What is Digg?61 Comments
- gametavern, on 04/24/2009, -1/+18I hate even looking because it pisses me off that we can't know more, or explore this better. Why couldn't I be born 3000 years in the future. Back to imagination I guess.
- HerRedRing, on 04/24/2009, -0/+17Amazing. We have the technology to take pictures of far corners of the universe...and then show them in the format of 640x480 pixels.
- Wrake, on 04/24/2009, -1/+16Awesome stuff! Keep in mind,
"Finished color images are actually combinations of two or more black-and-white exposures to which color has been added during image processing.
The colors in Hubble images, which are assigned for various reasons, aren't always what we'd see if we were able to visit the imaged objects in a spacecraft. We often use color as a tool, whether it is to enhance an object's detail or to visualize what ordinarily could never be seen by the human eye." http://hubblesite.org - divinediva, on 04/24/2009, -1/+14I was in awe of the majesty of the universe
- Pilot85, on 04/24/2009, -0/+7Posted: 2 times
Spelled Correctly: 0 times - awfl, on 04/24/2009, -0/+6You are spot on; even if the Hubble has millions into it's high resolution camera, we as a species cannot seem to provide wired bandwidth to a significant portion of the human population, yet, that can support a much higher resolution, not without a monopoly or a monthly service plan. :)
- Harabeck, on 04/24/2009, -0/+5As long as we reach the point where the life expectancy is increasing faster than we age, we could all be there in 3000 years to solve the mysteries.
- defektiv, on 04/24/2009, -0/+5Picture #3 has evidence of a coverup. I believe it shows the existence of aliens but someone shopped it out with MSPaint and the large eraser tool.
- yoyoyoyo, on 04/24/2009, -0/+4at least you weren't born 3000 years ago... think of science back then...
- EliteEagle, on 04/24/2009, -0/+4Were probably gonna destroy ourselves but I feel the same way
- DoctorFaust, on 04/24/2009, -0/+4Come on. This can't be the coolest stuff they saw.
- Obsidian743, on 04/24/2009, -3/+6I have to say that kind of ruins it a little for me.
- jkoke, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3If you want to see more about how the color is added to the Hubble images, take a look here:
http://hubblesite.org/gallery/behind_the_pictures/ ...
There's no deception going on -- the telescope takes multiple black and white photos of different areas of the color spectrum (including infrared and ultraviolet) and these are composited together to create either natural color or enhanced color images. - mtcritelli, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3Pretty amazing what we can do....
- awfl, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3Funny thing is that these galactic pictures, beyond their sheer beauty, are mostly forever beyond practical reach or even human comprehension - no one, though we try, can internalize the sheer universal scale, the complete chemistry or physics; we try to understand by finding scalable rules, by analogy and example, to allow us to try to get our head around it but they are just human approximations. We are truly small in the land of the giants, but at the same time the absolute largest and rarest in the sense of complexity of what we actually see, so far, in such great expanse. As our ability to sense grows, I will be forever in awe waiting to find out if there is more complexity, or variety, than we already know.
- Crisender111, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEDOnlLngO0
- zabean, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3A new page for every slide...
- claires, on 04/24/2009, -1/+4nice
- hiabex, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3Alan Watts (The late and great 20th Century philosopher) was keen to suggest that when we look longingly into the stars and marvel at the majesty of the heavens, we are generally oblivious to the fact that we are looking at our own true nature... or to put it more succinctly/eloquently www.alanwattspodcast.com Glorious shots!
- markseibold, on 04/24/2009, -0/+3Yes
Wrake makes a very good point here. As an astronomy artist and astronomer since childhood, we are in the know about this quite well; however the general public may not understand. That is not to say that they too can enjoy the beautiful photos that the Hubble Space Telescope takes just for the sheer glimpse at them. I find it a little disconcerting though that many people do not even know where the name Hubble comes from. There is a very good reason why they named the Space Telescope after the most advanced American astronomer of the 20th century. And his great advancements occured in 1920! We owe a history lesson to be taught to the public about that guy!
His early photos were only Black & White through the 100 inch Mount Wilson telescope but they changed our perception of the entire universe as we once knew it.
