Thoughts on where we point telescopes such as the Hubble

[lomotel]

---

Ever since Galileo discovered planets using his telescope, humans have been practicing to look at the sky's either "UPWARD" or at the "HORIZON" (this is with reference to the Earth's axis).

But what if we will look "DOWNWARD"? Try to imagine HUBBLE telescope pointing it's lens downward instead of the usual horizontal position of searching. Maybe we can find new planetary discoveries or galaxies.

pls. spare me from bashing as this is only a layman's thought =)

[fritzd]

I don't quite understand what you mean. But as far as astronomers and astrophysicists are concerned, we have been mapping out our galaxy and even beyond by looking in all possible directions. Maybe this will help.
George Smoot on the design of the universe | Video on TED.com

[rodsky]

Ever since Galileo discovered planets using his telescope, humans have been practicing to look at the sky's either "UPWARD" or at the "HORIZON" (this is with reference to the Earth's axis).

But what if we will look "DOWNWARD"? Try to imagine HUBBLE telescope pointing it's lens downward instead of the usual horizontal position of searching. Maybe we can find new planetary discoveries or galaxies.

pls. spare me from bashing as this is only a layman's thought =)

1. The Hubble is in space.

2. In space, there is no "up", "down", "left" or "right".

3. Therefore, it has already been pointed where you wanted it to point--there is no reason to say "The Hubble may have not been pointed here...here...or here".

In addition to this, refer to the following diagrams/images:

The problem is, most people think in "earthbound" terms, when defining up or down. As seen in this image...

...one would say that the stars are "up" kay naa man sila where the green arrow is pointed. Unya ang yuta/earth, they define to be "down" (red arrow), because it's the opposite of where the green arrow is pointing. This is what is meant by earthbound thinking or orientation.

However, when you shift your perspective to that of space, "earthbound" definitions of "up" and "down" no longer matter, as seen in this image...

...as you can see, the telescope and the man are still on the same surface, yet the surface is actually curved, not flat, because our earth is a sphere. Thus, when earth rotates...after 12 hours...this is the result...

...murag nabali ang tawo ug telescope, but from their perspective, things are still sakto sa ilang panan-aw, dili bali, because gravity is still pulling them "downwards" (red arrow).

So, to answer your original question, look at the stars "below" or "downwards" the earth in the last two images...makit-an man gihapon ang stars nga naa sa "downwards" nga direction, because the earth rotates upon its axis, and thus, ang dili makit-an now, makit-an man sad after a few hours--all because of the rotation of the earth.

-RODION

[lomotel]

wheww..sakto!

i'm just wondering why i haven't seen Hubble telescope pointing its lens in the downward direction, usually you can see it pointing like this

[rodsky]

wheww..sakto!

i'm just wondering why i haven't seen Hubble telescope pointing its lens in the downward direction, usually you can see it pointing like this

That image is not even accurate in its representation of the Hubble floating in space--it's just a simple diagram that illustrates (for the common man) what the Hubble's different parts are. But yes, you are correct in that, most of the time, the Hubble is pointed away from the horizon/surface of the earth's curvature. Why is this so? It's because Hubble's optics are very sensitive, and sudden bursts of brilliance from bright objects like the earth and sun would wreak havoc on these sensitive instruments. But no worries...the Hubble orbits the earth, and thus it can point to any section of the celestial sphere.

-RODION

[Dee_Dee]

[cromagnon]

nice shots

[britannica]

ohhhhhhhh.....my brain hurts.............cant process..........overheat.........

[rodsky]

ohhhhhhhh.....my brain hurts.............cant process..........overheat.........

From now on, any comment pertaining or akin to "nosebleed" type remarks in the science section will be deleted (except this one of course, to serve as an example), and the poster will be given an infraction. This is a science thread--if you can't hack it, don't post. Enough said.

-RODION

[analog man]

naa lang ko pangutana rods ha.

kanang light years ba. gi-unsa man na nila pagsukod?
bana-bana lang tingali na.

kay kung ingon ana, possible nga kana atong nakita nga mga bituon ron, patay na diay na. kay nagtravel pa man ang light ug pila ka light years.

it's not measured from point to the other end point.

speed = distance / time

then

distance = speed X time

libog jud kaayo ko, unsa ila gamit para sa time component? ang speed of light ra?