 28 foot telescope see?”, anything it wants!
Don't you read Sky&Telescope?
Vaporware at it's most expensive you guys are gonna feel so stupid when NASA flees to the Cayman islands with all your stupid money
It was first known as the LSST (Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) and was renamed in honor of the late Vera C Rubin who did pioneering work on the rotation of galaxies and who was an enthusiastic mentor for young women astronomers.
"The James Webb space telescope launch in 2021." Don't you think it would be safer to say "Launching sometime in the mid twenty-first century."?
2021 may be a little optimistic but i'm hopeful it launches smoothly by end of year and that the public starts seeing dividends by Q1 2021.
теб пък кой те пита ве, кавалче?
Honestly why are people complaining about this to begin with? It's a difficult thing to get right, and you sure as hell don't want to get it wrong. The payoff of waiting is not only worth it, it's necessary.
@@nizarch22 People are complaining because of the assumption it's too far out to be serviced, so it is about to get launched unserviceable, outmoded and parked in the same orbit with a space tourist hotel by the time it arrives. Or parked in a space industrial park.
@@tsamuel6224 The orbit is necessary for it to function, it will be used 24/7, unlike the hubble. It has to be at one of the lagrangian points, which are 2.5 million km away (away from most satellites), so nobody ever expected it to be serviceable. Plus, everyone I see is complaining about the time, not anything else.
Folks here should understand this is a survey telescope. The short exposures aren’t meant to create colorful high resolution images like those made by Hubble or other large telescopes.
Its unique feature is the huge field of view. Basically it will make a detailed mosaic image log of the entire sky ever few days.
It’s goal is to spot transient or unexpected objects as soon as possible. It sounds routine but it will be a very, very busy instrument.
Thank you for your time putting this video together, appreciate it!
How are they going to be able to process that amount of data?
I've been observing the night sky since being a kid in Wyoming, and doing astrophotography since 1986. Yes, the massive low Earth satellites will be a problem, but there is one aspect which will reduce their impact on astrophotography - the Earth's shadow.
The SpaceX constellation of satellites orbit at 370 miles. Anyone who observes the night sky from dark places knows that once the satellites pass into earth's shadow, they no longer reflect sunlight and are not visible. When taking astrophotographs, satellites are only a problem right after sunset and just before sunrise. The problem is the worst in the summertime when the earth's axis is tilted towards the sun and less in the winter when it is tilted away.
I live in Wyoming too! But I'm not happy about the satellites amazon just got permission for like 20,000 more so there will be even more and more the night sky will crawl, no more night time photos with wide angle either.
My understanding is they may still be 11-12th magnitude, presumably just reflecting the moon and earth lights. More than enough to ruin images with this massive, fast scope.
And don’t forget that launching a lot of satellites will bring down launch costs which makes space telescopes cheaper and more feasible. Win-win.
Just a small question, i was pleased to know that there are so many people like yourself who have been observing the sky at night for so long.
I have recently sent some DVDs to mufon that were taken using two night vision cameras that take about three minute of video at a time and do this for about four hours, i managed to catch rather a lot of objects in transit that were not supposed to have been there and clearly controlled flight i wonder if you have during your time come across anything like this.
I also use a mac telescope six inch but with very good optics, i mainly studied the moon but have used it elsewhere going a little deeper into space, i agree its a very much time consuming hobby but i love it.
Even non-reflecting satellites cover up the background when they pass over... clearly visible in astrophotographs !!!
This telescope was originally known as the LSST.
If JWST isn’t delayed further, 2021 will be a fantastic year for space observation !
I'm so ready. 2021 will be a good year for everyone. Let's make it happen.
CapsuleClub 1986
Let’s hope we all can get our lives back on track and may we reach farther and higher than humanity has done ever before
It will take several months before JWST even sees first light. It won't happen in 2021 even if it launches in Oct. 2021 as scheduled.
@@vimalramachandran What Delivery System would YOU trust to get the JWST into proper space? I'm worried ...
@@davidmacphee3549 Don't worry. The Ariane 5 is a good choice with a solid track record. The only hassle is to transport the telescope all the way to French Guiana from the U.S.
"We'll go through everything you want to know about the Vera C. Rubin Observatory."
How is the mirror made? How is it coated? What are the filters made from? What are they using as the camera's sensor? How do the move the telescope so precisely? How to they power the telescope. How was the high speed internet made? Is it glass fiber?
How many people need to be on site to run the telescope?