Much of the public has neverhad the chance to see through a good telescope and for some even by mid life, they have never seen the moon or Saturn's rings; these views through, say a local astronomy clubs gatherings at many large cities monthly science meetings or star parties can change ones life when they see these images live for the first time. I have provided this for thousands along a 10,000 mile solo road trip I made in 2000 with the use of what is considered as a large consumer grade telescope fitted with a research grade solar filter that my local astronomy club loaned to me for a month. You can Google my name to see the results or see www.markseibold.com
Yes The Hubble Space Telescope is a wonderful accomplishment as are the newer space telescopes Spitzer and Kepler. We need to do more astronomy teaching to students of all ages today to instill a better understanding of our universe.
Mark Seibold, Artist-Astronomer, Portland Oregon - inactive, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2Party pooper.
- DaffyDuck, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2Sorry to be pedantic but beauty is an attribute. Awe is a reaction. A telescope can't capture awe. Now, I'm back to being awed by the beauty.
- FishHammer, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2it's so cute!
- gl77, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2Awe.
- jajda, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2While you browsing these pictures you can feel you are nothing with entire Earth...
- Wrake, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2Has anyone found some high res versions of these yet? I'll donate to a charity if someone posts a link.
- jsindal, on 04/25/2009, -0/+2Man, just the fact that this thing can photograph.composite image something that is so far away that it would take 17 million years traveling at 186,000 miles per second to get to is pretty mind blowing.
- thewoodgnome, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2When will people wake up and realize that the images are photoshopped post hubble to make them "Look" nice.
1.) The colours are not real, they are an interpretation of non-existant colours.
2.) A guy sits down and mixes the various images hubble takes and judges what he believes people will like and go "Ahhhh" too.
If you don't believe me, then look it up. If you go there for real in space, you will be very disappointed. - inactive, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2I want Hubble v2.0!
- inactive, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2WOW! I see the face of a genie in the middle of pic 12: http://www.wired.com/science/space/multimedia/2009 ...
Anyone else? - milkmage, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2if?
c'mon dude.
believe.
The Hubble Ultra Deep Field, is an image of a small region of space in the constellation Fornax, composited from Hubble Space Telescope data accumulated over a period from September 3, 2003 through January 16, 2004. The patch of sky in which the galaxies reside was chosen because it had a low density of bright stars in the near-field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hubble_ultra_dee ...
6,200 × 6,200 pixels, file size: 18.19 MB, MIME type: image/jpeg
then ask yourself again "if there is more complexity, or variety, than we already know." - EVERY spec of light in that picture is a galaxy. - GrooTheWanderer, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2All together now... "Aaaawwe!!"
- Dustmuffins, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2...or food...
- 1x253, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2Aaaaww!
- theOster, on 04/24/2009, -0/+2not sure if these specific pics are here, but there's tons of other material
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ - awfl, on 04/24/2009, -0/+1No card-carrying geek would be without hubblesite.org and space telescope science www.stsci.edu; I am sure there are other orgs that control and handle the data before it is released to the public (in much higher res), but those are a start.
- CreamySmooth, on 04/26/2009, -0/+1That picture is the the image of a section of sky the size of a pin head held out at arms length. We cannot even comprehend how small we are.
- 88chrisb, on 04/24/2009, -1/+2Oar.
- Wrake, on 04/24/2009, -1/+2Hmm, well I'm also a big fan of photo manipulation art. I don't care how it's made as long as it looks sweet as hell. :)
- sporkman22, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1apparently someone is pissed i can do math and dugg me down.
- xsecretfiles, on 04/24/2009, -1/+2I just turned 20 last week, what a coincidence.........
- jerryn, on 04/24/2009, -1/+2Cool Pic.. if you look at it long enough.. it kind of has the shape of an embryo...
- grantmoore3d, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1It looks like a giant shrimp
- diggnidy, on 04/24/2009, -3/+4Damn universe , you scary!
- LogicalWisdom, on 04/26/2009, -0/+1I think it's better to be living in the time when all the questions can't be answered, it means there's an opportunity to be one of the pioneers that figure it out.
Just a different perspective... - inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1For the lazy:
http://hubblesite.org http://www.stsci.edu - robwhite1979, on 04/24/2009, -0/+1did anyone else notice how crap the comments are on this article?? i don't mean the digg comments btw, i mean the ones on wired.com...
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1time is relative, you are in 3000's years in future, we just don't know our position now.
- inactive, on 04/25/2009, -0/+1Or putting it in these 1-photo-per-page format which is extremely unpleasant to use. I made it through about 4 pictures before I came back here looking for the "***** it, bury due to multiple pages".
- sporkman22, on 04/24/2009, -3/+3ps, the hubble is turning 19, not 20.
-
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 