What is Digg?49 Comments
- CGorman68, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Bah, pictures of space make me feel small.
Let's see some stuff taken with a scanning electron microscope... That'll make me feel important again! :) - nesibus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16The only thing I do not like about awesome pictures...is that all colors are fake. The actual image taken by hubble does not have that color in it. Its made to represent certain things such as hot and cold and what not.
If only it actually did look that good. - Batiu-Drami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Take a photo of your hand. Is it a photo of you? Yes. Is it a photo of *all* of you? No.
It never claimed to be a picture of the entire universe. - Steelfox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Supernova 1987A still looks like goatse.
- HouseofEl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The Deep Field photo always makes me ponder what really is out there. Not the sci-fi alien's visiting earth kind of stuff, but a real thought of who is out there. Is there a war going on? Do they suffer from the same petty differences we fight over here on Earth? Is there someone looking at a similar photo wondering what we are like? It's amazing and thought provoking to really think about that. Truly is the stuff dreams are made of.
- dpierce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You're right in that it is false color. But it's not simply whether it is hot or cold. It is based on the composition. For example, green is oxygen.
http://hubblesite.org/gallery/behind_the_pictures/meaning_of_color/eagle.shtml - GnuTzu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Click gently, that first one will knock your eye out.
- nesibus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Its cameras record light with special electronic detectors that produce a black and white image. The images are shot through filters that allow only a certain wavelength of light through. That light is then recorded. After the data is downloaded, the colors are assigned for a variety of reasons. Keep in mind that Hubble can see all of the visible light spectrum (what we see) and way beyond into the infrared and ultraviolet. Scientists use color as a tool – they may simulate what our eyes would see (natural color), what an object looks like in infrared or UV (representative color) or use color to bring out structural detail (enhanced color.) Most of Hubble’s most popular images are made by combining red, green & blue filters to simulate what the human eye sees.
- Jadael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I really don't understand how anyone can look at science and say it's making us cold, heartless bastards.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I like the way the site owner's put thumbnails of the images next to google ads. Bet he ***** advertisers out of a tidy sum after being frontpaged on digg.
- nesibus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Most are black and white, color is added to represent hot and cold, or just to show detail between things.
- Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Time to pull out that bandwidth destroying page again...
http://images.lunarpages.com/ - alephsmith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Sure the colour is 'fake colour' bit it still represents some information that is there. it is just not usually visible to the human eye.
- Zaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Most of these objects would simply look white to the human eye, but that's simply because the human eye is limited in its sensitivity. Our telescopes can gather information that we could never get into our heads except by the use of false color imagery. Don't forget, these objects radiate X-rays, radio waves ect.
- blapierre, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Too bad they don't actually look like that. The nice colors are just the result of using different filters to show variations in mass/energy.
- triccare, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Though it may be true that the colors are applied, the important point, and that which is most awesome, is that the information is real. The universe is truly this complex, whether the human eyeball is capable of seeing it or not. Because our own sight is extremely limited, that instruments such as HST and the techniques of false color application, are necessary for us to understand just how much there is to little corner of reality we occupy.
- LucidHawk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I've got news! This is the 21st century!!
Why are astronomers and laymen still promoting these tire old things!
It's like some sort of gay conspiracy..
Here's a sample of what people actually clicked on this article for:
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2006/46/images/a/formats/xlarge_web.jpg
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2006/35/images/a/formats/xlarge_web.jpg
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/2006/01/images/a/formats/xlarge_web.jpg - Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@Batiu-Drami:
Thanks. You beat me to it. I wonder why some folks are so oblivious to the obvious. - Jadael, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This is basically what a lot of cameras do, film and digital.
Technicolor was the first to do it, I think, or at least to be widely used.
It was basically three black & white cameras, but each one shot through a colored filter. When you projected each image through a projector with the same filter, so that the three images overlap, they produced a full color image. That's a gross oversimplification, and probably not how they actually projected it, but it's basically what went on.
A digital camera records images as three images, each recording the level of a narrow band of wavelengths. These correspond to RGB channels in image file formats.