I could go on for a while. I don't mind not having all these questions answered in a video, I just mind the assumption we don't want to know more.
(Yes, I'm being a bit unreasonable.)
That would make up for a nice sequel to this video!
BUMP! Great questions!
not unreasonable. assuming that a short video will satisfy the curiosity of every viewer is annoying.
When will it come online?
The mirrors are made at the University of Arizona's Stewart Mirror Lab and are made by spin casting. That is to the glass is put in an oven that spins at a rate that produces the desired base parabolic shape for a given mirror. The back of the mirror in the oven is made of ceramic honeycomb pieces that are blasted out with high-pressure water (by hand) to leave honeycomb voids, thus making the mirror lighter. The mirror's surface is then precisely figured using computer-driven grinding and polishing.
The telescope has 3 mirrors: the primary and tertiary mirrors are one-piece, with that piece figured differently for two different zones: an annular, outer zone is the primary, and then the. inside circular area is the tertiary mirror. The other mirror, the secondary stands on its own and is also an annular mirror. The hole in its center allows light to pass to the camera.
For the record, the primary mirror is 8.4m in diameter, while the tertiary mirror is 5m in diameter. Both are concave. The secondary mirror is convex and has a diameter of 3.42m, making it the largest convex mirror ever made.
If you are into big mirrors, you might want to check out the LBT (Large Binocular Telescope) observatory's page. It's a binocular telescope made with 2 8.4m diameter primary mirrors. Also check out GMT's page (Giant Magellan Telescope). Its primary mirror will be made up of 7 8.4m diameter mirrors. The primary mirrors for LBT and GMT were also made at the Stewart Mirror Lab. As it stands those 8.4 mirrors are the largest monolithic mirrors in the world.
Fun fact: on those 8.4 mirrors, the largest "bumps" or "holes" are only 30nm high (or deep). To get a feel for how small that is, if one of those 8.4 mirrors were as wide as the US, the biggest bump would only be 1 inch tall. Is that the best they can do? No. For mirrors of that size and the design wavelengths though, finishing the mirrors more perfectly wouldn't result in better images.
I feel like we will learn a lot about space in 2021 - 2025
thx for all the likes guys I love that other people also think that we will learn a lot during those times!!!!!!!!
Definitely. This ground telescope and JWST are going to show us never before seen things with extremely high resolution. I can’t wait!!!
Back here in reality land we'll probably kill each other before humanity learns anything. The moon will be the furthest we reach.
It will never happen....in your life time....I have been hearing about the webber telescope since the 1960.....
@@wilber19541 don't lose hope!!!
First prove man ever landed on the moon ~
Great video as ever. I'm still waiting for the final Opportunity video!! Been eager to finish off the story.
This is so brilliantly done, thank you!
we humanity need more videos like this.....save us from the junk
Share this kind of videos with all
That is why I enjoy anything from Astrum...Alex stays on-point with the subject & doesn't add useless fluff and/or wild conjecture.
I am so happy Vera Rubin has a project named after her! A very well deserved honor!
Your voice is very appealing 😹😹😹. It sounds like you're smiling while talking and it helps prolong my attention span. Ever considered going into teaching???
His voice reminds me of Roger Waters from Pink Floyd, sounds awesome
its cuz of his accent lol, everyone looks listening to a sexy accent
in the future we need telescopes being built on the moon, because the sky is getting more polluted every day, and if the same rhythm of countries going into space will soon be the moon and Mars covered in satellites in a large web where astronomy goes every day to further away, in fact.
Since 1997 we lost clear sky, because global warming.
Why the moon? the point of building telescopes on earth is because of easy maintenance and lower costs, but with the moon, we have no access. This is why we have telescopes in space
What advantage does the moon have compared to a telescope in orbit around Earth (like Hubble) or in a Lagrange orbit (like JWST)? It limits where the telescope can look, and takes an ENORMOUS amount of fuel to land things on the moon compared to getting something into orbit.
@@michaelnoble2432 radiotelescopes are interesting on the dark side of the moon...
@@olivierdeplanques708 good point - that eliminates almost all sources of man-made interference.
Superb information, thank you for sharing 🙏❤️
3.5 degrees. Flipping insane. Just wow, especially since it's moving too. Incredible.
Thanks For The Information Astrum
I feel for Duane Degn's impatience to know more, but this was a good overview of a subject I've not followed at all, and now I want to know more. I did, however, study physics many years ago and it's interesting seeing, with LIDO, the principles and design of the celebrated Michelson-Morely experiment of the late 19th Century which played a crucial role in the development of Special Relativity in 1905. Thanks for this, we'd like to see more, I'm sure.
