What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy's holiday campaign.
27 Comments
- novenator, on 12/27/2008, -0/+1010x the resolving power of the Hubble? from a land based telescope, that is phenomenal
- inactive, on 12/26/2008, -0/+9With a cost of $600 million, I'm guessing they'll want more than .25 to have a look.
- crapuccino, on 12/27/2008, -0/+8Worst case of aperture fever I ever saw!
Resolution is a function of aperture - Hubble is 2.4m - GMT is 24.5m so yes, that's 10x the resolution of Hubble. Cutting through the atmosphere will reduce that slightly, but they have software to eliminate atsmospheric effects now. - ReemonIJ, on 12/26/2008, -0/+8I am constantly blown away by our scientists and the huge progress they make. Power on.
- rynsa, on 12/26/2008, -0/+8"...It will, for example, be enough to allow the GMT to look the Universe's first stars, follow the formation of galaxies within a few million years of the Big Bang, and for the first time look directly at extrasolar planets, for a start."
Essentially... a time-machine. Cool. - Murdats, on 12/27/2008, -0/+6and all on a very thin budget compared to other fields
- kazamx, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5Why don't we do more of this sort of thing? $600M really is chump change when you think about it on an international level. Doesn't the US alone spend like $1B a day or week or something in Iraq?
- sternomastoid, on 12/27/2008, -0/+4The GMT is big, but not the biggest of the new telescopes to be built.
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/26 ...
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026856.300 ... - ChileanGoD, on 12/27/2008, -0/+4When you want to see the stars, you go to Chile. :)
- earthforce1, on 12/27/2008, -0/+4I can't wait for more ultra high resolution deep space images to use as wallpaper.
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -0/+3i want that at my roof gosh!!! its wonedrful
- ChileanGoD, on 12/27/2008, -0/+3They spend loaned money. It's not like you guys are producing that much.
- netneutrality, on 12/27/2008, -0/+3Wake me up when they finally get a telescope powerful enough to photograph the Apollo moon landing sites.
- Mockylock, on 12/28/2008, -0/+3"our" big bang. For some reason I believe there are an infinite number of these happening throughout the universe at all times.
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -0/+2Thats exactly how Roger Angel gets funding.
- HallenbeckJoe, on 12/27/2008, -1/+3Big friendly giant?
That's what she said! - defkt, on 12/27/2008, -1/+3I loved the BFG....
- novenator, on 12/28/2008, -0/+2you should submit the second link as a new article to Digg. It was a great read.
Also, WOW! 42m telescope? - ChileanGoD, on 12/27/2008, -0/+2I wonder what the chinese will build to beat them all.
- maphilli14, on 12/27/2008, -0/+2So when do they go on sale? I want one!
- forladiesonly, on 12/27/2008, -1/+3yo checkkit out, let's just take their word that the telescope can catch 6 times more light than any current telescope. Sure, the focal point would need to be millions of times larger to distinguish planets in other nebulae. But what if I told you that the GMT has a virtual lens diameter of 24.5 m, is that something you might be interested in? If we take into account the difference of resolving power that can be achieved with such a large lens diameter, and we assume that resolving power remains constant throughout space (it is a vacuum), then sin(theta) = 1.222 (lambda) / D, and so the angular resolution will nearly triple if compared to any other telescope ever built. dats crazy mayn! Envision a triangle where the angle is theta, and the distance we see is x. With a tripled resolving power, considering the distances (x) the telescope can allow us to see, that means an increased resolution of thousands of light years! What can we do with that? only time will tell.
- novenator, on 12/28/2008, -0/+1and then the Ultra Ultra Deep Space images
- ninjaskimo, on 12/27/2008, -1/+2sorry, you don't belong here.
- afizzledbear, on 12/27/2008, -1/+1At first I thought this was about a sequel to the BFG.
- Repeater2000, on 12/27/2008, -2/+2How many people dugg this story for Roald Dahl?
The algorithm am broken. - LawnMowerKitten, on 12/27/2008, -3/+2Title = Redundancy
- Tonezinator, on 12/27/2008, -3/+1I've seen bigger. Sorry Magellan, its true. Get over it.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 