Most astronomy cameras simply look at a different range of wavelengths, such as infrared or ultraviolet. These are then displayed as a wavelength range we can see. However, it's just as easy to produce an image that more closely matches what a human would see, a lot more pictures of nebulae are "true" color than people realize. - frant1c, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, some of the pictures have 'fake colors', as you say, but some are in visible spectrum, some are in infrared, and so on. Check the huge gallery over at HubbleSite.
- Gills, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think this one deserves to be on the list if not an honorable mention http://img490.imageshack.us/img490/6351/eyegod6lu.jpg
- Batiu-Drami, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Jugulator: see that page shoulda been dugg. Those be some impressive photos.
- perfectlycrazy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This article tricked me. Not a single one of those pictures was of me.
- clempka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTvwcLylZzs
There's a pretty cool video dealing with the same thing, set to the tune of Lateralus from Tool. Badass song, badass photos. - ldavid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2NOW that makes me feel small! ouch! nice photos
- Twango, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"So then what do you suggest it really looks like?"
Like what the sky looks like through binoculars. They colorize most of these pix. Some objects are dramatically colored naturally, such as the "Great Nebula" in Orion. - neszis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3These are easily some of the most stunning things I've ever seen. I wish I could see them in person, somehow. Truly, truly one of those things that you can just...stare at in awe of the beauty of the universe.
- JoeyDeacon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sure doesn't make me.
- jarvuss, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Maybe he means it's not pictures of the universe we are in... wait no that's called a galaxy. Seems accurate to me.
- ZoaZao, on 10/11/2009, -0/+1To say that you can widdle down every photo of our ever-expanding, vast, unending universe down to 10 pictures is insanity.
I'm angry. - goerg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the cat's eye nebula rocks ^^
anyway most of them are quite popular like Hubble's deep space view...
most impressive one: voyagers last glimpse home... - Screwy1138, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it's nice that we have the Hubble for these sorts of things.
*cough* - Melzas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Really cool pictures but the quality kinda sucked.
Anyone got these in high quality? - badken, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You know, I might have dugg this if it wasn't billed as the "10 MOST impressive" pictures, if instead it was just a collection of 10 pictures. Because that's what it is. Top 10/20/100/1000/whatever lists are tiresome, and only promote arguments about what doesn't belong and what's missing.
- madchemst, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Good show, Lucid. Thanks for the high resolution links.
- Character0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is that because women are just as elusive to you?
I'm just kidding, I'd probably side with you Berkana. - eatmorespam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Food for thought: Since distant objects appear as they did in the past, an astronomer on a world far away from us sees us as we were in the past, because it takes time for the light to reach us. So, it's entirely possible that two astronomers from different civilizations, distant from each other, could be pointing their telescopes straight at each other, but not be able to see each other because each would be seeing the other's world long before its civilization had developed.
- boon07, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The least impressive thing I've seen in a long time. They may well be remarkable but they can't be put into any context therefore they are meaningless. I could create images and say oooooohh look, space photos and it might actually be a distorted shot of a bag o' spanners.
- Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Ah, so damn conceited it's funny. Nice. Almost.
- IvanB, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2So then what do you suggest it really looks like?
- AuKNiFe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0well i don't think these are the most impressive astrophotos
you may visit hubblesite.org and click into the 'NewsCentre' for some more interesting images - crossers, on 07/18/2008, -0/+0oh it's something really cool! very nice pictures!
http://www.leannrimes.info
http://www.shpe-sac.org
http://www.pmidsig.org - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Too bad the universe is not as visually stimulating as we'd like it to be. :(
- pevail, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Sure makes you believe in the Almighty!
- bootle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Then, by your own logic, EVERY PHOTOGRAPH EVER TAKEN is a photo of the universe. No sir, I maintain my position that the title is inaccurate and misleading,
- Acclaim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0So, does this mean that these images are close to what our eyes would receive while using the red, green, and blue filters?
SPACE GOGGLES?! - Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Let me qualify that. I specifically mean beautiful women who aren't cold hearted cowards or airheads.
- Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2To be honest, I personally think the most awe inspiring and impressive entities in our universe are beautiful women. If you asked me to chose between glowing nebulae, huge clusters of galaxies with countless worlds throughout, and a beautiful woman, without a moment's hesitation I'd choose the latter.
- bootle, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Inaccurate. Not one of these images is a photo of our universe.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