Great summary of a complicated endeavour thank you Alex and keep up the good work!
I’ve been following the James Webb since it’s inception. I’ll check out the Rubin Observatory.
Great video as always! Thank you!
NASA’s compass program has created blueprints for a liquid mercury telescope on the moon, this would top even the James Webb telescope.
Edit: for the record this was just something I read and I don’t want to misinform anyone so please do some personal research on this if it’s a topic that interests you.
Not necessarily, that telescope will have to deal with the reflection of the sun on earth
@@plane9182 Not if they build it on the dark side of the moon.
Electro522 now there is no communication to earth, then you will have to send up relay and repeater satellites increasing the cost
@@plane9182 A more expensive telescope is far better than no telescope at all in my book.
@@Electru522 I love this reference to the Pink Floyd, but there is no dark side on the Moon, there is only a far side :-P
Very informative video. Looking forward to new discoveries by these telescopes.
Makes me miss seeing the sky jammed with stars. Too many shooting stars to count. Great video.
I have a spectacular starscspe here, on the Atherton Tablelands in North Queensland, Australia; Low population density, large allotments and no street lights.
@@rossbrown4991 You're lucky in that.
i half to drive about 2 hrs i am in a bortle 1 sky so its nice that a good portion of my state is a class 1 or 2 skys.. its always worth the drive
@The Devil r44445555
I don't know. Plan to put a building in front of my house and spoil my view? I'm going to give you hell.
Launch 40000 satellites for what amounts to internet access and the world doesn't get to see the stars.
Screw the telescopes in space. We want uninterrupted views from here on Earth.
Informative and well-narrated, thanks. Many American YT videos are badly narrated, but yours' (British?) is good. Keep it going!
The Rubin Observatory is going to produce so much data - It will be an amazing telescope the communication networking alone must be an amazing technological achievement to capture all that data for open analysis.
Very informative & great visuals!
love this channel it's so easy to listen to and informative
I was a technician that worked on the grinding and polishing these mirrors.
Wow that’s cool!
Once it starts scanning the sky, how long does it take until we can see the images?
Awesome video and thanks for sharing 👍
That is one monster of a camera. I'm hoping that this and the JWST will give us a lot of insight.
You should do audible book or something, your voice is very soothing, helps me sleep a lot (I usually can’t sleep n scoured the youtube at night), don’t get me wrong your videos r great n i love space.
*Your videos are extremely educative! Thank You. :D*
I share your videos on my FB page 'Astronomy Club Albania'.
Absolutely amazing.....can't wait to see what we find
God i hope jwst launches, been waiting since i first heard about it in 1998. I cant believe how long it has been. Exciting times for space!
Can’t wait for the images! Fantastic!
I kind of understand why the Webb is more hyped, because its pictures will be astonishing! The Vera observatory will generate a lot more data, but harder to comprehend and interpret. I am excited about both of them, but I cannot lie James Webb gives me chills :) - Also, the launch will be so complex we are all having high expectations about it!
and the possibility of finding Population III stars really gets me so excited
Nacey grace roman is coming too
Another awesome video
What a great time to be alive. New Mars rover, James Webb telescope, Cyberpunk 2077! Life is good!
well Cyberpunk 2077 is allready a failure
@@birdymaniac Yeah, what a shame. I was so looking forward to it.
You must live in New Zealand
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact
telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent
resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the
obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of
the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics
manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each
and every time.
I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
The space junk cube sat problem is a real issue. Right now it is just SpaceX but Facebook, Google and a couple of Chinese companies are also going to jump in the fray. In 10 years we might be looking at 5-10x the number of satellites in LEO
Dude I’ve been hyped for this telescope.
Probably not the first time I’ve heard of this telescope, but it’s definitely the first time I’ve cared! Thanks to this video!! 😀
Great video! Thank you!
The extremely large telescope will be something too
too bad the overwhelmingly large telescope got cancelled
Unbelievable large Teleskop?
@@James-le8gd I think ultimately they took the right decision.
ELT was a waste of time and money doomed to fail from the beginning.
Don't get me wrong, the Extremely series was an interesting concept but they rushed things and the final design was extremely (pun intended) flawed. It's best to redirect the resources that would be required to solve all the technical problems, that would surely arise, towards the Stupidly Large Telescope program. Now that will be a real breakthrough once completed.
The OLT series, I mean.
@@James-le8gd ELT is cancelled ? Who says so ?
Nice presentation.
The best channel ever 🔭🔥
Just heard about this observatory from a geographic's episode on "planet X" (planet 9) and had to know more!!!!
Fascinating and CAN'T WAIT to see what this observatory produces!
What AMAZING technological times we live in!
Oh to have been born a decade later than I was, to see what further advances are coming in space and explorations in the next 40 years!
Hey astrum-I was wondering if there is any plans to build a telescope in the polar regions? If not why / what is stopping that from happening?
I am aware of the logistics like food water internet and transfer speeds but would those problems be negated for a clear sky with no man-made objects?
Or would the magnetic field/radiation be another factor that prevents them from being built?
The north pole is just moving ice and constantly recycles its self, however on the south pole there is land and research bases already
There are already quite a few observatories on Antarctica. That said, placing telescopes near the poles limits how much of the sky they can see. One near the equator can see everything over the course of a few months (depending on how close it can be pointed towards the Sun) but one at either pole would only be able to see a bit more than half the sky, with rest being blocked by Earth.
@@pseudotasuki Can I ask you the meaning of this affirmation :' but one at either pole would only be able to see a bit more than half the sky, with rest being blocked by Earth'? I think that we should see only different stars at the poles.
Beacuse of the way the earth spins you would get a much smaller field of vision.
@@mysteryhombre81 True, I didn't think about it.
Daaaamn, that's amazing design on Rubin. Thanks again, Astrum!
Yup, north of Chile is great for this kind of projects and also for amateur astronomers.
You can even get guided tours to many of the biggest Observatory.
thank you for the info astrum
Ooh! The telescope with the giant lens that Physics Girl made a video about! (Though that was back when it was still called the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) Thank you for this great video!
These are great videos. It is dissapointing that mainstream television cannot produce information on a cool subject like astronomy as well as this. Mainstream TV would over hype and sensationalise an already amazing subject about where/what we really are and where we are going. Keep up the great videos and never become too commercialised.
Your point about mainstream TV is exactly why I started this channel!
I remember when History and Discovery channels had well researched shows.
With how many times it had been delayed so far, I won't be surprised if Rubin is finished before James Webb 😂
Thanks Alex, good to have one more thing to be excited about. We all need it in this dark year.
Okay, Alex, I really enjoy your videos; in fact, I hear them almost every day to relax, specially the ones on astronomy,, on .7 speed.
Having said that, you really need to watch *all* of PBS Space Time before making videos that involve modern/contemporary physics, whether it's quantum physics or general relativity. I don't blame you; not at all. I don't doubt you got sources for all of these claims. But many times--most of the time--journalists just aren't as well-versed in their topic as they think they are. PBS Space Time is written by an astrophysicist, a university professor and a researcher, who even corresponds with colleagues if there's a subject where he specifically doesn't feel comfortable being completely accurate. There have been a bunch of *grave* errors in some of your videos, I can usually just remove them from my playlist but I decided to come here and explain it all today.
At about 3:50 you say that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, and that, therefore, there is light accompanying it. That is not at all true. You 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 to watch PBS Space Time's "The Speed of Light is NOT about Light". The universe doesn't care at all about the speed of light. Light is just electromagnetism, and that's not even fundamental. But within general relativity there is a maximum speed, which got called speed of light because light travels at it, at the time it was the only known thing that traveled at it, and it happens to be the maximum speed. Today, we know that 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙡𝙚𝙨𝙨 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙡𝙚 not only can, but 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙫𝙚𝙡 𝙖𝙩 𝙘.
So c is more properly known as the 𝙘𝙤𝙨𝙢𝙞𝙘 𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙡𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙩, or the speed of causality. Causality itself travels at the speed of light, and one of the things that are related to causality is gravitational influence. When gravity in a given space changes in a specific manner (which it outside of the scope of this post, but it has to do with quadrupoles--search for it), it leads to 𝙜𝙧𝙖𝙫𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙬𝙖𝙫𝙚𝙨. That's what LIGO measures. When two black holes merge, they create gravitational waves, but no electromagnetic radiation (if any is created, it is gobbled and doesn't reach us).
When neutron stars collide, however, they may well create EM radiation that flee before the resulting black hole has a chance at gobbling it (the neutron stars collide first at their edges, but the black hole is formed from their nucleus), that's when you can expect to look and see them colliding. But often this burst is very short--indeed, most of it is gobbled by the resulting black hole. So neutron star collisions are (relatively) rare, the EM radiation is a short burts, and the universe is enormous. The chance of someone happening to have a telescope pointed at the right neutron star binary at time of collision is short.
Now, gravitational waves travel faster than light, in effect. They aren't affected by anything that's in the way. So they do give you advance warning that some light is coming. Unfortunately, the first time this happened, the advance warning was, well, 1.7s. Which is why this telescope is immense help. It will be looking at A LOT of the sky at once, and even after the event we may see pictures of them.
JWST In 2021? I love the optimism.
Thanks for making!
If the Reuben telescope is as good as the Reuben sandwich it should turn out great.
Damn. Time to go to the grocery store. That happens to me a lot. I'm online and someone mentions something delicious. I'm a little OCD, so ..
LOL
AMAZING! CONNGRATS TO INVENTOR!
Tonite 8/28/2021 look up high in the sky Mars is closest to the earth today and you can't miss it because it's very Orange
Jupiter is next to the Moon.
this will be awesome. so excited to get the kuiper belt mapped, there's surely more dwarf planets out there
As a photographer nerd: Anybody knows what the focal length of the telescope is? And does it need to change focus from infinity to get the moon in sharp focus?
Im curious as well. The pictures in the video where quite wide but they probably exist from multiple images.
@@tms-tomas9803 actually Wikipedia has part of the answer:
Focal length:
10.31 m (f/1.23) overall
9.9175 m (f/1.186) primary
@@jesperlett Wow, thats very impressive!
@@jesperlett The difference between the focal plane for the Moon and the objects at infinity will be 0.3 micrometers. This is negligible compared to the non-flatness of the sensor and size of the pixels -- both of which are 10 micrometers.
Great video
It's even bigger than my dad's telescope.
Thanks for this very informative video. I must say,. I can't wait what photos that it will get. I'm curious to it
A question about light LEO objects: those are visible only in night sky while they are still sunlit. So, they ruin only a part of field of view for a fraction of time. How large that "ruined portion" is? How much can changes of observation schedules for V.C.Rubin telescope mitigate that?
Also: even when having satellites or orbital debris in field of view, can knowing their orbital parameters precisely make it possible to "subtract" them from images? Or is their light so strong that is saturates the camera? Something in between?
This telescope takes two images of the same patch to compare and dismiss the cosmic ray blips. It surely will do the same with any pesky leo satellites.
I’ve read an article about that a while ago. You can remove the trail via algorithm , however it takes quite a long time for the computer to figure that out, due to the sheer size.
@@DavidOfWhitehills Cosmic rays last micro-seconds. Satellite "trains" last for minutes on end and are MUCH brighter. These satellites are a huge problem for astronomy.
@@michisob1 It is not always possible, in particular for Rubin observatory the current Starlink satellites will saturate the CCD camera pixels, meaning that information behind the trail cannot be recovered.
@@jerometremblay7128 In the dark of night satellites are invisible, the leo ones intruding the least into post-sunset pre-dawn. I do sometimes wonder if this is irrational panic or anti-Musk that motivates comments like yours. But I'm no astronomer.
It's image sensor is 25.2 inches across, or more than 2 feet. And here i am getting excited for micro 4/3 in a drone.
I can't envision working telescopes on the moon for decades. Plus, I think they've come to the conclusion that telescopes on the moon don't provide any advantage over telescopes they can place in orbit, Langrange points, or here on earth.
moon has a few advantages i can think of.
1 shielding for ultra low radio waves [earth is largest radio pollution source and no telescope can carry a radio shield large enough to block it]
2 physical mounting location is inherently superior to thrusters/reaction wheels in terms of reliability, speed, precision.
3 excuse for base.
@@AbsurdAsparagus 'Moon' is too dusty' with too sharp of dust particles, imo, for must use for anything except by automaton devices, robotics.
This is a good channel
I've been talkin about this telescope for quite some time.washing them make the mirrors has taught me how to actually find tune and grind and focus my own mirrors. Before anybody gets excited I have not succeeded.still though learning how they're making these giant sections of mirror is quite impressive. I can't wait to see the first images this thing turns out,especially since James Webb will be infrared and this will be visible light. With other packages available.
I don't know if I'm mistaken though, were they using a solid mirror on the Rubin observatory because I thought they was so big they had to do it in sections but I might be incorrect. PS I've probably answered my own question buy now but I would encourage everybody to do the research as well.
Thanks for the info
Another discovery the Rubin Observatory can help make is Planet 9 if it exists. Again, something you missed in the video.
All telescopes will be displaced by our low cost [$5MM], compact
telescope with a broad field magnification from 10X to continent
resolution/discernability at 100 light year distance. Similar performance on the
obverse side with table top sized microscopes where even the interior of
the nucleus will be viewable. Path to atomic scale electronics
manufacturing with real time defect removal for perfect outcomes each
and every time.
I think I'll call it the Tiny Wonder Scope
Brilliant job. Thanks for All.🙏
I'm very excited I'm a junior associate for this telescope. So I get access to the data as soon as it comes out. My work is on dwarf galaxies so the amazing depth of the telescope is going to be ground breaking.
Awesome!!! I hope yall get some good data out of it!
Eggbert08 honestly the scale of the data coming out of the telescope will be astronomical. The only way to get though the data and classify galxies will be though machine learning. Machine learning will dominate astrophysics in they coming years
Lovely video sir, and I also loved the "hidden" message about junk orbiting the Earth and its regulation
Woh, I just gained some XP :D
TY for this video !
You found an item. [Alien Sandwich]
Awesome video 👍👍
This is an awesome project.
On a side note, one other great side-effect of all the satellites being launched is that they will fund development of Starship, which is going to dramatically lower the cost of getting stuff to orbit. Space-based telescopes are going to get a lot cheaper once that comes online.
Try having a 150GB/s connection to a space telescope
Space X will ruin not just the Vera Rubiin but all humanities ground based astronomy,Elon is worse than Mr Burns.
Incredible. Science is truly amazing
with super heavy, telescopes that size can be put into orbit.
Moon doesn't have atmosphere
@@antonzaretsky9166 what
@@antonzaretsky9166 and?
@@lamontcranston8181 good for telescopes :)
@@lamontcranston8181 and NASA has been mulling around the idea of a massive Moon based observatory! Kind of like the Arecibo design just in a big crater
Great video but one comment. Around 5:20, one LIGO can not define the location of an object, but there are several LIGO built or being built and they allow for the triangulation of a rough area in the sky... Which you can then observe with telescope to correlate the signals :)
Any LIGO that is under construction, does *NOT* count as operational. Are there more than the two operational LIGO's - the two in the USA?
No one neglected this telescope and is very well known among everyone who's remotely interested in astronomy.
Haven't heard of it before now.
Astrum is correct it is not talked about.
It looks like an incredible piece of art. ... Very cool!
I am so excited. I try to tell others about this.... But I get blank stares. But then I have no one to talk to about the things that truly interest me....quantum, cosmos, meta physics, theology, history...
Very interesting video, thanks a lot...
I would talk about it but nobody I know likes space stuff lol
I can relate 😃
Lol same
So true. When I talk about space, space exploration, new technologies, etc. people's eyes glaze over and you can tell that they would rather be doing anything else at that point.
Religious people make up 84% of earth's population and for the most part do not enjoy discussions which are science related in my experience. This blanket statement has many many exceptions. If I listed only the ones I know about this would be a 10,000 word essay.
Takes them out of their belief bubble and the end result is anxiousness and fear. Cheers, John Noe
I can relate as well. Would love to find someone near me that had the same passion. I live in central IL, anyone near message me.
Amazing! Love Science and Space
Hello ASTRUM, what’s the difference between VCRO and the ELT (extremely large télescope )?
Biggest difference among many is the gigantic field of view of the Rubin.
Thank you very much.
ASTRUM!
Edit: is good
Looking forward to it.
0:10 How many people are confident that James Webb will be launched in 2021?
nope lol hello from Australia
If trump loses it is game over. It will never get launched. Fortunately, he will win with a huge margin. The scope will be in orbit by the time the demorats get another chance to cancel it.
Me!
Gravitational lensing would be fun to see...and whole milky galaxy map would be important for future interplanetary travel.
Good to see Astro society funding it, hope it completes its use👍🏻👍🏻
Vera Rubin is my favorite Scientist. She decided to look where no one expected to make any discoveries, the 'unexciting' outer edges of Galaxies. She discovered 'Sigma' the anomalous rotational speed of the outer edges of our Galaxy relative to the Black hole at the center!
Saw a presentation on this instrument, the presenter was unable to answer my question, so I pose it here: How can such fast optics be used with interference filters, which only work properly with light from a limited range of angles? The light cone from such a fast system would have very steep marginal rays, which would totally screw up a normal interference filter. The only way around this I know of is to use very wide band filters, but my understanding is that is not the case here.